PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AND CONTROLLING RECIDIVISMUSING EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS WITH OFFENDERS-AN EXAMINATION OF BEST PRACTICESYoung-Hoon Ha*
I. INTRODUCTION
Generally, for released offenders, it is not an easy task to successfully readjust to society after serving aprison sentence. Released prisoners often think they have repaid their debt to society by serving theirprison sentence. Despite the sentence having being served however, society does not welcome released
prisoners. Instead it distrusts them and maintains a distance from them. This situation, in which our society
is not ready to accept released prisoners as new citizens even though the released want to be good citizens,
Barnes and Teeters explain as “societal lag”.
According to a statistic, more than 50% of all offenders have a previous criminal record. This means that
one of the most effective ways to prevent crime is to control offenders and prevent re-offending. As Barnes
and Teeters said, we should accept that society as a whole is also responsible for the recidivism of offenders.
Generally, recidivism means a continuance of crime by the same person. However, the precise meaningof recidivism is different depending on the stage of criminal procedure. In Korea, at the police andprosecution stage recidivism means that the same person has been apprehended for crime twice or more;
the courts consider recidivism has occurred when the same person has been convicted twice or more; andthe correctional system considers recidivism to be the imprisonment of the same person twice or more in
the five years since h or her release. In this paper, when I mention police I employ the police’s
interpretation of recidivism, and when I mention correction I employ the correctional meaning of recidivism.

II. THE RECIDIVISM RATE IN KOREA
According to statistics from the National Police Agency, the recidivism rate in 2005 in six categories,
murder, robbery, arson, theft, rape, and violence is 58.3%. This means that about six out of ten people who
committed those crimes are recidivist in the same or different crimes. The recidivism has rate continuously
increased since 1990 and it reached almost 70% in 2003. It has decreased in 2004 and 2005, but it is too early
to say the rate is continuously decreasing.

* Assistant Deputy Warden, Gyeong Ju Prison, South Korea.

125

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Table 1: The Recidivism Rate for Six Major Crimes (2001~2005)
Year

Rate

Total

MurderRobbery

Rape

Arson

Theft

Violence

2001

C

586,929

1,171

5,547

5,584

1,220

59,472513,935

2001

R

380,970

819

3,790

3,865

876

32,453

339,267

2001

%

64.9

69.9

68.3

69.2

71.8

54.6

66.0

2002

C

513,367

1,051

5,453

5,136

1,135

63,644436,915

2002

R

337,246

742

3,836

3,659

823

34,051

294,135

2002

%

65.7

70.6

70.3

71.2

72.5

53.5

67.3

2003

C

512,212

1,085

6,970

5,425

1,417

61,651

435,664

2003

R

337,540

764

4,873

3,664

1,048

32,980294,211

2003

%

69.9

70.4

69.9

67.5

74.0

53.5

67.5

2004

C

536,644

1,200

6,466

6,418

1,546

68,398452,553

2004

R329,818

758

4,077

3,787

1,160

34,541

285,495

2004

%

61.5

63.2

63.1

58.4

75.0

50.5

63.1

2005

C

522,459

1,178

5,084

6,667

1,616

72,149435,765

2005

R

304,522

739

3,313

3,733

1,137

36,010259,590

2005

%

58.3

62.7

65.2

56.0

70.4

49.9

59.6

C = Caught
R = Recidivist

III. ISSUES IN KOREAN RECIDIVISM
A. Environmental Issues of Offenders
The first obstacle facing released offenders who want to start a new life is the stigma of being an exconvict. The stigma exists everywhere in their community: friends, workplace, even in the home, andfollows the released wherever they go and obstructs a new way of life. Furthermore, most released
prisoners don’t know how to follow the rapid changes in society following a long period in prison. This leads
to frustration and often contributes to them giving up in their struggle for a new life.
In the two or three month period just after release, ex-prisoners can easily become vulnerable, sociallyand psychologically. Therefore, people refer to this period as the crime incubation period. If there is notenough support and care for released persons during this time it’s very difficult to expect offenders to start a
new life. Unfortunately it is not easy to meet those support and care needs at this moment.
A particular problem is that many released offenders don’t have functional families and are exposed to thetemptation of the criminal world. Even though people agree with the concept ‘welcome them for a new life,’
still they distrust and try to keep away from the released. Being unable to find a way to live as a member ofthe community creates negative results in the fight against recidivism.

B. Issues in the Correctional Stage
It is true that there is still doubt whether a real rehabilitation is possible or not, even though mostcountries have adopted policies which express the value of treatment and rehabilitation through educationand training in prison. Martinson, (1974) said “nothing works” after he researched the effect of prison
treatment programmes but Adams and Palmer (1976) said there are positive effects to treatment
programmes for prisoners. So it is not an easy question to answer with certainty one way or another.
The Korea Correctional Bureau surveys the re-entry rate to prison every three years to see how prison
treatment programmes work. According to the results of the survey from 1 January 1999 to 31 Dec 2001,
there were 92,828 released prisoners and 23,096 of them returned to prison within three years of theirrelease. This means that 24.9% of released prisoners (one in four) returned to prison within three years.

126135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

There are two main reasons for this return rate. Firstly, treatment programmes in prisons given to
prisoners during the prison term didn’t work as expected. Across the country there are 47 correctional
institutions and there are many treatment programmes for offenders, varying a little depending on theinstitution. But those programmes don’t work as expected because of overcrowding, lack of personnel andprogramme experts, and the accommodation policy for sentenced prisoners which designates prisonsaccording to the offender’s incarceration number.
Another important reason is that vocational training in prison is not related to life outside of prison.
Almost all correctional institutions have vocational training programmes and the Correctional Bureau has adepartment controlling all prison industries and vocational training programmes but the work skills andcertificates are usually too old to be of use after release. Most prison industry is based on simple labouring.
Programmes given in prison are not modern enough to keep up with the changes occurring outside of prison
so they are of little use when offenders are released.

C. Issues of Aftercare
Even though offenders repent and prepare to be good citizens during their prison terms they still need aperiod of time to adjust to the community and this period is crucial for deciding whether they can
successfully reintegrate or not. If they fail to adjust during this period there is little hope that they will avoid
a criminal future.
It is true that once even one crime is committed many offenders can’t get out of the vicious circle ofcrime. It means that efforts of the criminal justice system to prevent recidivism are not working at all. In
particular, correctional treatment programmes in correctional institutions and aftercare programmes forreleased offenders are ineffective. To solve this dilemma many countries try to refocus on community
corrections.
The rehabilitation centre system was developed on the basis of this philosophy. Rehabilitation centres
help released prisoners by giving physical and psychological support for their reintegration to thecommunity. In Korea, rehabilitation centres began as civil volunteer work and developed as governmental
work. Now the National Rehabilitation Agency under the Ministry of Justice is in charge of the rehabilitation
programme. The agency helps released offenders by supporting them with food and shelter, travelling
expenses, vocational training and job placement.
Job placement is the most important area with which offenders need help; there are restricted types ofjobs available for the released, mostly physical labour. Many offenders quit such jobs because they think it is
too hard and the payment is too low. For employers who hire released offenders there is no advantage,
instead only the risk of criminal activity by their new employee. This means that released prisoners are
rarely employed.
Another issue in rehabilitation work is money. To help the offenders the Agency needs more money thanis available in its budget. The budget for rehabilitation is a low government priority.

Table 2: Budget of the National Rehabilitation Agency (in Millions of Won)
Year

00

01

02

03

04

Total

6,216

6,808

6,858

6,346

6,836

Governmental subsidy

3,709

4,447

4,657

5,003

5,642

Self business

2,507

2,361

2,201

1,343

1,194

In Table 2, we can see that the budget of the National Rehabilitation Agency has increased since 2000,
but the amount is still very low (in 2004 less than US$700,000). To guarantee successful rehabilitation work
sufficient funds are essential but the actual budget allotted is much too low. For example, in 2002, the budget
given to the Agency allowed only 1.6% of all released offenders to get help. This shows that the governmentis unconcerned about the matter of rehabilitation for released offenders.

127

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Table 3: The Number of Offenders Helped by the Agency
Year

Number of
CrimesPerpetrators
CaughtClearance
Rate (%)

Number of
CaughtNumber of
HelpedRatio of
Help

1999

1,732,522

1,651,896

95.3

2,081,797

42,5222.00

2000

1,867,882

1,664,441

89.1

2,126,258

41,651

1.96

2001

1,985,980

1,763,346

88.8

2,234,283

35,882

1.6

2002

1,977,665

1,826,852

92.4

2,267,557

35,9891.6

According to Table 3, the number of crimes has gradually increased but the number of offenders who
were helped by the National Rehabilitation Agency has decreased. This decrease comes as a result of thelack of funding and lack of understanding of rehabilitation work.

IV. CRIME PREVENTION EFFORTS IN KOREA
A. Police Stage
The most significant crime prevention activity at the police stage is an observation system for persons
liable commit to crime. The object of this observation system is to prevent recidivism by released offenders
and to use the collected data for investigations. This system can be described as a kind of probation system;
however, it is not legally regulated but is executed by an official order from the National Police Agency.
According to the National Police Agency, released offenders are categorized as a person liable to commit
crime in two cases. The first case is when he or she is likely to commit crime after a conviction for robbery,rape, theft, violence, kidnapping, gambling, fraud, counterfeiting, smuggling, and drug related crime. The
second case concerns organized gangsters, and when there is a high liability of recidivism according to thepersonal character of the offenders.
Police watch these people after they are released from prison. When the head of a police station is
notified of the release of offenders from prison, he or she has to check the offender’s address and decide
whether or not to designate the offender as a person liable to commit crime within two months of release. If
an offender is so designated the police check the person once a month or once every three months,
depending on the likelihood of reoffending.
Once an offender been placed on the list the police create a personal file and research details such as
family members, residence, job and neighbours to record therein. This observation system was originally the
duty of investigative police staff in police stations but in practice, because of the lack of staff, officers inpolice boxes sometimes conduct this observation duty.

B. Correctional Stage
1. Re-entry Rate Survey
To see how correctional treatment programmes work for prisoners, in 1997 the Korean Corrections
Bureau began to survey the re-entry rate to prisons. When it started, the project was undertaken every
three years, but since 2002 it has been completed annually. The re-entry rate refers to the ratio of released
prisoners returning to prison within three years, for any reason.
2. Survey Items
Data collected through the Corrections Bureau’s statistics and survey items include the person’s age, sex
and previous convictions, as well as the number of times he or she has been imprisoned, the length of his or
her prison term and the reason for release. The Corrections Bureau chose to register this because it isrelatively easy to measure and to compare with other countries.

128

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

Table 4: Re-entry Ratio by YearYear

’94~’96’97~’98’99~’01

2002

Surveyed Year

2002

2004

2005

2006

Re-entry Ratio

31.6%

24.7%

24.9%

24.3

Contents

According to Table 4, the re-entry rate is about 25%. Hopefully it will continue to show a decrease,
however small. The rate of recidivism needs to be watched continuously for a long period of time.

Table 5: Re-entry rate by Reason for Release
Reasons for Release
Year

2002

’99~’01’97~’98

Contents

Total

Number of
Released

Temporary
Expiration of
Release from
Preventive
Preventive
Custody
Custody

Expiration

Parole30,86920,393

10,090

24

331

31

Number of
Re-entered

7,498

5,998

1,334

11

155

0

Ratio

24.3%

29.4%

13.2%

45.8%

46.8%

0.0%

Number of
Released

92,82861,70228,477

153

1,234

1,262

Number of
Re-entered

23,096

18,070

4,266

97

595

68

Ratio

24.9%

29.3%

15.0%

63.4%

48.2%

5.4%

Number of
Released

55,12044,067

8,448

152

1,095

1,358

Number of
Re-entered

13,633

12,009

1,086

59

379

100

Ratio

24.7%

27.3%

12.9%

38.8%

34.6%

7.4%

PardonWhen considering the reason for release, the re-entry rate shows great variation. Offenders released
from preventive custody and on temporary release from preventive custody show the highest re-entry rate.
The reason for the high rate is because offenders imprisoned under the social security law have usually been
incarcerated multiple times. Even though the law was abolished in 2005, offenders who were imprisoned
under that law are still imprisoned. On the other hand, offenders released on parole and offenders who werepardoned show a very low re-entry rate. To be released on parole or be pardoned, a prisoner needs to havedemonstrated good behaviour and to give an indication that he or she has been rehabilitated.

129

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Table 6: Re-entry rate by gender
Number of
Released

Total
Number of
Released

Male

2002

30,869’99~
99~’0101’97~
97~’9898

Year

Number of
Re-entered

FemaleTotal
Number of
Re-entered

Male

FemaleMale

Female28,893

1,976

7,498

7,258

240

25.1%

12.1%

92,82886,377

6,451

23,096

22,409

687

25.9%

10.6%

55,12051,464

3,656

13,633

13,305

328

25.9%

9.0%

Re-entry Rate

The re-entry rate for male released offenders is twice as high as that of females. Another interesting
thing to note is that the re-entry rate for male offenders has decreased while that of female offenders has
increased. We can therefore assume that correctional treatment programmes for female offenders are agreater concern than those for male offenders, but unfortunately it is not borne out in practice.

Table 7: Re-entry Rate by the Number of Times of Imprisonment
Year

2002

’99~’01’97~’98

Contents

Number of Terms of Imprisonment

Total
1

2

3

4

5+

Number of
Released

30,86914,847

7,835

3,526

1,839

2,822

Number of
Re-entered

7,498

1,676

2,155

1,358

815

1,494

Ratio

24.3%

11.3%

27.5%

38.5%

44.3%

52.9%

Number of
Released

92,82848,32522,293

9,228

4,890

8,092

Number of
Re-entered

23,096

6,229

6,715

3,569

2,312

4,271

Ratio

24.9%

12.9%

30.1%

38.7%

47.3%

52.8%

Number of
Released

55,12027,39012,211

5,660

3,592

6,267

Number of
Re-entered

13,633

3,755

3,553

2,168

1,446

2,711

Ratio

24.7%

13.7%

29.1%

38.3%

40.3%

43.3%

Table 7 shows that as the number of times a person is imprisoned increases, the rate of re-entry also
increases. It is much more difficult to rehabilitate an offender who has been imprisoned two or three times.

130

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

Table 8: Re-entry Rate by Age
Year

2002

’99~’01’97~’98

Contents

Total

Number of
ReleasedAgeunder20

20~29

30~39

40~49

50~59

60 +

30,869

378

9,369

9,724

8,083

2,493

822

Number of
Re-entered

7,498

138

2,560

2,627

1,690

392

91

Ratio

24.3%

36.5%

27.3%

27.0%

20.9%

15.7%

11.1%

Number of
Released

92,8282,056

28,42330,59622,062

7,665

2,026

Number of
Re-entered

23,096

819

8,513

8,011

4,388

1,117

248

Ratio

24.9%

39.8%

30.0%

26.2%

19.9%

14.6%

12.2%

Number of
Released

55,1201,424

18,384

18,62911,378

4,147

1,158

Number of
Re-entered

13,633

520

5,468

4,700

2,205

621

119

Ratio

24.7%

36.5%

29.7%

25.2%

19.4%

15.0%

10.3%

In Table 8 we can see that older offenders have a lower re-entry late. This emphasizes the importance of
rehabilitation programmes for young prisoners. In other words, if we can succeed in preventing young
prisoners from recommitting crime, we can greatly reduce the rate of recidivism.

Table 9: Re-entry Rate by Crime
Year

2002

’99~’01’97~’98

Contents

Total

MurderRobbery

SexualViolence

Theft

Fraud

Drugs

Negligence

Number of
Released

30,869

716

1,810

1,641

5,555

7,663

3,280

2,763

Number of
Re-entered

7,498

65

532

395

2,365

1,078

1,348

294

Ratio

24.3%

9.1%

29.4%

24.1%

42.6%

14.1%

41.1%

10.6%

Number of
Released

92,828

2,488

5,851

4,543

17,511

23,397

9,083

8,869

Number of
Re-entered

23,096

240

1,782

1,125

7,257

2,881

4,265

972

Ratio

24.9%

9.6%

30.5%

24.8%

41.4%

12.3%

47.0%

11.0%

Number of
Released

55,120

1,296

3,214

2,377

10,164

5,326

2,842

4,386

Number of
Re-entered

13,633

99

834

518

4,126

476

1,397

615

Ratio

24.7%

7.6%

25.9%

21.8%

40.6%

8.9%

49.2%

14.0%

131

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

According to Table 9, theft and drug crime shows the highest re-entry rate. The reason for this rate isthat theft and drug crime usually has a nature of addiction to it.

Table 10: Re-entry Rate by Prison Term
Prison Term
Year

2002

’99~’01’97~’98

Contents

Total

6 months~ 1 Year

5 Years~7 Years

7 years~ 10years

10 years~15 years

15 years~ 20 years

20 years

Number of
Released

30,86910,614

849

514

246

53

27

Number of
Re-entered

7,498

1,875

191

172

68

8

3

Ratio

24.3%

17.7%

22.5%

33.5%

27.6%

15.1%

11.1%

Number of
Released

92,82831,026

1,971

1,754

985

259

229

Number of
Re-entered

23,096

5,249

455

664

297

50

18

Ratio

24.9%

16.9%

23.1%

37.9%

30.2%

19.3%

7.9%

Number of
Released

55,12022,202

4,399

558

345

56

2

Number of
Re-entered

13,633

5,287

1,021

94

43

4

0

Ratio

24.7%

23.8%

20.5%

16.8%

12.5%

7.1%

0.0%

According to Table 10, offenders released after a prison term of between seven to ten years have thehighest re-entry rate. As prison terms increase beyond ten years, the re-entry rate drops.

(i) Analysis of the Re-entry Rate
The re-entry rate is not an absolute authority on recidivism because it can change depending on many
variables. According to the results of this research, special correctional programmes for preventive custody
offenders and female offenders need to be developed.
The high rate of re-entry for offenders under 20 years old means that juveniles tend to fall into thecriminal world more easily than adults and should be the focus of preventive and rehabilitative criminal
policy.
The number of crimes committed and the re-entry rate correspond strongly. This shows that as an
offender is imprisoned repeatedly, he adjusts well to prison society. To overcome this dilemma, adjustment
programmes in prison, support for the released, and community understanding for the released are essential.
With this survey, the Corrections Bureau can check the effectiveness of correctional treatment
programmes and formulate new policies and programmes accordingly.

C. Probation Stage
1. John School System
The John School programme is a kind of alternative treatment, instead of punishment, for those who pay
for sexual acts. John School started in the U.S.A in 1995 and took its name from the most common nameregistered by those undergoing treatment.

132

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

Korea introduced this system in 2005 and is now expanding its application. In this programmeparticipants listen to the stories of victims of the sex industry and learn how to develop a healthy sex life.
According to statistics collected by the Probation Agency, 2,235 people finished this programme during theperiod of 1 August 2005 - 31 December 2005. They showed a 1.6% recidivism rate compared to 7.5% forother offenders under probation.
2. Curfew Supervising Voice Verification System
The Curfew Supervising Voice Verification System is an alternative treatment programme to
imprisonment. Offenders who committed crimes such as paying for sex, housebreaking, robbery, theft, andjuvenile sexual offences are eligible for this programme. If a judge imposes this CVS programme on an
offender he or she is under curfew from 10pm to 6am. The program period varies from three months to one
year depending on the nature of crime.
When judge impose CVS, a voice template is built into a computer and the computer calls the offenderrandomly. Each time the offender answers the phone he or she is asked to repeat a series of different words.
The computer matches the spoken words to the template and provides a report to the probation officer who
decides if the offender was compliant or not.
If the offender fails to answer a call he or she has to appear in the probation office and report the reason.
If the offender fails to answer to the call three times the CVS programme is revoked and the offender isimprisoned.
The CVS programme is imposed by court order so there are no concerns about human rights’ violations.
According to statistics collected by the Probation Office, the recidivism rate of offenders under thisprogramme is 2.7% compared to the rate of 7.4% for offenders under probation only. This programme ismainly imposed on juvenile offenders but courts are currently trying to utilize this programme for adultoffenders too.

V. CONCLUSION
People say that crime has existed from the beginning of human history and it will last as long as mankind.
We all know that this is true and that there is no panacea for crime prevention. But as we saw earlier, morethan 50% of offenders have previous convictions. This means that the majority of offenders are recidivists.
More than half of crime is perpetrated by career criminals. This is why we have to focus on the prevention ofrecidivism. Maybe we can’t find the best way but we can at least find a better way, if we study and adopt
appropriate crime prevention policies and learn from each other.

133