No. 105
July 2001

Established1961
IN THIS ISSUE
Page

LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR ...................................................................................................................................... 1

THE 118TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE.................................................................................................. 3

BEST PRACTICES IN THE INSTITUTIONAL AND COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT OFJUVENILE OFFENDERS
Course Rationale....................................................................................................................................................... 3
Course Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
Lecture Topics ........................................................................................................................................................... 8
Individual Presentation Topics .............................................................................................................................. 11Group Workshop Sessions ..................................................................................................................................... 13Group 1
Group 2
Group 3Observation Visits .................................................................................................................................................. 27Group Study Tours............................................................................................................................................... ...29
Special Events .......................................................................................................................................................... 30
Reference Materials Distributed............................................................................................................................ 33
Visiting Experts ....................................................................................................................................................... 37
Participants ............................................................................................................................................................... 37
INFORMATION ABOUT PROGRAMMES & ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................ 41
Training Programmes............................................................................................................................................. 41
The 119th International Training Course.............................................................................................. 41
Special Training Programmes ................................................................................................................................ 43
Juvenile Treatment Systems for Kenyan Criminal Justice Officials ................................................ 43
Corruption Control in Criminal Justice............................................................................................... 44
Administrative News............................................................................................................................................... 45
Faculty Changes....................................................................................................................................... 45
Overseas Trips by Staff........................................................................................................................... 46
FACULTY & STAFF OF UNAFEI ..................................................................................................................................... 47

UNAFEI IS AN AFFILIATED REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1

LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR

It is my privilege to inform readers of the successful completion of the 118th
International Training Course on “Best Practices in the Institutional and Community-Based
Treatment of Juvenile Offenders” which took place from 21 May to 12 July 2001. In thisCourse, we welcomed 10 Japanese and 15 overseas participants: 9 from Asia, 2 from
Oceania, 2 from Latin and South America, 1 from the Middle East and 1 from Africa.
They included police, public prosecutors, judges and other high-ranking public officials.
As this newsletter demonstrates, the Course was extremely productive. It consisted ofIndividual Presentations, Group Workshop sessions, visits to relevant criminal justiceagencies, and presentations by visiting experts, faculty members and ad hoc lecturers.
The United Nations has recognized the prevalence of juvenile offending and at theTenth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders(April 2000, Vienna) it urged for measures to be taken to address the root causes and risk
factors related to juvenile delinquency. In particular the international community has
accepted that the move towards restorative and community justice is a natural consequenceof a decreasing use of formal juvenile justice systems. Resultantly, UNAFEI, as a United
Nations regional institute, decided to undertake this course looking specifically at the issueof the treatment of juvenile offenders both institutionally and in the community.
The challenges facing the treatment of juvenile offenders in the new millennium are
multiple and diverse from country to country. In some of the countries, represented by theparticipants of this Course, their treatment systems are simply overwhelmed by the numberof juvenile offenders passing through their respective criminal justice systems. In othercountries there has been a great deal of reform both at administrative and legal levels
reflecting the public’s concern about the patterns of juvenile offending.
The treatment of juvenile offenders requires an integrated approach from allagencies so engaged. This must be supported by individual treatment programmes andsophisticated information databases, which record the changing characteristics of juvenile
delinquents. In addition, treatment must be cost-effective yet best suited to the needs ofjuveniles offering them real opportunities on the road to rehabilitation. Furthermore, thesupport of the public is vital to the overall success of both community and institut ional
treatment practices.
During the eight-week period, the participants diligently and comprehensively
examined measures to strengthen and improve practices in the institutional and communitybased treatment of juvenile offenders. This was accomplished primarily throughcomparative analysis of the current situation and problems of juvenile delinquency, juvenile
correctional practice and the treatment of juvenile delinquents in the community. Our indepth discussions enabled us to put forth effective and practical solutions to emerging
problems in the changing international society.

2

I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to all the participants upon theirsuccessful completion of the Course, made possible by their strenuous efforts. My heartfelt
gratitude goes to the visiting experts and ad hoc lecturers who contributed a great deal to the
Course's success. Furthermore, I appreciate the indispensable assistance and cooperation
extended to UNAFEI by various agencies and institutions, which helped diversify the
programme.
A warm tribute must be paid to the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
for its immeasurable support throughout the Course. At the same time, I must express great
appreciation to the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF) and its branch organizations
for their substantial contributions as well as to the Fuchu Rotary Club and Soroptomist
International, Fuchu. Lastly, I owe my gratitude to all the individuals whose unselfish
efforts behind the scenes contributed significantly to the successful realization of this Course.
Upon returning to their home countries, I genuinely believe that, like theirpredecessors, the strong determination and dedication of the participants will enable them towork towards the improvement of their respective nation's criminal justice systems, and tothe benefit of the international society as a whole.
Finally, I would like to reiterate my best regards to the participants of the 118th
International Training Course. I hope that the experience they gained during the Course
proves valuable in their daily work, and that the bonds fostered among the participants,
visiting experts, lecturers and UNAFEI staff will continue to grow for years to come.

July 2001

Mikinao Kitada
Director, UNAFEI

3

THE 118TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE“BEST PRACTICES IN THE INSTITUTIONAL AND COMMUNITY-BASEDTREATMENT OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS”

Course Rationale

In the field of juvenile justice, the United Nations has played a key role inestablishing standard practices, by preparing international instruments such as theConvention on the Rights of the Child (especially, articles 37, 39 and 40), the United
Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing
Rules), the United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (theRiyadh Guidelines), and the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles
Deprived of Their Liberty.
A number of Member States have undertaken special efforts to administerjuvenile justice systems in line with these instruments. In the process of these efforts forjuvenile justice reform, the need for technical assistance has become evident, and led tovarious activities (e.g., monitoring activity by the Committee on the Rights of the Child;establishment of a co-ordination panel on technical assistance and assistance in juvenile
justice; and the publication of the United Nations Juvenile Justice Guide to International
Standards and Best Practice) as reported by the UN Centre for International Crime
Prevention (E/CN.15/2000/5). In May 2001, UNAFEI joins these activities by conducting
an international training course focusing upon the treatment of juvenile offenders.
In the wake of the new millennium, organiza tions in charge of the treatment ofjuveniles in conflict with the law are facing many challenges. In some countries, thetreatment system is overwhelmed by the sheer volume of offenders supplied by the police,prosecution and the judiciary. In some countries, the pressure from society to redefine
the most appropriate measures to deal with juvenile offenders has intensified, resulting inmany legal and administrative changes. Equally, in some countries the introduction of
new technologies, such as information technology is craved, but barred by thetremendous amount of human and monetary resources incurred. In other countries, thecost of offender treatment is under pressure to be reduced so that offenders and the rest ofsociety get a reasonable share of the national wealth.
In response to these situations, “the Vienna Declaration on Crime and Justice:
Meeting the Challenges of the Twenty- first Century” (A/CONF.187/4/Rev.3), adopted by
the Tenth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of
Offenders, held in Vienna, 10-17 April 2000, stresses the importance of undertaking
measures to prevent juveniles from becoming delinquent (para. 24) by developing
comprehensive crime prevention strategies addressing the root causes and risk factors
related to crime (para. 25).

4
Recognizing the emphasis put by international instruments on the reintegration ofjuveniles in conflict with the law, with minimum use of the formal juvenile justice system,
is compatible with the recent trend towards community and restorative justice (refer topara. 27 and 28 of the Vienna Declaration), UNAFEI aims, through this training course,
to come up with strategies to overcome recurrent and newly raised challenges in this area.
The challenges are mainly divided into two: the management of offenders and the
management of organizations. The participants of this course are requested to discuss
solutions to the many issues relating to these two areas.
Efficient treatment and management of juveniles at risk of offending or reoffending needs first attention. To increase the efficiency of crime reduction throughoffender control requires thorough integration of prevention and treatment, ininstitutional and community-based treatment. Newly emerging ideas such as ‘risk
management’, ‘community justice’, ‘restorative justice’ and ‘multi-systemic approach’,
give impetus to the integration of the various treatment systems of the agencies dealing
with juvenile offenders. These ideas suppose that the risk of (re)offending can be
identified early in life and can be minimized through successive interventions utilizing
the combination of various social resources. Interventions taking advantage of theeffectively interwoven safety nets of society, linked agencies, and empowered
communities, backed by professional case management, are suggested as effective.
Participants will look at examples based on an integrative approach and its actual
implementation.
Furthermore, the importance of the provision of individualized treatment, backed
up by the case file system, cannot be over-emphasized. With the introduction ofindividual case file/record systems linked with a sophisticated database utilizing
information technology, administrators will also be able to study the trends in the everchanging characteristics of juveniles and their crimes. However, the documentation of
offender information on computer networks necessarily entails an unusual amount oftechnical and legal/administrative considerations. Participants are expected to exchange
their views concerning the introduction, development and utilization of offender data
management systems in each country.
Efficient management of organizations dealing with juvenile offenders is also an
area requiring attention. Firstly, the cost of providing offender treatment services has
become a heated issue in many countries, and has prompted the quest for cost-effective
corrections using such measures as diversion, privatization of services, and incomegenerating activities. In addition, although the training of staff has been a perennialconcern of correctional service providers, many countries in the Asian and Pacific area
have had difficulty in equipping their offender treatment officers with the attitudes andskills necessary for working with juvenile offenders. As well, the integrity of officers
sometimes called into question in the conduct of their business. Participants will discuss
concrete measures to improve the cost-effectiveness of treatment, while designing bestpractices for training of their officers in charge of the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders.

5Second, since juvenile criminal justice has changed dramatically in recent years,
managing public relations is becoming more and more difficult for correctiona ladministrators, and gaining public confidence is becoming crucial to the sound provisionof correctional services. Participants will discuss how to talk to society and how to adapt
to the changing expectations in this rapidly developing society.
Giving due consideration to the above rationale, this International Training Course will
clarify the challenges facing the organizations in charge of treating juvenile offenders,and explore the best practices to overcome these challenges. By learning from thesuccesses and failures of ever-implemented solutions (not only in the Asia-Pacific region
but also in other parts of the world), we will arrive at the best practices applicable andfeasible in each participating country. Among the major topics to be discussed are thefollowing items:(1) Best practice in the institutional treatment of juvenile offenders:(a) Development of a model treatment programme, being provided separatelyfrom adult offenders.
(b) Designing a case management system to provide individualized treatment.
(c) Establishing a case file/record system and linking it to an offender databaseand statistical compilation system.
(2) Best practice in the management of organizations providing institutional
treatment to juvenile offenders:(a) Strategic utilization of limited financial resources and maximizing costeffectiveness.
(b) Staff training: designing training systems and curricula to enhance skills andintegrity.
(c) Managing public relations and obtaining public trust in correctional services.
(3) Best practice in the community-based treatment of juvenile offenders:(a) Development of a model treatment programme.
(b) Designing a case management system to provide individualized treatment.
(c) Establishing a case file/record system and linking it to an offender databaseand statistical compilation system.
(4) Best practice in the management of organizations providing community-based
treatment to juvenile offenders:(a) Strategic utilization of limited financial resources and maximizing costeffectiveness.
(b) Staff training: designing training sys tems and curricula to enhance skills andintegrity.
(c) Managing public relations and obtaining public trust in correctional services.

6

Course Summary
Lectures
In total, 13 lectures were presented by visiting experts, 9 by ad hoc lecturers and 7
by the professors of UNAFEI. Five distinguished criminal justice practitioners fromabroad served as UNAFEI visiting experts. They lectured on issues relating to the main
theme, and contributed significantly to the Course by encouraging discussions after theirown lectures, participating in the discussions of other programmes, and conversing with theparticipants on informal occasions. Additionally, distinguished senior officials of theGovernment of Japan delivered ad hoc lectures. The lecturers and lecture topics are listed
on pages 8 to 10.
Individual Presentations
During the first three weeks, each Japanese and overseas participant delivered a 45minute Individual Presentation respectively, which introduced the actual situation,
problems and future prospects of his/her country. These papers were compiled into a bookentitled "COUNTRY REPORTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE IN
CRIME PREVENTION" and distributed to all the participants. The titles of these
Individual Presentation papers are listed on pages 11 to 12.
Group Workshop Sessions
Group Workshop Sessions further examined the subtopics of the main theme. In
order to conduct each session effectively, the UNAFEI faculty selected individuals to serveas ‘group members’ for the sub-topics, based on their response to a questionnaire
previously distributed. Selected participants served as chairpersons, co-chairpersons,rapporteurs or co-rapporteurs, and faculty members served as advisers. Each group’s
primary responsibility was to explore and develop their designated topics in the Group
Workshop Sessions. The participants and UNAFEI faculty seriously studied the topics
and exchanged their views based on information obtained through personal experience,
the Individual Presentations, lectures and so forth. After the Group Workshop Sessions,
reports were drafted based on the discussions in the conference hall. These reports were
subsequently presented in the Report-Back Session, where they were endorsed as thereports of the Course. Summaries of the Group Workshop reports are provided on pages
13 to 26.
Visits and Special Events
Visits to various agencies and institutions in Japan helped the participants obtain amore practical understanding of the Japanese criminal justice system. In addition to the
Course's academic agenda, many activities were arranged to provide a greater
understanding of Japanese society and culture, with the assistance of various organizations

7and individuals, including the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF).
detailed descriptions, please refer to pages 27 to 32.

.

For more

8

Lecture Topics
Visiting Experts' Lectures
1)

Dr. Alan Leshied (Canada)• Cognitive Behavioral Treatment for Young Offenders• Multisystemic Therapy: Community-Based Treatment for High Risk Young Offenders• What Works with Young Offenders: Summarizing the Literature2)

Ms. Pamela Phillips (New Zealand)• Challenges to Juvenile Treatment in New Zealand• Restorative Justice Initiatives in New Zealand3)

Ms. Chomil Kamal (Singapore)• Directions of Juvenile Justice Reforms in Singapore• Juvenile Offender Database Management in Singapore

4)

Mr. Rob Allen (United Kingdom)• Juvenile Justice Reform in England and Wales• Youth Justice Board Initiatives in Reducing Offending• Involving Community in Youth Justice5)

Dr. Tracy W. Harachi (United States of America)• A Community-Wide Approach for Prevention of Delinquency• A Prevention Science Framework Aimed at Delinquency• Prevention Science Principles for Intervention

9Professors Lectures
1)

Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe, Professor, UNAFEI• Current Crime Trends in Japan2)

Mr. Hiroshi Tsutomi, Professor, UNAFEI• Purposes of the Course

3)

Ms. Sue Takasu, Professor, UNAFEI• The Prosecution in Japan4)

Mr. Toru Miura, Professor, UNAFEI• Family Court Hearing Proceedings and the Recent Reformation of the Juvenile Justice

System of Japan5)

Ms. Mikiko Kakihara, Professor, UNAFEI• The Criminal Justice System in Japan: Rehabilitation in the Community

6)

Mr. Kenji Teramura, Professor, UNAFEI• Institutional Corrections in Japan7)

Mr. Kei Someda, Professor, UNAFEI• An Outline of Restorative Justice

Ad Hoc Lectures
1)

Mr. Kenji Higashikawa
Chief Liaison Officer, International Affairs Department, National Police Agency• Overview of the Police in Japan2)

Mr. Ei Shimamura
Assistant Director, Juvenile Division, Community Safety Bureau, National Police Agency• The Trends of Juvenile Delinquency and Police Activities and Countermeasuresagainst it103)

Mr. Kazuo Kurashima
Classification Coordinator attached to the Medical Care and Classification Division,
Correction Bureau, Ministry of Justice• Classification Services for Juveniles

4)

Mr. Shuji Yoshida
Director, Education Division, Correction Bureau, Ministry of Justice• Institutional Treatment of Juvenile Offenders

5)

Mr. Takashi Kubo
Professor, Research and Training Institute of the Ministry of Justice• Training Courses for Professional Probation Officers in Japan6)

Mr. Kazuo Suzuki
Director (Superintendent), Training Institute of Correctional Personnel, Ministry ofJustice• Staff Training System Focused upon Juvenile Institutions in Japanese Corrections

7)

Mr. Motoyuki Shishido
Vice-Chairman of Secretariat, Kantou Regional Parole Board, Ministry of Justice• The Activities of Regional Parole Boards

8)

Mr. Toshihiko Takagi
Director of the Supervision Division, Rehabilitation Bureau, Ministry of Justice• Treatment of Juveniles in the Community

9)

Mr. Yukio Shirai and Mr. Kenichi Morishita
Professors, the Research and Training Institute for Family Court Probation Officers,
Supreme Court of Japan• Role of Family Court Probation Officers in Japan

11

Individual Presentation Topics
Overseas Participants
1)

Mr. Mohammed Azizul Haque (Bangladesh)• Treatment of Juvenile Offenders in Bangladesh

2)

Ms. Phyllis Yolanda Beckles (Barbados)• Country Report

3)

Dr. Fernando Rabello Mendes Filho (Brazil)• Country Report

4)

Mr. Chen Hao (China)• Main Practices in the Treatment of Juvenile Offenders and Juvenile Crime Prevention inContemporary China

5)

Mr. Waliki Naiseruvati Satakala (Fiji)• Challenges Facing Organisations in Charge of the Treatment of Juvenile Offenders andthe Best Practices to Overcome these Challenges

6)

Mr. Ambati Siva Narayana (India)• Country Report

7)

Mr. Sambas Somawidjaja (Indonesia)• Social Rehabilitation for Juvenile Delinquents and Drug Addicts in Indonesia

8)

Mr. Teh Guan Bee (Malaysia)• Institutional Treatment and Management of Organizations for Juvenile Offenders in
Malaysia

9)

Mr. Binod Mohan Acharya (Nepal)• Crime Prevention and the Treatment of Juvenile Offenders in the Nepalese Context10) Mr. Zaka-Ur-Rab Rana (Pakistan)• Best Practices in the Institutional and Community-Based Treatment of Juve nile
Offenders11) Mr. Amin Inabi (Palestine)• Country Report12) Mr. Martin Tongamp (Papua New Guinea)• Country Report1213) Ms. Bitsang Joyce Matshego (South Africa)• Country Report14) Ms. Rajapakshage Sunethra Gunawardhana (Sri Lanka)• Report on the Treatment of Juvenile Offenders in Sri Lanka
15) Ms. Duangporn Ukris• Thailand Country Paper
Japanese Participants16) Mr. Naoyuki Fukushima (Japan)• The Role of the Family Court – Especially the Role of the Hearing17) Mr. Kazuhito Hosaka (Japan)• Best Practices in the Institutional and Community-Based Treatment of Juvenile
Offenders18) Mr. Yasuhiro Hosoi (Japan)• Effective Group Management at Juvenile Training Schools19) Ms. Yukiko Kudou (Japan)• Agencies Linked to the Treatment of Juvenile Offenders and the Development of
Effective Treatment Programmes20) Mr. Shousuke Kuwabara (Japan)• Educative Action of a Juvenile Delinquent21) Mr. Masamichi Noda (Japan)• Educational Action at the Family Court as Community-Based Treatment
22) Ms. Kae Sakuma (Japan)• Best Practices in the Institutional and Community-Based Treatment of Juvenile
Offenders23) Mr. Takahito Shimada (Japan)• Research on Juvenile Delinquency at the National Research Institute of Police Science24) Ms. Tomoko Yoshida (Japan)• Training System for Correctional Personnel in Japan25) Mr. Hideo Yoshioka (Japan)• Diversity of Treatment of Juvenile Delinquents13

Group Workshop Sessions
The following section summarizes the Group Workshop Session reports. The full textof the reports will be included in UNAFEI Resource Material Series No. 59.

Group 1

BEST PRACTICES IN DELINQUENCY PREVENTION

Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members

Advisers

Visiting Experts

Dr. Fernando Rabello Mendes Filho
Mr. Shousuke Kuwabara
Mr. Ambati Siva Narayana
Mr. Takahito Shimada
Mr. Chen Hao
Mr. Sambas Somawidjaja
Mr. Binod Mohan Acharya
Mr. Naoyuki Fukusima
Ms. Kae Sakuma
Prof. Toru Miura
Prof. Yasuhiro Tanabe
Prof. Hiroshi Tsutomi
Dr. Tracy Harachi
Mr. Rob Allen(Brazil)(Japan)(India)(Japan)(China)(Indonesia)(Nepal)(Japan)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(U.S.A.)(U.K.)

Report SummaryI.

INTRODUCTION

Juvenile delinquency is a pressing issue in developing countries where many
children are on the verge of starting a criminal way of life. The United Nations has taken
its lead in its support for the prevention of delinquency, through its Articles, andGuidelines contained in the Convention of the Rights of the Child, the United Nations
Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (“The Beijing
Rules”), and the United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency(“The Riyadh Guidelines”).
Effective delinquency prevention is based on what is called risk factor prevention,
which aims to identify risk factors for offending and implement prevention methods
designed to counteract them. In addition, protective factors are identified and enhanced.
Programmes are chosen and implemented to target these factors arranged along thedevelopmental trajectory.
Among the comprehensive delinquency prevention
frameworks developed upon the risk factor prevention paradigm, the “Communities That
Care (CTC)” model developed by a research team of the University of Washington(Seattle, U. S. A.) stands out. The CTC model is quite flexible and applicable to various
situations because it does not argue for any particular programmes, but allows

14
programmes to be selected according to the needs and resources of each particularcommunity.
II.

DESIGNING A MODEL

The CTC model is an overarching model linking preventive efforts targetingrisk/protective factors found at multiple levels of society: individual, family, school andcommunity. Accordingly, this multi-domain nature of risk/protective factors calls for acollaborative multi-agency approach to delinquency prevention. The principles of
prevention in this model are:a.
Preventive interventions should focus both on reducing risk and enhancing
protection.
b.
Preventive interventions should target individuals exposed to higher levels of risk,
lower levels of protective factors.
c.
Address risk and protective factors at developmentally appropriate stages andwhenever possible, intervene early.
d.
Use data to select priority risk and protective factors in designated communities.
In short, the CTC model provides a framework in which risk/protective factors are
systematically targeted by programmes/policies with known efficacy.
A.

Delinquency Prevention Process
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Step 5
Step 6
Step 7

B.

Mobilization of the key leaders
Assessment of the prevalence of risk, protection and problem
behaviors in the community
Prioritization of risk factors and protective factors for preventive
actionSelection of tested interventions to address priority risk andprotective factors
Effective implementation of tested interventions
Monitoring changes in targeted risk and protective factors andproblem behaviors
Adjustment or modification of interventions as indicated by
performance monitoring data.

Actors in Delinquency Prevention

The CTC model can be initiated locally without national level assistance.
However, following the lead of the Riyadh Guidelines which emphasize the importanceof comprehensive prevention plans at every level of Government, this three- levelstructure is suggested as a model.
1.

National Board (Step 1)
The national board is responsible for mobilizing and coordinating local
delinquency prevention initiatives in the country. The board is ideally a coalition of

15
multiple governmental agencies in charge of areas relating to delinquency prevention
such as criminal justice, social welfare, health services, education, and community
services. The national board may have representatives from non-governmental agencies.
2.

Community Board (Steps 2-4, 6 and 7)
The principal actor is the community board which is responsible for putting thedelinquency prevention framework into practice under the guidance and with the supportof the national board. The community board consists of people who collaborate together
such as the principal of the local school, active parents, Lions/Rotary members,
programme managers of local social service agencies, local probation officers, local
police chiefs and local public health nurses. In some developing countries where
governmental resources are relatively limited, non-governmental organizations should be
invited.
3.

Programme Implementers (Step 5)
Direct service providers implement programmes under the guidance of thecommunity board. The providers include criminal justice professionals, nurses, school
teachers, social workers, drug therapists, sports organizations, citizen volunteers, etc.
III.

OPERATIONAL ISSUESA.

National Board Members/Key Leaders

The members of the board need to be informed of and recognize the importanceof delinquency prevention to its country. Key leaders need to be provided with an
overview of the risk- focused prevention framework and learn the need to support andfinance programme implementation of risk and protective factors.
B.

Community Board Members/Prevention Team

They have to go through the same overall prevention content training as thenational board members. After being provided with general ideas on risk- focused
prevention framework, board members learn how to be a team to confirm group rules andassign roles and responsibilities. Next, the board members should learn the general
rationale for risk and protective factor assessment and resource assessment.
C.

Programme Implementers

Programme implementers are direct service providers who need to be trained in
specific programme areas such as pre-natal, pre-school, school, family and community
programmes.

16
D.

Reducing Costs and Finding New Resources

It is not realistic to discuss how to reduce costs of delinquency prevention because
resources for prevention are much limited. Therefore, the report concentrates on how tofind new resources for prevention.
E.

Provision of Funding

Not only governmental agencies but also non-governmental (especially,
international) organizations will be partners. However, long-term funding which maylast 5 or 10 years will only be available from governmental sources.
Local businesses sometimes sponsor delinquency prevention projects to heighten
their image as well as to reduce crime (e.g. shoplifting in the shopping mall) in thecommunity. Also, business circles such as Lion’s clubs and Rotary clubs can beprospective benefactors.
Even mutual assistance at individual levels can be facilitated if the coordinating
structure is introduced. Philanthropic acts of kind-hearted individuals should be
acknowledged accordingly. Charity shows or bazaars soliciting donations from local
residents are other alternatives.
Local media, such as radio or TV stations, can be good partners. For example,
they can offer a spot for an NGO/governmental agency, provid ing a service for parents ofchildren who are too young to inform those that have found them of their parent’s address.
F.

Sharing of Services of Governmental Sectors

The collaborative/multidisciplinary approach is a key to delinquency prevention
and if governmental agencies can work together, the outcome will be fruitful.
IV.

ACCOUNTABLITY AND EVALUATION

Evaluation serves two purposes. First, it gives information necessary to refine
and improve practices.
Second, it tells whether the objectives are realized besides
ensuring accountability. In any sense, procedures of evaluation should be planned at theinitial stages of planning and the resources to be used for evaluation should be reserved.
Corresponding to these two purposes of evaluation, there are two types of evaluation:
outcome evaluation and process evaluation. Outcome evaluation, conducted at thecommunity board level, is a periodical repetition of risk/protective factor assessment
including the reassessment of delinquent and other problem behaviors. Processevaluation, conducted at the programme implementer level, is a carefully designed
monitoring of the programme implementation process while it is in progress.
The community board should remain accountable to stakeholders by providingthem with relevant information. The information should be carefully prepared and17communicated in a timely manner, taking their needs and interests into consideration.
This will bring continuous and stable support to the community board activities.
Guideline 61 of the Riyadh Guidelines emphasizes the importance of informationexchange at national, regional and international levels.
Delinquency prevention cannot be carried out without good communication
strategies. Roughly speaking, there are four types of communication strategies: mass
media (TV, radio and newspaper), in-house materials prepared by delinquency prevention
bodies (e.g. newsletters, posters, pamphlets, billboards, videos, etc.), meetings/gatherings(e.g. seminars and events with entertainment) and the Internet.
Communication strategies should be carefully selected depending upon the
purpose of communication. There are basically four purposes of communication:
resource mobilization, involvement of target population, and dissemination of
information to people engaging in delinquency prevention and attitudinal change ofcommunity.
V.

CONCLUSION

Delinquency prevention has been a global endeavor for decades, and it is still to
be a critical challenge worldwide. In this report, we have strived to explore the bestpractices in delinquency prevention, which was primarily adopted from a leading model
called the CTC model developed by the Social Development Research Group of the
University of Washington (U.S.A). Needless to say, this paper revealed that moreconsideration should to be taken when the model is applied in developing countries.

Group 2

BEST PRACTICES IN THE COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT
OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS

18

Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs
Members

Visiting Experts

Advisers

Mr. Amin Ali Ibrahim Inabi
Ms. Rajapakshage Sunethra Gunawardhana
Ms. Phyllis Yolanda Beckles
Ms. Yukiko Kudou
Ms. Bitsang Joyce Matshego
Mr. Martin Tongamp
Mr. Masamichi Noda
Mr. Hideo Yoshioka
Ms. Chomil Kamal
Mr. Rob Allen
Dr. Alan W. Leschied
Prof. Sue Takasu
Prof. Kei Someda
Prof. Mikiko Kakihara(Palestine)(Sri Lanka)(Barbados)(Japan)(South Africa)(Papua New Guinea)(Japan)(Japan)(Singapore)
(UK)
(USA)
(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Report SummaryI.

INTRODUCTION

Globally, the latter half of the last century has found those of us responsible forthe care, protection, and rehabilitation of juvenile offenders, faced with phenomenal
challenges, vis-à-vis an increase in criminal activity as well as the dangerous nature ofthem. It is recognized that stiffer penalties are not necessarily the required response at
this time, despite the public call for such.
Empirical research shows that stiffer penalties are even able to increase reoffending. We, therefore, believe that community-based treatment is a more effective
way to meet the best interests of juveniles and protect communities by preventing further
juvenile offences.
II.

DESIGNING A MODELIn deliberating on the preferred model for the community-based treatment ofoffenders, members of group 2 unanimously agreed on the need to identify a few guiding
principles. These principles were themselves guided by an appreciation of themultidimensional and complex nature of youth offending and the need to draw on theexpertise of a broad base of knowledge in the community, if accurate assessments andappropriate treatments are to be delivered.

A.

Principles

19
The principles underpinning our proposed model of community-based treatment
are as follows: (i) as far as possible, at least for juveniles under a certain age, thepreferred option is to divert him or her at pre-court or at the court stage; (ii) there should
be a multidisciplinary team to work on the best treatment option that will address theneeds of the juvenile to help him or her remain in the community; (iii) the
multidisciplinary team should influence the availability of community resources tosupport the juvenile in conflict with the law; (iv) the system should be one of throughcare for continuity of care and supervision of the juvenile.
B.

Multidisciplinary Team1.

The Purpose
The purpose of the Multidisciplinary Team is to assess and decide upon the bestinterests of the juvenile through the maximum utilization of community resources bydrawing on the expert views and opinions of professionals from diverse backgrounds.
The overall goal of the team is to identify programmes that decrease criminal behavior
and increase personal responsibility.
2.

Function of the Multidisciplinary TeamThe basic function of the Multidisciplinary Team is to collectively assess thejuvenile, to devise a treatment plan which meets the best interests of the juvenile based on
the attendance of a wide range of professionals from relevant areas and a concentration ofexpertise of the members and information regarding community resources.
C.

An Application of What Works

1.

What Works?
When selecting a programme, we should consider its effectiveness. That is, weshould adopt a programme that has empirical evidence of sufficient effectiveness for thejuvenile’s rehabilitation.
2.

What works best for whom?
Although there are many generally effective programmes, none of them work
equally well with all juveniles. While for certain juveniles, some treatment works, it will
not work for others, and for a third group, they may even get worse as a result. Therefore,
it is crucial to adopt programmes that are empirically related to the juvenile’s risks andneeds. Such programmes have a stronger likelihood of successful rehabilitation of thejuvenile.
3.

The role of the Multidisciplinary Team at the Court Stage
The Multidisciplinary Team adopts a broad perspective for assessment. The teamgathers information from various sources, considers them from all aspects, and identifies
the juvenile’s risks and needs. Secondly, the team selects a programme that is mostclinically relevant to the juvenile’s risks and needs.
III.
OPERATIONAL ISSUES

20
A.

Staff Training

1.

Objects
A model system for community-based rehabilitation of juvenile offenders needs
to be supported with a training system that will equip each officer with core competencies
to execute proper care and supervision of juveniles according to best practice standards.
To achieve this, it is important therefore that staff be given proper training,
instruction and guidance to: (i) clarify their responsibilities with regard to therehabilitation of offenders and to ensure that the offenders’ rights as well as that ofsociety’s are protected; (ii) understand the vital need to cooperate and coordinate
activities with all the other agencies concerned with the rehabilitation of each juvenile;(iii) continually maintain and improve their knowledge and professional capacity byattending relevant in-service and other training programmes.
2.

Specialized Training
Besides the generic training at a basic level, the Group also saw the need forfurther training depending on the areas of specialization and specific treatment issues thata community-based corrections staff needs to address beyond his/her early years in
Service. Programmes that have demonstrated effectiveness will require personnel to begiven proper training and guidance in programme delivery to ensure the integrity of the
programmes are preserved. Thus, staff involved in the delivery of cognitive behavioral
programmes, multi-systemic therapy, etc will require specialized training.
B.

Reducing Costs

The group noted that institutional treatment; especially secure treatment isinvariably more expensive than community-based treatment. In the field of communitybased treatment for juvenile offenders, finding new resources from the community levelis the main cost-reduction method. For finding new resources, at first, we have to follow
a risk assessment. The NGOs, neighborhoods, peers and employers at the community
level can be prospective benefactors. Whether, the resources are governmental or nongovernmental agencies, the efficient use of the allocated money is caused to reduce thecost of the treatment procedure.
IV.

ACCOUNTABILITY AND EVALUATIONA.

Offender Information Management System

1.

Guiding Principles for an Offender-Based Information System
The following guiding principles underpin the Group’s proposal for an offenderbased information system: (i) special consideration should be given to facilitate the active
involvement of the “many helping hands”; (ii) it is important that the tracking of offender
performance should be driven primarily by a focus on helping the offender to addressrisks, needs and issues and strengthen the prospect of community-based treatment; (iii)21
there should be strict rules governing confidentiality of information on offenders andfamilies (exception should only be on a need to know basis).
2.

Outline of Case Management System
The starting point of involvement differs somewhat with a few countries having
Probation Officers being involved right from the time of arrest and police investigation,
while other countries had their Probation Service only come in after the defendant has
made a guilty plea or is found guilty as charged.
3.

Development of an Offender-Based Information System
In attempting to develop a model system for the community-based treatment ofjuvenile offenders, the Group is mindful that due consideration has to be given to thedevelopment of an offender-based information system; one that starts from risk and needs
assessment at the pre-disposition investigation stage. This has to be followed closely by
a process of formulating an individualized supervision or treatment plan to address therisks and needs of each juvenile to steer him/her from offending.
4.

Risks and Needs Assessment
For many of the participating countries, there exists some form of standardizedrisk assessment tool that is usually a form or format. During the course, participants werealso introduced to the systematic risk assessment instruments used by the UK, i.e. ASSET
and the Canadian Youth Level of Service Inventory (YLSI). The risk and needs
assessment instrument is a vital tool for an offender-based information management
system. For one thing, it helps with classification of a juvenile in terms of the degree ofsupervision and level of service he/she needs to strengthen the prospect of successful
rehabilitation in the community.
5.

Formulation of an Individualized Care and Treatment Plan
The formulation of an individualized care and treatment plan is based very muchon what is uncovered during the pre-disposition social investigation. Additional
information that comes to light after this stage should also be considered to ensure thetreatment plan is responsive to the changing needs and circumstances of each juvenile.
The care and treatment plan is the description of the objectives of supervision and theactivities or casework intervention that will be carried out during the process ofsupervision. The plan should factor in the following objectives.
B.
1.

Public Relations: Gaining Public Confidence

Overview
In general, the public is reluctant to accept offenders in their community.
However, social support is vital to reintegrate juveniles into the community. Furthermore,
the community has a lot of resources that contribute to prevent recidivism. Social support,
including financial assistance and technical aid, is precisely essential for communitybased treatment.

22
In fact, there is a mutual relationship between social support and successful
rehabilitation of a juvenile delinquent. That is, social support enhances the effectivenessof community-based treatment programmes; on the other hand, successful rehabilitationof offenders brings public confidence to the community-based treatment system.
2.

How to Gain Public Confidence
As noted above, in order to gain and enhance public confidence, promotion ofcommunity involvement is of paramount importance. In general, the Probation Service
coordinates various agencies and groups and plays a major role in the promotion ofrehabilitation. Then, we mainly discussed the strategies for this target. Some examples ofthem are as follows: (i) public participation in the Juvenile Justice System; (ii) volunteers
in community-based treatment programmes; (iii) avoiding stigmatization; (iv) providing
services to the community; (v) providing security to the community; (vi) public relations.
C.

Summary

An offender-based information system is a vital step in the move towards bestpractices in the community-based treatment of juvenile offenders. It allows for: (i) asystematic assessment of the risks and needs of each juvenile; (ii) objective
benchmarking of progress made by each offender; (iii) analysis of the impact of treatment
programmes and other casework intervention by Probation Officers, volunteers and otheragencies working in partnership to achieve successful outcomes for the juvenile.
V.

CONCLUSION

Successful responses to this model depend on the gallant public relations efforts
of practitioners. There is no reason why any and all avenues should not be spared. We are
cognizant of the fact that consistent vigilance for changes of the mood and attitudes of thecommunity will be necessary. However a keen eye must be kept for any new oradditional resources that might manifest from time to time.
Continuity of community-based rehabilitative treatment also means continuous
research and evaluation of programmes that can inform practitioners. While weappreciate that resources are scarce, we must ensure that what resources are available arebeing appropriately distributed to those youth most in need. Above all, staff training
must be given a high priority if professionals are to be equipped to provide effective
services.
Finally, we cannot emphasize too strongly that the needs of youth are complex
and require the input and support of many community professionals. We have advanced
the concept of the Multidisciplinary Team, which we feel is the best vehicle to support
such evidence-based practice.

23
Group 3

BEST PRACTICES IN THE INSTITUIONAL TREATMENT OFJUVENILE OFFENDERS

Chairperson

Mr. Mohammed Azizul Haque(Bangladesh)

Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur

Mr. Yasuhiro Hosoi
Mr. Zaka-Ur-Rab Rana

(Japan)Co-Rapporteur
Members

Ms. Duangporn Ukris
Mr. Waliki Naiseruvati Satakala
Mr. Teh Guan Bee(Thailand)

Mr. Kazuhito Hosaka
Ms. Tomoko Yoshida(Japan)(Japan)Ms. Pamela Phillips
Prof. Yuichiro Tachi(New Zealand)(UNAFEI)

Prof. Kenji Teramura(UNAFEI)

Visiting Expert
Advisers(Pakistan)(Fiji)(Malaysia)

Report SummaryI.

INTRODUCTION

It was observed that in the present era, the organizations in charge of thetreatment of juveniles in conflict with the law are facing many challenges. In most of thecountries the sheer volume of offenders supplied by the criminal justice administration
overwhelms the treatment system. The group discussed a number of structure models forthe custody of juveniles. Each model that was discussed and designed, carry the main
theme of rehabilitation, re-socialization and reintegration of juvenile offenders. It wasalso agreed that the children requiring institutional care and treatment should be assessed,
observed and classified before proposing any treatment plan. It was also agreed that ways
and means of effectively carrying out the programmes, services and functions of theinstitution are dependent on the knowledge, competence, motivation and commitment of
the staff which can be enhanced by providing training to the institutional staff. The grouplaid a great stress on the need of basic orientation, on-the-job training as well as refresher
and advanced courses.
II.

DESIGNING A MODEL SYSTEMA.

Development of Model System Geared at Through Care

Most of the countries are facing the following problems in the institutionalorganizations set up for youth offenders:(1) Overcrowding in institutions;(2) Non-availability of technical and professional staff;(3) Non-existent or non-professional parole system;24(4) Non-existent juvenile/family courts, classification and juvenile training
schools.
It was agreed that to achieve the objective of re-socialization and reintegration of
a juvenile, the following institutions are to be established:(1) Juvenile Classification Home (JCH);(2) Juvenile Training School (JTS);(3) Juvenile Medical Training School (JMTS);(4) Juvenile Prison (JP).
It was also agreed that a Minor Children Re-socialization Centre aimed atpreventing the behavior of juveniles progressing to offending, under the social welfare
department, should be established in each country. The basic aim of establishing these
institutions is to re-socialize and rehabilitate the juvenile offender in the community.
B.

Case Management System

The group proposed a number of concepts for the implementation of the functionsof a case management system. It was agreed that the juveniles referred to an institution
should have Individualized Treatment Plans. However, this does not prevent group workwith juveniles. Programmes should be designed for the individual, not for the sake ofease of the management of the institution. It was unanimously agreed that the treatment
plan offered should be periodically reviewed and adjusted to meet changes in thejuvenile’s behavior.
C.

Effective Programme s/ Interventions

It was found that juvenile delinquents in juvenile institutions have often antisocial,self centred and harmful attitudes. If staff do not control and understand the relationshipwith an inmate’s group, antisocial juveniles in juvenile institutions will affect bad
influence over other inmates. On the other hand, in order to equip the juveniles withsocial skills, staff need to teach juveniles how to establish better relations with each other.
For obtaining this objective, we should utilize group approaches like Positive Peer
Culture (PPC), Aggression Replacement Training (ART) and aftercare programme.
III.

OPERATIONAL ISSUES

The second major topic for discussion amongst the group was operational issues
such as staff training, reducing cost and finding new resources for the institution. It was
decided that on entering into the correction services everybody should be provided withtraining for special subjects like criminology, behavioral sciences (e.g., child psychology,
correctional sociology, etc.) child welfare and case studies, etc. so that they come toknow about the juvenile needs and treatment given. It was also decided that the training
should be provided as per the needs of the staff in the institution. Training subjects andmaterials should be standardized, yet delivered in a flexible way.

25
A.

Reducing Cost

On account of economic depression, all around the world, most of the countries
are striving hard to achieve the best results in juvenile institutional treatment by utilizing
minimum resources. The following steps may be helpful in reducing the cost, like theintroduction of Information Technology (I.T.), the establishment of institutions such as
Juvenile Classification Homes, Juvenile Training Schools, and Juvenile Medical Training
Schools, etc. These should be housed on one campus, with the Juvenile Court to avoid
operational and transportation as well as security hazards. Treatment plans should not be
generalized but be provided according to needs.
B.

Finding New Resources

Community involvement is considered to be an important element in helping to
reduce the institut ional cost. In every country there are a large number of NGOs, privatecompanies, manufacturers and philanthropists who are willing to extend every support for
the welfare of juveniles because they are the hope and future of tomorrow. These
resources can be utilized in different areas like education, recreation, vocational training
as well as for raw materials and expertise. By the involvement of community in the areasof human, material and monetary resources in different projects of juvenile institutions
we will be able to reduce manpower as well as material costs.
IV.

ACCOUNTABILITY AND EVALUATIONA.

Offender Information Management System

The group considered a wide range of issues for the development of Offender
Information Management Systems (OBIS). It was agreed information management
systems are important for planning, policy and practice development, as well as forreporting on the work of the institution at both the case (individual) and system(institution) level. The introduction of computerized systems is considered to be anecessity at every institute. A computerized system would also provide a ready link to
the Internet for the latest research about the treatment of young offenders as well as online training courses for professional development of staff.
B.

Public Relations - Gaining Public Confidence

The most important issue of public relations in correctional institutions is that ofgaining public confidence. Generally, the public at large are unaware of the activities of
the institutions and often form the ir views from individual cases that are reported in asensational way in the media. It is therefore agreed to explore all avenues of providing
precise and accountable information to the public to promote awareness of the work of
the institutions and obtain support from society. It is therefore, agreed to develop a public
relations strategy.
In conclusion, the role of the UN is appreciated an account of preparing standardpractices and international instruments. As a result, a number of member states have

26
incorporated such recommendations in their laws and started the implementation process
in their Juvenile Justice Systems. Newly emerging ideas such as “risk management,
restorative justice and multi-systematic approaches,” give impetus to the integration of
the various treatment systems at the institutions. They have been studied and suggested
as an integrative approach in designing a model system.
In the end we hope that the proposed model will be practically applicable in every
participant ’s country, of course, with some of the modifications keeping in mind thenature, resources, circumstances and infrastructure of their respective countries.

27

Observation Visits
Date

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

May 30Tokyo Family Court• Mr. Kotaro Nagashima
Deputy Chief

May 30

Ministry of Justice• Mr. Kanihiro Matsuo
Vice-Minister of Justice

June 1

Training
Institute
Correctional Personnel

June 5

Tama Juvenile
SchoolJune 7

HachiojiJuvenile
Classification Home

• Mr. Hiroshi Ishige

Tokyo Probation Office• Mr. Yoshinori Shimizu

June 11forTraining• Mr. Kazuo Suzuki
Director• Mr. Hiromi OkudairaSuperintendent

Director

Director
June 18

June 20

Fuchu No. 9 Elementary
School• Mr. Takahiro Sakai

Keiwa-en Halfway House• Mr. Masashi Iwata

Principal

Head
June 29

Kawagoe Juvenile Prison• Mr.Yoshihiko Satou

WardenJuly 5

Seimei-Gakuen Institute for
Juvenile Delinquents• Mr. Hisashi Iwata

Superintendent

28
Date

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

July 6

Suntory Musashino Brewery• Mr. Shouzou Katayama

Plant Manager
July 9July 9July 10

July 10

Kifunebara Juvenile Training
School for Girls• Mr. Yukihito Higashitani

Hiroshima Juvenile Training
School• Mr. Masayoshi Kitayama

Osaka
Centre• Mr. Takashi Koizumi

Child

Guidance

Osaka
Municipal
Rehabilitation Centre for theHandicapped

Superintendent

Superintendent

Director• Mr. Syunichi Hayashi

Director

29Group Study Tours
Date

Group

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

June
22~23

NagasakiFukuoka• Sasebo Juvenile Training School• Mr. Makoto One

July
8~11

HiroshimaKansai• Kifenebara Juvenile Training School for Girls• Mr. Yukihito Higashitani• Hiroshima Juvenile Training School• Mr. Masayoshi Kitayama• Osaka Child Guidance Centre• Mr. Takahi Koizumi• Osaka Municipal Rehabilitation Centre for• Mr. Syunichi Hayashi

the Handicapped30

Special Events
May 21

Welcome Party

May 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 31 & June 4,8Japanese Conversation Classes
The overseas participants attended Japanese conversation classes provided by JICA.
They learned practical Japanese expressions. The Sensei (teachers) were Ms. Yukiko Shiina
and Ms. Kazue Suzuki. Iroiro Arigato Gozaimashita.
May 26

Party hosted by the ACPF Yokohama Branch
The ACPF Yokohama Branch hosted a dinner party at the Manchinro Honten
Chinese Restaurant in Yokohama in honor of the participants.

May 30Courtesy Visit to the Ministry of Justice andReception by Vice-Minster of Justice
After visiting the Ministry of Justice, a reception was held by the Vice-Minister ofJustice, Mr. Kunihiro Matsuo at the Lawyers Club, Tokyo.

June 1

UNAFEI Olympics
The UNAFEI Olympic Games were held on the grounds of the Training Institute for
Correctional Personnel. The participants competed in such events as the three-legged race,
racket relay and the true or false quiz. Afterwards, there was a friendship party at UNAFEI.

June 2

Kyodo no Mori ParkThe participants visited ‘Kyodo no Mori Park’ with UNAFEI staff, attending aluncheon at Tanaka House held on their behalf by Soroptomist International of Tokyo. The
participants were introduced to the Japanese art of Origami, and experienced a traditional tea
ceremony. Afterwards, they enjoyed the cultural and historical facilities located at the park,
including a museum, planetarium and extensive gardens, before returning to UNAFEI.
June 9Tea Ceremony“Chan-no-yu” or “Sado”, a formal Japanese tea ceremony, was demonstrated for theparticipants in the UNAFEI lounge B by Ms. Sousui Kobayashi, an Ura Senke Tea Master,and her apprentices.

31
June 12

ACPF Fuchu Branch Party
A dinner party hosted by Mr. Tsuneo Kashima, President of the ACPF Fuchu
branch, was held at UNAFEI in honor of the participants.

June 16

ACPF Japanese ClassA Japanese Class was held for the participants by volunteers from the ACPF.

June 18

Koto Concert
The Ensemble 21st Century, a group of volunteer musicians, performed traditional
Japanese ‘Koto’ music for the participants at UNAFEI.

June 20

ACPF Tokyo Minoru-kai Party
The ACPF Tokyo Minoru-kai Branch, affiliated with the ACPF Headquarters, hosted adinner party at the Sunshine 60 Building in Ikebukuro in honor of the participants.

June 22~23
Nagasaki-Fukuoka Study Tour
Nagasaki: The participants visited the Saika Bridge and the Dazaifu Shrine.
Fukuoka: The participants were able to enjoy a trip to the Fukuoka City Museum andsightseeing at the Fukuoka Tower.
June 25

VPO’s International Training
Ten Volunteer Probation Officers visited UNAFEI for an international Training
Programme. It was jointly organized by UNAFEI and the Rehabilitation Bureau of the
Ministry of Justice of Japan. A discussion session and friendship party were arranged to
exchange views between the VPOs and the participants.

June 30

Home Visits
The ACPF Fuchu Branch organized dinners for the participants in the homes ofmembers from the Fuchu International Exchange Salon, Tokyo Fuchu Rotary Club andSoroptomist International of Tokyo, Fuchu. The hosts were Mr. Rinshi Sekiguchi, Ms.
Junko Ogawa, Mr. Houtoku Onuki, and Ms. Setsuko Senba.

July 3

Flower Arrangement
A group of volunteer instructors, led by Ms. Kuniko Mori and Ms. Junko Oishi,
explained and demonstrated to the participants ‘Ikebana’, traditional Japanese flower
arrangement. Afterwards, the participants had the opportunity to arrange the flowers
themselves.

July 6
July 7

Rotary Club of Fuchu Party
The Rotary Club of Fuchu held a party in honor of the participants.

F.C. Tokyo V Kashima Antlers
The participants enjoyed a J-League First Division soccer match between F.C.
Tokyo and Kashima Antlers. The tickets were kindly provided by the ACPF Tokyo
Minoru-kai Branch.

32
July 8~11
Hiroshima-Kansai Study Tour
Hiroshima: on their first day, the participants visited the Peace Memorial Museum
and Peace Memorial Park in Hiroshima. On their second day they enjoyed sightseeing at
Himeji Castle.
Kyoto: on their fourth day the participants took advantage of a sightseeing tour of
Kyoto City.
July 12

Farewell Party

33

Reference Materials Distributed

United Nations Reading Materials(1.) Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 (General Assembly resolution
44/25, annex)(2.) United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile
Justice 1985 (The Beijing Rules) (General Assembly resolution 40/33, annex)(3.) United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency 1990
(The Riyadh Guidelines) (General Assembly resolution 45/112, annex)(4.) United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty
1990 (General Assembly resolution 45/113, annex)(5.) Guidelines for Action on Children and Criminal Justice System 1997
(Economic and Social Council resolution 1997/30, annex)(6.) Vienna Declaration on Crime and Justice: Meeting the Challenges of theTwenty-first Century 2000 (A/CONF.187/4/Rev.3)(7.) The United Nations and Juvenile Justice: A Guide to International Standards
and Best Practice1999(8.) Juvenile Justice, Innocenti Digest No. 3, 1998
Juvenile Justice Reform(1.) The Crime and Disorder Act: Introductory Guide-Youth Justice, UK Home
Office, 1998
(2.) The Crime & Disorder Act 1998 - Implementing the Act, Delivering the Aim,UK Home Office,1999(3.) Crime and Disorder Act 1998: Youth Justice-The Statutory Principal Aim ofPreventing Offending by Childern and Young People, UK Home Office,1998(4.) The Crime and Disorder Act: Inter-Departmental Circular on Establishing
Youth Offending Teams, UK Home Office, 1998 (22.12.98)(5.) Youth Justice Board: Who, What, Why? 199834(6.) The Youth Court in New Zealand: A New Model of Justice 1993 (Legal
Research Foundation Publication N0. 34)(7.) Balancing Opposing Paradigms between Retributive and Restorative Youth
Justice, The Singaporean Experience: Factorial Approach Towards Juvenile
Justice Management in Singapore 2000 (Paper given at International
Conference on Youth Justice 2000 in Singapore, September 2000)

Delinquency Prevention(1.) Section II: Summary of Findings,The Comparative Costs and Benefits ofProgrammes to Reduce Crime: A Review of National Findings with
Implications for Washington State, Steve Aos et al. Washington State
Institute for Public Policy. 1999
(2.) Explaining and Predicting Crime: The Globalization of Knowledge-The
American Society of Criminology 1999 Presidential Address David P.
Farrington. 2000
(3.) Effective Programmes to Counter Juvenile Delinquency. David P. Farrington(Paper given at International Conference on Youth Justice 2000 in Singapore,
September 2000).
(4.) Developmental Crime Prevention. Builidng a Safer Society: Strategic
Approaches to Crime Prevention (Crime and Justice: A Review of Research
Volume 19). Richard F. Trembleay and Wendy M. Craig. 1995
(5.) Part One: Preventing Drug Abuse Among Young at Risk, J. David Hawkins
et al., 1992
(6.) Comprehensive Community- and School-Based Interventions to Prevent
Antisocial Behavior. Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders. Richard F.
Catalano et al., 1998

Treatment in General(1.) Youth Level of Service and Case Management Inventory. Robert D. Hoge
and D. A. Andrews. 1994

35(2.) Youth Level of Service and Case Management Inventory: Intake Manual and
Item Scoring Key. Robert D. Hoge and D. A. Andrews. 1994

(3.) Can Rehabilitative Programmes Reduce the Recidivism of Juvenile
Offenders? An Inquiry into the Effectiveness of Practical Programmes.
Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, Mark W. Lipsey, 1999.
(4.) Effective Intervention for Serious Juvenile Offenders. Serious & Violent
Juvenile Offenders. Mark W. Lipsey and David B. Wilson. 1998.
(5.) Principles of Effective Intervention with Offenders. Choosing Correctional
Options That Work: Defining the Demand and Evaluating the Supply. Paul
Gendreau. 1996

Community-Based Treatment(1.) Probation Services (Second Edition). Dick Whitfield. 1998
(2.) 10 The Juvenile Offender in the Community. The Offender in the Community.
Todd Clear and Harry R. Dammer. 2000.
(3.) 11 Managing the Offender in the Community. The Offender in theCommunity. Todd Clear and Harry R. Dammer. 2000.

(4.) 12 Reducing Risk Through Correctinal Treatment. The Offender in theCommunity. Todd Clear and Harry R. Dammer. 2000.

(5.) Community Justice: A Conceptual Framework. Boundary Changes in
Criminal Justice Organizations (Criminal Justice 2000 Volume 2). David R.
Carp and Todd R. Clear.
(6.) A Vision for Community Juvenile Justice. Juvenile and Family Court Journal.
Gordan Bazemore. 1998.
(7.) Multisystemic Therapy. Blueprints for Violence Prevention: Book Six
Multisystemic Therapy. Scott W. Henggeler et al.1998.
(8.) Inside Multisystemic Therapy: Therapist, Supervisory, and Programme
Practices. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Sonja K.
Schoenwald et al. 2000

36(9.) I. Guiding Principles. Restoring Hope Through Community Partnerships:
The Real Deal in Crime Control. Betsy A. Fulton. 1996.
Institutional Treatment(1.) Aggression Replacement Training: Methods and Outcomes. ClinicalApproaches to Working with Young Offenders. Arnold P. Goldstein andBarry Glick. 1996
(2.) Adult Correctional Treatment. Prisons (Crime and Justice: A Review of
Research Volume 26). Gerald Gaes et al. 1999.
(3.) New Directions in Effective Correctional Treatment. Forum. Barbara
Armstrong and Guy Bourgon. 2001
(4.) Chapter 1 EQUIP: Introduction and Description. The EQUIP Programme.
John C. Gibbs et al. 1995
(5.) Chapter 2 Developing a Positive Youth Culture. The EQUIP Programme.
John C. Gibbs et al. 1995
Restorative Justice(1.) Restorative Juvenile Justice: In Search of Fundamentals and an Outline for
Systemic Reform. Restorative Juvenile Justice: Repairing the Harm of Youth
Crime. Gordon Bazemore and Lode Walgrave. 1999
(2.) Origin and Development of Family Group Conferences. Family Group
Conferences: Perspectives on Policy and Practice. Ian Hassall. 1996.
(3.) Family Group Conferences with Youth Offenders in New Zealand. FamilyGroup Conferences: Perspectives on Policy and Practice. Trish Stewart, 1996.
(4.) Making Justice Work. Restorative Justice: Contemporary Themes andPractice. Helen Bowen, 1999.
(5.) Taking Responsibility in Being Accountable. Restorative Justice:Contemporary Themes and Practice. Judge Fred McElrea, 1999.
(6.) Restoration: A Better Way. Restorative Justice: Contemporary Themes andPractice. Judge Stan Thorburn, 1999.
(7.) Alan and Cory-Aggravated Robbery. Restorative Justice: Contemporary
Themes and Practice, 1999.

37

EXPERTS & PARTICIPANTS LIST

Visiting Experts
Ms. Pamela Phillips

Coordinator, Community Conferencing,
Department of Families,
Youth Justice Directorate,
Brisbane, Queensland,
Australia

Dr. Alan W. Leschied

Associate Professor,
University of Western Ontario,
London, Ontario, Canada

Ms. Chomil Kamal

Deputy Director and Chief Probation Officer,
Ministry of Community Development,
Singapore

Mr. Rob Allen

Member of the Youth Justice Board and Director of
the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation,
London, England

Dr. Tracey Harachi

Research Associate Professor,
Social Development Research Group,
University of Washington,
United States of America

Overseas Participants
Mr. Mohammed Azizul Haque

Senior Superintendent,
Barisal Central Jail,
Barisal, Bangladesh

Ms. Phyllis Yolanda Beckles

Senior Probation Officer,
Probation Department,
St. Michael, Barbados

38

Dr. Fernando Rabello Mendes Filho

Presidence Advisor,
Para’s Child and Adolescent Foundation,
Belem Para, Brasil

Mr. Chen Hao

Deputy Director,
Household Registration Division,
Public Order Bureau,
Ministry of Public Security,
Beijing, China

Mr. Waliki Naiseruvati Satakala

Assistant Superintendent of Prisons,Fiji Prison Service,
Suva, Fiji

Mr. Ambati Siva Narayana

Inspector General of Police,
Indian Police Service,
Security Intelligence,
Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, India

Mr. Sambas Somawidjaja

Head of Sub-directorate for Social
Rehabilitation
For Juvenile Delinquency,
National Social Welfare Board,
Jakarta, Indonesia

Mr. Teh Guan Bee

Principal,
Sekolah Tunas Bakti (Juvenile Boys Home),
Taiping, Malaysia

Mr. Binod Mohan Acharya

District Judge,
District Court,
Kalikat, Nepal

Mr. Zaka-Ur-Rab Rana

Senior Lecturer,
Central Jail Staff Training Institute,
Lahore, Pakistan

Mr. Amin Ali Ibrahim Inabi

Director,
Probation Department,
Ministry of Social Affairs,
Ramallah, Palestine

Mr. Martin Tongamp

Probation Officer,
Division of Probation and Parole Services,
Boroko N.C.D, Papua New Guinea

39

Ms. Bitsang Joyce Matshego

Deputy Director,
Youth and Females Department ofCorrectional Services,
Pretoria, South Africa

Ms. Rajapakshage Sunethra Gunawardhana

Provincial Commissioner,
Department of Probation and Child Care Services,
Badulla, Sri Lanka

Ms. Duangporn Ukris

Acting Superintendent,
Sirindhorn Vocational Training School,
Nakornprathom Province, Thailand

Japanese Participants
Mr. Naoyuki Fukushima

Judge,
Tokyo District Court,
Tokyo, Japan

Mr. Kazuhito Hosaka

Prosecutor,
Mito District Public Prosecutors Office,Ibaragi, JapanMr. Yasuhiro Hosoi

Principal Specialist,
Fukui Juvenile Classification Home,
Fukui, Japan

Ms. Yukiko Kudou

Probation Officer,
Hokkaido Regional Parole Board,
Sapporo, JapanMr. Shousuke Kuwabara

Senior Family Court Probation Officer,
Fukuoka Family Court,
Fukuoka, Japan

Mr. Masamichi Noda

Family Court Probation Officer,
Hiroshima Family Court, Kure Branch,
Hiroshima, Japan

Ms. Kae Sakuma

Public Prosecutor,
Saitama District Public Prosecutors Office,Kumagaya, Japan

40
Mr. Takahito Shimada

Researcher,
National Research Institute of
Police Science,
Kashiwa, Japan

Ms. Tomoko Yoshida

Professor,
Training Institute for
Correctional Personnel,
Fuchu, JapanMr. Hideo Yoshioka

Probation Officer,
Yamaguchi Probation Office,Yamaguchi, Japan

41

INFORMATION ABOUT PROGRAMMES & ACTIVITIES
Upcoming Programmes
1.

The 119th International Training Course

The 119th International Training Course, entitled “The Current Situation of andCountermeasures against Transnational Organized Crime”, is scheduled to take place from
10 September to 4 November 2001. This training course will examine current trends andissues in transnational organized crime, particularly in light of the United Nations
Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.
Rationale
In proportion to the expansion of the international exchange in people and goods,
the number of transnational crimes has been increasing. Transnational criminalorganizations have been among the first to take advantage of the new global reach madepossible by the revolutions in communications, transportation and commerce.
Transnational organized crime is a growing threat to the security of the internationalsociety and the stability of sovereign states. It undermines the integrity of legitimate
national economies, global financial systems, the rule of law and fundamental social
values.
Drug trafficking, money laundering, use of violence and extortion, acts ofcorruption, trafficking in women and children, illicit manufacturing of and trafficking infirearms, the illegal trafficking and transportation of migrants, computer-related crime,
and the illegal trafficking in stolen vehicles, perpetrated under the influence of criminalorganizations, have been serious problems throughout the world, including Asia and thePacific region. For example, the smuggling of migrants disrupts the establishedimmigration policies of the destination countries and often involves human rights abuses.
The exploitative nature of the trafficking in human beings often amounts to a modern
form of indentured servitude, with forced prostitution ranking highest among the meansof exploitation. Smuggling and trafficking have become major sources of income forcriminal organizations at the national and international level.
In recognition of the gravity of the above- mentioned situation, the United Nations
has given special attention to the issue of transnational organized crime. In November
2000, the General Assembly adopted the United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime (hereinafter referred to as “the TOC Convention”), with
its two protocols on trafficking in persons (especially women and children) and thesmuggling of migrants, respectively. The TOC Convention was opened for signature bymember states in December 2000 in Palermo, Italy. More than 120 countries attended theConference and signed the TOC Convention, which will be open for signature until 12
December 2002, in New York, USA.

42
One of the most important tasks for the criminal justice system is to expose theillegal activities of organized criminals, as well as their structures, and to punish themeffectively. However, organized criminals often remain undetected and beyond arrest
because of the difficulties and complexity inherent to the investigation of organized crime.
In particular, it is difficult to penetrate into the core of organized criminal groups and tocatch their ringleaders. In order for law enforcement officials to reach such criminals, theyneed innovative legal weapons.
The TOC Convention requires party countries to introduce a variety ofremarkable countermeasures to combat transnational organized crime. One of the mostsignificant articles is Article 5, requiring member states to criminalize participation in an
organized criminal group. Article 20 requires member states, within its possibilities andunder the conditions prescribed by its domestic law, to take necessary measures to allow
for the appropriate use of controlled delivery, electronic surveillance and undercover
operations. Similarly, Article 26 refers to mitigating punishment for a cooperative
accused and immunity from prosecution to aid in the investigation and prosecution oforganized criminals.
In order for evidence through the above methods to be admitted as substantial
evidence in trial, revision of the evidentiary rules in each country may be needed.
Member states are encouraged to adopt witness and victim protection measures, such as
establishing procedures for physical protection, and permitting testimony to be given
through the use of communications technology (Articles 24 and 25 of the TOC
Convention).
In addition, bearing in mind that organized criminal groups launder the proceedsof their crime and therefore the criminalization of money laundering is an effective
method to contain organized crime, the TOC Convention incorporates comprehensive
anti-money laundering clauses in Articles 6 and 7.
Moreover, international cooperation is indispensable to the combat oftransnational organized crime. Consequently, the TOC Convention contains very broadand comprehensive clauses for international cooperation in criminal matters, such as theconfiscation of crime proceeds (Article 13), disposal of confiscated proceeds (Article 14),extradition (Article 16) and mutual legal assistance (Article 18).
It is evident that the TOC Convention provides international community with very
powerful and effective action against transnational organized crime. Thus in order to both
utilize the provisions of the Convention and to implement effective methods forinvestigating, prosecuting and punishing transnational organized criminals, it is significant
to analyse the situation of the said crimes, and to examine the feasibility and modality ofthe methods to address them.
Taking this background into consideration, UNAFEI, as a regional institute(affiliated with the United Nations) for the prevention of crime and the treatment ofoffenders, has decided to undertake a series of international training courses and seminars

43
for the coming years under the general theme of “transnational organized crime”. This
course is part of UNAFEI’s continuing commitment to this internationally important
theme.
Giving due consideration to the above rationale, this training course purports to
explore the ways and means of strengthening and improving methods and techniques in
the fight against transnational organized crime. Particular focus will be given to theeffective implementation of the TOC Convention. Sharing practical information andexperiences on how other countries tackle our common issues will facilitate our efforts inthe fight against transnational organized crime.
In the discussion of this course, focus will be placed on the following elements:(1) Overview of the Situation of Transnational Organized Crime. Current Situation of:(a)Illicit drug trafficking(b)Illegal firearms trafficking(c)Human (women and children) trafficking(d)Money laundering(e)Others (excluding terrorism)(2) Components and Legal Frameworks for Combating Transnational Organized Crime:(a)Criminalization of participation in an organized criminal group(b)
Anti-money laundering systems(3) Tools Facilitating the Investigation of Transnational Organized Crime and Methods
for Obtaining Cooperation with Witnesses to Punish Organized Criminals. Current
Situation of, Problems and Solutions for:(a)Controlled delivery(b)Electronic
surveillance(Wire-tapping,
Communications
interception etc.)(c)
Undercover operations(d)Immunity systems(e)Witness and victim protection programmes(4) Ways and Means of Strengthening and Improving International Cooperation,
Particularly through Implementation of the Mechanism of Mutual Legal Assistance andExtradition.

Special Training Programmes

1.

Special Training Programme: Juvenile Treatment Systems

UNAFEI will conduct a special training programme for Kenyan criminal justiceofficials who are working for the prevention of delinquency and the treatment of juvenile

44
delinquents in their country. The training course, entitled “Juvenile Delinquent
Treatment Systems”, will be held from 5 November until 29 November 2001.
4.

Special Training Programme: Corruption Control in Criminal Justice

UNAFEI will conduct a special training course entitled “Corruption Control inControl in Criminal Justice” from 11 November to 28 November 2001. In this course,
twelve foreign officials engaged in corruption control will comparatively ana lyze thecurrent situation of corruption, methods of corruption prevention, and measures toenhance international cooperation in this regard.

45

ADMINISTRATIVE NEWS

Faculty Changes
Mr. Hiroshi Iitsuka, formerly Professor of UNAFEI and Chief of Training
Division, was transferred to the Matsudo Branch of the Chiba District Court on 1 April
2001.

Mr. Akihiro Nosaka, formerly Professor of UNAFEI and Chief of Informationand Library Service Division, was transferred to the Chiba Probation Office on 1 April
2001.

Mr. Shinya Watanabe, formerly Professor of UNAFEI and Chief of Research
Division, was transferred to Fuchu Prison on 1 April 2001.

Mr. Chikara Satou, formerly Professor of UNAFEI, was transferred to the
Hachioji Branch of the Tokyo District Probation Office on 1 April 2001.

Mr. Toru Miura, formerly a Judge at the Kushiro District Court, joined UAFEI as
a Professor and the Chief of Training Division 1 April 2001.

Mr. Kenji Teramura, formerly a Senior Researcher with the Takamatsu Regional
Headquaters, joined UNAFEI as a Professor and Chief of Information and LibraryService Division 1 April 2001.

Mr. Kei Someda, formerly a Senior Researcher at the First Research Department,
joined UNAFEI as a Professor and Chief of Research Division on 1 April 2001.
Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe, formerly a Prosecutor with the Tokyo District Prosecutors
Office, joined UNAFEI as a Professor on 1 April 2001.
Ms. Sue Takasu, formerly a Prosecutor with the Yokohama District Prosecutors
Office, joined UNAFEI as a Professor on 1 April 2001.

46
Ms. Rebecca Findlay-Debeck left her position as a linguistic advisor at UNAFEI
on 1 April 2001 and was replaced by Mr. Sean Eratt, formerly a Solicitor in England.

Overseas Trips by Staff
Mr. Mikinao Kitada (Director) represented UNAFEI and was a member of theJapanese delegation at the Tenth United Nations Commission on the Prevention of Crime
and Criminal Justice held in Vienna, Austria from 8 May to 17 May 2001.
Mr. Keiichi Aizawa (Deputy Director) attended the First Asia Cyber Crime
Summit which was held in Hong Kong from 24 April to 27 April 2001. Mr. Keiichi
Aizawa presented a lecture as a panelist at this Summit.
Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe (Professor) attended the Seminar on Forfeiting the Proceedsof Crime and presented a lecture. This Seminar was hosted by the Asset Forfeiture andMoney Laundering Section of the United States Department of Justice and the Anti-Money
Laundering Office of Thailand. It was held from 15 May to 18 May 2001 in Thailand.
Mr. Hiroshi Tsutomi (Professor) attended the Ad Hoc Expert Group Meeting on
Criminal Justice Statistics as an expert. This Meeting was held in Buenos Aires, Argentina
from 23 to 25 April 2001.

UNAFEI Home Page: http://www.unafei.or.jp/
UNAFEI Email: unafei@nifty.com

47

STAFF & FACULTY OF UNAFEI

Faculty:
Mr. Mikinao Kitada
Mr. Keiichi Aizawa
Mr. Toru Miura
Mr. Kenji Teramura
Mr. Kei Someda
Mr. Yuichiro Tachi
Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe
Ms. Sue Takasu
Mr. Hiroshi Tsutomi
Ms. Mikiko Kakihara
Mr. Sean Brian Eratt

Director
Deputy Director
Chief of Training Division, Professor
Chief of Information & Library Service Division,
Professor
Chief of Research Division, Professor
Professor
Professor
Professor
Professor, 118th Course Programming Officer
Professor, 118th Course Sub-Programming
Officer
Linguistic Adviser

Secretariat:
Mr. Yoshinori Miyamoto
Mr. Kunihiko Suzuki

Chief of Secretariat
Deputy Chief of Secretariat

General and Financial Affairs Section
Mr. Norihiko Kimura
Mr. Kimihiro Suga
Ms. Ikumi Yoshida
Mr. Wataru Inoue
Mr. Shokichi Kai
Mr. Teruo Kanai
Mr. Noboru Kaneko

Chief

Driver
Maintenance
MaintenanceTraining and Hostel Management Affairs Section
Mr. Takuma Kai
Mr. Makoto Nakayama
Ms. Aya Saito
Ms. Mayu Hayashi
Mr. Hiroyuki Koike
Ms. Kyoko Matsushita

Chief, 118th Course Assistant Programming
Officer

48

International Research Affairs Section

Secretarial Staff

Mr. Kouichirou Iida

Ms. Shinobu Nagaoka
Ms. Akiko Tsubouchi

Kitchen, Chef

JICA Coordinator

Mr. Tomohiko Takagi

Ms. Etsuko Mitani