Predictive Algorithms and Juvenile Delinquency in Kinshasa: Emerging Challenges and Ethical Implications

References

[1] Almasoud, A. S., & Idowu, J. A. (2025). Algorithmic fairness in predictive policing. AI and Ethics, 5(3), 2323-2337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00541-3 Link

[2] Barabas, C., Virza, M., Dinakar, K., Ito, J., & Zittrain, J. (2018, January). Interventions over predictions: Reframing the ethical debate for actuarial risk assessment. In Conference on fairness, accountability and transparency (pp. 62-76). PMLR. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/barabas18a.html Link

[3] Berk, R. (2019). Accuracy and fairness for juvenile justice risk assessments. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 16(1), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12206 Link

[4] Duursma, A., & Karlsrud, J. (2019). Predictive peacekeeping: Strengthening predictive analysis in UN peace operations. Stability: International Journal of Security and Development, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/sta.663 Link

[5] Hou, F. (2022). [Retracted] Echoing Mechanism of Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Occupational Therapy Education Guidance Based on Artificial Intelligence. Occupational therapy international, 2022(1), 9115547. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9115547 Link

[6] Hunt, X., Tomlinson, M., Sikander, S., Skeen, S., Marlow, M., du Toit, S., & Eisner, M. (2020). Artificial intelligence, big data, and mHealth: The frontiers of the prevention of violence against children. Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 3, 543305. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2020.543305 Link

[7] Jonas, K. A. W. M., Tang, H. Y., Deng, L. C., Yu, Y., Jean-Baptiste, K. N. D., Basile, K. K., ... & Meng, H. (2022). Prevalence and risk factors associated with physical and/or sexual abuse among female middle school students: a cross-sectional study in Kinshasa, DRC. Journal of interpersonal violence, 37(11-12), NP8405-NP8429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520976221 Link

[8] Keddell, E. (2019). Algorithmic justice in child protection: Statistical fairness, social justice and the implications for practice. Social Sciences, 8(10), 281. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8100281 Link

[9] Keddell, E. (2023). The devil in the detail: algorithmic risk prediction tools and their implications for ethics, justice and decision-making. Decision Making, Assessment and Risk in Social Work, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 405-20. http://digital.casalini.it/9781529614640 Link

[10] Khatun, S., & Kumar, K. S. (2025). Assessing the Efficacy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Applications in Predictive Policing: A Systematic Review Method. Digital Strategy and Governance in Transformative Technologies, 94-118. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003477808-7 Link

[11] Khosa, J., Mashao, D., Olanipekun, A., & Harley, C. (2024). How Effective are Different Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Legal Outcomes in South Africa?. Journal of Applied Data Sciences, 5(4), 1890-1900. https://doi.org/10.47738/jads.v5i4.215 Link

[12] Kurumalla, S. (2025). Ethical Implications of Artificial Intelligence in Criminal Justice. International Journal of Research Advancements and Future Innovations p-ISSN 3051-245X e-ISSN 3051-2468, 1(01), 1-8. https://ijrafi.com/newijrafi/index.php/ijrafi/article/view/12/16 Link

[13] Kutnowski, M. (2017). The ethical dangers and merits of predictive policing. Journal of community safety and well-being, 2(1), 13-17. https://doi.org/10.35502/jcswb.36 Link

[14] MAJIGO, R. (2023). The Role of Information and Communication Technology for Effective Crime Detection and Prevention in Tanzania Police (Doctoral dissertation, IAA). http://dspace.iaa.ac.tz:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/2714 Link

[15] Mancuso, S., & Corselli, L. (2023). Profiling in Algorithm-Based Decisions: An African Perspective. COMPARATIVE LAW IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE, 5, 245-265. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004680944_013 Link

[16] Martin, K. (2023). Predatory predictions and the ethics of predictive analytics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(5), 531-545. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24743 Link

[17] McKay, C. (2020). Predicting risk in criminal procedure: actuarial tools, algorithms, AI and judicial decision-making. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 32(1), 22-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/10345329.2019.1658694 Link

[18] McSherry, B. (2020). Risk assessment, predictive algorithms and preventive justice. In Criminal justice, risk and the revolt against uncertainty (pp. 17-42). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37948-3_2 Link

[19] Milaninia, N. (2020). Biases in machine learning models and big data analytics: The international criminal and humanitarian law implications. International Review of the Red Cross, 102(913), 199-234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383121000096 Link

[20] Miron, M., Tolan, S., Gómez, E., & Castillo, C. (2021). Evaluating causes of algorithmic bias in juvenile criminal recidivism. Artificial intelligence and law, 29(2), 111-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020-09268-y Link

[21] Modise, J. M. Balancing Safety and Justice, the Ethics of Predictive Policing. https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24SEP617 Link

[22] Mutsaers, P., & van Nuenen, T. (2023). Predictively policed: The Dutch CAS case and its forerunners. In Policing race, ethnicity and culture (pp. 72-94). Manchester University Press. https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526165596.00010 Link

[23] Ndikumana, F., Izabayo, J., Kalisa, J., Nemerimana, M., Nyabyenda, E. C., Muzungu, S. H., ... & Sezibera, V. (2025). Machine learning-based predictive modelling of mental health in Rwandan Youth. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 16032. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-00519-z Link

[24] Oswald, M., Grace, J., Urwin, S., & Barnes, G. C. (2018). Algorithmic risk assessment policing models: lessons from the Durham HART model and ‘Experimental’proportionality. Information & communications technology law, 27(2), 223-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2018.1458455 Link

[25] Refolo, P., Ferracuti, S., Grassi, S., Raimondi, C., Mercuri, G., Zedda, M., ... & Oliva, A. (2025). Ethical issues in the use of genetic predictions of aggressive behavior in the criminal justice system: a systematic review. Frontiers in Genetics, 16, 1599750. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2025.1599750 Link

[26] Stevenson, M. T., & Slobogin, C. (2018). Algorithmic risk assessments and the double‐edged sword of youth. Behavioral sciences & the law, 36(5), 638-656. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2384 Link

[27] Susser, D. (2021). Predictive policing and the ethics of preemption. The ethics of policing: New perspectives on law enforcement, 268-292. https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479803729.003.0013 Link

[28] Tolan, S., Miron, M., Gómez, E., & Castillo, C. (2019, June). Why machine learning may lead to unfairness: Evidence from risk assessment for juvenile justice in catalonia. In Proceedings of the seventeenth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (pp. 83-92). https://doi.org/10.1145/3322640.3326705 Link

[29] Tonry, M. (1987). Prediction and classification: Legal and ethical issues. Crime and Justice, 9, 367-413. https://doi.org/10.1086/449140 Link

[30] Yagoub, S. HUMANITARIAN CON. https://www.intersos.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/SAFA_Yagoub-Paper-for-the-INTERSOS-Humanitarian-Congress.pdf Link

@article{1714239,
      author = {Paulin Kamuangu, Aristote Ntukadi},
      title = {Predictive Algorithms and Juvenile Delinquency in Kinshasa: Emerging Challenges and Ethical Implications},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {9},
      number = {8},
      pages = {563-577},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1714239.pdf},
      abstract = {This paper evaluates a sample of 444 reported incidents of urban crime in Kinshasa and identifies important trends that can be used to predict juvenile delinquency using predictive modeling. The proportion of incidents is 44.6% assault (198 cases), 39.2% theft (174 cases), and 16.2% vandalism (72 cases), so 48.9% of the incidents occurred in conditions, whereas 48.9% of the assaults occur during the night or evening hours (Jonas et al., 2022; Hunt et al., 2020). Incidents are clustered in municipalities like Limete (14.6% - 65 cases), Ngaliema (9.5%), and Mont-Ngafula (8.1%), frequently in areas remote from law enforcement (46.8%), and with lengthy police response time (median 20 minutes overall, over 75 minutes in distant areas) (Milaninia, 2020; Duursma & Karlsrud, 2019; Majigo, 2023). These spatiotemporal and environmental determinants point to variables that can be used to predict risks using machine learning in urban African settings (Khosa et al., 2024; Ndikumana et al., 2025). The value of the contribution of this study is that it reveals the viability of applying the application of predictive algorithms to the specifics of delinquency data in Kinshasa to identify the hotspots and allocate resources proactively, and critically evaluates the emerging issues associated with the application of predictive algorithms in resource-limited environments (Mancuso & Corselli, 2023; Tolan et al., 2019; Almasoud & Idowu, 2025). The article offers a conceptual roadmap to ethical artificial intelligence application in juvenile justice in urban African settings by promoting a change in the framework where pure risk prediction would be replaced by equity-oriented interventions, which would promote social justice and youth rehabilitation over stigmatization (Berk, 2019; Keddell, 2019; Barabas et al., 2018; Kurumalla, 2025). This model remains consistent with the prevailing demands for transparent, proportional, and rights-oriented predictive tools to prevent harm and improve preventive outcomes (Modise, 2024; Stevenson & Slobogin, 2018; Oswald et al., 2018).},
      keywords = {Predictive algorithms; Juvenile delinquency; Kinshasa; Machine learning; Algorithmic bias; Ethical implications; Predictive policing},
      month = {February},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I8-1714239}
  }