GROUP 3

THE USE OF EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION IN REDUCING RECIDIVISM AND
PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AFTER THE OFFENDER HAS SERVEDHIS OR HER SENTENCE
Chairperson
Co-Chairpersons

Mr. Young-Hoon Ha
Mr. Sukit Chau-Intra
Mr. Kenichi Oguri
Mr. Syed Waseem Raza Jaffery
Mr. Toshitaka Ito
Mr. Boketshu Mike Mbongo
Ms. Maria Magdalena Valdivieso Rodriguez
Mr. Daniel Manuel Jovez Zambrano(Korea)(Thailand)(Japan)(Pakistan)(Japan)(D.R.Congo)(El Salvador)(Venezuela)

Visiting Expert

Mr. Peter Wheelhouse
Dr. William L. Marshall(United Kingdom)(Canada)Advisers

Prof. Hiroyuki Shinkai
Prof. Tae Sugiyama
Prof. Haruhiko Higuchi(Canada)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs
Members

I. INTRODUCTION
The alarming rise in crime rates all over the world has forced the international community to explore
new avenues to save the public at large from criminals. In the pursuit of public safety, different effective
measures and models for the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into society after theirrelease are being vigorously examined.
Reintegration demands that the scope of the legal system be enlarged so that the future life of theoffender in the community is considered in sentencing and during the correctional phase. By now it should
be clear that the reintegration concept not only serves the social interest by preventing recidivism, but also
the personal life of the offender who benefits from the opportunities of a crime free life. Reintegration should
introduce the broader social issues into the criminal justice system, creating an area of convergence with thesocial welfare, public health and educational systems.
The group is comprised of two judges of District Courts, an Additional Secretary from the Public
Prosecution Department, a public prosecutor, an immigration officer, police officer, and two prison officers.
The group is grateful to the visiting experts and professors of UNAFEI especially Professors Shinkai and
Sugiyama who not only advised us during the discussion but also guided us to prepare this paper. The group
was assigned to study the topic and present a detailed report keeping in mind the following tentative points:• Problems and challenges facing current legal systems;• Identification of effective policies and models that reduce recidivism and promote public safety;• Continuation of treatment programmes offered while the offender served his or her sentence andprovision of new programmes;• The supervision of known offenders in the community;• Appropriate co-ordination among related agencies and the use of community resources;• Monitoring and evaluation of the selected interventions;• The adoptability of such models in the respective countries.

II. PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMSThe criminal justice system is comprised of police, prosecution, courts and corrections (prison, probationand parole) and is facing a number of challenges and problems, in particular in the implementation ofcorrectional programmes.

174

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

•

•
•

•
•
•

Corruption, being an international problem, is prevailing in all countries. However, some countries,
by enacting special laws and developing strong systems of checks and balances between the exercise
of powers, authority and accountability, have been able to control corruption. The relationship ofcorruption to recidivism is relevant to the extent of implementation of policies to control recidivism.
Lack of devotion to implementing policies can be regarded as corruption. Corruption is also one of
the major problems not only in criminal justice systems but also in other departments.
The courts are overburdened because of understaffing, the delaying tactics of defence lawyers andinefficient, insufficient and non-specialized prosecutors. Judges have no proper sitting arrangements
and are sometimes even without adequate staff.
There is massive overcrowding in jails and a preponderance of inmates under trial due to delays incompleting investigations, restrictive application of bail laws, and frequent adjournment of hearings.
Delay in submission of indictment results from inefficiency, non-availability of modern techniques ofinvestigation, and lack of integrity on the part of police in the investigation.
The police-public ratio is extremely low which results in the inefficiency of the existing police
personnel. Frequently, they are to exercise their duties round the clock.
The group observed the extent to which the participating countries exercise correctional
programmes; however, they were not considered adequate. In particular, programmes for offenders
who have satisfied their legal obligations are non-existent.
Existing classification of offenders and rehabilitation or correctional programmes may notnecessarily be based on established principles of risk, needs and responsivity.

III. EXISTING CORRECTIVE MEASURESThe group was of the view that rehabilitative programmes for released ex-offenders should begin on thevery first day of custodial and non-custodial sentences. The programme cannot meet success unless thefoundation is laid at the start on the basis of assessment of risk/need factors by a team of professionals. The
offender should be classified in one or two particular groups as per requirement and be admitted to aparticular programme. Reassessment should occur before release, keeping in mind the response shown by
the offender to the programme. It was necessary to first analyse the existing system of classification ofprisoners on the basis of risk/need factors, responsivity at the end of the sentence, and the presently
available rehabilitation programme. There was also consensus on the proposal made by Mr. Mbongo that theoffender should not be exposed to society directly. There should be a system of rehabilitation where he or
she can be sent out for three months before release. The group found that the system of parole in somecountries, and half-way houses in Japan and in some other countries, caters for this purpose before release inaddition to providing residence and meeting other needs. We then discussed generally the present
classification systems, rehabilitation programmes offered to offenders, parole systems and systems of halfway houses in some of the participating countries. The issue of rehabilitation programmes for inmates andreleased offenders was discussed thoroughly, keeping in mind the knowledge gained through visiting
Kawagoe Juvenile Prison, Sapporo Prison, and a half-way house in Sapporo; and a presentation on the Hong
Kong system of corrections. It was agreed that rehabilitation programmes should be based on thesepatterns.

A. Classification Systems
In almost all the countries in Group 3 there is a classification system for categorizing prisoners. In somecountries, it is based on categories of crimes or the treatment programmes to be offered to the offender, i.e.
violent offenders, sex offenders, drug addicts, etc. and in some countries the offenders are classified on thebasis of the length of sentence, age, gender and work to be assigned in the prisons. Some of the countries
classify the prisoners in the categories of organized crime, major crime, middle crime or minor crime. The
group considered the classification systems of many countries and agreed that prisoners should be classified
on the basis of risk, need and responsivity factors.
B. Rehabilitation Programmes
Presently, different countries are running different rehabilitation programmes according to their systemof classification and their social environment. On the basis of classification, the inmates are provided thefollowing rehabilitation programme:(i) General academic education; and(ii) Skill development education such as carpentry, bakery, dressmaking, cosmetology, etc.

175

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Some of the countries, in addition to providing formal and market based vocational education, also introduced
the following rehabilitation programmes:(i) Psychological treatment like anger management control(ii) Anxiety intervention treatment(iii) Creative thinking and resolution of problems(iv) Emotional control treatment(v) Sex offender treatment(vi) Drug addiction treatment.
Several kinds of sport and recreation are offered to prisoners to keep them mentally and physically fit.
Many countries, like Pakistan and Thailand, provide religious education to the inmates.

C. System of Parole
In Japan, Pakistan, Korea, and Thailand etc., prisoners are released after serving one third of sentences inprison, on the basis of good conduct. During the parole release period the offender is supervised and kept
under observation by probation or parole officers. During parole release, he or she enjoys full or limited
liberty according to the law of his or her country. In case they misuse their release, they are punished with
revocation of license and return to prison to undergo the remaining period of their sentence ofimprisonment.
D. Half-Way Houses
Half-way houses can be defined as community-based centres where offenders can obtain basic necessities
like food, clothing and shelter. They generally cater for probationers, parolees and fully released prisoners.
Half-way houses are generally run by private associations (such as the Juridical Persons for Offenders’
Rehabilitation Services). Half-way houses offer vocational guidance to discharged prisoners and help them tofind suitable employment. The half-way houses provide accommodation, money and food as well as training
and job referrals for the discharged prisoners. Most residents work outside the half-way house on a daily
basis. Employment offers them financial independence and builds in them good work ethics. The Japaneseand Korean systems have a nationwide special type of supervision and aftercare for discharged prisoners.
Thailand has only one half-way house which provides assistance including the offering of accommodation,
meals, job placement and counselling services.

IV. POST RELEASE REHABILITATION PROGRAMMES
A. Legal Framework
At the very outset of the discussion, consensus was reached that fully released offenders must be
rehabilitated to help their reintegration into society and that the assessment of offenders on the basis ofneed/risk factors should be made before their release. If required they should be sent to rehabilitation
centres for further treatment. In many countries, it was found that different post-release rehabilitative
programmes, especially for drug offenders, are being implemented successfully, but it was noted that most of
the offenders after their release do not come forward or volunteer themselves for rehabilitative
programmes. Many group members proposed that treatment should be compulsory for those who areassessed as requiring it. At this stage, lengthy discussion started on the point that after full release of theoffender, compulsory rehabilitation programmes violate constitutional protection against double jeopardy inmost countries and violate human rights.
Ms. Valdivieso, participant from El Salvador, vehemently opposed making rehabilitation programmes
compulsory for fully released ex-offenders on the aforementioned grounds. On the contrary, Mr. Jaffery
proposed that, for recidivists, it can be made compulsory, whereas for first time and juvenile offenders thiscan be voluntary. For achieving the objective of public safety, such provision can be enumerated in law. Ms
Valdivieso was of the view that in her country, the matters pertaining to offences and punishment are
constitutionally governed, therefore such a law cannot be promulgated in contravention of the constitutional
provisions.
The group was about to reach to a conclusion that in this context, practices of the United Kingdom
regarding compulsory drug treatment, and Hong Kong for all types of offenders, can be adopted as role

176

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

model by every country according to its circumstances.
However, there was strong dissenting opinion that such a model may not be applicable to some countries’
legal contexts. The group then discussed how we can motivate ex-offenders into programmes when there
are no legal provisions. In this controversy, Mr. Mbongo floated the idea of awarding of certificates after
undergoing a rehabilitation programme making the involvement of the offender in the programme indirectlycompulsory and to make it helpful in seeking employment. He stressed his idea on two points: firstly, it willserve as good behaviour certificate; secondly, it will motivate the offender to undergo the rehabilitation
programme in order to be accepted by society. Such certificates may be important for society: offenders who
have undergone rehabilitation have a good conduct certificate with which to find a job. However the idea was
not supported by the majority of members on the grounds that it may have a reverse effect on the exoffender due to the unco-operative attitude of society in their respective countries.
The group was advised by Dr. Marshall that in order to attract offenders to undergo the aftercare
programme motivation factors should be addressed carefully. Motivation can be formed externally orinternally. In some cultural contexts, motivation could be given in a form of incentive; e.g. provision of
vocational training, employment or the issuing of good behaviour certificates. Offenders may even becoerced into treatment by making an appropriate legal framework. However, motivation can also be formedinternally by offenders in order to lead a better life by receiving treatment.

B. Continuation of Rehabilitation Programmes
The group pondered the continuation of rehabilitation programmes after full release of the ex-offenderand also discussed various modes for rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The group considered
existing programmes in the participating countries. However, we did not find applicable ones except for avery modest example in El Salvador. In El Salvador, the provision of assistance to ex-offenders has been
assigned to the Prison Department. After release of the offender, the prison officers make occasional calls tothe ex-offender and ask about his or her activities. Consequently, the group agreed that the main stress wason the fact that continuation of rehabilitation programmes should not be for all ex-offenders but before
release a team of professionals should reassess the inmate on the basis of conduct during the sentence(prison, probation and parole) on the basis of need, risk and responsivity. Thereafter, the period, degree andkind of treatment to be continued should be decided.
The group also considered how to decide continuation of rehabilitation programmes, and who would makesuch decisions. Two proposals were put forward by Mr. Jaffery. First, the already existing departments ofprisons and parole boards may be assigned to assess and supervise the programme in consultation with eachother. Second, new departments may be established to carry out the aforementioned functions. After
deliberations the first option was accepted. During the discussions, the Hong Kong system of Corrections1
was also examined and was found more suitable. The salient features of the Rehabilitation Service of Hong
Kong are that:• The service has been divided into Assessment Services, Programme Services, Psychological
Services, Education Services, Vocational Training Services and Supervision Services;• Each service provides a complete programme for offenders preparing him or her during the sentence
period to become a useful and law abiding citizen according to assessments made by the Assessment
Service;• The supervision staff provide support to offenders and their families and advises the offenders
during and after release.

C. Problems and Needs of Offenders
When a prisoner is released from prison or released on parole or has his or her sentence suspended, heor she generally faces many problems or has different needs, requiring help. There is now considerable
evidence of the factors that influence reoffending. Building on criminological and social research, the Social
Exclusion Unit (SEU) of the United Kingdom, for example, has identified nine key factors:2
1 Kwok Leung-ming, “Mobilization of Community Resources and Successful Reintegration of Offenders”, contained in thisvolume of the Resource Material Series.
2 Peter Wheelhouse, “Interventions with Drug Misusing Offenders and Prolific and other Priority Offenders”, contained in thisvolume of the Resource Material Series.

177

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

education
employment
drug and alcohol misuse
mental and physical healthattitudes and self-control
institutionalization and life-skills
housingfinancial support and debt
family networks.

The group was also informed of the fact that the Canadian model of correctional treatment is based on theprinciples of risk, needs and responsivity. Prof. Don Andrews from Carleton University in Canada,3 in his
writing, has given four basic principles: risk, needs, responsivity and professional discretion, to be taken into
account while making assessment and recommending treatment to an offender. He presented two types ofrisk factors: static factors and dynamic factors. Assessment of risks can be made using two types of
information: static and dynamic. Static information is information that cannot change. For example, age andgender are clearly static factors. History of previous offences and type of crimes committed are also static
factors. It is not possible to change these factors through treatment. Dynamic risk factors are importantbecause these are the factors that are changeable. Risk factors are changeable, therefore they can be
reduced through treatment, and it is possible to measure changes that indicate a decreased risk of reoffending. For example, treating substance abuse problems can reduce the risk of drug use that is likely toresult in a return to prison, and educational and employment programmes can increase skills and work
opportunities, thereby supporting employment after release. The offenders with the highest risk require themost intensive treatment services
The need principle states that in a correctional system only criminogenic needs should be addressed.
The reason for this is that if one is trying to change criminal behaviour, it is only those factors that areassociated with criminal activity that should be addressed. Other factors may seem likely to be targets fortreatment, but they will not result in reduced crime by the offender. The principle of professional discretion
recognizes that assessment instruments cannot be designed to address every case. There are, at times,
unique characteristics of an individual or situation that must be taken into account when making decisions
about treatment. This means that there will be situations when the assessment tools might indicate an
offender has a low risk of reoffending, but special circumstances, such as behaviour since arrest, may
indicate that there is a high risk or probability of reoffending. The professional classification officer should
use this information when making decisions. Thus, addressing the criminogenic needs of the highest risk
offenders contributes to public safety by reducing the likelihood of new offences after release from prison.
The group debated each of the factors given above and came to the conclusion that rehabilitation
programmes are being provided to inmates during the period of sentence. The group has already resolvedthat post-release rehabilitation programmes for all of the above need factors should be continued after full
release, except the provision of housing facilities and financial support due to the resource constraints ofmost countries. However, the ex-offender can be helped in seeking a job. The idea of half-way houses has
also been supported as they also provide housing to fully released offenders. Instead of providing housing,ex-offenders can be accommodated in half-way houses as their capacity is increased.

V. UNHELPFUL SOCIETAL ATTITUDE
Society has inherent hatred for offenders and the public at large thinks that criminals should be punishedseverely for the crimes they commit. However, in order to grasp ‘true’ public opinion, we may need to create
more reliable and valid social surveys. In any case, the idea of rehabilitation is new for the general public of
the participating countries; therefore, as a general rule of resistance against change, the public shows its
discontent with such idea. Research shows that rehabilitative treatment has produced better resultscompared to strict incarceration. The group discussed how the community can be motivated and involved in
the genuinely required process of rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-offenders, as without the support of3 Quoted in Brian A. Grant, “Reducing Recidivism by Applying the Principles of Risk, Need and Responsivity”, contained inthis volume of the Resource Material Series.

178

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

society, the desired objective of public safety can hardly be achieved. The group discussed the Hong Kongmodel in detail and concluded that by motivating and involving society through different effective steps
society’s attitude can be changed to a great extent, if not totally.
The print and electronic media can be very helpful in creating awareness and modifying the attitude ofsociety to the reintegration of ex-offenders. Therefore, it was stressed that a media strategy should be
developed by the corrections system in collaboration with the information ministries of respective countries
to educate the public on the realities of the ex-offender population. The information ministries can launch
programmes showing documentary films, interviews of film stars and renowned sportspersons on television
through the co-operation of big industries and other business communities. The purpose can be further
achieved by arranging seminars and workshops and walks or rallies involving non-governmental institutions,notables from all walks of life, and students.
The group was unanimous on the point that religious institutions can play an important role creatingawareness in society for accepting and rehabilitating the ex-offenders as all religions preach that one shouldhate the sin and not the sinner.
Informal institutions like the Cooperative Employers of Japan, Volunteer Probation Officers, Juridical
Persons for Offenders’ Rehabilitation Services and Women’s Association for Rehabilitation Aid can play animportant role in mobilizing and motivating the community. These organizations can make efforts for
employment of released offenders in the construction, manufacturing, service, wholesale and retail sectors.

VI. SUPERVISION OF KNOWN EX-OFFENDERS
A. Legal Dispositions
On this issue, the group again entered into a very heated debate that after full release of the offender,
supervision is not possible on the following grounds:(i) Most of the Constitutions of the participating countries provide protection against double jeopardy;
and(ii) Supervision after release interferes with the liberty of the person and will amount to violation of thehuman rights of the ex-offender.
Ms. Valdivieso, participant from El Salvador, vehemently opposed the supervision of known offenders on
the aforementioned grounds. On the contrary, Mr. Young-hoon Ha and Mr. Jaffery were of the view that laws
can be amended as laws are made for the people and for the sake of the safety of the people at large laws canbe modified. The group predominantly concluded that for the greater interest of society laws may be made,where deemed necessary, and protection of society can not be sacrificed for the sake of the human rights ofhabitual and known ex-offenders. Mr. Peter Wheelhouse, Visiting Expert from United Kingdom, also
endorsed the proposition. So it was decided to examine the systems of different countries which havealready evolved some system of supervision of known ex-offenders which may be adopted by othercountries with due modifications according to their needs.

B. Supervision by Police and Other Related Agencies
During the discussion it was apprised that police functionaries of almost all the countries keep track of
the activities of known and habitual ex-offenders but it is not conducted in a systematic manner except inJapan and the United Kingdom.4
For instance, Japan5 has no comprehensive supervision system for prisoners who are released after
completion of their sentence in prison, under parole or probation. The police have recently created awatching system for known sex offenders. According to the system, the Ministry of Justice is informed of
the release of the sex offender by the prison authorities at least 28 days before release. Upon receiving suchinformation, the Ministry forwards the information to the National Police Agency which alerts the police of

4 Peter Wheelhouse, “Interventions with Drug Misusing Offenders and Prolific and other Priority Offenders”, contained in thisvolume of the Resource Material Series.
5 Based on the briefing given in the National Police Agency, Japan on 1 February 2007.

179

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

the area where the offender resides. The concerned local police keep the offender under observation
indirectly. Till now, 237 sex offenders have been kept under observation. Sixteen have reoffended, including
sex crime. Although this indirect watching system is being criticized to some extent it has met success. Thismay be because the offender knows that the police are keeping track of his or her activities. This system isgood, but watching is confined to known sex offenders.
In the United Kingdom, the Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPO) Programme started in 2004 and it
specifically targets the small number of the most active and/or problematic offenders. It was designed to give
offenders a choice between the cessation of offending with the acceptance of support in the form of
rehabilitative programmes or to carry on offending, resulting in prompt arrest and punishment. The PPO
programme is comprised of following:• Prevent and Deter• Catch and Convict• Rehabilitate and Resettle.
The essential feature of the PPO programme is that it has been designed to tailor responses to local
problems and avoid a prescriptive approach regarding implementation. In doing so, the PPO programmeembraces the use of local knowledge, practitioner expertise, and previous experience of similar schemes.
The individual stakeholders, practitioners, and specific agencies are responsible for all the decision-making
aspects of the programme throughout, from how to choose the prolific offenders through to whichinterventions they may receive and how often they may receive them. These factors were all designed witha specific intention: to reduce the crime levels of the offenders on the PPO programme.

C. Vigilance Committees in Cities, Towns and Villages
While discussing the watching system conducted by the police and other agencies, it was realized thatpolice alone, unless the community gives full support, are unable to handle the gigantic task of supervisionof known ex-offenders because supervision is confined only to watching and to making the offender awarethat he or she is under observation. The police cannot watch the offender every moment and also cannot
interfere with his or her private life. Mr. Young-Hoon Ha informed the group that in Korea, the government
notifies the public bi-annually of the list of known sex offenders and the public and can check whether or nota sex offender is residing near their home. This helps the public to remain cautious. The role of noninstitutional organizations and volunteers was also discussed. Such groups can extend full co-operation andsupport to the police in observing the known ex-offenders. Many proposals were considered and agreement
was reached that in each city, town and village there should be a vigilance committee comprising of notablesof the respected area from all walks of life including lawyers, doctors, educators, students, andrepresentatives of the local police. In some societies, such vigilance committees could be made responsible
for observing the activities of known ex-offenders. In other situations such committees’ responsibility may
be limited to general crime prevention. However, all members agreed that it should be used to createawareness in the concerned community of adopting safety measures.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
The group considered the topic for discussion in detail, keeping in mind that rehabilitation of the offenderduring the period of sentence and after sentence is key to public safety. Reduction in the rate of recidivism ispossible only through rehabilitation of offenders; custodial or non-custodial sentences without rehabilitative
programmes are useless. The issues of detrimental societal attitudes and supervision of known habitual
offenders were discussed in detail and the following recommendations were made:1. Necessity of an Aftercare Programme• The group agrees on the general need for an aftercare programme when an offender completes hisor her sentence. It is advisable that the programmes are designed to make the offenders useful andlaw abiding citizens who can rehabilitate and reintegrate and have an objective to reduce recidivism.
• Such programmes should be based upon standard assessment of the offenders upon their entry into
prison. The programme should be based upon the risk, need and responsivities of each offender. The
specific programmes could address a wide variety of their criminogenic needs such as: sex offendertherapy, drug addiction treatment and treatment for their criminal style of thinking (cognitive
distortion) so that the chance of reoffending can be reduced.

180

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR•

Priority would have to be placed on programmes for high risk and high need offenders in order toreduce the chances of reoffending and to effectively utilize limited resources.

(i) Gradual Reintegration• Upon release, high risk offenders should not be exposed to society directly. There should be asystem of rehabilitation where the information of the offender may be sent out for short periods prior
to release, depending upon his or her risk.
• As a practical system, where applicable, there should be half-way houses and parole systems, notonly to provide board and lodging, but to offer mental care, living skills guidance and job placement
services.
(ii) Good Staff: Recruitment, Training, Integrity and Motivation• Aftercare programmes should be of employ specialized staff such as psychologists, social workers
and psychiatrists. Staff should high integrity in the execution of their work.
• To raise the level of efficiency, the conditions of service of personnel involved in the programme may
have to be improved to motivate them and also to attract highly qualified staff.
• Staff should be exposed to new techniques in carrying out their tasks. The staff should have accessto institutions where they can acquire more knowledge and higher qualifications.
• The current strength of correction officers should be enhanced to reduce the burden on the existing
officers.
(iii) Volunteers• Efforts have to be made to seek the involvement of volunteers with relevant competence toimplement specialized programmes at minimum cost. The Japanese Volunteer Probation system
could be a good model.
2. Post Release Rehabilitation Programme• For successful results of post-release rehabilitative programmes, offenders should be given
treatment from the very first day of custodial and non-custodial sentences.
• The standard classification/assessment system needs to be introduced to the custodial and noncustodial punishment system and used upon an offender’s entry into the system. Assessment should
consider the motives and circumstances of the crime and the degree of the criminal behaviour i.e.
assessment on the basis of need/ risk.
(i) Information Flow
• Management information systems may have to be improved to keep and maintain up-to-date records
of offenders. As far as practicable, computers should be utilized.
• In order to judge the success of the programme, assessments may be made regularly, duly
recognizing the risk of the offender.
(ii) Motivation of Offenders After Release• In order to attract offenders to the aftercare programme, motivating factors should be addressedcarefully. Motivation can be formed externally or internally. In some cultural contexts, motivation
could take the form of incentive; e.g. provision of vocational training, employment or the awarding ofa good behaviour certificate. Offenders may even be coerced into treatment by making anappropriate legal framework. However, motivation can be formed internally by offenders in order tolead a better life by receiving treatment.
3. Co-ordination among Related Organizations• Efforts to co-ordinate the work of not only related agencies such as prisons departments, parole andprobation departments, and police departments, but also private institutions like NGOs, religious
institutions, and charitable institutions should be made to enhance the capabilities of theseorganizations.
• The personnel in governmental organizations engaged in the delivery of programmes may exchange
information with each other freely to enhance better understanding of the offenders.
4. Community Involvement (Public Awareness)• Societal attitude may be changed by conducting seminars or workshops, media campaigns, walks or

181

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74•

rallies, with the co-operation of non-governmental institutions, notables from all walks of life,
students, and religious institutions to create or develop awareness of rehabilitation and reintegrationof offenders and to reduce stigmatization of offenders by society.
Informal organizations performing rehabilitative activities for reintegration of ex-offenders should be
encouraged by the government.

5. Sustainability of Programmes (Political Support)• In designing programmes, factors such as consistency, adaptability, feasibility, suitability andaffordability ought to be given prime attention. Gaining political support by presenting theeffectiveness of such programmes is of vital importance.
6. Supervision of Known Ex-Offenders(i) Supervision by Police and Other Related Agencies• In order to protect the public, there would be a need to keep eye on high-risk known offenders.
Information on such offenders should be given to the police from correctional institutions upon theirrelease. Examples from Japan and the UK can be used as a model.
(ii) Vigilance Committees• Where applicable, a vigilance committee comprising notables of the respected area from all walks oflife including lawyers, doctors, educators, students and representatives of local police, may takeresponsibility for the supervision of known offenders.

182