EFFECTIVE COUNTERMEASURES AGAINST OVERCROWDING OF
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIESChe-leung Lam *I. INTRODUCTION
Continuous growth of prison populations and overcrowding in correctional facilities is a serious problem
facing the Government of many parts of the world. As one of the world’s well developed cities, Hong
Kong is no exception to encountering the same stress of overcrowding in correctional facilities. As it hastremendous adverse effects on prison discipline and order as well as the rehabilitation of offenders, sufficientand effective countermeasures have to be taken in tackling the problem.
In the past decade, Hong Kong has suffered from overcrowding in correctional facilities. In 1999, the total
penal population was 10,358. With the total number of penal places in all 20 penal institutions standing at
9,045, the overall occupancy rate was 114.5%. In 2003, the total penal population was 11,682 and the overall
occupancy rate was 122.6%. It was not until 2008 that the situation improved slightly with a total penal
population of 9,343 and an overall occupancy rate of 96.7% (Appendix A). Nevertheless, it is still projectedthat there will be a serious shortfall in penal places in Hong Kong in the near future.
In view of such, the Correctional Services Department (CSD), as an integral part of the Hong Kong
criminal justice system, took various measures, including redevelopment and collocation of penal
institutions, enhancement of ageing penal facilities and proposals for establishing a super prison, to forestall
the situation from worsening. To a certain extent, the situation has been slightly alleviated with immediate
improvement noted.
However, it is anticipated that the situation may not be so desirable and long lasting with countermeasures at the CSD level alone. A comprehensive review of the criminal justice system to effect changes ineach stage of “due process”, from arrest to adjudication, sentencing, and correction, and enhancement inpublic education, are necessary. That is to say, innovations and enhancement at the Pre-sentencing stage,
Penal custody stage and Post-release stage of the criminal justice process, as well as the Public level (“the4Ps”) are worth considering.

II. THE EXISTING CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN HONG KONG
Before going further, it may be necessary to provide a full picture of the criminal justice process in HongKong. The criminal justice system in Hong Kong is one of the world’s most fair and well-developed systems.
From the arrest of a person by police or other law enforcement agencies to incarcerating a convicted person
as ordered by a court, there are statutory steps and procedures at every stage of the proceedings (Appendix
B). The time for the whole process may vary from a few days to years, depending on the progress ofinvestigation as well as the hearing of the courts. Anyhow, the procedures outlined below must be strictly
complied with.

A. Police Interview/Investigation
Upon arresting a person, the police will interview him or her with a caution statement taken from theperson arrested and conduct a preliminary investigation into the case if it has criminal elements. Dependingon the findings of investigation, the police may decide either to discharge the person because of insufficientevidence, to release the person with a caution (for teenagers with minor offence(s)), or to proceed withformal prosecution.
* Principal Officer (Rehabilitation Unit), Hei Ling Chau Addiction Treatment Centre, Hong Kong Special Administrative
Region, China.

112

142ND INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

B. Prosecution
Once prosecution of the person is decided, he or she will be formally charged and may either be releasedon police bail or detained in police custody pending a court appearance. In some cases, especially forjuveniles under the age of 18, where evidence is sufficient for prosecution a police officer of Superintendent
rank may exercise his or her discretion to caution rather than prosecute, with a view to offering him or her achance to mend his or her ways and save the juvenue from the bitterness of legal proceedings. This actin isunder the Police Superintendent Discretion Scheme.
C. Court Proceedings
Standing trial by court, the offender will be asked for his or her plea, and may plead guilty or not guilty to
the charge(s) laid against him or her. Once he or she pleads guilty and is convicted, sentence will be imposed
and the case closed. Where he or she pleads not guilty to the charge or pleads guilty without agreeing to thefacts of the crime(s) he or she has committed, the case will be adjourned for trial and he or she may either
be released on court bail or detained in jail custody. The case will be terminated after trial and sentence.
D. Sentencing
Before imposing a sentence on a convicted person, the court will take into consideration the backgroundof the individual, the nature of the offence(s) and the response from the public through various documents
and reports. Of course, some philosophies behind sentencing adopted by the judge such as retribution,
deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation, restoration and reparation, etc. may also affect the decision of thecourt. There are quite a lot of sentencing options in the Hong Kong criminal justice system but they cangenerally be categorized as non-custodial and custodial sentences.
1. Non-Custodial Sentences(i) Absolute discharge;(ii) Conditional discharge (Bond);(iii) Fine;(iv) Compensation Order;(v) Suspended sentence; and(vi) Community-based sentences:(a)Probation Order;(b)
Community Service Order; and(c)Curfew Order.
2. Custodial Sentences(i) Imprisonment;(ii) Training Centre;(iii) Detention Centre;(iv) Rehabilitation Centre;(v) Drug Addiction Treatment Centre;(vi) Reformatory School; and(vii) Hospital Order.

III. THE SITUATION OF OVERCROWDINGIN HONG KONG CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
A. Statistical Figures of Penal Population in Hong Kong
As mentioned before, Hong Kong has been suffering from the problem of overcrowding in penal facilities
in the past decade. With reference to the statistical figure (Appendix A), from 1999 to 2008, the occupancy
rate was over the certified capacity. In 1999, the total penal population was 10,358 and the overall occupancy
rate was 114.5%. It was most alarming that the total penal population reached 11,472 with the overall
occupancy rate at 121.3% in 2002. In 2003, the total penal population was 11,682 and the overall occupancy
rate was 122.6%. It is not hard to imagine how bad the situation was. It was not until 2008 that theovercrowding at the aggregate level improved slightly as compared with the preceding year. By the end of
2008, the total penal population was 9,343. With the total number of penal places in all 19 penal institutions
currently stands at 9,657, representing an overall occupancy rate of 96.7%.

113

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

Notwithstanding the slight improvement at the aggregate level, there is still a significant shortfall in
the number of penal places at maximum security prisons, remand facilities and female institutions. In thecase of male institutions, the occupancy rate in remand facilities and maximum security prisons was 106%,
representing a shortfall of 213 places. Similar to the situation in male institutions, overcrowding was more
serious in female remand facilities and maximum security prisons, where the occupancy rate was 162%,
representing a shortfall of 230 places. Worse still, according to the latest projection conducted by theCorrectional Services Department in 2008, the penal population is expected to increase to 11,960 by 2010
and 12,970 by 2015.

B. Staff Strength of Correctional Services Department of Hong Kong
In order to effectively manage such a huge number of offenders and rapid growth of the penal population,
an increase in staff strength of the Correctional Services Department seems to be necessary and inevitable.
However, it is frustrating that the staff strength of the Department has declined continuously in the past ten
years.
Due to the Asian financial turmoil in 1997, there was an economic recession in Hong Kong. The Hong
Kong Government has since 1999 taken more stringent control over expenditure and accelerated thepace of civil service reform by reducing the number of civil servants from around 198,000 in early 1999
to about 160,000 by 2007–2008. In this connection, the Department deleted 560 permanent posts in staff
establishment and 473 permanent posts in staff strength between 1999 to 2008 (Appendix C) throughorganizational restructuring and work process re-engineering.
Faced with the continuous growth of the penal population and declining in staff strength, theadministration and management of the Department was severely challenged. At the end of March 2009,
the total penal population (including inmates, Halfway House residents and detainees of Castle Peak Bay
Immigration centre) in Hong Kong is 10,575 and the strength of frontline custodial staff is 3,713. The ratioof staff to prisoners is 1: 2.85. The great pressure and heavy workload of staff, as well as the huge burden ofmanagement of the Department are not difficult to imagine.

C. Adverse Effects caused by the Overcrowding in Correctional Facilities in Hong Kong
There may be a wide diversity of causes of the overcrowding problem in Hong Kong correctional facilities
and the cores of the problem is really complicated. It may be attributable to the combination of factors likethe rise in the crime rate, the upsurge of illegal immigrants, legislative changes in sentencing policy andpublic preference for punitive reactions to crime and criminals. Anyhow, as the last law enforcement agency
in the chain of “due process” to detain and rehabilitate convicted offenders, the Correctional Services
Department is hardest hit with the burden by the overcrowding of penal population.
1. Breach of Discipline and Order in Prison
Most obviously, the overcrowding of the penal population directly causes greater pressure on thealready stressful prison life. Living in a restricted and congested environment, prisoners’ emotional
and psychological states are most affected. Scuffles, quarrels or even fighting among prisoners are notuncommon. Under such circumstances, the peace of the prison is difficult ot maintain and good disciplineand order is seriously challenged. It really places great pressure and burdens on the prison management andadministration.
2. Hygiene Problems
Difficulty in maintaining discipline aside, overcrowding in penal facilities also raises the problem of
personal hygiene. In a crowded and congested living environment, it is not hard to imagine that the quality ofventilation, cleanliness of dormitories and a good standard of prisoners’ personal hygiene may not be easily
maintained. As such, infectious illness such as influenza, skin disease, avian flu or even tuberculosis may
easily break out. It poses hazards and threats to the health of both prisoners and staff, and adds to burden of
medical care.
3. Hindrance to the Rehabilitative Programmes of Prison
Overcrowding in penal institutions also defeats the fair use of the facilities and treatment/training
programmes of prisons. Apart from punishment by deprivation of liberty, incarceration aims also at114

142ND INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

rehabilitating the offenders with its facilities and treatment/training programmes. In an overcrowded
situation, the common facilities in prison such as dining halls, counselling rooms, vocational training
workshops, multi-function rooms, chapels, etc. cannot be fairly and fully utilized by all prisoners. Withdisruption to institutional life, the designated treatment/training programmes such as counselling groups,
hobby classes and religious classes may not cater for all the population in the prison. It deprives prisonersof benefits from the treatment/training programmes and thus hinders the primary objectives of correctional
facilities to rehabilitate and re-socialize prisoners.

IV. MEASURES TAKEN BY THE CORRECTIONAL SERVICES DEPARTMENTAGAINST THE OVERCROWDING PROBLEM
In face of the continuous growth of the penal population and the resultant overcrowding problem incorrectional institutions, the Correctional Services Department endeavoured to take various measures
including launching the Rehabilitation Centre programme, collocation and redevelopment of correctional
institutions, enhancing development of early release schemes, taking initiatives in rehabilitation
programmes, and a lot of re-offending preventive initiatives to address the problem. The result was
encouraging and the pressure of overcrowding was to a certain extend alleviated.

A. Launching the Rehabilitation Centre ProgrammeWith a view to meeting the rehabilitation needs of young offenders, the Department launched the
Rehabilitation Centre programme in 2002. It consists of four Rehabilitation Centres, namely the Lai Chi
Rehabilitation Centre (for males), the Lai Hang Rehabilitation Centre (for males), the Chi Lan Rehabilitation
Centre (for females); and the Wai Lan Rehabilitation Centre (for females). The Lai Chi Rehabilitation Centre
and the Chi Lan Rehabilitation Centre run the Phase I programmes emphasizing discipline training whereas
the Lai Hang Rehabilitation Centre and the Wai Lan Rehabilitation Centre offer the Phase II programmes
focusing on community-based training. The training period in Phase I is two to five months and Phase II is
one to four months but the date of release of the inmates is not fixed and depends on their progress during
training.
Before the rehabilitation Centre programme came into operation, young offenders who were convicted
and needed custodial sentences might either be sentenced to a Detention Centre (1 to 12 months) or aTraining Centre (3 to 36 months). As the a Detention Centre was fit only for first offenders, most of therecidivists were usually sentenced to a Training Centre of which the training/detention period was much
more longer that that of Detention Centre. The launching of the Rehabilitation Centre programme not only
provided a new sentence option to the courts, but also bridge the service gap between the Detention Centre
and Training Centre to relieve the overcrowding of the penal population of young offenders.

B. Collocation and Redevelopment of Correctional Institutions
With a view to alleviating overcrowding in female institutions and grasping the opportunity to refurbish
the outdated penal facilities, the Department converted the now defunct Lai King Training Centre into apenal facility for young female offenders to relieve overcrowding of the Tai Tam Gap Correction Institution(for young females). Before commencing the conversion work, two Training Centres, Lai King Training
Centre and Cape Collinson Correctional Institution for males, were combined and the Lai King Training
Centre was collocated to the site of the Cape Collinson Correctional Institution. Upon completion of theconversion, 80 additional penal places for female offenders were provided.
In addition, the Department started a redevelopment project in Lo Wu Correctional Institution in 2007
and it was expected that the new institution would commence operation in early 2010. Comprising two
medium security and one minimum security institution, the redeveloped Lo Wu Correctional Institution
will provide 1400 female penal places, which will substantially relieve the overcrowding situation in female
institutions. Moreover, an extension project in Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre (for males) also provided 144
additional male penal places.

C. Enhancing the Development of Early Release Schemes
There is no parole system in the criminal justice system of Hong Kong. However, there are someearly release schemes which are similar in nature to the parole system. Since 1987, the Release Under

115

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

Supervision Scheme (RUSS) and the Pre-Release Employment Scheme (PRES) has been enacted.
Under the Release Under Supervision Scheme, prisoners who are sentenced to three (or more) years’
imprisonment and have served half of their sentences with good performance may be granted early releasefrom prison to undergo a period of aftercare supervision. For the Pre-Release Employment Scheme,
prisoners who are sentenced to two (or more) years’ imprisonment and have good performance during
incarceration may be granted early release from prison six months before their date of discharge to undergo
a half year of statutory aftercare supervision.
As one of the measures to relieve overcrowding of long term prisoners, the Department greatly
enhanced the development of these two schemes in the past ten years. In 1997, there were only ten
prisoners released under the schemes. In 2007, a total of 67 prisoners were released under the schemes(Appendix C). The upward trend of prisoners eligible for early release is obvious and it does help a lot in
diminishing the population of long-term prisoners.

D. Initiatives in Rehabilitation Programmes
Apart from taking various measures to tackle overcrowding in penal facilities and increase the penal
places, the Department also endeavoured to improve the rehabilitation on of offenders by taking initiatives
in rehabilitation programmes to help reduce crime rate and recidivism.
1. Initiatives for Reforming Offenders and Facilitating their Reintegration into Society
In this regard, actions were taken to:(i) develop the Risks and Needs Assessment and Management Protocol for Offenders;(ii) run Relapse Prevention Course for offenders with substance abuse problems;(iii) launch an Offending Behaviour Programme for prisoners;(iv) organize an Adventure-Based Counselling Programme (ABC) for young offenders;(v) refine the Inmate-Parent Programme to foster offenders’ family relationships.
2. Initiatives for Enhancing Offenders’ Employability
For enhancing offenders’ employability, initiatives were taken to:(i) refine the Employment Guidance Programme;(ii) introduce a new Information Technology Course for young offenders;(iii) provide accredited vocational training courses for prisoners.

E. Preventive Measures to Reduce Crime Rate and Recidivism
Special efforts for offenders’ rehabilitation and reintegration aside, the Department also took initiatives
at the social and community level as preventive measures to enlist public support with a view to reducing
crime rates and recidivism. It included:(i) organizing a series of publicity campaigns to appeal for public acceptance of offenders and public
support for offenders’ rehabilitation;(ii) l aunching of the Rehabilitation Pioneer Project to let students and youth meet with somerehabilitated offenders and share the serious, far-reaching consequences of crime;(iii) r unning of Continuous Care Projects involving eight Non-Government Organizations to followup those supervisees whose statutory aftercare supervision had expired to sustain the services
provided to those in need;(iv) organizing an employment symposium to appeal to the public for job offers for ex-offenders.
V. POSSIBLE MEASURES IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM OF HONG KONG
With the implementation and launching of various measures and initiatives by the Correctional Services
Department, the pressure of overcrowding of penal populations is obviously alleviated and the situation is
improved to a certain extent. However, as mentioned before, it is projected that there will still be a serious
shortfall of penal places in 2010 and 2015. The existing policies and measures taken may not suffice to tackle
the problem then. Thus, a comprehensive review of the whole criminal justice system to make changes at
each stage of the “due process” and enhancement in education and of the public are deemed necessary in
the long run.

116

142ND INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

Herewith, some possible measures or enhancements at the 4 “P” stages and level, namely the Presentencing Stage, Penal Custody Stage, Post-release Stage and Public Level, are suggested for a long lasting
solution to the problem.

A. Pre-Sentencing Stage
1. Release on BailThis stage includes the processes from an offender being arrested to prosecution and then sentencing.
With a view to effectively controlling the remand population in correctional institutions, more release on bailfor minor offences should be granted during the processes of police investigation and court adjudication. To
safeguard security loopholes and forestall the arrested person from jumping bail, Global Positioning System(GPS) technology may be used to trace the the targets.
2. Extended Use of Police Superintendent Discretion Scheme
On the other hand, the Police Superintendent Discretion Scheme should be further extended to young
adults first offenders who commit crimes of a minor nature, rather than confining its use to juveniles under
the age of 18. It is believed that a large portion of the criminal population may be exempted from the legal
proceedings as well as penal custody.
3. Community-Based Sentences
Regarding the court sentencing level, more community-based sentences, including Probation Orders,Community Service Orders, Curfew Orders, etc. should be imposed instead of the custodial sentences.
Moreover, non-custodial sentence options other than the conventional ones should be incorporated into thejudges’ decision lists.
4. Work Camp for WomenWith respect to the overcrowding situation in female penal institutions in Hong Kong, the concept of
the Work Camp for Women is worthwhile considering. In general, female offenders are usually non-violent,pose less threat to society, and their offences are mostly minor in nature or commercial crimes. Under the
sanction of the Work Camp, a term of work training is imposed on female offenders whose daytime workinside the camp is compulsory. They are allowed to stay overnight at home after working at the camp. While
staying outside the camp, their behaviour is monitored by their supervising officers. This sanction may
serve both the purposes of relieving overcrowding of female penal facilities and repaying society for theircrimes.
5. Restorative Justice
Another sentencing option which can be taken into consideration is restorative justice. The conceptof restorative justice is to settle some minor crimes through a reconciliation and mediation process by
involving the three parties, namely the offender, victim and community, instead of going through thetraditional legal proceedings by imposing a custodial or non-custodial sentence. Under the sanction ofrestorative justice, the elements of healing, victim-offender mediation, and apology and reintegration will
be part of the reconciliation and mediation process. Apart from helping to contain the growth of the penal
population, restorative justice may also benefit the rehabilitation of offenders as well as the recovery ofvictims.

B. Penal Custody Stage
This stage mainly focuses on the incarceration of prisoners and relates to the core business of theCorrectional Services Department.
1. Redevelopment of Correctional Institutions
There is no doubt that the redevelopment of correctional institutions to increase penal places and update
the aging penal facilities is the most tangible and effective measure in tackling the problem of overcrowding
in correctional facilities. Other than redeveloping the existing penal institutions, the Department may
consider exploring more suitable locations for establishing new penal institutions with modern rehabilitation
facilities.

117

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

2. Parole System
Unlike other well-developed countries, there is no specific parole system in the criminal justice system
of Hong Kong. Though the aforesaid two early release schemes serve a similar purpose in releasingsome long-term prisoners, the applicability of the schemes is virtually restricted to those prisoners
with a comparatively longer term of imprisonment. To reduce the penal population in the long run, acomprehensive parole scheme open to most of prisoners is necessary and worthy of development.
3. Transfer of Sentenced Persons
Besides, the Department may endeavour to study the feasibility and technicality of transferring personsof other nationality sentenced here in Hong Kong to their home countries to serve their remaining termsof imprisonment. According to the statistical figures (Appendix D), in Hong Kong correctional institutions,the total number of illegal immigrants in prison and prisoners of other nationality in 1998 was 3,749 (2,363
illegal immigrants and 1,386 of other nationality) or 31.47% of the total penal population. In 2004, the total
number was 2,750 (1,488 illegal immigrants and 1,262 of other nationality) or 21.65% of the total penal
population whereas there was 2,414 (967 illegal immigrants and 1,447 of other nationality), or 23%, in 2008.
Though there has been a slow down in the number of illegal immigrants incarcerated in Hong Kong, thenumber of prisoners of other nationality has risen slightly. The total number remains high and forms quitea large portion of the total penal population. As such, to transfer these sentenced persons to their homecountries to serve the remainder of their sentence is considered to be one of the effective measures to easeovercrowding of the penal population in Hong Kong.

C. Post-Release Stage
The post-release stage is the last but not the least stage of the criminal justice system. To the contrary,
it is a crucial stage in controlling the rate of crime and recidivism through rehabilitative initiatives andmonitoring of offenders released from penal institutions.
1. Enhancement of Aftercare Supervision
With legal provisions in Hong Kong, all prisoners/inmates released under the Post-Release Supervisionof Prisoner Scheme or special correctional programmes such as the Training Centre, Detention Centre,
Rehabilitation Centre and Drug Addiction Treatment Centre must undergo a period of statutory aftercare
supervision for one to three years after their release. During the supervision period, supervisees’ behaviour
and employment status are closely monitored. A breach of the supervision requirement or relapse tocrime will result in their recall to the correctional institutions for re-imprisonment or further training or
treatment. With the monitoring and guidance of the aftercare supervision, the ex-offenders can effectively
be kept on the right track and engage themselves in gainful employment. It is really an effective tool torehabilitate ex-offenders and contain their re-offending behaviour. In view of such, the Department may
inject more resources to enhance and develop her aftercare service, especially in staff strength, with a view
to minimizing the rate of crime and recidivism. With the trimming down in the crime and recidivism rate,
overcrowding in penal facilities may no longer occur in future.
2. Development of Social Enterprise
There is no denying that steady and gainful employment is one of the prerequisites of offenders’rehabilitation and reintegration. However, it is not easy for ex-offenders to get a desirable job given theircriminal background and lack of work skills. Feeling discriminated against and looked down upon, they
may be so frustrated that they resort to their former criminal path. To achieve both the aims of eliminating
discrimination against offenders and enhancing their employability, the Department may adopt a proactive
attitude to join hands with some merchants to form various social enterprises with a view to providing
job offers for ex-offenders. With job satisfaction and steady financial income, the path for offenders’rehabilitation and reformation are much broader and more vivid. Greater success in offenders’ rehabilitationmeans less risk of overcrowding in penal institutions.

D. Public Level
1. Enhanced Publicity Campaigns
As mentioned before, discrimination and stereotyping by the public are one of the greatest obstacles tooffenders’ rehabilitation. It is not rare for offenders who have sufficient determination and family support
to feel frustrated and inferior because of discrimination at work, school or even in the community. They

118

142ND INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

eventually re-associate with their former dubious peer groups to seek identity and validity. In this regard,
the Department may channel more resources into publicity campaigns, for examples, announcementof public interest on radio or TV, TV programmes and episodes, voluntary social services for offenders,
exhibitions, seminars, symposiums, etc. extensively and intensively until the completion of public education,
introducing the rehabilitation services provided by the Department and appealing for public acceptance andsupport of offenders’ rehabilitation. Strong support from the community and the public can directly foster
offenders’ reintegration and reduce the penal population.
2. Enhancement in Prevention Programmes
To effectively control the crime rate and penal population, it is wise to prevent new offenders from thecriminal path. In this connection, the Department has launched a Rehabilitation Pioneer Project covering aseries of educational talks, visits and forums for youth. Under the scheme, young students may visit penal
institutions and meet with inmates who share their experiences and lessons learned. It is a crime fighting
tool by deterring youth from committing crime after getting them to realize the consequences of crime.
Taking it as a crime prevention programme to further control the penal population, the Department may
consider extending the programme to the scope of adults rather than only focusing on youth groups in order
to extend the service and benefit more members of the public to avoid their stepping on the track of crime.
Similar programmes with specific topics such as drug abstinence, sex offences or violent offences would be
worthwhile. With the implementation of sufficient crime prevention measures, desirable control of penal
population may not be troublesome correctional administration.

VI. CONCLUSION
Overcrowding in penal facilities burdens and pressures correctional administration worldwide. The
causes of the problem are complicated and inter-related. It is not possible to attribute it to a single factor.
With the aforesaid illustrations of the “4Ps”, namely the Pre-sentencing Stage, Penal Custody Stage, Postrelease Stage and Public Level, it is not hard to note that there is a causal, vicious circle in the criminal
justice system and each stage of which may cause overcrowding in penal facilities. Besides, other systemsof the society may also consider extending the variety and contain, if not eliminate the development of thecausal, vicious circle.
Each stage of the “4Ps” may be the start of the overcrowding problem. In the Pre-sentencing Stage,
abuse of remand with less bail granted and imposing custodial sentences rather than non-custodial may
result in an increase in the penal population. In the Penal Custody Stage, lack of foresight in penal places
planning under or poor use of early release schemes, if not the parole system, and ineffective rehabilitation
programmes may worsen the situation and foster recidivism and overcrowding. In the Post-release Stage,
poor management and development of aftercare services, making no good use or under utilization ofsocial resources, and incompetence in implementation of crime prevention measures may undermine therehabilitation of offenders and accelerate crime and recidivism rates as well as overcrowding. Of course,
at the Public Level, discrimination, stigmatization and low acceptance of offenders may also impede therehabilitation and reintegration of offenders and boost the crime and recidivism rate and overcrowding. As
such, it is explicit that each stage is inter-related and a deficit at any one stage or level may affect the next
and trigger a vicious circle.
Besides the “4Ps”, other social systems, such as economy, education and community, may also have agreat impact on the issue. Economic downturn, incapable education system and grievances in society or
hostility towards or dissatisfaction with government may all cause an upsurge in crime and the recidivism
rate and penal population as well. Therefore, in order to thoroughly reduce overcrowding in penal facilities,
the government should take initiatives or make remedial policies in the relevant social systems in addition
to a comprehensive review with effective innovations and measures at each of the “4Ps”.

119

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

REFERENCES
Annual Digest of Correctional Statistics 2008. Statistics and Research Section, Correctional Services
Department.
Annual Review 2008, Hong Kong Correctional Services Department.
Discussion Paper of Legislative Council Panel on Security, Prison Development, 2006.
Discussion Paper of Legislative Council Panel on Security, Redevelopment of Lo Wu Correctional
Institution, 2008.
Bowen, H. (2002). Recent Restorative Justice developments in New Zealand/Aotearoa, International Bar
Association Conference 2002.
Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press.

120

142ND INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

APPENDIX A
Table 2 : Prison Population and Accommodation
Year

PrisonPopulation

I. Year End Position
1996
11,044% Change overPreceding Year

Certified
Accommodation

No. ofPrisons

Occupancy
Rate (%)

-1.3

8,574

18

128.8

1997

10,056

-8.9

8,572

19

117.3

1998

10,627

+5.7

8,631

19

123.1

1999

10,358

-2.5

9,045

20

114.5

2000

10,696

+3.3

9,115

20

117.3

2001

10,852

+1.5

9,204

20

117.9

2002

11,472

+5.7

9,459

20

121.3

2003

11,682

+1.8

9,527

20

122.6

2004

11,437

-2.1

9,729

20

117.6

2005

10,063

-12.0

9,190

19

109.5

2006

10,110

+0.5

9,784

19

103.3

2007

9,819

-2.9

9,576

19

102.5

2008

9,343

-4.8

9,657

19

96.7

121

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

APPENDIX B“Due Procedure” in the Hong Kong Criminal Justice System
Policeinvestigation

Release due to insufficientevidence or otherconsiderations

Action required
Police discretion

Minor offence, admission
to involvement. offender
aged under 18

Prosecution
Judicial
appearing/hearing

Police Superintendent’s
Discretion Scheme
Supervision under theJuvenile Protection Section

Guilt
admitted

Guilt
deniedCourt hearing

Acquittal

Verdict

Sentencing

Discharge

122

Order to pay fines,
bond of good
behaviour, care andprotection order. etc

Conuuunity-b
ased sentence

Custody

613

622

601

225

596

211

613

223

62

622

230

69

615

223

63

36

13

2

637

221

65

31

12

2

4

737

358

718

344

32

725

360
712

352
737

370
716

355
733

359
721

356
727

365
708

358

719

367

705

353

700

346

700

344

693

344

677

327

682

342

674

312

680

339

665

305

682

339

654

303

678

339

629

295

N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

Notes : Establishment (E) excludes supernumerary posts.
Strength (S) refers to substantive rank.
Civilian staff refer to General Grades and Common Grades Staff.

726

350

73

7,563 7,290 7,286 7,082 7,097 6,987 7,215 6,982 7,028 6,927 7,059 6,971 7,020 6,950 6,828 6,814 6,738 6,652 6,678 6,517 6,637 6,456 6,622 6,456 6,655 6,509

621

197

76

25

13

2

4

Total

621

231

63

37

12

2

3

1

775

643

233

75

18

16

2

4

1

Civilian
Staff

632

240

66

34

12

2

2

1

1

361

665

237

56

22

13

2

4

1

1

CSI Staff

658

247

62

33

12

2

5

1

1

6,427 6,214 6,191 6,020 6,012 5,923 6,108 5,911 5,936 5,850 5,967 5,905 5,934 5,892 5,782 5,770 5,701 5,648 5,654 5,531 5,618 5,486 5,601 5,499 5,638 5,585

639

250

65

30

12

2

4

1

1

N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

644

271

63

34

12

2

4

1

1

Sub-total

192

1

619

265

66

30

12

3

4

1

1

217

2

621

272

69

34

12

2

3

1

1

AO II
(VM) *

13

627

271

63

31

15

2

4

1

1

25

671

282

70

36

14

2

4

1

1

Offr
(VM) *

642

274

60

33

13

2

4

1

1

2,851 3,100 2,973 3,065 2,927 3,016 2,955 3,043 2,843 3,027 2,880 2,989 2,831 2,938 2,807 2,911 2,808 2,917 2,803 2,872 2,799 2,861 2,778 2,863 2,811 2,963

655

288

71

38

13

2

4

1

1

AO II

634

256

64

32

12

2

4

1

1

2,205 1,863 2,049 1,913 2,021 1,886 2,061 1,847 2,059 1,821 2,042 1,895 2,047 1,919 1,979 1,864 1,916 1,771 1,888 1,721 1,876 1,702 1,868 1,670 1,869 1,648

675

280

72

38

14

2

4

1

1

AO I

655

262

69

33

15

3

4

1

1

669

287

69

38

15

2

2

1

1

Offr

261

61

35

11

4

4

1

1

316

72

38

14

2

2

1

1

PO

76

36

9

3

4

1

1

81

38

15

2

2

1

2

CO

35

12

2

3

1

1

41

2008
E
S

Supt

2007
E
S

15

2006
E
S

SS

2005
E
S

2

2004
E
S

CS

3

1

1

2003
E
S

3

1

1

2002
E
S

AC

1

1

2001
E
S

1

1

2000
E
S

DC

1

1999
E
S

1

1998
E
S

CCS

1997
E
S

1996
E
S

Rank

Table 35 : Establishment and Strength of Correctional Services Department ( as at end of year )142ND INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

APPENDIX C

123

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

APPENDIX D
Table 34 : Parole Applications

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Application for RUSS
Success *Recommended by CSD

5

3

2

2

4

1

2

0

2

3

13

Not recommended by CSD

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

1

3

Recommended by CSD

1

3

1

3

0

0

0

1

0

1

1

Not recommended by CSD

21

10

11

5

5

3

6

2

4

3

2

Withdrawal

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

Total

28

17

15

10

10

4

8

4

10

8

20

Recommended by CSD

5

1

2

4

5

13

17

12

29

46

46

Not recommended by CSD

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

2

2

5

Recommended by CSD

7

10

5

9

9

4

4

1

1

2

1

Not recommended by CSD

39

24

17

12

18

17

20

12

8

12

38

Withdrawal

4

6

1

1

0

3

0

2

1

0

2

Total

55

41

25

26

32

37

41

31

41

62

92

Failure *Application for PRES
Success *Failure *Notes : RUSS = Release Under Supervision Scheme
PRES = Pre-release Employment Scheme* Based on Decision made by the Release Under Supervision Board.

124

142ND INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

APPENDIX E
Table A3 : Penal Population by Sex by Broad Nationality ( as at end of year )Mainland Chinese
Sex / Year
Male

Local Chinese Illegal Immigrant

Legal Entrant@

Sub-total

Other Nations /Territories#

Total

1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008

6,909
6,767
7,329
6,999
7,047
6,962
6,823
6,427
6,282
6,190
5,804

2,043
1,943
1,579
1,613
1,593
1,675
1,160
885
984
785
615*

389
359
330
314
369
574
1,015
864
825
766
803

2,432
2,302
1,909
1,927
1,962
2,249
2,175
1,749
1,809
1,551
1,418

1,142
1,019
1,010
892
934
954
1,022
846
1,033
1,027
1,037

10,483
10,088
10,248
9,818
9,943
10,165
10,020
9,022
9,124
8,768
8,259

Female
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008

528
531
559
606
674
691
723
698
676
727
762

320
328
433
605
337
138
328
405
424
413
352

339
374
564
781
1,533
1,760
1,394
914
810
607
708

659
702
997
1,386
1,870
1,898
1,722
1,319
1,234
1,020
1,060

244
224
213
244
257
258
240
272
330
431
410

1,431
1,457
1,769
2,236
2,801
2,847
2,685
2,289
2,240
2,178
2,232

Both Sexes
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008

7,437
7,298
7,888
7,605
7,721
7,653
7,546
7,125
6,958
6,917
6,566

2,363
2,271
2,012
2,218
1,930
1,813
1,488
1,290
1,408
1,198
967

728
733
894
1,095
1,902
2,334
2,409
1,778
1,635
1,373
1,511

3,091
3,004
2,906
3,313
3,832
4,147
3,897
3,068
3,043
2,571
2,478

1,386
1,243
1,223
1,136
1,191
1,212
1,262
1,118
1,363
1,458
1,447

11,914
11,54512,017
12,054
12,74413,012
12,705
11,311
11,364
10,946
10,491

Notes :	Penal population includes prisoners, inmates, remands, VMs, VIIs, ECVIIs and other detainees and civil prisoners inpenal institutions but excludes infants, half-way houses residents and detainees in CIC.
@ refers to Mainland Chinese 2-way permit / passport holders.
# Including VII(S.32) detained in GIRC since June 1998 after closure of all VM centres.
* Including 2 detainees in SLPC.

125

REPORTS OF THE COURSEGROUP 1
EFFECTIVE COUNTERMEASURES AGAINST OVERCROWDING OF
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIESChairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members
Advisers

Mr. Oleskyenio Enrique Florez Rincon
Mr. Hiroshi Suda
Mr. Ricky Iomea
Ms. Marialda Lima Justino da Cruz
Mr. Jean Claude Ngoie Mutombo
Mr. Mahendra Nath Upadhyaya,
Mr. Takahiro Sumikawa
Prof. Naoyuki HaradaProf. Fumiko Akahane(Colombia)(Japan)(Solomon Islands)(Brazil)(DR Congo)(Nepal)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCION
On 22 May 2009, Group 1 commenced its workshop. The Group appointed, by consensus Mr. Florez
as its Chairperson, Mr. Suda its Co-Chairperson, Mr. Iomea as its Rapporteur and Ms. Justino da Cruz as
its Co-Rapporteur. Lively discussions occurred during the course of the sessions. The Group had its lastworkshop session on 15 June 2009.

II. SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSSIONS
A.	Alternatives to Pre-Trial Detention
1.	Police Power in releasing Suspects on BailThe powers available to police in fixing bail in some cases and releasing suspects without being indictedvaries from one jurisdiction to another. However, in some countries, the discretionary powers of police
during investigation appear to be similar in some ways. For instance, in the criminal justice systems of
Brazil and the Solomon Islands, police can fix bail in less serious offences, and in Brazil, only the judge has
the power to release a suspect on conditions. In Nepal, the police can release a suspect with the consent of
the public prosecutor.
One participant from Japan stated that in Japan, police can release suspects but sometimes publicprosecutors view this as not proper. The reason is that although police might think that the case is notserious the public prosecutors might think otherwise. Thus, it is believed that police judgments in somecases are not adequate at times.
The above views show that although having power to release suspects by police would contribute to
avoiding unnecessary detention and overcrowding in correctional facilities, the objectives and principles ofjustice must also be carefully observed.
At the close of the discussion, some members support the idea that police should have discretionary
powers to release suspects and on the contrary, some participants think that it is not a good idea to givethese powers to the police because of the possibility that the powers might be abused.
2.	House Arrest or Detention by Police
The first subject of discussion was house arrest or detention by police. In some countries, after asuspect has been arrested, he or she must be referred to a judge who decides whether the suspect should
be released or not. In some countries which are represented in the group, if a judge releases a suspect
restrictions can often be imposed.
In some jurisdictions, such as Japan, the police arrest and then refer the suspect to public prosecutors(within 48 hours) who then decide whether to seek detention or not. If a prosecutor decides not to ask acourt for detention then the suspect can be released without any restrictions. The police sometimes releasea suspect to his or her home but no restrictions may be imposed.

126

142nd INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSEIn discussing the issue of house arrest, the use of monitoring systems was also touched on. It is
understood that this system is used in some countries. Some expressed the view that this system is not
appropriate pre-trial because the suspect is yet to be convicted. Also, it might be against human rights
principles.
It was pointed out by some members that although house arrest is an effective measure against
overcrowding, the rights of the suspect/accused must also be considered. It was also expressed that there
should be a balance between the rights of the suspect and the need to protect evidence from destruction.
Some participants argued that house arrest is only necessary for serious offences.
In spite of the various views expressed, the group agrees that house detention is an effective measure
to alleviate overcrowding. However, the issues such as human rights and costs also need to be considered.
These must also be balanced with the need to protect the destruction of evidence, the need to avoid
absconding and the need for maintenance of public safety.
3. Submission to Supervision of a Person or an Institution
As far as the countries represented in the group are concerned, this alternative to incarceration ispracticed in some countries and not in others.
This supervision is practiced only in relation to juveniles and some participants expressed the view that
this is not effective. The importance of the responsibility of supervisors was also discussed. It is a goodmeasure against overcrowding but only if supervision is effective.
4. Electronic Monitoring
As far as the countries represented in the group are concerned, this system is yet to be introduced intheir respective systems. Most members commented that the system is hard to implement and would bevery expensive. On the contrary, one argued that although the system might be expensive, it is better thankeeping innocent persons on remand in jail for a long period of time. Some expressed the view that thissystem is necessary in some societies, especially in relation to sex-offenders. Others think this system isinfringes upon human rights.
5. The Prohibition of the Suspect from Leaving a Particular Area
It appeared from the discussion that this is used in some countries and not in other countries. In
countries where this is used, the procedural stage where this is used varies. For example, in Japan the abovemeasure can only be used after indictment, as a condition attached to bail, by a judge. In other countries,
this measure is used even before indictment and is often a condition attached to bail. In most countries thismeasure is applied only in relation to petty offences.
According to the discussion, this is believed to be effective and working well on the presumption thatsuspects who are released with this condition attached often observe this order because of fear of being
detained again for breach of the condition.
In Japan, as in other countries, one reason why suspects are detained during investigation is becauseof the need to prevent interference with investigation or destruction of evidence. Also, accomplices are
sometimes not released during the investigation period because of the possibility that they might conspire todefeat the course of justice.
In conclusion, of the discussion regarding the above subject, it appears that all members of the groupagree that this is a good measure, but there is a need for effective supervision to avoid issues such as
interference with investigation or the destruction of evidence.
6. Investigation without Arrest
Each member of the group explained the system in their respective countries regarding arrest during andafter investigation. In some countries, police can arrest a suspect during investigation; however there aresome cases in which the police must obtain a warrant of arrest from a judge before arresting a suspect. In
relation to minor offences, suspects can be released within a few hours of arrest.

127

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

In Japan and other countries, for minor offences, whether a suspect is arrested or not, the investigation
continues and the suspect is usually not detained. In some countries the arrest of the suspect is mandatory,
but the decision to release a suspect can only be made by a judge or a prosecutor.
In conclusion, in some countries it is difficult for investigators to investigate without the arrest of thesuspect because of the possibility of destruction of evidence, absconding and safety of the suspect, victims
and witnesses. The group agrees that police having the discretion to release suspects in minor cases cancontribute to alleviating overcrowding. Some participants were quite sceptical about giving that discretion to
the police because of the possibility of the abuse of power.
7. Prohibition of the Suspect/Accused from appearing at Identified Places or meeting Named Individuals
Most of the participants indicated during the discussion that prohibiting a suspect or an accused fromappearing at identified places or meeting named individuals is an order which courts often impose.
In Japan and the Solomon Islands, this is sometimes imposed as a bail condition when a judge grants bailto a suspect or an accused. The objective is mainly to prevent the destruction of evidence and to prevent
accomplices from conspiring to defeat the course of justice.
In Brazil, this is stipulated in the law, with the aim of protecting victims, such as victims of family
disputes, but it is not applied as a bail condition.
The group agrees that this is a good alternative to pre-trial detention but sometimes lacks effective
supervision. However, some participants argued that this seemed to work well as people often report to
Public Prosecutors any breaches or failure to comply with the condition/order by the suspect.
The group accepts that in developing countries, sometimes suspects cannot afford to meet certain bailrequirements such as the need to deposit certain amounts of money.
However, this may not be a big problem as one participant from Japan pointed out that in Japan, whena suspect is unable to pay the bail bond required of him or her, an association does exist and can assist in
paying the bond.
The group unanimously agrees that the payment of bail bonds is a good measure and it is important for
the establishment of associations to assist suspects regarding bail bonds.
8. Confiscation of Passport of the Suspect
This measure is used in most of the countries represented. Some participants also indicated that the
courts can also have the discretion to make an order preventing the suspect from applying for a passport if itconsiders that there is a flight risk.
In Nepal, the investigating authority can make this order in relation to suspects that have been indicted
for corruption offences. It is interesting to know that in Nepal, foreigners indicted for offences that carrya maximum penalty of more than six months’ imprisonment are not entitled to bail, unless they show
exceptional circumstances. This is different from Japan where there is no restriction on bail no matter theseverity of the offence. In the Solomon Islands, suspects charged with murder and treason are not entitledto bail unless they show exceptional circumstances. In Brazil, terrorist crimes, practice of torture and drugrelated offences, such as drug trafficking, are non-bailable.
Despite the different approaches in applying this measure, the group agrees that this is a good alternative
to incarceration and recommends that there should be flexibility in bail to avoid overcrowding.
9. Release with an Order to Pledge Financial or other forms of Property, such as Bail
It is understood that there is criticism of bail because it is believed that it is not applied equally. Somesuspects can afford to meet such orders but others cannot.
In concluding this topic, the group agrees that this is a good system however; it is recommended that it isimportant and necessary for countries that are yet to have associations that can assist suspects with meeting128

142nd INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE

bail requirements to establish such an association.

B.	Diversion from Criminal Justice Procedure
1. Absolute or Conditional Discharge
In most of the countries represented in the group, absolute or conditional discharge is a course applicableby courts and prosecutors.
In Japan, once a case is prosecuted, the prosecution cannot be suspended but withdrawal is possible.
In many countries,1 the decision to suspend or withdraw a matter must be approved by the bosses of theprosecution department and the government. In countries where such a decision is solely made by theprosecutor having carriage of the matter, it was argued that victims who do not agree with any decision
to suspend prosecution should be provided with an opportunity to request an independent review of suchdecision.
2. Decriminalization
Some participants believe that decriminalization of some minor offences is important because it reduces
overcrowding and also because judges and prosecutors do not have to be burdened with more cases. One
participant however, thinks that decriminalization should not happen because of overcrowding. There areother factors that must be considered before any decision could be made whether to decriminalize or not.
The group seems to agree that the situation differs from one country to another and in some cases,
decriminalization of minor offences is effective. However, public opinion must first be ascertained before any
decision is made.
3. Restorative JusticeThe other topic of discussion was restorative justice. In some countries represented there is no
restorative justice. In one or two countries, although there is no requirement under law for restorative
justice, it is practiced in the form of reconciliation or compensation. This is often done in minor cases and isused in the criminal justice process.
The participant from Colombia informed the group that Restorative Justice is an alternative mechanism
which is practiced in his country. He explained what restorative justice is and its different forms which
include:•••••Restitution/Compensation;  
Community work;
Individual reparation;
Collective reparation;
He further indicated that the period for completing restorative justice is 60 days. If not completed
within this period then prosecutors will proceed with the case in court. Resolving a case throughthis system prevents a case from entering the criminal justice process. In Colombia more offences
are resolved through an established Reconciliation Office. This is an independent office.

In some countries represented, there is no restorative justice and in some countries, there is no strictor formal legal requirement for it but it is used in the criminal justice system, for instance, matters are
sometimes resolved by way of reconciliation. Although this is not in a strict sense restorative justice, it issomehow appears to be a form of restorative justice.
The group then identified the merits and demerits of Restorative Justice. The merits are:• Alleviates overcrowding;  
• Saves time and money;  
• It lessens the burden or workload on police, public prosecutors and judges;  
• It satisfies victims;  
• It avoids stigmatization of offenders.  
The demerits are:• Lack of specific and general deterrence;  
• Recidivism cannot be avoided;  
1 Countries represented in Group 1.

129

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80•••

Possibility of victim being disadvantaged in the mediation process;  
Possibility of unfair treatment for some offenders (risk of injustice to some offenders);  
Public insecurity.  

The group agrees that what may be considered a serious offence in one country may not be a serious
offence in another country. What may be seen as minor offences in some countries might be serious offencesin other countries.
However, the group tends to agree that Restorative Justice may and should only be applied to offences
which are considered to be minor offences in each country.
The group recommends that the establishment of an independent and neutral mediating body in theprocess is fundamental.

C. Speedy Trial Measures
1. Summary Proceeding and Speedy Trial
Each participant from the countries represented informed the group of the current situation in theircountries in relation to speedy trial.
In Japan, there are two processes, one is the summary proceeding and the other is the speedy trial. In asummary proceeding, if the punishment for an offence is equivalent to a fine, trials may not be held. Instead,the evidence documents are sent to the judge after indictment and the judge then makes a decision.
Speedy trial in Japan is used to shorten the time period between indictment and trial and is used mainly
in minor drug offences, immigration related offences, etc., where the execution of an imprisonment sentence
must be suspended.
It is obvious from what was said by the participants that in most of the countries, there is lack of such a
speedy trial procedure. Suspects therefore have to be detained for longer periods of time in prisons.
The group identified some common factors of lack of speedy trials. These include:••••No fixed timeframe for investigation and prosecution;
Minimum number of judges in some countries;
Legal frameworks, such as procedures, sometimes unclear and lengthy;
Behaviour of stakeholders such as defence lawyers (e.g. intentional delaying of cases).

2. Pre-Trial Preparation System
Discussion started with the focus on the new pre-trial preparation system which was introduced in Japan
in 2005. The process, as explained by a Japanese participant, allows for the screening of the facts and thelegal issues. This is where the public prosecutor, the suspect or his or her lawyer and the judge discuss whatevidence would be produced in court. The judge cannot scrutinize the content of the evidence.
It is designed with the aim of reducing the trial period, court sessions and time between conclusion ofhearing and the pronouncement of judgment/sentence. One participant from Japan explained that basedon his personal experience, some of the cases were finalized within two months, so this system is notdisadvantageous for the accused.
The new pre-trial preparation/trial arrangement is similar to pre-trial conference in the Solomon Islands.
In the Democratic Republic of Congo, pre-trial preparation is done only for minor offences. This is notpracticed in other countries represented.
The group therefore agrees that this is a very good system because it:• reduces the length of detention (remand period) and reduces the time period for trial;• reduces and avoids overcrowding;• avoids wasting of court resources and allows for speedy trials.

130142nd INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE

III. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. There is a need to fix timeframes for investigation and prosecution; however, the timeframe may be
extended depending on the nature of each case;
2. There is a need for flexibility in the recruitment procedure or policies and appointment of sufficientnumbers of judges;
3. The use of summary proceedings is recommended to avoid wasting time and resources;
4. There is a need to utilize pre-trial preparations or arrangements.

131