GROUP 3

ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY IN THE REINTEGRATION OF VICTIMSAND OFFENDERS INTO THE COMMUNITY
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs

Mr. Mustapha Hajjam
Mr. Souichiro Nishioka
Ms. Negil Kauvu
Mr. Mitsuaki Takayama
Mr. Anare Bulainacagilaba
Mr. Abd Wahab Bin Kassim
Mr. Manat Cheokul
Mr. Motohiro Yano

(Morocco)(Japan)(Papua New Guinea)(Japan)(Fiji)(Malaysia)(Thailand)(Japan)Visiting Expert

Professor Sir Anthony E. Bottoms
Professor Irvin Waller(United Kingdom)(Canada)Advisers

Prof. Kei Someda
Prof. Motoo Noguchi
Prof. Hiroyuki Shinkai(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Members

I. INTRODUCTION
A. BackgroundIn a rapidly changing society, urban crime, youth crime and juvenile delinquency are becoming a complex
issue experienced by developed and developing countries, the world over.
Crime prevention and treatment of offenders should not be left entirely to the criminal justice agencies
but, requires close cooperation and collaboration with other sector agencies, organizations, community
institutions and every individual, to minimize crime and disorderly behaviour in the community.
Group Three was assigned the task to discuss the ‘Role of the Community in the Reintegration of theVictim and Offender into the Community.’
The Group set out to report on the ‘Holistic’ and ‘Restorative Justice’ approach in the reintegration of
offenders and victims in society. We provide views and current practices experienced by participating
countries, and propose recommendations regarding the topic under discussion.

B. Topics Examined and Analyzed
Based upon the above-mentioned topic, we examine the following issues: (a) a holistic approach for the
reintegration of offenders and victims into the community through processes such as the restorative justiceapproach; (b) ways for the active involvement of the community toward effective treatment of offenders; (c)establishment of a community network with relevant agencies and organizations for an integrated aftercare
system; and (d) methods of recruitment and utilization of community resources and citizen volunteers.
C. Holistic Approach
1. What is a Holistic Approach?
Given the background of the UN principle, we agreed to proceed with defining the notion ‘What is a
Holistic’ approach in more practical terms, and in the context of a restorative justice approach. A Holistic
approach basically means; promoting collaboration between CJS, other relevant agencies and community
resources, mobilizing community resources and improving partnerships with CJS, other relevant agencies
and community resources in the community.
In this instance, the community would include family, religion, community groups and relevant agencies
such as schools, etc. and organizations involved in tackling the causes of crime in providing services andsupport to both the offender and the victim.

236

129TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

2. Why We Need a Holistic Approach?
We then looked at why we need a holistic approach? The common reason that we felt necessary andappropriate to adopt this approach is as follows. Since the causes of crime are multiple, criminal justiceagencies alone cannot tackle and solve the issue of crime. As mentioned in the introduction part of thisreport, it will require the cooperation and collaboration of all relevant sector agencies, organizations andcommunity institutions to tackle this pressing issue. A common problem experienced in the respective
countries, is a lack of collaboration and cooperation among criminal justice agencies, other relevant sector
agencies and community resources in participating countries.

D. Community
1. What is Community?
During the first plenary presentation, we discussed the notion of “What is Community”. Is it community
in the urban or rural setting?
In the light of the context of this seminar entitled ‘Effective Prevention of Crime associated with
Urbanization based upon Community Involvement and Prevention of Youth Crime and Juvenile delinquency’,the ‘Community’ should therefore be viewed in the context of urbanization taking into consideration theemphasis of community involvement in urban areas for the prevention of crime.
2. The Role of the Community
Rule 1.3 of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile (“The Beijing
Rules”) stipulates that, “sufficient attention shall be given to positive measures that involve the full
mobilization of all possible resources, including family, volunteers and other community groups, as well as
schools and other community institutions, for the purpose of promoting the well-being of the juvenile, withthe view to reducing intervention under the law”.
Given the basis of the UN SMR (“The Beijing Rules”) Group Three has attempted to provide the current
practices, common problems and countermeasures proposed by participating countries.

II. MEASURES FOR EFFECTIVE TREATMENT OF OFFENDERSUNDER THE HOLISTIC APPROACH
A. Current Situation
1. General Situation
Participating countries of the current group workshop; namely, Morocco, Thailand, Malaysia, Japan, Fijiand Papua New Guinea have various programmes and services provided by agencies, organizations, religious
institutions, and individuals in the reintegration of offenders in society. These organizations provide thenecessary support in many different ways for the mentioned purpose with little or limited support fromrelevant Government agencies.
2. Summary of Each Participating Country’s Situation(i) Morocco
Bayti Association for the Assistance of Youth (BAAY) was founded in 1994, whose main objective is to‘Protect the Rights of Children,’ provide assistance and education to children living in difficult
circumstances, especially juvenile delinquents and sexually exploited children. With its multidisciplinary
team including educators, social workers, psychologists, instructors, artists and students, BAAY sets up
original and specific programmes for social reintegration, parental education, individualized pedagogy
workshops and adapted professionalism. One of the main focuses of its programme is to ‘prepare the juvenile
delinquent’s exit to society’. In this area, BAAY is working with the Moroccan Correctional Services toprovide help to juveniles in custody and facilitate their reintegration into society after completing theirsentences.
BAAY which is located in Casablanca and whose activities are medical treatment, schooling, workshops,
sports, theatre and art, has two branches in Essaouira (the west), and Meknes (the centre). Another is
expected to open in Tetouan (the north). These centres account for a total capacity of 100 beds. To date,more than 4970 children have benefited from the association’s various workshops. Two hundred and fifty of237

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.68

these children have been reunited with their families, 43 are currently attending school, 40 are involved inpersonalized workshops, 50 are taking professional training and 15 are currently employed in the private
sector.
Its staff consists of 47 salaried employees, and 20 volunteers. Its annual budget is around 400,000 Euros,
and is sustained by other partners such as the schools, the State, national and international NGOs, and theprivate sector. BAAY intends in the future to orient its action towards prevention, education in the rural
milieu and women’s status.

(ii) Fiji
Social Welfare Probation Officers (PO) supervise probation conditions (PC) and follow-up visits to ensurecompliance of PC by PO. The Prison Department (PD) provides counselling and advice to offenders,furthermore PD liaise with stakeholders and the private sector for possible employment of the offender. Fiji
Police befriend offenders when released from prison and involve prisoners in community projects and crime
prevention activities. Hospitals provide therapeutic services to drug addicts and the Ex Prisoners
Association provides opportunities to offenders in income generating activities.
(iii) Malaysia
The Discharge Prisoners Aid Society (DPAS) is composed of respected people, selected from thecommunity who voluntarily support and assist ex-prisoners. They receive a grant of RM2,000 (US$ 700) per
society per year for operational costs, such as stationary, etc.
• Provide possible job employment depending on the skill acquired.
• Organize and coordinate activities such as seminar talks to the public for acceptance of offenders bysociety.
• Encourage ex-prisoners’ involvement in programme activities conducted in the community.
The District Children Welfare Committee (DCWC) is monitored by the Social Welfare Department(SWD). The committee members, including the Chairman, are appointed by the Minister of the SWD. The
committee consists of 7-15 members with an operational grant of RM2,000 (US$700) per year to the society.
The roles of DCWC are as follows:• Encourage the involvement of the community in crime prevention.
• Assist in identifying appropriate responsible persons such as adoptive parents for supervision ofjuveniles.
• Assist POs in the performance and supervision of juveniles attending appropriate approved
secondary schools (lower).
• Ensure care and protection of juveniles in detention centres.

(iv) Thailand
Volunteer Probation Officers (VPO) have been utilized in the community to assist the Probation Office intheir work for juvenile and adult offenders in the prevention of crime. VPOs are located in provinces andwork side by side with probation officers under the jurisdiction of the Probation Department.
(v) Japan
In Japan, juveniles are placed on tentative probationary supervision by the Family Court. The Family
Court can place the juveniles on tentative probationary supervision under the guidance of a suitable
institution, agency or individual. Among about 2,200 tentative probationers, 315 juveniles were placed under
the guidance of such agencies, organizations and individuals, etc. Most juveniles who are placed on guidance
are rehabilitated under tentative supervision by the Family Court Probation Officers.
Volunteer Probation Officers (VPO), who are community-based, carry out the probationary/parole
supervision in collaboration with Professional Probation Officers (PPOs) under the direction and supervisionof the Chief Probation Officer. There are approximately 50,000 VPOs around the country. VPOs provide dayto-day supervision services with most probationary/parole supervision cases (excluding short-term traffic
probation for juveniles).
The VPO Association, including VPOs, perform various community-based crime prevention activities andexercise their local knowledge in strengthening partnerships through networking to effectively promote andsupport the offenders rehabilitation and aftercare.

238

129TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

One hundred and one Halfway Houses (HH) are run by 99 juridical persons for offenders rehabilitation
services (non-profit and non-government organization). The HH accommodate offenders released from
Correctional (prison) institutions who have no proper place to live or have serious family conflicts, addiction
to substances and lack of financial management skills. A quarter of parolees depend on HH as a bridge
between prison and society.
Halfway houses succeed in networking for the treatment of offenders and their aftercare, involving
welfare, health and medical agencies and organizations, self-help groups, related professionals and various
volunteers.

(vi) Papua New Guinea
In PNG, there are community groups, non government agencies and religious institutions that provide
various programme activities and services in the reintegration of offenders and victims towards theprevention of crime. The City Mission provides unemployed youth with spiritual, social, mental and physicalcounselling, skills training, recreational activities and possible employment with the private sector.

B. Common Problems Encountered by Participating Countries
According to the participating countries, there are problems encountered by such organizations andinstitutions in effectively delivering appropriate programme activities and services in the reintegration of
offenders into society. Some of the common problems experienced are identified as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

The community’s lack of knowledge and understanding of the roles and responsibilities ofappropriate agencies, non-government organizations and relevant institutions in the programmes
and services provided for offenders in the community;
As a result, there is lack of family, community, private and public support for offenders;
Difficulties experienced by courts in identifying organizations and institutions that provide
appropriate programmes and services to enable courts to make referrals accordingly;
The Government’s lack of recognition and necessary support of relevant agencies, includingorganizations and institutions in the reintegration of offenders in the community;
The lack of capacity experienced by appropriate government agencies is having an adverse effect on
the quality of supervision provided to volunteers, including offenders in the community;
Difficulties experienced by participating countries of the group where the volunteers are utilized,
namely, Japan, Thailand and PNG in the recruitment of volunteers, especially in urban areas in the
supervision of offenders; andOther obstacles experienced in the coordination of relevant agencies, organizations and institutions,in the effective reintegration of offenders in the community.

C. Common Countermeasures for Participating Countries• Explore and consider incentives for volunteers in the performance of voluntary services for the
reintegration of offenders and victims in the community;• Develop appropriate offender treatment models;• Develop appropriate policy guidelines to improve coordination and collaboration among relevant
sector agencies, organizations and institutions;• Consider developing policy guidelines to utilize the services of retired public servants or otherrespected individuals commonly referred to as Volunteers who are willing to volunteer their services
for the reintegration of offenders in the community;• Consider embedding appropriate policies into legislation; thus giving effect and recognition tovolunteers, organizations and institutions in the performance of their voluntary services foroffenders in the community;• Establish appropriate Technical Committees, Taskforces or Working Groups in respective countries
to improve coordination, sharing of ideas, and the discussion of issues to improve practices andconsider the limitations of agencies, organizations and institutions;• Encourage income generating opportunities for offenders;• Strengthen, promote and encourage the work of volunteers;• Improve and strengthen the cooperation and networking among relevant agencies, provincial andlocal level governments, NGO’s and community groups;• Improve training systems of appropriate organizations and institutions with the view to provide
effective delivery of programme activities and services. This would further improve the provision ofeffective supervision and monitoring of offenders and victims in the community;

239

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.68•

Provide and raise public awareness of the role and responsibilities performed by agencies,
organizations and institutions including the role of volunteers in the reintegration of offenders andvictims in the community;

III. MEASURES FOR VICTIM SUPPORT UNDER THE HOLISTIC APPROACH
A. Background
Participants expressed similar views in that the current Criminal Justice System (CJS) practiced in
respective countries does not consider the views of victims under most circumstances. Instead, there was ageneral consensus among participating countries that the fundamental rights of the victim to be heard in the
CJS practiced by developed and developing countries play a minimum role in considering the victim’s views.
Many victims face insensitive treatment by the police, prosecutors and court officials, thus causing a“second injury”. This applies particularly to certain especially vulnerable categories of victims, such as
migrants, minorities, juveniles and victims of sexual offences.
Even if the offender is apprehended and brought to trial, the experience of victims in many jurisdictions
is that they have been marginalized and do not have the opportunity to express their views and concerns in
the criminal justice process or in human rights courts or international tribunals. Many countries in the groupdo not allow the victim to present his or her civil claim in conjunction with criminal proceedings.
It appears that the present reintegration process practiced by CJS in participating countries is more
offender-focused, while little consideration is given to the victim.
Considerable attention is quite justifiably paid to ensuring due process for the defendant, who is, after all,threatened with State-imposed punishment, and should therefore, be afforded every possibility of
establishing his or her innocence, and/or other considerations in his or her defence. This degree of attention
is not, however, paid to the victim. The State was assumed to be representing the interests of the victim,
and accordingly no need was perceived for direct victim involvement in the proceedings.
In 1985, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the ‘Declaration of Basic Principles ofJustice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power’. The Declaration defines who the victims of crime are. It
recognizes that crime is not just against the State but also inflicts loss, injury and psychological trauma on its
immediate victims and families.
Also, in 1999, the UN adopted the Handbook on Justice for Victims on the use and application of the
Declaration. (UN, 1999) This handbook is designed for criminal justice and other relevant agencies thatcome into contact with victims.

B. Current Practices
In Japan, the victim’s situation and sentiments are taken into account in judging the necessity ofprosecution under the principle of discretionary prosecution and establishment of relief measures for thecase of non-prosecution by public prosecutors offices and also in sentencing in the trial process. The court
shall also give victims the opportunity to state their opinion on the trial day.
Additionally, victim relief measures are taken by the police agency and consideration for victims such as
the notification of the content of disposition and the state of its execution are implemented in cooperation
with related criminal justice agencies.
Furthermore, “The Law for Victims of Crime” has been enacted of which Article 24 provides that in the
Cabinet Office, as a special organ, a committee for promoting policy for the victims is established.
With regard to Fiji, and including PNG, there is a Sexual Offenses Squad established within the Police
Department that deals with victims of all forms of sexual abuse (SA) and domestic violence (DA). A crises
centre has also been established in Fiji for victims of SA & DV. Also, in Malaysia, there is a special protection
facility for women and children. This facility falls directly under the responsibility of the Department ofSocial Welfare with the support of the Royal Malaysia Police (RMP). In addition, the RMP also has a special
child protection unit for handling child abuse cases.

240

129TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINARIn PNG, the victim’s view is provided through what is called the ‘Pre-Sentencing Report’ (PSR). Whenthe offender is found guilty by the court, and if the court feels this case may warrant a PSR, the court makesa request to the Probation Office to provide an objective PSR. The report will include views obtained fromthe victim and members of the family to be submitted before any criminal proceedings.

C. Problems Encountered
Due to minimal involvement of players in the current CJS practiced, it would be fair to make a generalcomment that little attention has been given to also provide similar support and assistance to victims ofcrime by participating countries.
Most participating countries expressed similar views that although there are programmes and services
provided for victims of crime in the respective countries, however these are minimal and vary from one
country to another. As expressed, participants in the CJS are more or less focused on the treatment of theoffender and his subsequent reintegration in society.
Recognition given to victims of crime is minimal: there is limited support and assistance provided toorganizations and institutions that promote such programme activities and services for the victims, apartfrom the efforts of agencies directly involved in the protection of children and women, and individualorganizations committed to the reintegration of victims in society.
We are also mindful of the fact that an offender can be a victim one way or another or vice versa. For
example, a female suspect arrested for stealing, may be subject to sexual abuse whilst going through theformal process.
A vertically structured administration is considered to be an obstacle to the implementation of concretemeasures expressed by participating countries.
The magnitude of victimization is not fully known to the authorities due to an unwillingness to reportincidents.

D. Countermeasures• Consider the establishment of a horizontal committee composed of related agencies for promoting
policy guidance for the reintegration of victims in society;• Develop an appropriate policy guideline with a clear statement of objectives and guiding principles
for practitioners in their respective professions;• Deliver appropriate training for practitioners in agencies, organizations and institutions;• Incorporate UN principles in appropriate domestic laws and regulations of respective countries andimplement appropriate programme activities;• Establish an appropriate National Crime Prevention Council by respective countries;• Consider reforming the CJS, if necessary, to incorporate or amend relevant provisions in theappropriate legislation with the view to give effect to the victim’s right to be heard and protected;
and• Consider the re-distribution of discretion, authority, budgetary resources and human resources forvictim support.
IV. RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
A. What is Restorative Justice?
“Basic principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters (ECOSOC R 2002
12)” adopted by the Economic and Social Council, the United Nations (July 2002) used the term ‘Restorative
Process’ to mean, any process in which the victim and the offender, and, where appropriate, any otherindividuals or community members affected by a crime, participate together actively in the resolution ofmatters arising from the crime, generally with the help of a facilitator.
Restorative processes may include mediation, reconciliation, conferencing and sentencing circles.
‘Restorative outcome’ means an agreement reached as a result of a restorative process. Restorative
outcomes include responses and programmes such as reparation, restitution and community service, aimed

241

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.68

at meeting the individual and collective needs and responsibilities of the parties and achieving thereintegration of the victim and the offender.
‘Parties’ means the victim, the offender and any other individuals or community members affected by acrime who may be involved in a restorative process.
While we discussed the concept of RJ, the following key issues and limitations were raised forconsideration.
1. Modern RJ
The notion of modern RJ emerged after the establishment of the modern criminal justice system.
Therefore, modern RJ is not a revitalization of traditional RJ. Under the Modern RJ, we always should
respect the fundamental human rights of victims and offenders based upon the principle of the due processof law.
2. Limits to RJ1
It is not straightforward to apply RJ where there is no direct victim, e.g. drugs offences, drunk driving.
Corporate victims such as large companies are also sometimes thought to be difficult to accommodate withinstandard RJ procedures.
3. Victim AttendanceThis is obviously desirable for the proper functioning of RJ procedures. But victims clearly must not be
coerced into attending, especially if they are in a vulnerable state.
4. Procedural Justice vs “Restorativeness”
Kathleen Daly (Australia), an RJ researcher, has drawn attention to this important conceptual distinction.
“Restorativeness” refers to a genuine emotional meeting of hearts and minds between victim and offender
within the RJ procedures. Daly’s research in South Australia suggests that it is significantly easier for RJ
conferences to achieve procedural justice (which they do better than courts do) than it is to achieve true
‘restorativeness” (though this definitely does sometimes happen). Moreover, restorativeness cannot beeasily orchestrated, e.g. if the victim is not ready to engage emotionally with the process, thenrestorativeness is unlikely to be achieved.
5. Offender Recidivism
The evidence on this is mixed. The best evidence comes from the RISE project in Canberra, which has
four samples. In the initial results, RJ did better than courts in reducing recidivism in one sample (theviolence sample) but not the other three. However, later (unpublished) RISE results are apparently lessfavourable to RJ, especially for aboriginal youth.
There is also some limited evidence, from RISE and elsewhere (see research review by Kurki) that
better results are obtained re offender recidivism where the victim is present at the RJ procedure. This
makes good theoretical sense in terms of the likely mechanisms involved.

B. Why do we Need RJ?
Under the current CJS, the authority to punish an offender is monopolised by the State. However, inrecognition of the need to restore harm caused by the crime and reintegration of the victim and offender into
the community, the modern form of Restorative Justice started to be discussed. Above all, in the current
CJS, the status of the victim is merely a part of the evidence in the trial. But the victim of crime has an initialconcern about the harm caused by crime. Therefore, we have to respect the status of the victim. On theother hand, the offender is also affected by the crime, which he/she committed. The reintegration of victim
and offender fully is achieved through the RJ process.
C. Current Situation
In accordance with the terms of the 10th UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of
1 The Group takes note that the arguments on the limitations of RJ are inspired by Professor Bottoms, one of the advisers to

the Group.

242

129TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

Offenders (Vienna 10-17 April 2000,) the Moroccan Code of Penal Procedure (CPP), promulgated in October
2003, stipulates in Article 41 as to the victim-offender process in the CJS, the following:
For example, before the prosecution process, the victim and offender, in case of an offence sanctioned
with not more than two years imprisonment, can register their reconciliation upon agreement in thepresence of the Public Prosecutor. The statement is signed by all parties involved and submitted to the
President of the first proceedings tribunal. This new CPP considers restitution in the form of compensation
to the victim.
In Thailand, the practice of restorative justice through what is called ‘Family Community Group
Conferencing’ (FCGC) began in June 2003. The Community involvement through Family Group
Conferencing is practiced and encouraged in diverting minor offenders from the CJS and reintegrating theminto society.
This programme (FCGC) is aimed at restoring the harm caused by the juvenile and provides the victim
the opportunity to participate in the process of reconciliation.
Traditional RJ is not a new concept in PNG. It embodies the values and practices familiar in many
traditional PNG societies. The RJ approach is concerned with balancing the needs of the victim, offender andthe community and draws on traditional and contemporary international practices to achieve a balanced
approach among all relevant parties involved. But Modern RJ must be established through the protection of
fundamental human rights of the person concerned.
Village Court System (Informal)
The primary role of the Village Court System (VCS) in PNG is to ‘ensure peace and harmony’, andendeavour to obtain an ‘amicable settlement of disputes’ and apply custom as determined in accordance with
the Village Court Act 1989. It is important to emphasize that the VCS is arguably the most significant
community-based restorative forum in PNG.

D. Problems Encountered• There is gender bias in the appointment of VC magistrates (PNG).
• There are instances whereby VC magistrates go beyond their jurisdiction (PNG).
• Difficulties experienced of prevention of re-victimization and assurance of compensation andrestoration by offenders in CJS.
• Insufficient evidence on crime in RJ.
• Limited cooperation of the community in implementation of the RJ process.
• Difficulties in ensuring the offender’s activities of restitution and reparation restoration in RJ.
E. Countermeasures• Consider the recruitment and appropriate training of selected facilitators.
• Courts to be involved in the Judgment of establishing guilt prior to referral to any restorative justiceprogramme.
• Formation of a group of selected and competent officers; including volunteers to facilitate appropriate
restorative justice programmes.
• Mobilization of community resources and implementation of a training system for facilitators.
• A selected agency to provide supervision and monitoring to ensure compliance and fulfilment of theagreement between the offender and victim in the restorative justice programme.
• Referral to CJS in case of the offenders’ failure in implementing the outcome of RJ process.
V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
A. Recommendations
Based upon the discussion of the group, we identified common problems with relevant countermeasures.
The group, therefore, submit the following recommendations.
1. Rehabilitation of Offenders(i) Diversification treatment, support and aftercare of offenders
Develop appropriate offender treatment, support and aftercare measures by utilizing community

243

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.68

resources. In developing offender treatment, special attention should be given to the relationship between
substance abuse and offending behaviour.

(ii) Education and training
Improve the training systems of appropriate organizations and institutions with a view to providing
effective delivery of programme activities and services. This would further improve the provision ofeffective supervision and support of offenders in the community.
(iii) Legislation
Develop appropriate policy guidelines to improve coordination and collaboration among relevant sector
agencies, organizations and institutions and the Government to consider embedding appropriate policies into
legislation; thus giving effect and recognition to volunteers, organizations and institutions in theperformance of their voluntary services for offenders in the community.
(iv) Utilizing proven evidence
Introduction of evidence based practice for offender treatment, support and aftercare. Promote utilizing
proven evidence from other countries’ studies and encourage further research and surveys in participating
countries.
2. Victims of Crime2(i) Education and training
Develop standards for police, lawyers, medical professionals and others as well as establish appropriate
training and educational courses. There is also a need to raise public awareness on avoiding victimization,
promoting understanding of the victims’ situation and so on.

(ii) Victim assistance programmes
Invest in projects to implement victim assistance and support, including services provided to women andchildren by non-governmental organizations, health and police professionals.
(iii) Legislation
Develop appropriate policy guidelines to improve coordination and collaboration among relevant sector
agencies, organizations and institutions.
Adopt legislation to incorporate the principles of the UN Victim Declaration into appropriate language ofMembers State countries in a form that provides a framework for the implementation of the Declaration.

(iv) Research and surveys
Invest in research to assess the extent to which victims receive services and justice as well as surveys tomeasure the extent of victimization and its impact, including the international victim survey and a regularsurvey focused on domestic violence and establish a permanent network of centres concerned withresearch, training, education and action for victims.
3. Restorative Justice Approaches(i) Education and training of facilitators
Consider the recruitment and appropriate professional training of selected facilitators.

(ii) Development of appropriate RJ programmes
The establishment of an expert group of selected and competent officers and facilitators; including
volunteers to develop and facilitate the implementation of appropriate restorative justice programmes.
(iii) Implementation of the RJ outcome
An agency mandated and authorized to provide supervision and monitoring to ensure compliance andfulfilment of the agreement between the offender and victim in the restorative justice programme.

2 The Group was greatly inspired by Professor Waller, an adviser to the Group, to develop recommendations under thisheading.

244

129TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR(iv) Legislation
Develop appropriate legislation to provide a basic legal framework for the restorative justice system toprotect fundamental human rights as practiced in New Zealand, Australia and other countries.
4. Other Relevant Issues3(i) National crime centre
Implement national crime prevention programmes consistent with the UN Guidelines and therecommendations of the World Health Organization to significantly reduce violence and criminal
victimization prioritizing violence within the family.

(ii) Policing
Foster policing that is focused on strategic approaches to the reduction of crime and partnerships withagencies such as schools, social services and local government that are likely to lead to real reductions invictimization specifically focused upon youth at risk.
(iii) Local government
Establish local level government crime prevention strategies to diagnose crime problems, develop plans,
and implement strategies and monitor success in reducing crime.
The Group stressed that the recommendations reflected are not exclusive and participating countries areencouraged to continuously endeavour to explore best practices from other countries to consider improving
upon them.

B. Conclusion
The issue of youth crime and juvenile delinquency associated with urbanization is a critical challenge
experienced by countries worldwide.
There is no single or easy solution to combating crime, especially as we confront the transition into a
new knowledge based economy and all that comes with it. The challenge is for us to continue to explore bestpractices, and draw from lessons learnt from other countries, and consider improving the current situation ofevidence-based best practices.
The Group discussed the role of the community and the concept of a restorative and holistic approach.
We strongly felt that the re-integration of offenders and victims based upon community involvement is thebest vehicle to support evidence-based practice in reducing the crime levels in the respective countries.

3 The Group was again greatly inspired by Professor Waller, an adviser to the Group, to develop recommendations under thisheading.

245