EFFECTIVE TREATMENT AND SOCIAL REINTEGRATION OF
JUVENILES IN KENYA: PRACTICE AND LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
Clement Okech＊

I. INTRODUCTION
Intermediary life stages from childhood upbringing experiences and before maturity can present significant challenges both to the parents, actors and the children themselves. This may be characterized, foradolescents, with conflicts and for children in difficult circumstances, with desolation. Addressing devianceand delinquency occasioned by these experiences is one of the most pressing concerns for juvenile justicepractitioners and governments world over.
The development of delinquent tendencies can be apportioned to the individual (capacities to cope) andhis or her interaction with the environment. There are five developmental risk domains in juveniles,
according to Howell (2009)1, that characterise and influence delinquent behaviours. These include the individual, family, peer group, school and the community. When causes of juvenile delinquency are examined,
it is these areas that come out most responsible, and therefore intervention should be focused on addressing them.
The delinquency and criminal activities of Kenyan youth are not dissimilar from the rest of the world,much as there are disproportionally high poverty levels which may be a predisposing factor to criminal
behaviour. This is reflected in the data from the National Police Service in Kenya (2016) and from the
Kenya Prison Service (2015), which provide an indication that crimes committed by youthful offenders are
more related to survival. In attending to juvenile problems, agencies respond to the negative risk factors
as well as develop responses that help in reducing chances of engaging in criminality. In this regard, boththe state and non-state actors share responsibility in addressing these challenges.
This paper looks at how Kenya Probation Service endeavours to assist the court towards addressing
juvenile delinquency and the specific role of probation officers both in court and in community supervisionof offenders. It first attempts to understand the challenge of assessing child offenders considering their developmental domains and defining possible approaches in addressing the problem behaviour. It looks into
the subject of social investigations, assessment, development of supervision and treatment plans. The
paper also explores promising collaborative approaches by juvenile justice agencies and also the attempts
at how the Probation Service is engaging the community in the supervision of juvenile offenders in thecommunity through volunteerism.

II. PHILOSOPHY AND MODELS UNDERPINNING JUVENILE JUSTICE RESPONSES
Social science research tells us that, for the majority of youth who commit offences, the behaviour will
desist in late adolescence or early adulthood, Farrington (2007) and Loeber, R., et al. (2002).2. It is the contention of these eminent researchers that only about 8 to 10% of boys who are offenders as youth who
continue to offend increasingly into adulthood. Thus, most youth who commit one or more delinquent acts
do not continue offending into adulthood. This means that findings of high risk during adolescence are
weak predictors of long-range offending, even if they are good indicators of offending during adolescence,(Ibid). Given this notion, actors need to apply plausible approaches that are likely to stem delinquency at
the adolescence stage.
Assistant Director of Probation; Probation and Aftercare Service, Kenya.

＊

1 Howell, C. James. Preventing and Reducing Juvenile Delinquency: A comprehensive Framework 2nd. Edition. Sage.

2 Farrington, D. P. (2007); Loeber, R., et al. (2002); Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2001), Moffitt, T. E., et al. (1996); Roberts, B. et al.

(2001) in Gina M. Vincent, et al (2012), Models for Change, System Reforms in Juvenile Justice.

13

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
The handling of children within the juvenile justice system characterises a perceived philosophicalapproach in a given society. In Kenya this view has been framed by different situations, instruments andthe practices shaped overtime by colonial and successive governance regimes. The philosophies are conceptual ideals that best explain the juvenile offender and the manner in which the state may respondwithin a defined juvenile justice parameter. The conceptualisation rests upon society’s view on childhood,adolescence, maturation and social development (Howell 2009). The understanding that children are developmentally different from adults helps in shaping the juvenile justice philosophy.
According to Howell (ibid), there are three broad philosophical principles which underpin the administration of juvenile justice. These are:⿟⿟ Diminished capacity/responsibility,⿟⿟ Proportionality and⿟⿟ Opportunity for reformation.
Howell explains that the principle of Diminished Capacity is the extent to which a juvenile has thecapacity to bear blameworthiness or culpability for the offence. It considers whether the child has theability to make full judgement in a circumstance that an adult would make better reasoning. The second
principle on Proportionality springs from the first in that the child, even though he or she may have thecapacity to make judgement, cannot be required to take full accountability for the omission or commission
and thus should not be subject to a punishment that would have been meted out to an adult in similar circumstances. In which case the punishment should not just be proportionate to the offence but also takecognisance of the developmental stages and level of maturity. The third philosophical principle on opportunity to reform relates with the notion that adolescence and youth in general are at transitory stages in lifethat require safeguards and room to navigate through into adulthood.
These three principles explain the diligence required while assessing juveniles at the judgement anddisposal stage of the case and the understanding required of courts and probation officers. Thus responses
need to take cognisance of these at decision making. The three different philosophies on juvenile justice
shape the models of responses and interventions that may be espoused by different jurisdictions. The
foregoing philosophical principles have further produced different models of juvenile justice including the
medical model, the Rehabilitation and Welfare Model, Community Reintegration Model, Control and Prevention Model, the Just Desert Model and The Due Process Model.

III. PROBATION OFFICERS AND THE REHABILITATION OF JUVENILES
Probation officers as juvenile justice actors are perhaps the most central players in the rehabilitation of
offenders in Kenya. This follows their role in helping in decision making as to which juvenile offendershould be accorded what sentence and where it should be served and under what conditions. In otherwords, the probation officer plays the role of advising courts through the presentence reports or throughregulator consultation on the best disposal method for a child in conflict with the law. Subsequent to thisis the probation officer’s role in assessing and providing the requisite supervision and intervention in thecommunity if so granted. Although the officers do not directly work with all those sent to correctional institutions, save for probation hostels, they remain the connection between such institutions and thecommunity and family to whom the juvenile offenders shall return. Again, it is the role of the probation
officer to provide advice on the pre-release conditions that must be taken on board before an institutional
release decision is made. In the context of rehabilitation, the role of a probation officer in the change
process ideally starts at the point at which the decision is being made at the courts to release a juvenile tothe community or not, or what other measures may be preferred. While undertaking these functions, theprobation officers have to work with the community, and the Kenyan system has embraced this ideal. The
foregoing is examined below in detail.
A. Assessment for Decision Making at the Court
The court will always determine the disposal method of the child after careful consideration based onseriousness of the offence, aggravating and mitigating factors mental status, maturity, risk level, criminogenic needs, and amenability to treatment. Whereas some of these variables would have been dealt withat the trial stage, others are more personal and community oriented and as such may be hard for the14

164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
court to reach without engaging a probation officer. As noted, the juvenile trial process is more adversarial, but it is at the case disposal stage that it changes to a semblance of inquisitorial with the court’s invitation of a probation officer to provide a presentence reports. While referring the case to a probation officer,
the court appreciates that each child is unique, that children come from diverse social backgrounds, haveexperienced different problems, possess different personality traits and learn to cope in varied ways, inwhich case individual needs, problems and concerns should be assessed in the most effective way.
1. Social Investigation and Assessment
Social inquiry or investigation is a process of generating data and information on an offender for the
purpose of documenting and understanding the attendant causes of behaviour for purposes of making
decisions (at court or for interventions). Presentence reports provide advisory information to the courts
with a view to the court making a sentencing verdict including decision on alternatives to imprisonment.
The investigations are conducted for the purposes of generating various assessment reports including presentence reports. Social investigations help in formulating a plausible theoretical explanation of thecriminal behaviour of an offender, understanding the personality of the offender beyond the crimecommitted, developing a basis for intervention/rehabilitation and identifying resources required to effectchange.
Specifically, the aim of social investigations in light of a presentence report is to:⿟⿟ Appraise the background, personality and conduct of the youthful offenders in light of the offence
committed and what they perceive of their ill action
⿟⿟ Identify the criminogenic factors at play (using the offender Risk and Needs Assessment)
⿟⿟ Evaluate the seriousness of the offence and the impact on victims
⿟⿟ Engage families and significant others in the community about the offender⿟⿟ Identify and arrange for partnership with organisations which can aid the process of eventual rehabilitation
⿟⿟ Gain knowledge of the culture and resources available in the local communities
⿟⿟ Propose cogent measures necessary to address the identified ‘needs’ and forestall risk of reoffending including an appropriate sentence
As noted by Howell3, the family and the individual are essential domains that influence developmental
risk factors. The role of the probation officer is therefore to gather as much verifiable information as
possible that relate to the social and economic standing of the parents and how this may sway the conductof the child; the training and discipline (or lack of it) the parents have given to the youthful offender andhis siblings, an overview of the offender’s developmental history noting any gaps and incidences that may
help to understand the current behaviour, how he relates with other people and how they may influence
his conduct, the interpersonal relationship with siblings and other peers, and the schooling and performance of the offender thereof.
The other area that is investigated is the living circumstances in which the offender has stayed and if
there can make a correlation with the presented conduct behaviour. The place of residence in theoffender’s lifetime including any stint in criminal justice facility is a variable for investigation and if the
youthful offender has been staying alone the probation officer investigates how the offender is meeting theliving expenses while looking at clues that may connect the type of offence and the lifestyle he or she may
be leading. Of importance is also who the offender has been living with and if there has been change ofresidence especially moving from living with one relative to the other frequently and why this is so. The
location of where the youthful offender is staying is also examined to determine the environmental factorsthat may inform the errant behaviour.
As LeMarquand and Tremlay 20014 note, low intelligence and poor academic achievement can beconnected to juvenile delinquency which if not addressed early may see the youthful offenders graduating
into adult criminality. Interest in and education achievements have a connection with criminal behaviour
3 Ibid.

4 David LeMarquand and Richard E. Tremlay, Delinquency Prevention Programmes in Schools. Handbook of Assessment

and Treatment (Edited by Clive R.Hollin) 2001, John Wiley and Sons, England.

15

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
much as the positive side of this can be useful as a positive risk factor. It is thus important for the
probation officer to confirm whether the juvenile is enrolled in school and his or her academic qualifications and, if in school, the report from the school including indication as to truancy and school misconduct.
How a youthful offender spends his or her leisure time and with whom is crucial. What hobbies andinterests the juvenile offender has and how he or she generates money to sustain such hobbies. The
reason why youthful offenders commit a specific crime is important. The circumstances in which theoffences was committed, the number of previous findings of guilt, what were the mitigating or aggravating
factors, the contribution of friends, relatives, are all significant in understanding the risk factors. The
probation officer will always note the offender’s attitude towards the offence and previous criminal activities including whether there is any genuine repentance, tendency to blame others or any revelation about
his previous criminal activities.
The decision to release or commit juvenile offenders may also be influenced by victim’s and community
thoughts on the offender. The probation officer must assess what they professionally think of the action of
the youthful offender, whether there is any room for reconciliation or need of compensation and, theextent to which the offence has impacted on the life of the victim(s). It is imperative that any protective
measures that may be necessary are noted. It is important to note that the probation officers always haveaccess to the juvenile’s court file detailing the offence and the full recorded proceedings.
2. Adoption of the Presentence Report
The presentence report generated by the probation officers is a core instrument for juvenile justice in
Kenya. In all cases where a child has been found guilty and intends to make a committal or supervisionorder, the court has to refer the matter for advice by the probation officer. The probation report illuminates the issues above and makes a cogent recommendation on the best way of disposing the case taking
cognisance of the applicable legislation and the best interest of the child. The court often adopts the recommendation and in very rare circumstances will the court divert from the suggestions of the probation
officer. The recommendations in the presentence report will always adopt one or a combination of themethods listed below where admissible.
B. Methods of Dealing with a Child Offender
There are both custodial and non-custodial options available for dealing with child offenders foundguilty of offences. Aside from a child found guilty of a capital offence (who must be held in custody at the
President’s pleasure), any other alternative to imprisonment may be granted. The applicable legislation inthis regard includes, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Probation of Offenders Act, the Borstal Institutions
Act, the Prison Act (For Committal to Youth Corrective Training Centre) and the Children’s Act Of 2001.
According to the Children Act, a child offender may be dealt with:⿟⿟ by discharging the offender conditionally or absolutely
⿟⿟ by discharging the offender on his entering into a recognisance, with or without sureties
⿟⿟ by making a probation order against the offender under the provisions of the Probation of
Offenders Act
⿟⿟ by committing the offender to the care of a fit person, whether a relative or not, or a charitablechildren’s institution willing to undertake his care⿟⿟ if the offender is above ten years and under fifteen years of age, by ordering him to be sent to arehabilitation school suitable to his needs and attainments;
⿟⿟ by ordering the offender to pay a fine, compensation or costs, or any or all of them;
⿟⿟ in the case of a child who has attained the age of sixteen years dealing with him, in accordancewith any Act which provides for the establishment and regulation of Borstal institutions;⿟⿟ by placing the offender under the care of a qualified counsellor;⿟⿟ by ordering him to be placed in an educational institution or a vocational training programme;
⿟⿟ by ordering him to be placed in a probation hostel under provisions of the Probation of Offenders
Act;⿟⿟ by making a Community Service OrderNo child offender shall be subjected to corporal punishment.
16

164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
C. Assessment for Supervision and Rehabilitation
There are many risk factors that can be attributed to juvenile delinquency but which vary from one
child to the other and from one situation to another. Some of these factors are influenced by developmental turning points in the course of upbringing, family dysfunction, education and cognitive ability, poverty
as a predisposing factor, absence of social support, violence in the community and personal circumstances
including special needs. Even though these factors are usually factors of inquiry by the probation officers,
their in-depth examination and evaluation is significant as they inform supervision and rehabilitation plans.
Assessment is conducted in order to identify the risk/need factors, make sentencing/supervision/
treatment decisions or case management decisions and providing information for a continuum of services.
The essence of assessment is to enable the probation officer as a case manager to identify and document
offender needs, apparent risks and strengths. It enables the officer to identify or create resources to meetthe needs and to forestall risk of re-offending.
Although Kenya Probation Service has not fully adapted to the application of structured/actuarial assessment instruments, the understanding of risk and needs assessment is well grounded. As such, theService is at a trajectory point using both the qualitative strength and needs assessment informed byin-depth social inquiries and on (pilot) structured risk-need assessment tools for juvenile offenders. Evenso, the qualitative SWOT analysis method used still delves into the criminogenic needs specifically thejuvenile’s anti-social patterns, social support for crime, criminal attitude, substance misuse, family dysfunction, education and pro-social activities. In addition, other areas, health (including mental health) andcriminal history, are examined.
1. Supervision on Probation Orders
One of the alternatives to institutionalisation that courts often use on child offenders is probation
orders. The United Nations as early as 1951 described probation as:“The conditional suspension of punishment while the offender is placed under supervision and isgiven individual guidance or treatment”
Rule 10.1 of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures 5 (the Tokyo
Rules) describe the purpose of supervision as being to reduce reoffending and to assist the offender’s integration into society in a way which minimises the likelihood of a return to crime. Probation orders were
established in Kenya in 1943 but became operational in 1946 and have been in use for the last 11 decades.
The concept of probation can best be understood by the interplay between the offender, the probation
officer and the courts. Hamai et al. (1995)4 conceives probation as a judicial function that entails supervision and therapy, and practiced in the community where the offender is helped to re-adjust and cease reoffending while at the same time be seen as a distinct discipline within the criminal justice system. The
essence of the probation order is to accord an offender who is deemed not to be dangerous to thecommunity, statutory supervision by a probation officer, in an effort to assist him to change his criminal
behaviour while at the same time offering protection to the community.
Juvenile offenders cannot be convicted as per the Children Act and the Probation of Offenders Act. Supervision is between six months and three years as may be pronounced by the court upon the advice ofthe probation officer. Offenders are instructed to willingly commit themselves to set conditions; failure tocomply may result in the order being revoked. The probation order may also entail an order to reside in aprobation hostel for not more than one year. It is during this period that supervision and therapy are
exercised to forestall reoffending and help the offender change his or her character.
Much of probation order supervision strives to improve on self-control, interpersonal skills, education(Shapard 1995)6. The officer ensures that the offender adheres to the court orders and helps the client insolving his or her problems in line with a supervision plan developed with the offender and significant
others. Counselling therapy in groups and family conferencing is also used during probation order supervi5 General Assembly resolution 45/110, annex.

4 Hamai, K., Viler. Harris, R., Hough and Zvekic, U., (1995) (eds), Probation around the World: a Comprehensive Study,

Routeledge.

17

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101sion.
2. Supervision on Community Service Orders
Community service order is a sentence of the court handed down to offenders guilty of an offence punishable by imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years with or without the option of a fine. It is anorder of the court requiring the offender to perform unpaid public work for the benefit of the community
for a period specified in the order. The sentence seeks to give a chance to non-serious offenders to reform
under some form of community supervision executed by probation officers and other auxiliary community
supervisors and volunteer probation officers by way of repaying the community for the offence committed
through performing unpaid public work within their localities. Community service orders were establishedin Kenya in 1998 through the community Service Orders.
A juvenile offender can only be placed on community service order for a period between one day and
up to three years, and for a child he or she must be sixteen years or above. Placement must take consideration of the offender’s age, health status and the overall well-being including schooling. According to theAct, an offender can only work on public projects. All necessary case work may be given to the offenderas he continues to perform community service.
D. Assessment for the Development of Individual Supervision/Treatment Plans
The result of the social investigation and assessment is used in developing individual supervision andtreatment plans. The SWOT analysis has been adopted as a resource method for developing supervisionand treatment objectives given the risk factors already identified during the interviews with the child, significant others and through case conference.
Strengths, Weaknesses/Limitations, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis is a case planning
method used to assess the individual and family strengths and needs during supervision and rehabilitation.
In our circumstances, it is used by the probation officers to assess the positive risk factors and the criminogenic needs of the child and also to identify the resources necessary to help the child with problem
behaviour.
The specific setting of the objective for supervision and intervention is done after the SWOT analysis
has been carried out.
⿟⿟ Strengths: These are personal characteristics of the child that give him or her advantage.
Strengths are positive aspects that are inherent or have been achieved and can be used for
behaviour change.
⿟⿟ Weaknesses: (or Limitations): are internal characteristics that place the child at a disadvantage
relative to others or it is the inhibitions within the individual child that may militate against thechild’s good behaviour.
⿟⿟ Opportunities: These are chances/resources available to improve the behaviour of the child.
These are external positive factors.
⿟⿟ Threats: These are external elements in the environment working against the child that could
cause trouble for the child leading to re-offending. Examples of threat may the criminogenic environment, negative peer influence.

6 Shepard, J, Jr. (1995), State Pen or Playpen? Is prevention ‘pork’ or simply good sense? American Bar Association Journalof Criminal Justice 10: 34-37 in in Sims B, and Preston P, Handbook of Juvenile Justice, Theory and Practice, Tailor andFrancis, London.

18

164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
Table 1: SWOT Analysis and Risk Factors
STRENGTHS

Identify the child’s strengths and positive
attributes

Internal positive and personal attributes of
the child
Positive Risk Factor

WEAKNESSES

Identify the child’s negative attributes

Internal personal attributes of the child
Negative Risk Factors

OPPORTUNITIES

Identify positive opportunities within thefamily and community

External positive attributes from the environment including social capital
Positive Risk Factors

THREATS

Identify negative threats that may work
against the child change process

External negative attributes from the environment including peers
Negative Risk Factors

Probation officers identify and use the strengths and the opportunities to manage or address the weaknesses and the threats. All the factors identified as strengths and opportunities are used or considered inaddressing the dynamic factors identified as weakness and threats. The Probation officer is then expected
to set and prioritize the risk and needs assessed (setting them as problem areas and turning them into objectives) starting with the ones which can be addressed easily and then moving to the ones which pose
greater challenges. The problems identified must be those that have a bearing with the crime committedor those that have a higher chance of influencing positive change.
The result of the assessment done using the SWOT method or Risk/Need Assessment (RNA) tool isthen tabulated clearly where most of the weaknesses, where changeable, are classified as objectives oftreatment or supervision. Appropriate intervention is then apportioned and executed accordingly. This
process can be repeated several times during the period of offender supervision in the community or in
the institutions.

IV. SOCIAL REINTEGRATION OF CHILD OFFENDERS
Effective aftercare is an important component of institutionalisation for juvenile offenders (Howell,2009)7. Social reintegration of those leaving correctional facilities begins with generation of a pre-releaseassessment report being written by a probation officer. This does not preclude the fact that there is continuous communication between the probation officers and the Borstal, rehabilitation schools or probation
hostel personnel. For the Borstal, there is established a Board of Licence which exercises the function ofdetermining premature release of youthful offenders. Although courts commit offenders to the facility fora mandatory period of three years, the Board has the power under the Act to release the offenders
subject to certain conditions. The rehabilitation schools also require a pre-release report from probation
officers as do the probation hostels.
A. Purpose of the Pre-Release Reports
The purpose of the pre-release reports is to help competent authorities make more informed decisions
in post-sentence dispositions. The report helps in identifying for intervention and for protection purposes
both positive and negative risk factors necessary for re-entry and also for the prevention of relapse. For
offenders due for pre-release disposition, the reports help in identifying key reintegration issues which are
the embodiments of the risk factors. There are many of reasons why a report may be necessary, considering the type of the report and the offender in question. Nevertheless, the following are some of the generalobjectives of a pre-release report which must be taken cognisance of when the same is being prepared.
⿟⿟ To provide the competent authority or releasing organ with information regarding the homecondition of the inmate
⿟⿟ To provide information to the competent authority about the inmate’s acceptance by his family
or community.
7 Ibid.

19

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
⿟⿟ To provide information on the resources available for continued post-release rehabilitation
depending on the needs of the offender⿟⿟ To indicate potential risks, if any, and likelihood of the offender reverting to criminality
⿟⿟ To indicate availability of accommodation upon release⿟⿟ To indicate availability of a person(s)—guardian, parent or care-giver—who is ready to take
immediate charge and in accordance with release conditions if any
⿟⿟ To verify information on the offender, family and other circumstances already available to theholding authority
⿟⿟ To indicate any fears by the victim(s) about the offenders potential return
⿟⿟ To verify if there is objection by other authorities, e.g., the police about the offender’s release on
license.
⿟⿟ To find out if the offender had faulted/breached previous licenses
⿟⿟ To indicate to the holding authority of the supervision arrangements necessary for observation of
the release license and thus forestall re-offending⿟⿟ To prepare concerned parties of the potential return of the ex-offender⿟⿟ To generate a possible reintegration case plan to be implemented upon release⿟⿟ To provide a plausible suggestion or recommendation and if the offender may be subject torelease, to propose any condition(s) that may be attached to the release if applicable
B. Contents of the Pre-Release Reports
There are many issues that the report can contain subject to the information collected during the interviews and inquires and the audience of the report. Generally they may be summarised as risk protective factors (1) Common offenders reintegration ‘needs’ (2) acceptance by the family or community (3) accommodation and housing (4) substance and alcohol misuse (5) healthcare including mental health and (6)employment (7) presence of alluring negative peers including previous acquaintances and those picked
during confinement, (8) training acquired and how this may be used as an asset in reintegration, conclusion
and recommendation. The recommendation should be tailor made to the specific authority or organ requesting the report
During the social reintegration of the youthful offender, the probation officers have to work with thefamily, community, government agencies, e.g., schools and colleges, county governments, volunteer
probation officers and other non-governmental organisations interested in the empowerment of offenders.
C. Aftercare
The provision of aftercare for released youthful offenders takes more or less the same case management style like that of offenders under probation supervision. This entails assessment, social case work,
empowerment, training, work placement, and educational programmes. Individual counselling is one of themost common treatment methods employed by probation officers. As noted by (Siegel 2002)8, the purpose
is not to try to change the child’s personality but rather to help him or her deal with adjustment problems
as changing personality is a process. Any relapse may call for breach of release licence and having theoffender returned to the correctional facility for the remainder of the residue or as may be determined by
the Board of Licence. Probation officers seek the empowerment of the ex-inmates especially those comingfrom Borstal Institutions who have acquired technical skills. Community resources including use of nongovernmental organisations and Probation Volunteers is significant.

V. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT WITH JUVENILE OFFENDERS THROUGHVOLUNTEER PROBATION OFFICERS PROGRAMMEThe Children’s Act provides avenues in which charitable non-governmental organisations can participate in the administration of juvenile justice by establishing institutions for rehabilitation and welfare
support. But it is the direct involvement of the community through individual participation that is a relatively new concept in Kenya.
The Volunteer Probation Officers programme was started in 2005 as an initiative of the department in
8 Siegel, L, (2002) Juvenile Delinquency: The Core, in Sims B, and Preston P, Handbook of Juvenile Justice, Theory andPractice, Tailor and Francis, London.

20

164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
order to address shortcomings identified in the general offender supervision. In line with in the United
Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures, (Tokyo Rules) and within the scope of thedepartmental legal mandate, the VPO programme was commenced with the objective of providing
auxiliary support to mainstream probation officers but specifically:
⿎⿎ To expand the departmental reach in the community in criminal justice dispensation
⿎⿎ To intensify offender supervision and⿎⿎ To increase the capacity and speed within which probation officers can be able to provide court
services.
⿎⿎ To increase effectiveness in service delivery
A. VPO Management and Selection Criteria
The head of the probation station is the programme coordinator at the station level while the county
probation directors provide regional coordination and management. The policy direction and national coordination is provided from the Probation Service headquarters. Although there is still no written policy on
the operations of the programme, the limited legal mandates as per the Probation of Offenders Act andCommunity Service Orders Act provide the instruments of engagement and work.
The programme survival depends on the calibre of persons selected who ideally should come fromretired probation officers/civil servants, church leaders, social workers, and community leaders. In addition
consideration is given to remote areas that provide a challenge to the probation officers in terms of reachor effectiveness. The DPOs are expected to liaise with stakeholders and identify suitable VPOs based on
the following criteria.
⿎⿎ Must be over 30 years of age
⿎⿎ Have reasonable level of education
⿎⿎ Must be a respectable member of the community
⿎⿎ Must be willing to create time for volunteer work
⿎⿎ Must be willing to provide free service
⿎⿎ Must be a role model, of good virtues and with integrity
B. The Duties of the VPO
The duties of the VPO include:
1.		 Assisting line probation officers in the generation of information for social inquiry reports
2.		 Provide auxiliary support in the supervision of offenders in the community
3.		 Engaging the community to accept and provide for the offenders as a measure of resettlement/reintegration of offenders back into their communities
4.		 Linking up the probation officer with the community
5.		 Creating public awareness on issues related to delinquency
6.		 Serving as agents of delinquency prevention within their communities
The programme is entirely voluntary, operating on individual free will and thus does not provide an
opportunity for employment. The selection is devoid of job seekers. The VPOs are trained on elementaryprobation work at the initial point before being advised to formally apply for engagement upon which they
are provided with letter of appointment to serve for a renewable period of three years. There are over
300 VPOs enlisted but only about two/thirds are actively engaged. This is because of challenges related tofunding to facilitate training and transport reimbursements.

VI. CONCLUSION
The role of the probation officer in the supervision and rehabilitation of juvenile offenders cannot be
underestimated. The salient variables underpinning the maturation of a juvenile are not factors which thecourt may be able to discern on its own. Thus, a comprehensive inquiry and assessment will always bringout these criminogenic needs which must be targeted for intervention. Rehabilitation of offenders in thecommunity, whether for those on probation orders or any other community supervision order can only beeffective if skilled personnel who follow professional standard procedures are the ones to work with the21

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
offenders. This must, however, be preceded by effective inquiry and assessment of salient variables that
may militate against the juvenile under supervision.
Although Kenya, like most democratic societies, has maintained institutionalisation alongsidecommunity correction of juvenile offenders, the role of the community and agencies working therein is
crucial. It is only a multidimensional approach and engagement of stakeholders that will ensure effective
social reintegration of offenders.

22