Dili, 16 July 2026 –The Court of Appeal has rejected the petition submitted by the Ombudsman for Human Rights and Justice (PDHJ) seeking a declaration of unconstitutional legislative omission concerning the absence of a comprehensive Juvenile Justice Law in Timor-Leste. Although the Court did not grant the constitutional remedy requested, it acknowledged the urgent need for a dedicated legal framework to regulate the juvenile justice system and strengthen the protection of children’s rights.
The judgment was issued by the Court of Appeal, on 9 July 2026, under Acórdão No. 08/Const/2025/TR by a panel composed of Maria Natercia Gusmão, Deolindo dos Santos, Jacinta Correia da Costa and Duarte Tilman Soares
The Ombudsman’s petition was submitted in the exercise of his constitutional mandate under Articles 150 and 151 of the Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, which empower the Ombudsman to request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of legal norms, including legislative omissions that may undermine the protection of fundamental rights.
The petition was filed in response to the continuing absence of a comprehensive Juvenile Justice Law in Timor-Leste, an issue that has become increasingly relevant in light of recent cases involving minors in conflict with the law. The Ombudsman argued that the legislative omission hinders the establishment of a specialized juvenile justice system capable of ensuring that children are treated in accordance with international human rights standards while also safeguarding the rights and interests of victims and the broader community.
In its decision, the Court concluded that although Timor-Leste has yet to establish an autonomous and systematic juvenile justice framework, the current legal situation does not amount to an unconstitutional omission under Article 151 of the Constitution. The Court reasoned that children in conflict with the law continue to receive a degree of legal protection through existing constitutional provisions and other legislation, and therefore the constitutional threshold required to declare an omission had not been met.
While dismissing the petition, the Court expressly acknowledged the substance of the Ombudsman’s concerns. The judgment recognizes that Timor-Leste still lacks a coherent, comprehensive and specialized juvenile justice system and describes this legislative gap as a significant deficiency. The Court further emphasized that the adoption of a dedicated Juvenile Justice Law is necessary to ensure stronger protection of children’s rights and encouraged the competent authorities to proceed with its enactment as soon as possible.
The Ombudsman emphasized that the proposed legislation is not intended to shield minors from accountability for criminal offences. Rather, it seeks to establish a balanced and specialized justice system that protects the best interests of children while ensuring accountability, rehabilitation, reintegration, and due process. At the same time, the law would strengthen legal certainty and provide greater protection and justice for victims of crimes committed by minors through clear procedures and appropriate judicial responses.
Although the Court declined to declare the absence of a Juvenile Justice Law an unconstitutional omission, the judgment represents an important judicial recognition that Timor-Leste urgently requires a comprehensive legal framework governing juvenile justice. The Court’s observations reinforce the need for legislative reform and provide further impetus for the National Parliament to adopt a law that protects the rights of children, safeguards victims, and promotes a fair, effective and child-sensitive justice system consistent with the Constitution and Timor-Leste’s international human rights obligations.
This post is also available in: Tetun