CRC/C/GC/24 Systems with exceptions to the minimum age 25. The Committee is concerned about practices that permit the use of a lower minimum age of criminal responsibility in cases where, for example, the child is accused of committing a serious offence. Such practices are usually created to respond to public pressure and are not based on a rational understanding of children’s development. The Committee strongly recommends that States parties abolish such approaches and set one standardized age below which children cannot be held responsible in criminal law, without exception. Systems with two minimum ages 26. Several States parties apply two minimum ages of criminal responsibility (for example, 7 and 14 years), with a presumption that a child who is at or above the lower age but below the higher age lacks criminal responsibility unless sufficient maturity is demonstrated. Initially devised as a protective system, it has not proved so in practice. Although there is some support for the idea of individualized assessment of criminal responsibility, the Committee has observed that this leaves much to the discretion of the court and results in discriminatory practices. 27. States are urged to set one appropriate minimum age and to ensure that such legal reform does not result in a retrogressive position regarding the minimum age of criminal responsibility. Children lacking criminal responsibility for reasons related to developmental delays or neurodevelopmental disorders or disabilities 28. Children with developmental delays or neurodevelopmental disorders or disabilities (for example, autism spectrum disorders, fetal alcohol spectrum disorders or acquired brain injuries) should not be in the child justice system at all, even if they have reached the minimum age of criminal responsibility. If not automatically excluded, such children should be individually assessed. Application of the child justice system 29. The child justice system should apply to all children above the minimum age of criminal responsibility but below the age of 18 years at the time of the commission of the offence. 30. The Committee recommends that those States parties that limit the applicability of their child justice system to children under the age of 16 years (or lower), or that allow by way of exception that certain children are treated as adult offenders (for example, because of the offence category), change their laws to ensure a non-discriminatory full application of their child justice system to all persons below the age of 18 years at the time of the offence (see also general comment No. 20, para. 88). 31. Child justice systems should also extend protection to children who were below the age of 18 at the time of the commission of the offence but who turn 18 during the trial or sentencing process. 32. The Committee commends States parties that allow the application of the child justice system to persons aged 18 and older whether as a general rule or by way of exception. This approach is in keeping with the developmental and neuroscience evidence that shows that brain development continues into the early twenties. Birth certificates and age determination 33. A child who does not have a birth certificate should be provided with one promptly and free of charge by the State, whenever it is required to prove age. If there is no proof of age by birth certificate, the authority should accept all documentation that can prove age, such as notification of birth, extracts from birth registries, baptismal or equivalent documents or school reports. Documents should be considered genuine unless there is proof to the contrary. Authorities should allow for interviews with or testimony by parents regarding age, or for permitting affirmations to be filed by teachers or religious or community leaders who know the age of the child. 7