RESOURCE MATERIALSERIES No. 74

UNAFEI
Fuchu, Tokyo, Japan

January 2008

Keiichi Aizawa
Director
United Nations
Asia and Far East Institutefor the Prevention of Crime andthe Treatment of Offenders(UNAFEI)
1-26 Harumi-cho, Fuchu, Tokyo 183-0057, Japan
http://www.unafei.or.jp
unafei@moj.go.jp

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTORY NOTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

v

WORK PRODUCT OF THE 135TH
INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR“Promoting Public Safety and Controlling Recidivism Using Effective Interventions
with Offenders: An Examination of Best Practices”
Visiting Experts’ Papers•

Controlling Prisoner Rates: Experiences from Finland
by Dr. Tapio Lappi-Seppälä (Finland) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3•

Crime Prevention and Community Sanctions in Scandinavia
by Dr. Tapio Lappi-Seppälä (Finland) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20•

Methods of Diversion Used by the Prosecution Services in The Netherlands andOther Western European Countries
by Dr. Peter J.P. Tak (the Netherlands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53•

Interventions with Drug Misusing Offenders and Prolific andOther Priority Offenders
by Mr. Peter Wheelhouse (United Kingdom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65•

Effective Correctional Programmes
by Brian A. Grant, Ph.D. (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83•

Mobilization of Community Resources and Successful Reintegration of Offenders
by Mr. Kwok Leung-ming (Hong Kong) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Participants’ Papers•

Country Report - China
by Mr. Yu Tongzhi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109•

Country Report - Indonesia
by Ms. Diah Ayu Noorsinta Hidayati . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115•

Country Report - Korea
by Mr. Young-Hoon Ha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125•

Country Report - Malaysia
by Mr. Raja Shahrom bin Raja Abdullah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134•

Country Report - Thailand
by Mr. Somphop Rujjanavet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

iii

Reports of the Seminar•

The Use of Effective Interventions in Reducing Recidivism and Promoting Public
Safety at the Prosecution and Sentencing Stageby Group 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150•

Promoting Public Safety and Controlling Recidivism Using Effective Interventions
with Offenders Whilst Serving Their Sentence: An Examination of Best Practices
by Group 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163•

The Use of Effective Intervention in Reducing Recidivism and Promoting
Public Safety After the Offender Has Served His or Her Sentence
by Group 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174

APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

iv

INTRODUCTORY NOTE
It is with pride that the United Nations Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of
Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI) offers to the international community
Resource Material Series No. 74.
This volume contains the work produced in the 135th International Senior Seminar that was
conducted from 12 January to 16 February 2007. The main theme of the 135th Seminar was“Promoting Public Safety and Controlling Recidivism Using Effective Interventions with
Offenders: An Examination of Best Practices”.
The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners states that theultimate purpose of imprisonment is to protect society against crime; at the same time itshould also aim at offenders’ reintegration into society. Non-custodial measures are more
conducive to social integration of offenders and facilitate their rehabilitation by allowing themcontinuous contact with the community. In 1990 the United Nations adopted the United
Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules), which
stipulate guidelines and standards concerning various non-custodial measures.
Since the 1990s, a re-evaluation of programmes that aim at the rehabilitation andreintegration of offenders has been made from the point of view of “What Works” not from thepessimistic point of view of “Nothing Works”. Thus now, a consensus is being establishedconcerning the models of effective intervention that aim at the prevention and/or reduction ofrecidivism. Such effective intervention models have already been implemented in institutions,such as prisons, and in the community (for example, as part of probation), in many countries in
the form of cognitive behavioural therapy, social skills training and motivational interviewing.
Empirical evaluations of their outcomes have been, and continue to be, carried out.
Reflecting such insights, the United Nations adopted the Bangkok Declaration on theoccasion of the 11th United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, heldin Bangkok, Thailand in 2005. The Declaration urges Member States to “recognize thatcomprehensive and effective crime prevention strategies can significantly reduce crime andvictimization … [, and] … urge that such strategies address the root causes and risk factors ofcrime …” Member States are also urged to “endeavour to use and apply the United Nations
standards and norms in [their] national programmes for crime prevention and criminal justice[and] to facilitate appropriate training for law enforcement officials, including prison officials,
prosecutors, the judiciary and other relevant professional groups, taking into account thosenorms and standards and best practices at the international level”. Therefore, it is very
important to discuss and examine the experiences and practices that aim at the prevention andreduction of recidivism and evaluate their adaptability, sustainability and cost-effectiveness inorder to incorporate such ideas into improving future treatment of offenders in respective
countries.
Based on the above, this Seminar aimed to study best practices of the effective
interventions that focus on the prevention and/or reduction of recidivism of offenders in theparticipating countries and provided an opportunity to examine necessary and productive
measures to promote offenders’ reintegration into society through the provision of effective
programmes at each stage of the criminal justice process.
In this issue, in regard to the 135th Seminar, papers contributed by visiting experts,
selected individual presentation papers from among the participants and the Reports of thev

Seminar are published. I regret that not all the papers submitted by the Seminar participants
could be published.
I would like to pay tribute to the contributions of the Government of Japan, particularly the
Ministry of Justice, the Japan International Cooperation Agency, and the Asia Crime
Prevention Foundation for providing indispensable and unwavering support to UNAFEI’sinternational training programmes.
Finally I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to all who so unselfishly assisted in the
publication of this series; in particular, the editor of Resource Material Series No. 74, Ms.
Grace Lord.
January 2008

Keiichi Aizawa
Director of UNAFEIvi

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES
NO. 74Work Product of the 135th International Senior Seminar“PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AND CONTROLLING RECIDIVISM USINGEFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS WITH OFFENDERS: AN EXAMINATION OF
BEST PRACTICES”

UNAFEIVISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERSCONTROLLING PRISONER RATES:
EXPERIENCES FROM FINLAND
Dr. Tapio Lappi-Seppälä*

I. TRENDS AND CHANGESThe last decades have witnessed unprecedented expansion of penal control in different parts of the world.
Between 1975 and 2004 prisoner rates in the US have increased by 320% from around 170/100,000
inhabitants to over 700/100,000 inhabitants.
Federal and State prisoners in the USA 1925-2003 (/100 000)
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1925 1931 1937 1943 1949 1955 1961 1967 1973 1978 1984 1990 1996 2002

This drastic change can be contrasted with another one, which took place in Finland after the Second
World War:
Prisoner rates in Finland 1945-2005

Prisoners / 100 000 pop

250

200

150

100

50

0
1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Combining these two diametrically opposing trends, we have a nice illustration on how things can takedifferent shape in penal policy in different jurisdictions, at the same time.
* National Research Institute of Legal Policy, Finland.

3

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Whatever happened in the US did not take place in Finland – to the contrary. Things can go differently,
and often do. The development in the US seems to have had a strong model-effect in the English-speaking
world. Similar – albeit smaller – changes have taken place also in Australia, New Zealand and the UK. These
trends do not confine themselves to the Anglophone world. During the last two decades the Netherlands has
increased more than six-fold its prisoner rate from the low of 20/100,000 to 130/100,000. Spain has morethan tripled its rate from 40/100,000 to 140/100 000.
Prisoner rates 1980-2005 in
Anglo-Saxon countries

Mean Prisoners (/100 000)

Prisoner rates 1975-2005
Netherlands & UK (England & Wales)

There is every reason to be worried by this development. As it seems, the expansion of prisoner rates is
not confined to the Anglophone world, nor to Europe. Similar trends can be found everywhere, including
Asian and African countries.
Japan, in turn, is an often cited as an example of a low-crime and low-imprisonment country. For a long
period of time, Japanese prison figures were among the lowest of the industrialized countries, even belowthat of Scandinavia. But it now appears that Japan too is experiencing increasing prisoner rates, and a rise ofaround 70% from the early 1990s to today.
Prisoner rates in Japan 1976-2005
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
76

19

79

19

19

82

19

85

19

88

91

19

19

94

97

19

00

20

20

03

Unfortunately, by the turn of the millennium the global increase in prisoner rates seemed to have taken ahold also of the Scandinavian countries. Starting from the late 1990s, prisoner rates have taken an upward
turn. Even if this increase is modest by international standards (on average from 60/100,000 to 7075/100,000 prisoners), it is nevertheless significant from the Scandinavian point of view.

4

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

90

Annual average / 100 000 pop

80
70

DEN

60

FIN

50

NOR

40

SWE

30
20
10
0
1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

In short, the global picture is dominated by rising prisoner rates. However, there are exceptions in trends
and there still are huge differences in the levels of imprisonment. That becomes also clear when we look at
the published prisoner rate data of the participating countries of the 135th UNAFEI International Seniorseminar.

Scandinavia

65

x
Maldives

343

Thailand256

Brazil193

Jamaica

182

El Salvador

174

Honduras

161

Malaysia

141

Myanmar

120

China

118

Korea
Ethiopia
Venezuela

97

Prisoner rates by the92

participants of the
UNAFEI 135th

74

Japan

62

Pakistan

Senior Seminar

57

Indonesia

45

Congo

38
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

The Maldives is in the lead with 350 prisoners per 100,000 people while the Congo has only 10% of that
number. Japan is located at the lower end of the scale, on the same level as Scandinavia. Are they justunavoidable and natural reflections of current levels of crime? My tentative answer is a decisive “No.”
Prisoner rates cannot be explained with reference to crime. They are products of political processes, butthese processes can also be influenced.
I will try to examine these processes on the basis of Finnish data. In a global context, the Finnish trends
are unique. At the beginning of the 1950s, Finland had some 200 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, while thefigures in Sweden, Denmark and Norway – and in Japan – were around 50. Even in the 1970s, Finland’s
prisoner rate continued to be among the highest in Western Europe. However, during the time when most
European countries experienced rising prison populations, the Finnish rates continued to decrease. By the
beginning of the 1990s, Finland had reached the Nordic level of around 60 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants.
The first thing to note is that this major change cannot be explained by decreasing crime – as so often is
assumed. When prisoner rates went down, crime went up.

5

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74
PRISON RATES AND CRIME RATESFinland 1950-2000
Crime

Prisoners
200

9 000

180

8 000

160

7 000

140

6 000

120

5 000

100
4 000
80
3 000
60

1998

1994

1990

1986

1982

1978

1974

1970

1966

1962

1958

1950

1998

1994

1990

1986

1982

1978

1974

1970

1966

1962

0
1958

0
1954

1 000

1950

20

1954

2 000

40

But neither was it so, that a decrease in the prisoner rates lead to an increase in crime – as is even more
often assumed. I will first look at the reasons and factors that contributed to this decline in prisoner rates. I
will thereafter consider whether, and to what extent, changes in prisoner rates were reflected in the crime
rates.
USA

726 USA 726

RUS

Russia 550

EST

Baltic 303

337
LIT

234

POL

209
191

SLO

Eastern Europe 182

165
164

SPA

144
141

POR

133
124

AUS

123
106

GER

97
96

Western Europe 109

91
BEL

88
85

SWZ

81

SWE

81
71
70

DEN

Scandinavia 72

65

Japan 62

62

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Figure I.1 Prisoner rates in 2004/2005
Source: KCL http://www.prisonstudies.org/
6

700

800

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

In a global context Scandinavia is tied with Japan in having the lowest numbers of prisoners per capita. At
present the figures are about 70-75/100,000. The corresponding figures for other Western European
countries are around 110; in Eastern Europe around 200; in the Baltic countries around 300; in Russia
around 550 and in the US over 700.
Prisoner rates in selected Asian countries 1995-2005
400
350
300
250

1996

200

2001

150

2005

100
50
0

Indonesia

Japan

Malaysia

Korea

Thailand

1996

23

38

108

139

173

2001

31

48

124

132

352

2005

45

62

141

97

256

800

Japan and Finland in Global Prisoner rate comparison(213 countries) 2004-2005

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

Japan

Finland

II. CHANGES IN PENAL IDEOLOGY
Long-term change in Finland – covering almost a half a century – was affected both by macro-levelstructural factors and ideological changes in penal theory, as well as legal reforms and changing practices insentencing and prison enforcement. Also, the role of these different background reasons varies over time.
Like in so many other countries, criminal political thinking in Finland underwent profound changes in thelate 1960s and 70s. In the 1960s, the Nordic countries experienced heated social debate on the results andjustifications of involuntary treatment in institutions, both penal and otherwise. (Such as in health care andin the treatment of alcoholics). What become later known as the “nothing works” doctrine had its earlier
counterpart in the Scandinavian discussions of the late 1960s. The tone and the results of this ideologicalturn were quite different in Finland compared to the US. In Finland the emphasis was on the ineffectivenessof institutional treatment and the excessive use of the prison system. While in US the fall of therehabilitative ideal lead subsequently to the renaissance of punishment – as we just saw – in Finland the7

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

outcome was just the opposite. The 1960s and 70s started a reform movement against excessive use ofcustodial sentences. The resulting criminal political ideology was labelled as “humane neo-classicism”. It
stressed both legal safeguards against coercive care and the objective of less repressive measures in general.
This change reflects more than just a concern over the lack of legal safeguards. Behind this shift instrategies in criminal policy were more profound changes in the way the entire problem of crime wasconceived. The whole theoretical criminal political framework and the conceptualization of the aims andmeans of criminal policy underwent a dramatic change. The aims of criminal policy were defined in par withthe overall aims of general social policy. Traditional goals, such as simple prevention or the ‘fight against
crime’ were replaced by differentiated twofold overall aims:(i) the minimization of the costs and harmful effects of crime and of crime control (the aim ofminimization); and(ii) the fair distribution of these costs among the offender, society and the victim (the aim of fair
distribution).1
The aim of minimization emphasizes the costs and the harmful effects of criminal behaviour instead ofthe mere number of crimes. It also draws attention to means which perhaps do not affect the level ofcriminality, but which affect the harmful impact that crime has on different parties (and especially on
victims). By stressing not only the costs of criminality, but also the costs and suffering caused by the controlof criminality the formula draws attention to the material and immaterial losses that arise, e.g. through theoperation of the system of sanctions. The aim of fair distribution brings into daylight the delicate issues of
how to allot the costs of crime and crime control between the different parties (society/community, thepotential or actual offender, the potential or actual victim) in a manner fulfilling the demands of fairness andsocial justice.
Also cost-benefit analysis was introduced into criminal political thinking. In making choices between
different strategies and means, the probable policy effects and costs – to be understood in a wide sense,
including also immaterial costs for the offender – were to be assessed.
One result of all this was that the arsenal of the possible means of criminal policy expanded incomparison with the traditional penal system. New strategies of crime prevention emerged in criminal
political dicsussions, to be later known as social and situational crime prevention strategies. This new
ideology was crystallized in slogans such as “good social development policy is the best criminal policy’’.
Also, the aim and the justification for punishment were subjected to re-evaluation. The shift was once
again towards general prevention. However, this concept was now understood in a different way. It was
assumed that this effect could be reached not through fear (deterrence), but through the morality-creating
and value-shaping effect of punishment. According to this idea, the disapproval expressed in punishment isassumed to influence the values and moral views of individuals. As a result of this process, the norms ofcriminal law and the values they reflect are internalized; people refrain from illegal behaviour not becausesuch behaviour would be followed by unpleasant punishment, but because the behaviour itself is regarded as
morally blameworthy.2

1 These were originally introduced into the international discussion at the Sixth International Congress on Criminology, 1970,

by a Finnish criminologist, Patrik Törnudd. This definition of goals was adopted by the Fifth United Nations Congress on thePrevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, where it was embodied in the report of the section dealing with theeconomic and social consequences of crime. The same report also recommends encouragement of cost-benefit thinking (for amore detailed discussion, see Törnudd, 1996 ).
2 This ‘redefinition’ of the aim of punishment in the Nordic countries could rely on a long theoretical tradition dating back to
the early Scandinavian realism of the Uppsala school of the 1920s and 1930s. In a closer analysis, this concept contains several
distinct hypotheses which are based on different assumptions of why, how and through what kind of mechanisms various
features of the legal system influence social values and compliance with the law. See in general Andeanes, 1974 and LappiSeppälä, 1995. Closely related trends are to be found in the German criminal law theory since the 1970s (“positive GeneralPrävention”, see Schünemann et al. 1998) and Anglo-Saxon sociology of the 1990s (on the theory of “normative compliance”
see Tyler, 2003 and Bottoms, 2001).

8

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

This view of the functions of the penal system has a number of important policy implications. To put itbriefly: the aim of indirect prevention is best served by a system of sanctions which maintains a moral
character and which demonstrates the blameworthiness of the act. The mechanisms require a system that is
enforced with ‘fair effectiveness’ and that follows procedures which are perceived as fair and just and which
respects the rights and intrinsic moral value of those involved. In short:••••

From the early 1970s onwards there was a general conviction that in crime prevention, criminal law
is only one means among many and that other means were often far more important;
Furthermore, it was also stressed that the general preventive mechanisms were more subtle andindirect than one usually thinks and that the effective functioning of the criminal law is notnecessarily conditioned by severe punishments, but by legitimacy and perceived fairness;
All in all, we should be realistic as regards the possibilities of achieving short-term effects in crime
control by tinkering with our penal system;
And most importantly, we should always weigh the harms and benefits of applied or proposed
strategies of criminal policy.

Between 1970 and 1990 all the main parts of the Finnish criminal legislation were reformed from thesestarting points. The list starts from the late 1960s and it contains over 25 law reforms, all having one thing incommon: the reduction of the use of imprisonment.

Law reforms decreasing (- -) and increasing (+ +) prisoner rates Finland 1966-2004
1966-20
EffectLaw reforms- -- -- ---- ----+
- -+
++
+
+
+
-

1966 Minimum time for parole 6 months -> 4 months
1967 Amnesty
1969 Decriminalization of public drunkenness
1969 Day-fine reform1972 Reduced penalties for theft
1973 Restricting the use of preventive detention
1973 Discount rules for remand
1976 Reform of the prison law: minimum time for parole reduced 4 months -> 3 months
1977 Conditional sentence expanded
1977 Sentencing reform; the impact of recidivism reduced
1977 Day-fine reform: heavier fines to replace imprisonment
1977 DWI reform: fines and conditional sentences instead of prison
1989 Fine-default rate reduced
1989 Minimum for parole 3 months -> 14 days
1989 The use of prison for juveniles restricted
1989 The length of pre-trial detention reduced
1991 Reduced penalties for theft
1991 Expanding the scope of non-prosecution
1992 Introduction of CSO
1994 Aggravated DWI 1.5 -> 1.2 %1994 Experiment on (non residential) juvenile penalty
1995 Community service permanent and nationwide
1995 Domestic violence under public prosecution
1999 Increased penalties for assault
2000 Increased penalties for rape2001 More fines for drug-users
2003 Zero-limits for drugs in traffic
2000/4 Combination sentence (conditinonal + CSO)

9RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

III. LAW-REFORM AND SENTENCING POLICIES
A. General Trends in Sentencing
The Finnish judge has traditionally had quite a limited number of options when sentencing. The two basic
alternatives to imprisonment have been conditional imprisonment (suspended sentence) and a fine, butthese alternatives have been used quite effectively. The scope of fines and conditional imprisonment(suspended sentence) were extended in the late 1960s, and mid 1970s also, by a series of law reforms.
Sixty percent of all cases dealt with by the courts result in fines. Eighty percent of cases dealt with either
by the courts or the prosecutors result in fines. A fine is a typical penalty for most middle-rank offences suchas theft, minor burglaries and assaults etc. The leading role of fines is to large extent explained by the dayfine system which was adopted in Finland some 80 years ago.
The other basic alternative, conditional imprisonment, has been widely used to replace custodial
sentences. From 1950 to 1990 the number of conditional sentences increased from some 3,000 to 18,000
sentences per year. At the same time the number of prison sentences remained stable. In 1950, 30% of all
sentences of imprisonment were imposed conditionally. In 2005 the rate was 64%.

Table III.1. The Use of Conditional and Unconditional Imprisonment from 1950 to 2000
Unconditional

Conditional

ConditionalN

N (all)%(of all prison sentences)

7000
8000

4000
14000

35
63

1950
2000

* Excluding sentences commuted to community service
Source: Statistics Finland

B. Sentencing Changes in Separate Offences
Long custodial sentences imposed for traditional property crimes kept the prison population at its peaklevel during the early 1950s. In 1972 new definitions and new punishment latitudes for larceny wereintroduced. Again, in 1991 the latitude for the basic form of theft was reduced.
As a result, there was a clear change in sentencing practice. In 1971, 38% of offenders sentenced forlarceny received a custodial sentence. Twenty years later, in 1991, this proportion had decreased to 11% (formore detail see Lappi-Seppälä, 1998 and Törnudd, 1993). Similar changes can be seen in several otheroffences too.
The length of all prison sentences forfour different offences 1950-1990
Theft
Aggravated assault
Robbery
Drunken Driving

25

Months (average)

20

15

10

5

10

1990

1970

1950

0

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Drunken driving plays a special role in Nordic criminal policy. The combination of hard drinking habits
and a very restrictive and intolerant attitude towards drinking-and-driving has kept drunken driving among
the key issues in debates on criminal policy. A substantial part of the Finnish prison problem during the
1960s resulted from fairly long unconditional sentences of imprisonment imposed for drunken driving.
During the 1970s this practice was changed in favour of non-custodial alternatives. The definition of drunken
driving was modernized by an amendment of the law in 1977 and the legislator took a definite stand in favourof conditional sentence and fines.
100 %Fine-%

80 %

60 %

40 %

Conditional-%

Prison-%

20 %

1990

1980

1970

1960

1950

0%

In 1971, 70% of drunk drivers received an unconditional sentence. Ten years later, in 1981, this proportion
had dropped to 12%.

C. The Sentencing Reforms of the 70s:
During the 1970s three other bills were passed in order to increase the use of conditional sentences andfines in general (and particularly in cases of drunken driving).
(i) The reform of the Conditional Sentence Act created the opportunity to combine a fine with aconditional sentence.
(ii) The reform of the day-fine system raised the amount of day-fines thus encouraging the court to use
fines in more serious cases.
(iii) The most important 1977 reform from a principle point of view was, however, the enactment ofgeneral sentencing rules. These provisions mitigated markedly old mechanical recidivism rules.
Diminishing the role of recidivism had an immediate affect on the sentencing practices of the courts.
D. New Sentencing Alternatives: Community Service
The next major change included the introduction of community service. This took place first on an
experimental basis in 1991. In 1994 the system was extended to cover the entire country and community
service became a standard part of the Finnish system of sanctions.
Community service is imposed instead of unconditional imprisonment for up to eight months. In order toensure that community service will really be used in lieu of unconditional sentences of imprisonment, a twostep procedure was adopted. First the court is supposed to make its sentencing decision in accordance with
the normal principles and criteria of sentencing, without even considering the possibility of community
service. If the result is unconditional imprisonment, then the court may commute the sentence into
community service under the following conditions:• First, the convicted person must consent to the sanction;• Second, the offender must also be capable of carrying out the community service order;• Third, recidivism and prior convictions may prevent the use of this sanction.
The duration of community service varies from between 20 and 200 hours. In commuting imprisonment
into community service, one day in prison equals one hour of community service. Thus, two months ofcustodial sentence should be commuted into roughly 60 hours of community service. If the conditions of thecommunity service order are violated, the court normally imposes a new unconditional sentence ofimprisonment. Community service does not contain any extra supervision aimed, for example, at controlling

11

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

the offender’s other behaviour in general. The supervision is strictly confined to his or her working
obligations. The legislator’s idea, thus, was that community service should be used only in cases where theoffender would otherwise have received an unconditional sentence of imprisonment. This aim was wellachieved.
Community service in Finland 1992-2003(courts)
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Imprisonment

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

11538 9563

1992

7699

6754

6101

5967

6642

7666

8151

8352

8489

7970

1487

2803

3277

3534

3957

3658

3413

3388

3311

3297

0

Community service

563

Along with the increase in the number of community service orders, there has been a decrease in thenumber of unconditional sentences of imprisonment. In 1998, the average daily number of offenders serving
a community service order was about 1,200 and the corresponding prison rate was 2,800. It is therefore
reasonable to argue that, within a short period of time, community service has proven to be an importantalternative to imprisonment. As the figure shows, the use of community service seems to have peaked in
1998.

E. Specific Groups of Prisoners
In the course of time, different groups of prisoners have received different forms of attention. During the
1960s and 1970s the focus was on fine defaulters and recidivists in preventive detention. In the 1970s and1980s the use of imprisonment for young offenders was restricted.
1. Fine Defaulters
In the 1950s and 1960s fine defaulters constituted a substantial part of the Finnish prison population(sometimes exceeding 25% of the total population). In the late 1960s the number default prisoners was
reduced with two consecutive law reforms: by decriminalizing public drunkenness (which led to fewer
default sentences since public drunkenness was one of the major offences leading to a default-fine) and byraising the amount of day-fines and decreasing the number of day-fines.
2000

30,0

1800

Number of F. def.

1400

Fine defaulters

20,0

1200

Fine def. %
1000

15,0

800
10,0

600
400

% of all prisoners

25,0

1600

5,0

2000

1990

1980

1970

1960

0

1950

200
0,0

Figure III.2. The number of fine defaulters in prison 1950–2000
12

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

450

9,0

400

8,0
7,0

Recidivists in preventive
detention

300
250% of all prisoners serving
a sentence

200

6,0
5,0
4,0

2,0

50

1,0

0

0,0
1990

1980

100

1970

3,0

1960

150

% of prisoners

350

1950

Number of recidivists inpreventive detention

2. Preventive Detention
The Finnish criminal justice system includes a provision for holding chronic recidivists in preventive
detention after the completion of the sentence, if both the sentencing court and a special court so decide.
During the 1960s, a large majority of detainees had been guilty of repeat property crimes. On the basis of anamendment passed in 1971, the option of preventive detention was restricted only to dangerous violent
offenders. The number of persons held in detention as recidivists dropped by 90% in one year, from 206 to
24. Since then, the annual average has been between ten and 20 prisoners.

Figure III.3. Restricting the Number of Prisoners in Preventive Detention
3. Juveniles
There is no special juvenile criminal system in Finland, in the sense that this concept is understood in
the Continental legal systems. There are no juvenile courts and the number of specific penalties only
applicable to juveniles has been quite restricted. However, offenders between 15 and 17 receive a mitigatedsentence. In addition, the conditions for waiver of sanctions (for example non-prosecution) are much lessrestrictive for young offenders. Offenders under 21 who are sentenced to imprisonment are usually releasedon parole after one third of the sentence has been served, instead of the normal one half. Despite the lack of
specific measures for juveniles, there has also been a deliberate policy against the use of imprisonment for
the youngest age-groups. This has been done mainly by relying on the traditional alternatives. The
willingness of the courts to impose custodial sentences on young offenders has decreased throughout the
1970s and the 80s. In addition, the Conditional Sentence Act was amended in 1989 by including a provision
which allows the use of unconditional sentences for young offenders only if there are extraordinary reasonscalling for this. All of this has had a clear impact on practice. At the moment there are about one hundredprisoners between the ages of 18 and 20 and fewer than ten in the 15 to 17 age group, while as recently as
the 1960s the numbers were ten times higher.
Limiting the use of prison for juveniles

140

The number of prisoners of the age of 15-17 years(including remand) Finland

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1975

1978

1981

1984

1987

1990

1993

1996

1999

2002

13

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

F. Parole
The system of parole (early release) has also proven to be a very powerful tool in controlling prisoner
rates. Any changes in the basic structure of this system will have visible effects on prison figures. In Finland
all prisoners except those few serving their sentence in preventive detention or serving a life sentence will
be released on parole.
At the moment, the minimum time to be served before the prisoner is eligible for parole is 14 days. A
series of reforms have resulted in this situation. During the mid-1960s this period was shortened from six tofour months, during the mid-1970s from four to three months and finally in 1989 from three months to 14
days.
IV. PRISON RATES AND CRIME RATES
A fundamental change in the use of imprisonment naturally leads to the question about the effects oncrime rates. Time and time again, research confirms the fact that the use of imprisonment is relatively
unrelated to the number of crimes committed or reported. There are, of course, several well known
methodological difficulties in combining crime rates with prison rates (and other changes in the sentence
severity). However, the possibility of comparing countries which share strong social and structuralsimilarities but have a very different penal history gives an exceptional perspective to the matter. In fact, theNordic experiences provides an interesting opportunity to test how drastic changes in the penal practices in
one country have been reflected in the crime rates, compared to countries which have kept their penal
system more or less stable. Figure IV.1 provides information on prisoner rates and reported crime in
Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway from 1950 to 2000.

Prison rate 1950-2000(/100 000 population)

200

14 000180

DEN

Offences against the criminal code 1950-2000(/100 000 population)

DEN

12 000

FIN

160

FIN

NOR
140

NOR

10 000

SWE

SWE

120

8 000

100
6 000
80
60

4 000

40
2 000
20

1998

1994

1986

1990

1982

1978

1974

1970

1966

1962

1954

1958

1998

1994

1986

1990

1982

1978

1974

1970

1966

1962

1958

1954

1950

1950

0

0

Figure IV.1. Prison Rates and Crime Rates 1950–2000
Compiled from: Falck, von Hofer & Storgaard 2003
A simple comparison between the Nordic countries reveals a striking difference in the use of
imprisonment, as well as a striking similarity in the trends in recorded criminality. The fact that Finland hasheavily reduced its prisoner rate has not disturbed the symmetry of Nordic crime rates. The figures start todifferentiate only during the 1990s, as reported crime in Norway kept going up, while the Danish figures aregoing down. However, the imprisonment rates in both countries stay at the same level (Norway between 56
and 60 and Denmark between 63 and 68). The figures also confirm, once again, the general criminologicalconclusion that crime rates rise and fall according to laws and dynamics of their own, and sentencing policies
in turn develop and change according to dynamics of their own; these two systems are fairly independent of
one another.

14

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

V. FACTORS BEHIND THE CHANGE
The decrease in the Finnish prison population has been the result of a conscious, long term andsystematic criminal policy. But what made it possible to carry out these law-reforms? Describing thetechniques used was easy. Explaining why they were adopted and accepted is harder. Exploring more closely
the dynamics of these changes is important for a number of reasons, in addition to mere scientific curiosity.3

A. Political Culture
Part of the answer could be found in the structure of our political culture. Finnish criminologist Patrik
Törnudd has stressed the importance of the political will and consensus to bring down the prisoner rate. As
he summarizes, “those experts who were in charge of planning the reforms and research shared an almost
unanimous conviction that Finland’s comparatively high prisoner rate was a disgrace and that it would bepossible to significantly reduce the amount and length of prison sentences without serious repercussions on
the crime situation.” (Törnudd 1993, p. 12). This conviction was shared by the civil servants, the judiciaryand the prison authorities and, equally importantly, by the politicians.4
Another and closely related way of characterizing Finnish criminal policy would be to describe it asexceptionally expert-oriented. Reforms have been prepared and conducted by a relatively small group of
experts whose thinking on criminal policy, at least on the basic points, has followed similar lines. The impactof these professionals was, furthermore, reinforced by close personal and professional contacts with seniorpoliticians and with academic research.5 Consequently, crime control has never been a central political issue
in election campaigns in Finland, unlike in many other countries. At least, ‘heavyweight’ politicians have notrelied on populist policies, such as ‘three strikes’ or ‘truth in sentencing’.

B. MediaThis takes us to another element in the Finnish criminal policy composition – the media market and therole of the media. In Finland the media have retained quite a sober and reasonable attitude towards issues ofcriminal policy. Finns have largely been saved from low-level populism. There is a striking difference
between the British and Finnish crime reports in the media. The tone in the Finnish reports is lessemotional, and reports – also when dealing with singular events – are usually accompanied with commented
research-based data on the development of the crime situation.
In fact, the whole structure of the Finnish media market looks a bit peculiar. Firstly, according to theinformation given by the World Association of Newspapers (World Press Trends 2004), the busiest
newspaper-readers in Europe are to be found in Finland and Sweden (90% of the population read a
newspaper every day, while in France, Italy and the UK the figures are 44%, 41% and 33% respectively).
Secondly, the clear market leader can be classified as a quality paper; tabloids have a far less prominent rolein Finland than in many other countries (including the UK). Thirdly, only a small fraction (12%) of newspaper
distribution is based on selling single copies. Almost 90% of the newspapers are sold on the basis ofsubscription, which means that the papers do not have to rely on dramatic events in order to draw thereader’s attention each day. In short, in Finland the newspapers reach a large segment of the population andthe market leaders are quality papers which do not have to sell themselves every day, since distribution isbased on subscriptions. This all may have an effect both on the ways crime is reported, and the ways people
think in these matters.

C. Nordic Co-operation
The early 1960s was a period of intensifying Nordic co-operation in legal matters. Crime and criminal
justice were among the key issues in this agenda. In 1960, The Scandinavian Research Council wasestablished with the support of the respective Ministries of Justice. This Council became a central forum for

3 In order to put things in perspective, it should be stressed that instead of a massive move towards decarceration one could

also describe the change merely as a ‘normalization’ of prison rates: a move from a level that was totally absurd to a level thatcan be considered to be a fair Nordic level – albeit ten times lower than the present U.S. level.
4 At least to the extent that they did not oppose the reform proposals prepared by the Ministry of Justice.
5 Several of our Ministers of Justice during the 1970s and 1980s have had direct contact with research work; indeed, one ofthem, Inkeri Anttila, was a professor of criminal law and the director of the National Research Institute of Legal Policy at thetime of her appointment as Minister.

15

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

the exchange of information between the Nordic countries. Interest in criminological research expanded andthe status and resources of criminology were strengthened in the Nordic countries. The reform work of the
1960s and 1970s in Finland was heavily influenced by this exchange of ideas, as well as by the legislativemodels offered by our Scandinavian neighbours (especially Sweden). In many instances liberal reforms could
be defended with reference to positive experiences gained from other Nordic countries and the need forInter-Nordic harmonization. This ‘Nordic identity’ was strengthened in Finland by the fact that Finland in the
1960s was quickly reaching the levels of other Scandinavian partners in economic and welfare resources.
A specific feature of this co-operation was that it was not founded on conventions but on non-binding
agreements between the nations.6 It was not led by politicians and governments, but by Ministries of Justiceand their experts. It proved to be very effective and less bureaucratic. The results of this co-operation weremanifested in legislative acts that have been adopted separately in each Nordic country, but with identicalcontents. This concerns, for example, extradition from one Nordic country to another as well as theenforcement of sentences within these countries.

D. Judicial Culture and Sentencing Structures
Micro-level institutional arrangements and specific professional practices have also contributed to thischange. Co-operation with the judicial authorities – the judges and the prosecutors – and their ‘attitudinalreadiness’ for liberal criminal policies have been of great importance in Finland. In many cases, legislators
have been strongly supported by the judiciary and especially by the courts of first instance. Quite often the
courts had changed their practice even before legislators had changed the law.
Also, the fact that judges and prosecutors are career officials with training in criminology and criminal
policy in the law schools contributes to this explanation. In addition, different courses and seminars arranged
for judges (and prosecutors) on a regular basis by judicial authorities – in co-operation with the universities –have had an impact on sentencing and prosecutorial practices.
The Finnish sentencing structure, which treats sentencing as an area of normal judicial decision making,guided by valid sources of sentencing law, may also function as a shield against political pressures. Finlandand Sweden have highly structured systems with detailed written provisions on the general principles andspecific sentencing criteria to be taken into account in deciding both the type and amount of punishment.
Arguments that affect sentencing must be presented in a form that fits the accepted rules and standards.
The specific structure of the decision making-process, as outlined in the general sentencing provisions (the“notion of normal-punishments”) stresses the importance of uniformity in sentencing (avoiding unwarranted
disparities). This places the existing sentencing patterns in a central position as starting points insentencing. And this, in turn, gives sentencing strong inertia; rapid changes are unlikely to occur, unlessthese changes have not been channeled through the valid sources of sentencing law (see in general LappiSeppälä, 2001).

E. Social Factors
But there are even more fundamental factors related to social structures and values. It needs to be notedthat penal reform in Finland was a part of a larger social policy movement. Finland revised its penal policy
together with its social policy. And the fact that reformulation of the basic principles and practices in criminaland social policy took place shortly after Finland had joined the Scandinavian welfare family is more than justa coincidence. Since those days explaining Finland is more or less the same as explaining the specificfeatures of the Scandinavian penal policy as a whole, including the comparative leniency, and the pragmaticand less politicized and non-moralistic approach in penal policy.
VI. CONCLUSIONS – NORDIC MODEL OF PENAL POLICY TODAY – AND TOMORROW?
Nordic penal policy has been an example of a pragmatic and non-moralistic approach, with a clear social
policy orientation. It reflects the values of the Nordic welfare-state ideal and emphasizes that measuresagainst social marginalization and inequality work also as measures against crime. It stresses the view that

6 The foundation for the co-operation is based on Helsinki Treaty (1962). The treaty obliged the contracting parties to “strive
to create uniform provisions concerning crime and sanctions of crime.” A general overview is to be found in Lahti, 2000.

16

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

crime control and criminal policy are still a part of social justice, not just an issue of controlling dangerous
individuals. These liberal policies are to a large extent also a by-product of an affluent welfare state and ofconsensual and corporatist political cultures. These structural conditions have enabled and sustained
tolerant policies, made it possible to develop workable alternatives to imprisonment and promoted trust andlegitimacy. All of this has relieved the political system’s stress for symbolic actions and it also has enabled
norm compliance based on legitimacy and acceptance instead of fear and deterrence. Further factors
explaining the Scandinavian leniency included strong expert influences, (fairly) sensible media anddemographic homogeneity.
However, the changes that have occurred during the last five to ten years raise unavoidable questions.
Has this now come to its end; what is the nature of these changes; are they more a result of changes inexternal conditions or signs of revised policy preferences; how are things going to proceed in the future, etc?
There is space for only short tentative replies.
Any overall assessment of complicated phenomena such as penal policy, covering several countries, faces
the risk of being incorrect, misleading or trivial. Also, the use of imprisonment as an indicator begins to lose
its validity as we wish to focus our picture. Furthermore, qualitative indicators must be included which, inturn, leaves more room for interpretation. Still, ample evidence supports the main conclusion; if we look at
the whole of Scandinavia, crime policy has become more offensive, more politicized, more adaptive to theviews and voices of the media. There are more diverting views, more agents involved, and less agreement
on matters of principle. One outcome of all this is that the role of penal expertise has diminished, being
partly replaced by grass-roots knowledge, views of influential interest groups, and by politicians themselves.
The expansion of the EU and the politically driven efforts to harmonize penal legislation among the EU
member states is perhaps the most significant single factor contributing to these changes. It has bothdamaged the quality of the legal drafting processes and increased the amount of penal repression. This is thebasic reason why a large segment of Nordic scholars have remained quite critical of political attempts toharmonize criminal law.7
How deep and how extensive is this change? Prisoner rates would justify (at least) the talk of a relatively
serious shift (an increase by some 40%). In absolute terms and from a comparative point of view, thesituation looks much less alarming (from 60-65 to 70-80 prisoners/100,000). There is also some indicationthat these figures might stabilize on this new level. In Finland, the prisoner rates have again declined byaround 10% during the last two years.
Which, then, are the issues that have undergone the most severe changes? If the measure is the ‘degreeof politicization’ the answer is clear: drugs, sex and violence (in that order). During the last 25 years over 30
law reforms have been passed to increase penal control in these issues. In drug issues, the Nordic countries
have emulated practices from each other, following the example given by the most severe system (at thattime). Norway started the race in the early 1970s, but soon Sweden took over. Under the pressure of these‘axel-powers’ the others were to follow. The last one to bend was Denmark in the early 2000s. This spiral ofmoralistic and populist rhetoric seems to be extremely hard to break, despite the widely shared critics from
both, legal, medical and social experts.
Drug laws are the most explicit example of politically motivated penal policy and, at the same time, themost evident anomaly in today’s Scandinavian crime policy. Something akin has taken place also in the fieldof sexual offences and violent crime. These reforms have received visible places among the governments’lists of political ‘achievements’, especially in Sweden and Denmark. Criminal law and increased severity
have become a question of equality between the sexes, which has made it politically very difficult to oppose
these reforms. Other supporting arguments for tightening control have been fetched from the need tocombat organized crime, especially motorcycle gangs. These deviations from traditional, detached andevidence-based pragmatic penal policy have had significant practical consequences. Expansive drug control

7 See for example Jareborg 1998, Greve 1995, Träskman 1999, and Nuotio 2003. These concerns are, by no means, restricted

to Nordic Countries: “I remain very nervous that in the current political climate if we were to agree, at an EU-level, on
common principles of punishment, these would lead to increased sentences of imprisonment without any real debate as to theefficacy and justice of such sentences.” (Padfield 2004 p.89)

17

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

is responsible for over half of the increase in the Scandinavian prisoner rates. Drugs and violence explain
together some 75-80% of the increase. The role of the politically highly visible sex offences has remainedmuch more modest.
Criminal policy has lifted its political profile in Scandinavia. But how populist and how punitive are thepresent policies, actually? Again, much depends on the point of reference. What appears to be an example ofpunitive response for a Scandinavian commentator may not look the same for readers from the US or UK. A
six month increment in rape penalties from two years to two and a half years may be a great deal in Finland,
but not necessarily in other countries. The key phrase “humane and rational criminal policy” may havedisappeared from political rhetoric and official statements; still, examples of expressive justice, public
humiliation and the denial of an individual’s social and political rights are conspicuously absent in the Nordic
penal policy. The issues of crime control are discussed at governmental level more often than before, but,much of these discussions take place in the form of crime prevention programmes which focus on social andsituational prevention – not on criminal law. The first National Programme for Preventing Violence in Finland,in 2006, defined measures against social marginalization as key factors and hardly mentions criminal law at all.
There are also differences in the degrees of politicization between the countries. Penal issues haveplayed a major role in national elections in both Sweden and Denmark, but were totally absent from the 2006
presidential election in Finland. Even the political systems seem to react differently: the Swedish politicalfield seems to be dividing more and more clearly into two blocks, thus resembling more and more the AngloSaxon bi-polarized structure. In Sweden, the Ministry of Justice has promised to build 1,500 new prison
places. In their web-pages the Swedish prison administration proudly claims that they are building new
prison places “more actively than any other country in Europe”. In Finland, the Ministry of Treasury has
refused to fund new prisons; consequently the Ministry of Justice has declared that the “control of prisoner
rates” is one their key targets for the period of 2007-2011. Some signs indicate that prison overcrowding is,again, entering political and public debate as a problem which requires serious attention, at least in Finland.
However, the changes in the composition of agents in the criminal political field have made the situation
unstable. The long-term consistency granted by strong involvement of civil servants and penal experts has
weakened, and this year’s plans to reduce the prison population may look different next year. Still, it might
be too pessimistic to announce the end of expert knowledge in penal policy. One of the major culturalchanges in politics (elsewhere than in criminal policy) has been the growing importance attached toresearch-based knowledge in social and political planning. All major political plans – starting from theGovernment Programmes – define knowledge as the key factor, on which the development of the“competitive welfare state” must be built. Building the infrastructures which “support the production of thesocial and technological innovations” is the mantra of today’s Scandinavian governments. No doubt, thedrafters of these programmes have something other than rational and humane criminal policy in their minds.
Still, this general urge to promote evidence-based policies may provide a footing for demands that this same
logic should be applied also to penal policy.
Is the bottle half-full or half-empty? Despite the most recent changes, there still may be room for some
optimism. Overall, prisoner rates are still low – even after these changes. Neither is the path taken by manyother penal systems an inevitable one. Very few of those social, political, economic and cultural backgroundconditions which explain the rise of mass imprisonment in the US and UK apply to any of the Scandinavian
countries, as such. The social and economic security granted by the Nordic Welfare State may still function
as a social backup system for tolerant crime policy. The judges and the prosecutors are, and will remain,
career officials with a professional touch in these matters. Political culture still encourages negotiations andappreciates expert opinions – at least that is something one may hope for.
Luckily enough, this is not only a matter of hope. In a political culture which, in general, values rational,
pragmatic and responsible argumentation there is lot that can be done. We must improve the pre-conditionsof rational policy-making over populist posturing by producing more and better information for thepoliticians, the practitioners and the public. We should apply the normal rules of political accountability inpenal discourse. Nowhere else in political life can plans and proposals be presented without estimations ofcosts, benefits and possible alternatives. Why should this be allowed in criminal policy where decisions
infringe legally protected basic rights and are hugely expensive? And, we should take advantage of the fact
that, in politics in general, there prevails distaste for populism and political cynical score-hitting - if exposed.

18

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Exposing populism and showing the attitudinal oversimplifications, false premises, and the dubious valuecommitments of populist proposals are important intellectual weapons in the hands of political opponents ofany penal populist.
For those Scandinavian politicians, who otherwise are strongly devoted to welfare values but who, at thesame time, are tempted by the strong rhetoric and powerful gestures of Anglo-Saxon penal politics, all thisshould present a difficult question: when we, in all other respects, defend policies based on social equality,
full citizenship, solidarity, respect for reason and humanity, why should we choose to carry out criminal
policy which shows so little appreciation to these very same values and principles?

19

CRIME PREVENTION AND COMMUNITY SANCTIONS IN
SCANDINAVIA
Dr. Tapio Lappi-Seppälä*
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Punishment and the Scope of Criminal Policy
A balanced view of the role criminal justice as part of criminal policy needs a wider perspective thanconsiderations of re-offending and protection of the public. Outlines for this wider framework have beenbriefly detailed in the previous paper. To summarize the main points:
MINIMIZING HARM AND SUFFERING CAUSED BY⋯
CRIMECRIME CONTROLREPAIRING THE
DAMAGES BY...

PREVENTINGCRIME BY...

•

•

•

SOCIAL CP

COMPENSATIONSITUATIONAL CP

VICTIM SUPPORT SCHEMESCRIMINAL JUSTICE CPRESTORATIVE JUSTICEGENERAL (public)

SPECIFIC (offender)

DETERRENCEINCAPACITATIONMORAL CREATING(INDIRECT)MOTIVATION

RE-OFFENDING
RECIDIV SMFirstly, the aims of criminal policy go beyond crime prevention. Though preventing crime is offundamental importance, we must also concern ourselves with how to deal with the consequences of
those crimes that have not been prevented. Repairing the damage, taking care of compensation for
the victims, and supporting them is an equally important goal in criminal policy.
However, crime and the reduction of the harm caused by crime remains the main target in criminal
policy. Still, we must not forget that crime control also causes both material and immaterial losses;
for offenders, their families, and for society as a whole. Keeping these costs under control is required
both on rational grounds, as well as on grounds of decency and humanity.
For lawyers, the criminal justice system may well be the first technique of crime prevention.
However, clear empirical evidence suggests that other measures, including social and situational
prevention, are far more effective compared to criminal justice interventions. Successful crime
prevention requires proper attention given to all means and strategies available. Crime prevention
based solely on criminal law would be both ineffective, expensive and inhuman.

* National Research Institute of Legal Policy, Finland.

20- deterrence- rehabilitation

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

How many serious crimes will be prevented by investing 1 000 000 dollars in...?
(Greenwoodet al1996)

Graduation
incentives

260

160

Parent training

Intensivesupervision

70

60

Incapacitation

0

•

50

100

150

200

250

300

When, finally, using criminal punishment as a crime prevention device, we should not limit ourimagination to common sense assumptions of the mechanisms of prevention. Assumptions of theeffectiveness of measures based solely on deterrence have been seriously challenged by boththeoretical and empirical analyses. Criminological theory strongly suggests that law-abidingness isbasically explained by internalized motives, not by fear1. Most people refrain from crime not becauseof fear of punishment, but because the behaviour itself is regarded as morally blameworthy, or simply
because of habit.

This partly explains why no research has been able to confirm that moderate changes in sentence
severity have long lasting and visible effect on the level of criminality (see Doob & Webster 2005 and theFinnish experience recounted in the previous paper in this volume).

B. Re-offending Rates as Indicators of Policy Success?
Still, there are people who need to be deterred and who need to be incarcerated for the protection of the
public. Criminal punishment, as a system, is needed for the upoholding of the norms of society (generalprevention in a broad sense). When imposing and enforcing these penalties in concrete cases, their effects
on individual offenders, obviously, become a matter of substantial importance. Standard measures for theseeffects are re-offending and recidicvism rates. But also here, few words of caution may be necessary.
1. Where do we get information of recidivism and re-offending?
Up till recent years, recidivism data has been based on separate recidivism studies. Along with theincreased international interest in the effectiveness of criminal justice interventions, several States have
now established national reconviction statistics.
This calls up the question of the reliability, comparability and validity of these data-sets. Much depends
on the purpose for which this data has been used. For national overviews concerning trends, this information
may be sufficient, however, for any other use several qualifications must be met.
2. Does recidivism data reveal us differences between effectiveness of different sanctions?
Only if measurements are calculated carefully enough. Assessments of re-offending differences between
different sanctions require that comparisons are made between similar groups. This requires high quality
research design, and fairly few studies fulfil this requirement.

1 See the papers of Professor Anthony E. Bottoms in UNAFEI Resource Material Series No. 68, March 2006. “Crime andCrime Prevention in the 21st Century” and “Crime Prevention for Youth at Risk: Some Theoretical Considerations”.

21

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Re-offending after different
sanction: Example
Recidivism rate in one year after different sanctions(Sweden 1996, excluding fines)
0

5

10

15

20

16

Probation
13

Contract treatmen

14

Community service
4

Return %30
26

PrisonElectronic monitoring25

The return back to prison (%) in two years
accordingto ageand previous prisonsentences(Finland, allprisonersreleasedin 1996)
0

20

40

60

80

100

BY AGE91

15-17 y40-50 y34

BY CRIM. RECORD
None
9 or more

17
39

The minimum requirement is that the groups under comparison are similar, in one way or another. The
best way to do this is to use randomized experiment design, something which only seldom comes toquestion in the field of criminal justice.
3. Can re-offending figures be compared between two or more countries?
Reliable comparisons between different countries are, at the moment, impossible due to differences indefinitions, follow up periods, and recording practices. This situation may improve in the future as recidivism
statistics will be more harmonized. But we still are left with the problem of the similarity of samples (above).
Cross national comparisons in recidivism after prison are highly influenced by the extent to which prison
is used in these countries. A country (such as US) which uses prison more, puts different people in prison
than a country ( any Scandinavian country) which uses prison less. The more people are in prison, the more
low-risk people there are behind the bars. Extensive use of imprisonment leads, therefore, logically, to low
recidivism rates. Ignoring this fact may lead to fatal mistakes and wrong conclusions.
4. How well does reconviction data inform us of true recidivism?
Not very well. Firstly, since only a minor fraction of new offences committed lead to convictions,reconvictions rates are always an undercount of true re-offending.
Related to that, reconviction rates are also affected by changes in police and prosecution practice. When
research in the US shows that offenders in intensive probation re-offend more often (as compared to normal
probation group), this was largely deemed to be the result of the fact that persons on intensive probation
were supervised more closely (and got caught for their offences).
In addition, the reconviction rate is a crude, all-or-nothing measure. Without further qualifications, it does
not take into account changes in severity and frequency, nor does it take into account the changes in timingof repeat-offending.
5. Is re-offending data an adequate measure of policy effects and success?
In other words, how well does recidivism data measure those effects it claims to be measuring (validity),in this case the policy success of individual sanctions and interventions. Also, at this point, there is muchthat could be improved.
Regarding offence-specific interventions, it would be important to be able to measure whether changes
occur in areas targeted by the intervention. Sex offender treatment programmes are targeted on sex
offending behaviour. Is it a failure or not, if a sex-offender after participating in programme for sexual
offenders is later found of being guilty for drunken driving but not for sexual offences? General reconviction
data should in these cases be supplemented with offence - related outcome data.
Secondly, criminal justice interventions may also have a second type of effects in addition to effects on
offending behaviour. These other benefits – also called as “non-reconviction benefits” – may also need ourattention. Social marginalization – of which crime is also a part – means unemployment, poor housing, weaksocial relations, substance abuse, and poor mental and physical health. These are social and human needs

22

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

which should be properly addressed. Non-reconviction benefits deserve our attention for two reasons:Firstly, they deal usually with factors which will, in the long run , also affect crime and recidivism:
employment and meaningful work, vocational education, family and social relations, mental health andabsence of drugs and substance abuse are essential elements for a life without crime. Secondly, enhancing
these dimensions of a good and meaningful life is a valuable thing as such. irrespective of direct crime
prevention effects.
6. Is it enough for us to know the re-offending rates (and the possible non-conviction benefits)?
Again, the answer is no. If crime prevention is our interest, we should always be ready to ask, at whatcost? To take an example, prison is expensive, probation is cheap. If both have the same re-offending results,
is not be wiser to invest in the latter, and use the remaining money in other crime prevention programmes?
This, of course, simplifies the situation, as prison serves also other penal purposes, including
incapacitation and general prevention. Still, we need to keep the cost/benefit aspect in mind, as a growing
amount of research is showing the over-riding success of social and situational crime prevention
programmes over criminal justice interventions and, especially, of imprisonment.

II. SCANDINAVIAN SYSTEMS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICEAll Nordic countries form unitary political systems with a single written criminal code. The
administration of justice is based on nationally organized institutions. Prison authorities and the prosecution
service are administratively under the respective ministries of justice, while the police forces are under theministries of the interior. Courts are under the budgetary power of the ministries of justice, but enjoy
constitutionally granted independence (as does the prosecutors service). Civil servants and criminal justiceofficials (judges, prosecutors, the police etc.) are permanently appointed non-partisan career officials.

A. Sanctions
The death penalty is prohibited in all Nordic countries, including during war time.
The most severe sentence in Denmark, Finland and Sweden is a life sentence, which means in practice a
prison term of around 15 years. Norway has abolished life sentences and replaced it with a 21 year maximum
term. The maximum term of imprisonment for a single offence in Denmark is 16 years, in Finland 12 years
and in Sweden ten years. In case of multiple offences and in case of recidivism (only Denmark and Sweden)
these limits may be exceeded.2
Imprisonment is used only with more serious offences. The clear majority of penalties imposed consist ofless severe alternatives. Among these, fines have been the principal punishment throughout the lastcentury. Denmark, Finland and Sweden impose fines as day-fines (a system first adopted in Finland in 1921).
The day-fine-system aims to ensure equal severity of the fine for offenders of different income and wealth.
The number of day-fines is determined on the basis of the seriousness of the offence while the amount of aday-fine depends on the financial situation of the offender. Thus similar offences committed by offenders ofdifferent income will result in (roughly) similar overall severity.
Middle-rank offences are punished as a rule by different type of community sanctions. The basic
structure of community sanctions is fairly similar in all Scandinavian countries. However, there are great
differences in the details.

Conditional imprisonment (a suspended sentence) is generally used for middle range offences. In Finlandsentences of imprisonment of, at most, two years may be imposed conditionally. In Sweden the limit is three
years. Norway and Denmark have no formal limits, but conditional sentences lasting more than two years
are quite rare.

2 On the Nordic sanction systems see Jareborg 2001 (Sweden), Kyvsgaard 2001 (Denmark), Lappi-Seppälä 2001 (Finland) and

Larsson 2001 (Norway). On the aims and principles of the work with prisoners see Nordic Prison Education 2005. The
Scandinavian juvenile justice systems are described in Stoorgaard 2004, Janson 2004 (Sweden), Kyvsgaard 2004 (Denmark)and Lappi-Seppälä, forthcoming (Finland).

23

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Community service is used as an independent sanction in Finland and Norway and as an attachment toother sanctions in Sweden and Denmark. The maximum number of community service hours vary from 200(Finland) to 420 (Norway).
In addition to the basic community alternatives, each country has its local applications. Sweden and
Denmark, with long rehabilitative traditions, have the widest array of community sanctions. Probation is the
backbone of the Swedish community sanction system. Sweden also uses electronic monitoring extensively
both as a front-door and as a back-door alternative. Contract-treatment is also included in the Swedish
sentencing menu. Denmark and Sweden apply also treatment oriented measures, either as independentmeasures or in combinations with other sanctions. This also is a kind of dividing line between the systems.
The Finnish legal system makes a clear distinction between treatment and punishment. Criminal courts
have no power to give treatment orders of any kind. Involuntary psychiatric treatment for the ‘criminallyinsane’ is ordered by medical authorities alone, but the courts decide whether the offender may be exemptedfrom punishment due to his or her mental state. Alcohol and drug treatment is always voluntary in Finland.
In both aspects the Swedish and the Danish system allow the courts more leeway. The Norwegian approach
is somewhere in between.

B. Sentencing Structure
Finland, Norway and Sweden prescribe for each offence a specific minimum and maximum penalty in thelaw. The Danish law uses offence-specific minimums only occasionally. Sentencing in courts takes place
within these limits. The discretion is guided mainly by legislative principles and norms. Finland and Sweden
have highly structured systems with detailed written provision on the general principles and specificsentencing criteria to be taken into account in deciding both on the type and on the amount of punishment.
Denmark has less detailed provisions, but with similar content. Norway lacks legislative sentencing
provisions, but in Norway the Supreme Court has taken a very active role in producing guideline decisions insentencing.
The Scandinavian sentencing structures are relatively well shielded against outside political pressures.
Sentencing commissions or detailed concrete guidelines are unknown for the Scandinavian systems.
Sentencing is treated as an area of normal judicial decision making, guided by valid sources of sentencing law
and their interpretation, according to the generally accepted interpretation standards. Thus, sentencing
cannot be affected by outside instruction.

C. Enforcement
The enforcement of criminal sanctions belongs to the administrative field of the Ministry of Justice. Eachcountry has nationwide prison and probation services, which are responsible for the implementation andenforcement of imprisonment and community sanctions.
Sentences of imprisonment are enforced either in closed prisons or in open institutions. Openinstitutions hold between 20 % (Sweden) to 40 % (Denmark) of the current prison population. Openinstitutions are in practice prisons without walls: the prisoner is obliged to stay in the prison area, but there
are no guards or fences. Closed prisons are small in their size. The largest units carry 200-300 prisoners,
while the regular size of a prison is around 50-100 inmates.
The system of early release is used on a routine basis. In Finland, practically all prisoners are released onparole after either one half or two thirds of their sentence. The use of early release is somewhat more
discretionary in other Nordic countries, still covering a clear majority of all releases. The minimum time tobe served before the prisoner is eligible for parole in Denmark is two months, in Finland 14 days, in Norway
two months and in Sweden one month. Parole revocations occur generally only due to a new offence
committed during the parole period.

D. Juvenile Justice
The age of criminal responsibility is 15 years in all countries. Children under 15 years of age at the timeof the offence may be subjected only to measures taken by the child welfare authorities. The criterion for all
child welfare interventions is the best interest of the child. All interventions are supportive by their natureand criminal acts have little or no formal role as a criterion or as a cause for these measures.

24

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Criminal justice becomes relevant once the offender has reached the age of 15. The child welfare system
continues to function for those aged 15 to 17 years old. So offenders of this age are usually under both thecriminal justice and the child welfare system. Strictly speaking, there is no special juvenile criminal system
in Scandinavia in the sense that this concept is usually understood in most legal systems. There are nojuvenile courts and the number of specific penalties only applicable to juveniles is fairly restricted (butexpanding). During the last decade each Nordic country has modified its system with new juvenile sanctions
to be applied for juveniles alongside the general alternatives. Denmark applies a youth contract (a contract
based obligtion to particitpate in certain activities) and youth sanction for the more serious cases (a two-year
programme, imposed by the courts but implemented by the social welfare authorities, see in general
Kyvsgaard 2004, p. 370-374). Sweden has adopted court ordered institutional treatment under the social
welfare authorities based on child welfare principles, as well as closed institutional treatment for more
serious cases (see Janson 2004 p. 409-411). Finland has adopted a specific youth punishment. The sanction
consists of non-institutional programmes and supervision arranged in co-operation with the social welfare
board and the Probation Service (see Lappi-Seppälä, forthcoming).
In addition to special juvenile penalties, there are limiting rules for the full application of penal provisions,as well as special rules and measures applicable only for young offenders. Young offenders are often diverted
from the criminal proceedings by using withdrawal from prosecution (diversionary non-prosecution); theyalso receive mitigated sentences and there are additional restrictions in the use of unconditional prison
sentences. Still the most common sanction for juveniles is either a fine or conditional imprisonment.

E. Restorative Justice and Mediation
Restorative justice schemes are gaining more and more importance in dealing with crimes committed byyoung offenders.
Mediation started first in Norway in 1981. In Norway, mediation is an independent criminal sanction
which has been acknowledged in the Code of Criminal Proceedings. A successful mediation also
automatically leads to non-prosecution.
In the other Nordic countries mediation has a more informal role. Finland started mediation in 1983. The
practice is as widely spread as in Norway. Denmark and Sweden started to experiment with mediation
during the 1990s. At the moment both countries are expanding the use of mediation. Even though mediation
is not restricted to any specific age-group, the majority of cases involve juvenile offenders or offenders
below the age of criminal responsibility. With the exception of Norway, mediation is not classified as acriminal sanction. However, the criminal code acknowledges mediation as one possible ground for thewaiving of charges by the prosecutor, the waiving of punishment by the court, or mitigation of the sentence.
Participation in mediation is always voluntary for all the parties.

F. Basics in Proceedings
The criminal procedure is mainly accusatorial and the public prosecutor bears the burden of proof. The
court system is arranged in three tiers. All parties (the defendant, the prosecutor and the victim) have anunrestricted and independent right to appeal. The position of the victims has traditionally been quite strong.
The victim has an unlimited right to press charges (but in some cases only if the prosecutor has first refused
to prosecute). Another Scandinavian peculiarity is that all compensatory claims connected to a criminal
offence are treated in the criminal proceedings. The Scandinavian countries follow the systems adhesion
process in a full sense. Therefore decisions on punishments are, as a rule, accompanied by decisions oncompensation. Compensation orders are not classified as a criminal sanction. 3 Still, it is possible thatcompensation (especially when completed voluntarily right after the offence occurs) may also serve as anargument for the courts to refrain from further punishment.
The prosecutor has basically the same options at their disposal in all Nordic countries. The prosecutors
have the powers to impose prosecutor’s fines (or summary fines). All systems also grant the prosecutor the
power not to prosecute, even if the facts of the case are clear (diversionary non-prosecution). Formally, thecountries differ in this respect as Norway and Denmark follow the principle of opportunity in prosecution,
granting the prosecutor a general right not to prosecute at his or her own discretion. Finland and Sweden
3 On the role of restitution and compensation in the Finnish legal system, see Lappi-Seppälä, 1996.

25

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

follow the principle of legality in prosecution. According to the legality principle, prosecution must take placein all cases in which sufficient evidence exists of the guilt of the suspect. The rigid requirements of theprinciple of legality are softened through the legislative provisions of non-prosecution, which state the legal
grounds for non-prosecution. In practice, the difference is non-existent. The scope of prosecution has varied
over time unrelated to the underlying basic principles but has been affected by more general criminal
political trends.

III. OVERVIEW OF COMMUNITY SANCTIONS
A glimpse at Scandinavian court statistics reveals that there is no short way of giving an overview of theuse of different sentencing alternatives. Both Swedish and Danish sentencing statistics contain over 20
different alternatives and options. However, this diversity results mainly from the fact that the law allows
different combinations of the same few basic alternatives. These are fines, conditional or suspended
sentences, supervision, community service and electronic monitoring.
In short community sanctions include the following:• conditional or suspended sentence - possibly combined with other alternative sanctions• probation or supervision - either as an independent or complementary sanction• community service (punishment) - either as an independent or complementary sanctions• treatment orders - either as an independent or complementary sanctions (or part of social services)• electronic monitoring (both in front-door and back-door versions).
Differences between the systems constitute from the following elements:• The number of combinations: Denmark and Sweden allow more combinations than others (Finland
and Norway). Combinations may include not only community sanctions but mixtures between
community and custodial sanctions.
• Status: Some countries have been more willing to give new alternatives an independent status(Finland and Norway), while the other have added these new alternatives as sub-conditions under
the old traditional alternatives (Denmark and Sweden).
• Juvenile justice: The sanctions systems differ also in the extent the countries have adopted specificsanctions for juveniles. The Swedish and the Danish systems are more differentiated than the
Finnish and the Norwegian ones. However, all Scandinavian countries follow the same model which
treats juveniles in the criminal justice system basically according to the same rules as adults, while
the main role in rehabilitation is in the hands of the child welfare authorities. Unlike many othercountries, the Scandinavian countries do not have specific juvenile justice system with its own
juvenile codes and juvenile courts.
• The role of treatment: Sweden and Denmark have maintained closer relations between punishment
and treatment. Sweden has even abolished the whole concept of penal capacity and defines
psychiatric treatment as a sanction imposed for offenders.
Once these differences are taken into account, the Scandinavian sanctions systems fall into two maingroups. Finland and Norway have a relatively simple system with fewer alternatives and with less emphasison treatment-oriented measures. In these countries the statistics differentiate around 7-8 basic sentencing
options starting from summary fines to unconditional prison sentences. Both Sweden and Denmark havemuch more complex systems with several possible combinations (over 20 in all).
The table below summarizes the use of the main sentencing alternatives in Scandinavian court practices
in year 2005, both in absolute numbers and per 100,000 of population.

26

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Table 1. The use of main sentencing alternatives in Scandinavian court practices in 2005
THE USE OF MAIN SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES IN 2005
Absolute numbers

FIN

SWE

DEN

NOR

PRISON(Average in months)
Probation
Probation + Contract treatment
Probation + Community service
Community service
Community S + conditional (+fine)Conditional + fineConditional + Supervision
Conditional alone
Treatment in social welfare
ALL COMMUNITY SANCTIONS
Court fine
ALL COURT IMPOSED PENALTIESSummary fines

8313
8,8

15335
8,5
4110
1114
1000
303
3344

11239
6,1

11292
4,9

3370
110
8930
(1232)
6717
19127
38291
65 549348449

6300
2907
19078
23328
57 741200 000

2632
3684
2567
6312
350
12913
21174
45 326
..

6750
2580
11962
2314
25 568289647

THE USE OF MAIN SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES IN 2005 (/100 000 pop)
FIN

SWE

DEN

NOR

158
8,8

170
8,5

208
6,1

245
4,9

57

365

70
32
211

3
68
47
117
6
239

260

730
1253

258
639

393
840

51
556

Summary fines

6643

2212

..

6295

Population (1000)

5 245

9 043

5 413

4 601

PRISON N
PRISON AMOUNT (months)
Probation
Probation + Contract treatment
Probation + Community service
Community service
Community S + Conditional (+ Fine)
Conditional + Fine
Conditional alone
Treatment in social welfare
ALL COMMUNITY SANCTIONS
Court fine
ALL COURT IMPOSED PENALTIES

45
12
11
64
2
170
128

37

147
56

What follows is a systematic description of the structure and use of these basic alternatives, with special
focus on re-offending (whenever there is either Scandinavian or comparable international data available).

IV. FINES
A. The Day-fine System
1. General Remarks.
A fine is the most frequently applied punishment in all Scandinavian countries. It is mainly applied in thecase of minor offences, but it serves as an alternative also in middle-rank offences such as less serious forms
of assault and minor cases of burglary. As it seems, there are differences in the scope of fines with Finland
being the country with the widest use of this alternative. Fines may also be used as an additional
punishment to a conditional or unconditional (in Denmark) sentence of imprisonment.

27

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Table 2. Fines in Scandinavian court practices
THE USE OF FINES IN THE SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES IN 2005 (/100 000 pop)
FIN

SWE

DEN

NOR

158

170

208

245

Court fine

730

258

393

51

Summary fines

6643

2212

..

6295

PRISON
FINES

Sanctions 2005 (/pop) - summary fines excluded

9000

1400

1200

Court fine

8000

Community
1000

Sanctions 2005 (/pop) - summary fines included

7000

Prison
6000

800

5000

600

4000

Summary fines
Court fineCommunity
Prison

3000
400

2000
200

1000
0

0

SWE

DEN

NOR

FIN

SWE

DEN

NOR

FIN

2. The Day-fine System
In Finland (and Sweden and Denmark) fines are imposed as day-fines. This system was adopted in
Finland in 1921. The main objective of the day-fine system, is to ensure equal severity of the fine foroffenders of different income and wealth. In this system the number of day-fines is determined on the basisof the seriousness of the offence while the amount of a day-fine depends on the financial situation of theoffender. The amount of the day-fine equals roughly half of the offender’s daily income after taxes.4 The
number of day-fines varies between 1 and 120.

An example:
The typical number of day-fines for drunken driving with BAC of 1,00/00 would be around 40 day-fines.
The monetary value of one day-fine for a person who earns EUR1,500 per month would be EUR20. For
someone with a monthly income of EUR6,000, the amount of one day-fine would be EUR95. Thus the total
fine for the same offense would be for the former person EUR800 and for the latter EUR3,800.
If the fine is not paid it may be converted into imprisonment (default imprisonment) through separate
proceedings. Two day-fines correspond to one day of imprisonment. The number of default prisoners hasvaried over time, reflecting also the changes in economic conditions. More recently, the problem of finedefaulters has, once again, become increasingly important.

B. Fines in Finland
The basic structure of the day-fine system has remained untouched since 1921. However, technicalcalculating rules (for the monetary amount of one day-fine) as well as the maximum number of day-fines andthe rules concerning the use of default imprisonment have been revised several times. Also the monetary
value of day-fines has been raised from time to time. The basic aims of these reforms has been to raise the‘penal value’ of a fine in such a ways that it would provide an credible alternative to imprisonment, especiallyfor middle rank offences, and to restrict the use of default imprisonment. The most recent reform of the dayfine system took place in 1999. The reform changed the calculating rules, raised in the minimum size of aday-fine and an extended the use of summary penal fees.
4 The exact amount results from a rather complicated calculation. However, the officials (police, the prosecutor and the courts)

have a handbook which makes it easy to count the amount of day-fines.

28

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

1. Proceedings and Summary Fines
A fine may be imposed either in an ordinary trial or, in the case of certain petty offences, throughsimplified summary penal proceedings (penalty orders). The vast majority of fines are ordered in a summary
process. In 1995, the power to order summary fines was transferred from the court to the prosecutor. Giving
the prosecutor an independent right to impose fines was an important reform from the point of view ofprinciple. It was also a substantial change in terms of numbers (over 200,000 cases per year). However, inpractice the change was smaller, since also under the former system summary fines were prepared by theprosecutors and the courts had a tendency to rubber stamp the prosecutors’ suggestions.
In addition, for minor traffic offences there is a summary penal fee that is set at a fixed amount (a pettyfine). This fine is imposed by the police. In the case of non-payment, summary penal fees cannot be
converted into imprisonment.
2. Practice
The fine has been the principal punishment throughout the last century. Around 60% of cases handled by
the courts result in fines. Of all criminal cases handled by the courts and/or prosecutors, over 80% arepunished by fines.5 In numbers, this means that the courts impose some 35,000 – 40,000 fines annually, theprosecutors order some 200,000 penalty orders, and the police write some 100,000 summary penal fees.
3. Public Acceptance of the Day-fine System
The day-fine system may also lead to quite intensive fines in cases where the offenders happen to havean extraordinarily high income. Such occasions occur particularly in the field of traffic violations. Every oncein a while the media reports of traffic-fines that exceed tens of thousands of euros. These extraordinarily
high traffic fines have even raised certain doubts about the legitimacy of the present system. Related to this,the counting rules had been criticized, especially by the conservatives, for leading to unjust results in higher
income levels, since prior to the year 1999, the amount of a day-fines was counted on the basis of grossincome (before taxes) instead of net-income (after the deduction of taxes). Moving from fining on the basis ofgross income into fining based on net-income was the major principal change, brought by the 1999 reform.
According to the bill, the central goal of the reform was to introduce a more just fining system, whereby the“size of the fine is perceived as fair among different income-groups.” (Government Bill 74/1998).
Public’s views and the fairness of dayfines(Source: Lappi-Seppälä 2000)
0

20

40

60

80

100

FAIRNESS: FINES ARE...
70

Fair
27

UnfairDon’t know

3

ROLE OF INCOME, FINES SHOULD BE...
According to income80

No differentiation
Don’t know

18
2

Follow-up research was carried out by the National Research Institute for Legal Policy. The central
findings of this study were that the fears of the perceived unfairness of the fining system had been grossly
exaggerated.6 Four out of five respondents regarded the day-fine system as a fair and just method ofpunishment. Fines imposed for traffic violations were considered fair by 60%, 14% of the respondents

5 This is partly due to the fact that there is no general administrative penal law in Finland. Practically all offences are classified

as crimes and treated under the label of criminal punishments.
6 See Lappi-Seppälä 2002,b.

29

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

considered them too mild and 17% too severe (9% refrained from expressing an opinion). The reform of thefining system introduced in 1999 did not bring about significant changes in public opinion. Neither it seems,
did the staggering fines imposed in summer 2000 (one over EUR43,000 and the other EUR38,000; both for
speeding). But as it turned out, the general public is not well aware of the rules concerning fines for traffic
offences. Whether the fines were calculated on the basis on net income or gross income (the main topic of
the reform!) turned out to be completely irrelevant to the perceived fairness of the fining system.

C. Effects on Recidivism
It is generally known that offenders receiving fines have the lowest recidivism rates. About 25% of thosereceiving fines were reconvicted for some form of penalty during the following five years whereas the figure
for those receiving a prison sentence was as high as 75%. But as the initial recidivism risk in these twogroups is totally different; these kind of figures cannot be used as a basis for any kind of comparison. We
need controlled comparisons where two groups are made similar.
There is fairly little systematic research employing control groups on the effects of fines on recidivism.
This mainly due to the fact that, outside Scandinavia, fines alone are rarely an alternative or substitute toimprisonment or even to community sanctions.
A study published in the US in 1991 (Gordon & Glaser 1991) compared recidivism after different
combinations of fines and other sanctions. Supervision with fines leads to lower recidivism (25%) than meresupervision (36%). Equally, short term imprisonment with supervision and fines leads to lower recidivism(37%) than mere supervision and fines (50%). However, the detected associations were statistically non
significant.
Methodologically more advanced US study based on randomized experiment (Turner & Petersilia 1996)
compared day-fines with flat-rate fines (no difference according to income). It turned out that day-fine group
had lower recidivism-rate (11% to 17%) and fewer technical violations (9% to 22%) than the control-group(latter differences were statistically significant).
The third study is a meta-analysis covering 18 studies (Genderau et al. 2000). The overall effect-size inthese 18 studies was -0,04. In other words, after the groups had been matched, those receiving fines had 4%
lower recidivism rate than those receiving other type of penalties.

RECIDIVISM RATES AFTER FINES
StudyResults
Supervision and fines (25 %)Only Supervision (36 %), non-significant
Supervision, prison and fines (37 %)Supervision and prison (50 %), non-significant
Arrests- Day-fines (11 %)- Control group (17 %), non-significant
Technical violations- Day-fines (9 %)- Control group (22 %), significant
Meta-analysis (18 studies)- Effect-size - 0,04 ( = 4 % difference)30

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

V. CONDITIONAL IMPRISONMENT/SUSPENDED SENTENCES
A. The Structure
1. Types and Terminology
A suspended or conditional sentence means that the offender is convicted, but exempted from serving asentence. The content of the punishment may or may not be specified in the original sentence. The
sanctions may be imposed with or without supervision. This all leaves us several combinations.
Consequently this sanction appears in different forms and under different labels around the world. There isno agreement on the terminology, either.
In the following the term suspended sentence is reserved for those arrangements where the content of
the sanction is not yet fixed. Conditional sentence means thus arrangements, where the contents of the
sanction is fixed, but the enforcement of the sentence is suspended under certain conditions. In thosesystems where only prison sentences are suspended (as in Finland), it is logical to talk about conditional
imprisonment. Thus we have the following categories:
Suspended sentence/conditional imprisonment in Scandinavia
TITLE

CONTENT FIXEDSUPERVISIONCOUNTRY

Suspended sentence

No

No

SWE

Conditional imprisonmentYes
No formal limits

No

NOR

Yes
No formal limits

On discretion

DEN

Yes
14 days - 2 years

On discretion only
for juveniles

FIN

2. Contents and Conditions
In all cases suspension and the enforcement of the sentence is conditional. These conditions may refer tomore general behaviour or only to new offences. Today clear emphasis in Scandinavia is on new offences.
General instructions for behaviour are of only marginal importance. In other words, the enforcement of thesentence is conditional in the sense that unless the offender commits a new offence during the probationary
period, imprisonment will not be enforced.
If the sentence is not specified (as in Sweden), a suspended sentence represents merely a formal
warning. In case the court also pronounces the length of prison term, as in Finland, the sanction has more
substance and a heavier symbolic content. This may be reflected also in the criminal proceedings. In Finland
the judge first declares that the offender has been sentenced to imprisonment for X months. After that it isdeclared that imprisonment will be imposed conditionally. These symbolic messages have relevance also inwider communications: newspaper headlines generally refer to conditional imprisonment as imprisonment(where they do not wish to undermine the severity of the sanction). This all has practical consequences:conditional imprisonment in Finland has a far heavier role than the Swedish suspended sentence.
Conditional imprisonment may be ordered with or without supervision. Both forms are used in Finlandand Denmark. Neither Norway nor Sweden combines supervision with a conditional or a suspended
sentence. Sweden uses supervision as part of their probation. Norway ceased to use supervision as part ofconditional imprisonment once they changed community service into community punishment (a decisionthat can be criticized).
Supervision is carried out both by social workers and volunteers workers. Supervision entails always
both elements of support and control. Support entails lodging, education or training and/or work, since this isof great importance for reducing the risk of recidivism. The control element may vary depending on otherconditions attached with the sentence. Breaches of the rules and conditions may in extreme cases lead to
revocation of the suspended sentence. However, as a rule, revocation is possible only due to new criminal
offences.

31

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

3. Combinations
In addition to the usual condition of supervision, conditional imprisonment can be supplemented with
substantial conditions or other elements (such as fines). This blurs the boundaries between conditional
sentences and other alternatives in the penal system. Some of these conditions and attachments are quite
substantial, as is the case when conditional imprisonment is combined with community service or atreatment order (as in Denmark). In these cases it would be advisable to classify the sanctions according to
the most substantial element involved. This advice has also been followed here.

FIN

SWE

DEN

NOR

158

170

208

245

Conditional + Fine

170

47

147

Conditional alone

128

70

117

56

298

70

164

203

PRISON N

All CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

Conditional imprisonment with different combinations in Scandinavia
Finland
16 000Cond/prison= 300 / pop= 1,9

Denmark
13 000Cond/prison= 170 / pop= 0,8

Norway9 000
Cond/prison= 200 / pop= 0,8

Sweden
10 000Cond/prison= 120 / pop= 0,7 (0,4)-Fines-Supervision-Community service

56 %
8%
1%

-Fines-Supervision-Community service-Treatment order

20 %
20 %
30 %
8%

Fine
-Fine

28 %

-Community service

35 %In all countries but Sweden the content of the sentence is fixed (Denmark applies both forms). In all
countries except a Norway suspended sentence may be attached with supervision. In this respect the
Norwegian law changed in 2002 when community service was replaced with a new alternative called
community punishment. Community punishment contains several elements. In addition to a normal
community service order, there are other restrictions including obligations to participate in different types ofprogrammes. Community punishment replaced not only the old community service, but also conditional
sentences with supervision (something which may be regretted).
4. Combinations
Suspended sentences may appear as an independent sanction or in different combinations. Bothalternatives are familiar to all Scandinavian systems. All countries recognize the possibility of using
suspended sentences (with or without supervision) as the only sanction. All except Sweden combine
suspended sentences with fines. All except Norway combine suspended sentences also with community
service. Denmark also attaches treatment orders (usually for drunk drivers) with suspended sentences(supervision).
In Finland a suspended sentence (conditional imprisonment) without supervision is a quite common
punishment for most middle rank offences. A majority (60%) of all prison sentences are suspended. In
sentencing practice there is a clear presumption that all shorter prison sentences (less than one year) aresuspended for first time offenders. A suspended sentence with supervision has, in turn, been usedsuccessfully instead of imprisonment for juveniles.

32

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

B. Conditional Imprisonment in Finland
1. Imprisonment and Conditional Imprisonment
Imprisonment may be imposed either for a determinate period (at least fourteen days and at most twelve
years for a single offence and fifteen years for several offences) or for life.7 Sentences of imprisonment of at
most two years may be imposed conditionally (conditional imprisonment), under certain conditions,prescribed by law.
Conditional imprisonment was introduced in Finland in 1918, originally under the title of conditional
sentence. In 1976, the scope of the conditional sentence was expanded. The maximum length of aconditional sentence was raised from one to two years. Also, the possibility of combining a conditional
sentence with a fine was introduced. The sentencing criteria were also amended: now the use of aconditional sanction was tied to general prevention, instead of the original special preventive orientatedreasons.
In 2001, the law was revised again. In order to give the courts a more reliable foundation for theirdiscretion the general preventive oriented criteria were replaced by more proportionality oriented
sentencing criteria.8 Also, the title of this sanction was changed from conditional sentence to conditional
imprisonment. At the same time, the possibility of ordering conditional fines was abolished. This option was
hardly ever used in court practice. In addition, a new combination of unconditional imprisonment and a shortcommunity service order were included in the law.
2. Sentencing Criteria
According to the new provisions, a prison sentence of no more than two years can be ordered
conditionally, provided that “the seriousness of the offence, the culpability of the offender manifested in theoffence, or previous convictions of the offender do not require an unconditional imprisonment”. Subsection 2
places an additional requirement: young offenders under the age of 18 years (at the time of the offence) may
be sentenced to unconditional imprisonment only if special reasons call for this option.
3. Subsidiary Sanctions
If conditional imprisonment alone is not considered to be a sufficient sanction for the offence, an
unconditional fine (subsidiary fine) may be imposed on the offender as well. This option has been used quite
frequently in drunken driving. In 2001, the scope of subsidiary sanctions was expanded. If the length of thesentence is between one to two years, a short community service order (20–90 hours) may be sentenced
alongside conditional imprisonment. In addition, young offenders under the age of 21 years (at the time ofthe offence) may be placed under supervision (see below).
4. The Probation Period and the Revocation of the Sentence
Imposing the sentence conditionally means that the enforcement will be suspended for a specificprobation period determined by the court. The length of the probation period is at least one year and at mostthree years. The practical meaning of the probation period is that the behaviour of the offender during that
period determines whether the original sentence shall be enforced or not.
A person who has been sentenced to conditional imprisonment can be ordered to serve his or her
sentence in prison if he or she commits a new offence during the probation period for which the court
imposes a sentence of imprisonment. Thus, a behavioural infraction alone is not enough for enforcement of aconditional imprisonment. An additional requirement for losing the benefit of a conditional imprisonment isthat the charges for the new offence have been brought within one year of the end of the probation period. It
is also possible to enforce only part of the earlier conditional imprisonment or sentences.
The courts impose some 16,000 conditional prison sentences annually. Each year around 700-800

7 A life sentence may be imposed for a very restricted number of offences – in practice only for murder. Those serving such asentence actually spend approximately 12 to 14 years in prison. After this they are released on parole.
8 It had turned out that the general preventive sentencing instruction – “maintenance of general respect for the law” (seefootnote ) – turned out to be too obscure and it may also invite the courts to base their decisions on (empirically) unfounded
speculations on the general preventive effects of single court decisions.

33

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

sentences are enforced. This equals around 5% of all conditional sentences imposed annually.
5. Supervision of Young Offenders
Conditionally sentenced young persons (who were 15 to 20 years old at the time of the offence) may be
put under community supervision if this is considered “justified in view of the promotion of the social
adjustment of the offender and of the prevention of new offences”). Such supervision is ordered for four outof five conditionally sentenced young persons. This decision is taken by the court in connection with theoriginal sentence.
The supervision is the responsibility of staff members of the Probation Service or of voluntary private
supervisors. The supervision primarily consists of regular meetings with a supervisor. In some cases, theoffender is required to participate in various group activities. Supervision can be discontinued after six
months if it is no longer needed. During the year 2001, 1,154 new offenders were ordered to undergo
supervision, and 46% of them were assigned a private supervisor. During that time 2,756 young offenders
were under supervision.

C. Implementation and Effects
In Finland conditional imprisonment has a strong position as an alternative to incarceration. Conditional
imprisonments correspond to roughly a quarter of all sanctions imposed by the courts. Two out of threeprison sentences are imposed conditionally.
Conditional imprisonment and others anctionsin Finnish courts 2005

Conditionalalone 21 %Conditional+ Fine 14 %CSO 5 %

Prison13%

Conditiona+supervision2%

Fine(courts)
58 %In 1950, 30% of sentences of imprisonment were imposed conditionally. In 1990 the rate was 60% and in2000 63%. The use of conditional imprisonment increased significantly during the 1970s. A primary factor
behind this was, above all, a reassessment of sentences for drunken driving. Conditional imprisonment is
one key tool through which Finland has managed to reduce its prison population over the last decades.
The useof sentencing optionsin the Finnish courts1950-2005
90000
80000
70000
60000

Cour t-fineCond it ional sentenceCommunit y service
Impris on ment

50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005

34

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Conditional and unconditional prison sentencein Finland 1950-2005
20000

Condi tiona l
Uncondit iona l

18000
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Conditional
Unconditional

1950

1960 1970

2812
6571

3686 5215 14556 17248 13624 13973 16165
6900 10212 10326 11657 6754 8147 8516

1980 1990

1995 2000

2005

The wide use of conditional imprisonment has met with some criticism, especially when applied toyounger age-groups. Concerns have been expressed that several such sentences may be imposed on thesame (young) offenders without this having a discernible impact on their behaviour. Nonetheless, it is likelythat large accumulations of conditional imprisonments are rarer than has been assumed. A study followed
those who, during 1992, received their first conditional imprisonment. During the following three years, only
16% were again sentenced conditionally, and most of these received only one new conditional imprisonment.
Only 2% of this sentencing cohort were given more than two additional conditional imprisonments during
the three-year period.
Offenders reconvicted in conditional sentence in Finland in three years time after release in 1992
(Lappi-Seppälä1999)
90

83,7

80
70

%

60
50
40
30
20

11,4

10

2,8

2,1

2

3-more0

None

1

The number conditional reconvictions

Repeated reconvictions were clearly more common among young offenders, compared to adults. But
even among the juveniles this was not widespread. About half of the juveniles receiving a conditional
sentence were reconvicted and received another conditional imprisonment. However, of all the young
offenders reconvicted, three out of four received only one or two new conditional imprisonments.
Around 4% belonged to the problem group who, over the next years, received at least five additional
conditional imprisonments, and 10% to the group who received at most four additional conditional
imprisonments.9 Other sentencing alternatives have been sought for this group of young offenders. Afterseveral years of experimenting, a new juvenile punishment was introduced in 2005.10

9 On this see Lappi-Seppälä, 1999.
10 A juvenile penalty (youth punishment) consists of a community supervision for a period of four months and non-institutional

programmes arranged by the Probation Service.

35

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

D. Conclusions
The criminal political relevance and value of conditional imprisonment is in its strong symbolic
dimension: it still is imprisonment, even if it is only conditional. It is less stigmatizing for the offender andfar less costly for society, when compared to prison. It allows different combinations, which have been used
quite frequently in many jurisdictions. These features allow also tailoring according to different offendergroups. In its basic form, conditional imprisonment functions especially well in two offender groups:• for middle rank offences for low-risk adult offenders without supervision• for middle rank and also for more serious offences for juveniles in conjunction with supervision.
There is very little research on the re-offending effects of conditional imprisonment without supervision.
A classical Swedish study from the 1960s revealed a constant patter between custodial and non-custodial
sanctions, including conditional sentence (Börjeson 1966). The overall result was that even in the absence ofsupervision, less intrusive measures tended to lead to lower re-offending rates. This basic result has hardly
been challenged, even though we know today much more of the effects of different treatment programmes
and intervention.
Should we wish to add more ‘substance’ to the sanction, more elements could be included in supervision.
Another option would be provided in the form of specific community sanction, known as probation.

VI. PROBATION AND TREATMENT ORDERS
A. The Structure
1. Terminology
A suspended sentence with supervision may also be called probation. But supervision in a form of
probation may also be ordered as an independent sanction (in addition, probation may also refer to parole
supervision, which will be discussed later).
Sweden is the only Scandinavian country with a separate independent probation type of sanction. Since
the 1960s this sanction – protective supervision (Skyddstilsyn) – has remained as the backbone of theSwedish community sanction system. Probation is a non-custodial sentence. Probation means a period of
three years, where the sentenced person is supervised during the first year. Misbehaviour can lead to theperiod being extended. Serious breaches of the probation can lead to the sentence being served in prison
instead.

Swedish probation orders. In Sweden, probation is a kind of ‘frame’-penalty. It leaves room for a number ofdifferent combinations. Probation can be combined with fines. A court can also combine probation with ashort prison sentence of between 14 days and three months. Two other combinations are also possible:
probation with special treatment order and probation with community service (see below). Regarding thecontent, probation appears thus in three different forms:• Basic probation includes only normal supervision. The offender must remain in contact with aprobation officer, notify the probation officer of any change in address, and provide essential
information on, e.g., employment, earnings and lifestyle. The probation officer can be from theprobation system or a layperson. Each client has a special schedule for the probation period that
regulates how often he or she meets with the probation officer.
• Probation may also include community service. Probation is complemented by an order to perform
unpaid work. The court determines the number of hours between 40 and a maximum of 240.
• Thirdly, probation may be combined with a special treatment plan, known as contract treatment. Thissanction is targeted primarily for long term substance abusers where there is a link between theabuse and crime. A contract is made between the court and the client on institutional care, in a homeor an open clinic. In contract treatment, treatment is always voluntary (but the choices are limited;either to go to prison or not).
In Sweden some 6,000-7,000 persons annually are sentenced to probation. Of these, little over 1,000 also
receive contract treatment and about 1,000 are also sentenced to community service.

36

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

2. Swedish Treatment Orders
In addition to those orders combined with probation, there are treatment orders for juveniles to be
carried out by the social welfare authorities. Offenders under the age of 21 can be sentenced to care under
the social service and if such care is deemed more suitable than any other sentence, the court can order thesocial welfare board to arrange suitable care through the social services. This option is used fairly
extensively (around 3,000 cases per year). Treatment by social welfare authorities is among the basic
sanctions of the juvenile justice system in Sweden.
The second class of treatment orders concerns compulsory treatment for alcohol and drug addicts. Thistakes place primarily in cases of less serious crime. If a court finds that the offender could be subject to carevia compulsory placement in a residential treatment centre, the matter is then left to the social welfare
board or, if the offender is already in such a centre, to the board of that centre to rule on the required care.
Decisions on compulsory care in individual cases are made by the County Administrative Court on
application of the social welfare board. The social welfare board is then responsible for implementing thedecision according to the court’s ruling.
The third class of treatment orders includes treatment orders in psychiatric treatment. Unlike the other
Scandinavian countries, psychiatric treatment is classified as a criminal sanction in Sweden. A court cancommit a person suffering from a serious psychiatric disturbance to compulsory forensic psychiatric care if
his or her condition requires such care. Forensic psychiatric care as a criminal sanction occurs in two
different forms: without special release examination and with special release examination. The former
follows the same rules in principle as for psychiatric care in general. Care may continue for a maximum offour months. Extensions of the care period can be made only after a ruling of the County Administrative
Court. A court can decide on special release examination if there is a risk that the offender will lapse into
serious criminality again. For these patients the County Administrative Court decides on release and parole.
In order for the court to commit a person to forensic psychiatric care with special release examination, aforensic psychiatric examination must take place. The annual number of treatment orders in psychiatric carevaries at between 300-400.
3. Danish Treatment Orders
In the Danish system, treatment orders appear with conditional imprisonment (see above) and as a formof prison enforcement.
In connection with conditional sentences, persons suffering from substance abuse (alcoholics and drug
addicts) or a mental disturbance may be faced with a requirement of treatment for alcohol or drug abuse, or acondition of outpatient psychiatric treatment. The condition may also be a very specific order, for example,
that a person convicted of sexual relations with children is not allowed to obtain employment at institutions
or schools attended by children. The purpose of both supervision and special conditions is to prevent theoffender from relapsing into crime. An action plan is prepared and reviewed in great detail with each client,
who has to both accept and understand the necessity of the plan. Most often the clients accept these
conditions as they see them as the price they have to pay to avoid deprivation of their liberty.
For those already sentenced to prison, there remains an option to suspend the sentence by undergoingtreatment for substance abuse. Persons who are sentenced to prison for 60 days or less can apply forsuspension of the serving of the sentence, if they are in obvious need of treatment for their abuse of alcohol.
If they comply with requirements (usually one year of treatment and supervision) they can petition for a
pardon. They can be pardoned against payment of a fine.
THE USE OF PROBATION AND SUPERVISION IN SCANDINAVIA IN 2005 (/100 000 pop)
PRISON

FIN

SWE

DEN

NOR

158

170

208

245

Probation

45

Probation + Contract treatment

12

Probation + Community service

11

Treatment in social welfare

32

6

100

6

All PROBATION ORDERS

37

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

B. Contract Treatment (Sweden)
For offenders with alcohol and drug abuse problems, probation may be combined with a special treatment
plan, so-called contract care. Contract care is an alternative to prison, where the penalty for the crime could
be to up to two years’ incarceration. Contract treatment is probation combined with treatment, normally for
substance abuse, where there is a clear link between the crime and the abuse. One condition for a sentenceof contract care is that abuse problems or other special circumstances which require care or treatment havebeen an important factor in the criminality.
The sentenced person signs a ‘contract’ with the court to complete a treatment programme instead ofserving their sentence in prison. If the person misbehaves, the sentence can be transformed to a prison
sentence. The treatment lasts between six months to two years. Part of the treatment takes place in an
institution. Participation in the treatment is always voluntary. Before passing the sentence, the offender is
asked whether he or she is willing to undergo the treatment.
The relation between other sanctions and contract treatment is arranged in two ways: Contract
treatment can be used as a normal sub-condition to probation, or it may be used as the very reason for not
imposing a prison sentence. In the latter case (a ‘genuine’ contract treatment), this sanction is used moreclearly as an alternative to imprisonment. In this case the court also declares the length of the original
prison sentence which would have been passed had the offender not been accepted to take part in thetreatment programme.
If the client misbehaves, this is viewed as serious and the penalty can be converted to a prison sentence.
Co-operation is required from the offender and the probation authority decides on its suitability in each case.
In Sweden some 1,300-1,400 contract treatment orders are given each year compared to 15,000 prison
sentences and 3,000 community service orders imposed annually. The daily average number of offenders incontract treatment is around 300, with the daily average number of prisoners serving a sentence at around
6,500. In other words, contract-treatment reduces the daily prison population by around 5%.

C. Assessing EffectivenessIn assessing effectiveness one must distinguish the different elements in probation orders and related
measures. Supervision and surveillance is one thing, support and treatment is another. Research data isavailable for both; however, the difference between these two has not always been acknowledged.
One major study from Scandinavia made an effort to measure the effects of supervisions, as compared toother sanctions (Bondeson 1977). The study was not based on comparison groups. Instead, all sentenced
offenders were divided into nine risk groups with the help of 36 statistical prediction variables. After thatrecidivism rates were calculated in all nine groups according to the sanctions used for each. The study
compared the effects of three sanctions in all nine risk groups: conditional imprisonment without
supervision, supervision, and prison with supervision (in parole). The overall result was that recidivism
rates seemed to increase in all risk groups as supervision increased and the sanctions became more
intrusive.
During the 1990s several studies in the US examined the effects of the intensity of supervision by using
comparison groups. The intensity of ordinary probation may have been increased with the help of urine
tests, electronic control, and unannounced home visits. Supervision may also have been combined withother sanctions or interventions, such as community service or treatment programmes.
The most well known study (Petersilia & Turner 1993) used a randomized experiment and divided
offenders into those under normal probation and those under intensive probation. The study examined 14
ISP programmes in nine US states. Recidivism was measured using both arrests and technical violations.
After a one year follow–up, 37% of the ISP participants and 33% of the control group had been rearrested(the difference was statistically non-significant). In addition, technical violations in the ISP group was almost
double of that in the control group (65% versus 38%). The overall conclusion was that intensive probation
did not decrease recidivism. However, the intensified control increased the probability that technicalviolations would be detected. This result has been replicated in a number of studies during the 1990s(MacKenzie 2006 p. 311-317 lists 16 such studies). A meta-analysis from 2000 (Genderau 2000) indicatesthat intensive surveillance has a negative effect in increasing recidivism by 6%.

38135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

This finding is as consistent as it surprising. One could have imagined that increasing surveillance would
decrease re-offending. The explanation may be in the simple fact that if one wishes to curb crime by mere
surveillance, then the surveillance has to be much more intensive. If normal probation means one or two
meetings in a month, and intensive probation five to ten meetings in a month, this still leaves the offenderplenty of free time to commit offences, once he or she so chooses. This puts the serious question whether
crime prevention by mere surveillance could ever be a wise and defendable option.
This disappointing finding must be supplemented with one important reservation. Although the evidence
seems to be quite clear on the point that increased surveillance had no impact on recidivism, there is someevidence that increased treatment of offenders in the ISP programmes may be related to significant
reductions in re-arrests. Several studies suggest that re-arrests are reduced when offenders receive
treatment services in addition to the increased surveillance and control of the ISP-programmes. Petersilia &Turner reported a 10-20% reduction in recidivism for those who were most active in programmes while they
were in the community (MacKenzie 2006 p.318). This conclusion applies also to those programmes andmeasures directed especially to young offenders (Clausen 2006 p. 149).
RECIDIVISM RATES AFTER INTENSIVE PROBATION AND SURVEILLANCE
Study

Results

Drug-treatment forms a special branch in research literature. Despite numerous studies published in thisfield (see MacKenzie 2006, p. 241 ff), poor quality in research design prevents definite conclusions. In
general, the evidence gives support to drug-treatment both in institutions and in the community. Ongoinginternational meta-analyses are supposedly going to shed more light on this issue.

D. Conclusion
As it seems, supervision and surveillance alone are unable to produce the desired re-offending results.
Should we wish to achieve more in this respect, other elements should be included in the sanction
structures. Treatment, and cognitive behavioural programmes, as well as help and support should be
attached to sanctions along with supervision.
Taking into account the fact that majority of violent crime is alcohol-related and that drug and substanceabuse is closely associated with juvenile crime and traditional property crimes, the treatment of substanceabuse problems remains a high priority, both in the realm of community sanctions and in prison. A number of
research findings seem to repeat themselves in this field:• Institutional treatment, in order to be effective, requires a functional aftercare component. Very little
can be achieved with programmes that start in prison but end once the person walks out.
• Relapses are part of the program. Getting hold of one’s drug or substance abuse problem is a longterm, incremental process which always includes steps in both directions. A realistic starting point
for any programme, therefore, is that relapses happen. This must be taken into account also in thosecriminal justice interventions which include drug or substance abuse treatment elements.

39

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

This still leaves us with the question of how to proceed with those offenders whose offences are too
serious to be dealt by with mere supervision and/or for whom neither treatment would seem to be afunctional alternative. For higher risk offenders and for offenders convicted for more serious offences, two
additional forms of community sanctions are disposable, either as independent sanctions or in combinations
with the alternatives already dealt by with: community service and electronic monitoring.

VII. COMMUNITY SERVICE
A. The Structure
Community service has a fairly clear basic content. It involves the performance of unpaid work, during
leisure-time and within a given period, for the good of the community. The status and contents of community
service may vary in several respects. Community service may be:• Imposed as an independent sanction or as an adjunct to another sanction, or• Replace only prison sentences or other penalties.
These combinations may also be found also among the Scandinavian countries. In Scandinavia Denmark
was the first to start with this new alternative in 1982. Finland was a late starter in 1991, but in a shortperiod of time, community service became more popular in Finland than anywhere else in Scandinavia.
In the shift of the 2000s the three other Scandinavian countries completed law reforms in order toincrease the use of community service, with good results. Sweden created a combination of community
service and suspended sentences, thus increasing the number of annual cases from 2000 to around 4000.
Denmark changed its policy in 2000 by allowing community service to be used also for drunken driving(which was previously forbidden). In two years’ time this increased the number of sentences from 1000 to
4000. Norway, in turn, tried to increase the credibility of community service by changing the title tocommunity punishment, by including also other elements in the sentence, and by expanding the scope of
application also to drunken driving. This resulted in an increase from around 500 cases to the present total ofa little over 2,500 cases.
Community service in Scandinavia
Denmark

Finland

NorwaySwedenStart/ permanent

1982, 1992

1991, 1995

1984, 1991

1990, 1998

Independent
or notNo. Condition for
Conditional
Imprisonment

Yes. Also partof over 1 year
conditional
Imprisonment

No. Part of“community
punishment”

No. Part ofsuspended
sentence orprobation

Replacing only
Imprisonment

No

Yes

No

Basically: yes

The length ofprison sentence

Basically: up to
12 months

Up to 8 months

Up to 1 year
In exceptional
cases over 1 year

Basically: up to
12 months

The number ofhours

30-24020-20030-42020-240

Number of court
cases 2005

3 864
68
(/100 000 pop)

3 480
66
(/100 000 pop)

2 632
57
(/100 000 pop)

3 647
40
(/100 000 pop)

Ratio CS/prison

0,33

0,42

0,23

0,23

Today all Scandinavian countries use community service on roughly the same scale. Denmark and
Finland are in the lead with 66-68 cases/100,000 inhabitants, followed by Norway (57) and Sweden (40)
However, if measured by the ratio between imposed community service and prison sentences, thesituation looks different. Now Finland has then highest application intensity (0,42 community service orders
against one prison sentence), followed by Denmark (0,33) and Norway and Sweden (0,23 each).

40

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

The use of community service differs also in other respects among the Scandinavian countries. There isevidence that Finland has been more successful in replacing prison sentences with community service,while in the other Scandinavian countries community service has substituted also other, more lenient,
options. This result is essentially related to specific legislative solutions, adopted in Finland.

B. Community Service in Finland
In Finland the main arguments while introducing community service were related to prison overcrowding
and the lack of suitable ‘intermediate’ penalties between fines and imprisonment. In Finland, community
service is imposed only instead of unconditional imprisonment. The duration of community service may vary
between 20 and 200 hours. The prerequisites for sentencing the offender to community service are (a) thatthe convicted person consents to this, (b) that the sentence does not exceed eight months, and (c) that theoffender is deemed capable of carrying out the community service order. Also (d) prior convictions may insome case prevent the use of this option. The offender’s ability to carry out the work is evaluated on thebasis of a specific suitability report. This report may be requested by any one of the parties, the prosecutoror the court. The suitability report is prepared by the Probation Service. If the conditions of the community
service order are violated, the court normally imposes a new sentence of unconditional imprisonment.
1. Avoiding Net-widening: the Two-step Procedure
In order to ensure that community service will really be used in lieu of unconditional imprisonment, atwo-step procedure was adopted: firstly, the court is supposed to make its sentencing decision by applying
the normal principles and criteria of sentencing without considering the possibility of community service;secondly, if the result of this deliberation is unconditional imprisonment (and certain requirements are
fulfilled), the court may commute the sentence to community service. In principle, community service may
therefore be used only in cases where the accused would otherwise receive an unconditional sentence ofimprisonment.
2. The Number of Hours of Community Service
The court should always determine the number of hours of community service to be served. The lengthof community service is at least twenty and at most 200 hours. In practice the length of service depends on
the original sentence of imprisonment. One day of imprisonment corresponds to one hour of community
service. Thus, two months of custodial sentence should be commuted into roughly 60 hours of community
service.
3. ContentsCommunity service consists of regular, unpaid work carried out under supervision. The sentence isusually performed in segments of three or four hours, ordinarily on two days each week. The intention isthat this service would be performed over a period that roughly conforms to the corresponding sentence ofimprisonment without release on parole (see above).
Approximately a half of the service places were provided by the municipal sector, some 40% by non-profit
organizations and 10% by parishes. The share of the State has been under 2%. Ten hours maximum can beserved in an effort to address the offender’s substance abuse problem, either in terms of a traffic safety
course organized by the Traffic Safety Organization or at a treatment clinic.
The Probation Service approves a service plan for the performance of a community service order. The
plan is prepared in co-operation with the organization with whom the place of work had been arranged. The
offender should be allowed an opportunity to be heard in the drafting of the service plan.
4. Supervision and the Violation of the Conditions
The performance of a community service order is supervised quite closely. The supervision is specificallyfocused on ensuring proper performance of the work. Unlike in the other Nordic countries, community
service does not contain any extra supervision aimed at controlling the offender's behaviour in general. The
supervision is strictly confined to his or her working obligations.
Minor violations are dealt with by reprimands, more serious violations are reported to the publicprosecutor, who may take the case to court. If the court finds that the conditions of the community service

41

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

order have been seriously violated, it should convert the remaining portion of the community service order
into unconditional imprisonment. The hours that have already been worked should be credited in full to theoffender. In this situation, the length of the imprisonment should be calculated by applying the generalconversion scale.
5. The Number of Community Service Orders
The legislators’ aim was that community service should be used only in cases where the accused would
otherwise have received an unconditional sentence of imprisonment. Along with the increase in the numberof community service orders, the number of unconditional sentences of imprisonment decreased between
1992 to 1997/98. In 1998, the average daily number of offenders in community service was about 1200 andthe corresponding prison rate was 2800. It is therefore reasonable to argue that, within a short period oftime, community service has proven to be an important alternative to imprisonment.
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0

Imprisonm ent
Com mun ity serv ice

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
1153 9563 7699 6754 6101 5967 6642 7666 8151 8352 8484 8000 8530 8285
0

563 1487 2803 3277 3534 3957 3658 3413 3388 3313 3297 3621 3370

Figure: Imprisonment and community service in Finland 1992-2005 (court statistics)
Between 1998 and 2000 the number of community service orders was slightly falling, while the numberof prison sentences was increasing. This reflects partly the fact that for one section of repeated offenders
this option has now been ‘saturated’. If offending continues, the courts will, at some point, move from
community service to unconditional prison sentence. After 2001, the situation stabilized.
Some 3,500 community service orders are imposed annually by the courts. This represents around35–40% of the sentences of imprisonment which could have been converted (sentences of imprisonment ofat most eight months). Over one half of the community service orders are imposed for drunken driving.
Annually, some 250,000–300,000 hours of community service are performed. This corresponds to some
400–500 prisoners (10–15%) of the daily prison population (assuming that in the absence of community
service a corresponding unconditional imprisonment of imprisonment would indeed have been imposed). A
typical community service order is for 70 to 90 hours. The proportion of interrupted orders has varied byaround 15% (of those sentences started each year).

C. Assessing Effectiveness
A Finnish study used quasi-experimental design and compared two matched groups of offenders; onesentenced to community service in that part of the country where community service was in use on an
experimental basis, and the other group of offenders with a similar background and convicted for similar
offences (mainly drunken driving, which has been the major offence in Finland for which community service
has been imposed). The follow-up period was extraordinarily long (five years). Only new sentences leading
to conditional or unconditional imprisonment or community service were counted as recidivism.
The study revealed a constant pattern showing that the community service group had fewerreconvictions throughout the follow-up period. The differences in reconviction rates varied depending where

42135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

the counting began. If begun from the court’s decision the difference after five years was 60% for community
service and 66% for the prison group. If begun from the completion of the sentence, the figures were 62%
and 72%. And if counting of the follow-up period in the community service group starts from the court’s
decision and in the prison group from release on parole (which would be sensible), the difference inreconvictions would be 60% (community service) and 72% (prison, see Muiluvuori, 2000).

Reconviction rates after prison and community service (Finland 1992)
80
70
Reconvicted %Prison
60
CSO
50
40
30
20
10
0
6 mths1y2y3y

Follow up period

4y5ySource: Muiluvuori 2000

In a methodologically more advanced study Killias et al, 2000, divided offenders randomly into acommunity service group and a control group (prison). Recidivism was studied using four indicators: (1)whether offenders were convicted; (2) the number of convictions; (3) whether offenders were arrested; andthe (4) number of arrests. In addition the authors compared how much the offenders had advanced, and how
many arrests they had before and after the sentence. By all measures the community service group survived
better. However, the small size of the sample kept the statistical significance rates low.

43

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

RECIDIVISM RATES AFTER INTENSIVE PROBATION AND SURVEILLANCE
Study

Results

D. Conclusion
The available evidence suggests that community service is (at least) a promising alternative, in terms of
reducing recidivism (using the Maryland University methodology scoring, see for example MacKenzie,2006). Stronger conclusions are prevented by small research samples which keep statistical significancelevels at modest rates.
However, in connection with community service, also other ‘non-reconviction benefits’ (see Introduction)need to be taken into account. These other beneficial features include positive contact with work life (andthe resulting enhancement of offender’s economical situation), better self-control over substance abuse andbetter preservation of family ties. A problem still deserving attention is how to deal with offenders whose
substance abuse prevents the use of community service. One answer is provided in the form of Swedish
contract treatment.

VIII. ELECTRONIC MONITORING
A. Introduction
1. Different Forms of Electronic Monitoring
Electronic monitoring (EM) may appear in three basic forms: (a) EM as imprisonment diversion applies
EM as a front-door option instead of prison; (b) EM as intensive probation aims to enhance the content ofother community sanctions; and (c) EM-release is a back-door replacement of imprisonment where EM is
used as an extra condition for early release. Most Scandinavian countries use EM either as a front-door orback-door alternative for imprisonment.
In EM the offender is required to stay at home at night-time and also major parts of free time. In the
Scandinavian versions offenders are always required either to work or to take part in other forms ofactivities, programmes or treatment. The concept of passive ‘house arrest’ is deliberately rejected.
Conditions further include abstinence from alcohol and substance abuse. The offenders are always subjected
to random surveillance, both in the form of face-to-face meeting and/or electronic monitoring.

44

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

For offenders in electronic monitoring a delayed schedule is always drawn, indicating where the offenders
should stay and at what time. This schedule is electronically monitored, usually (but not always) with thehelp of a specific tag, attached to the person under supervision. The tag sends a continuous signal to acentral computer in the probation service, thus causing an alarm if the offender leaves the designated area.
Today EM is used in all Scandinavian countries. The longest experiences originate from Sweden, where
EM has been in use since the mid-1990s, first as a front-door alternative to short prison sentences, and later(since 2001) as a back-door option for an earlier release in longer sentences. Denmark started a back-door
early release EM programme in 2005 and Finland did the same in 2006. Denmark,. Finland and Norway arepreparing legislation to introduce EM as a major front-door alternative. In addition, experiences from EM
have been obtained from most Scandinavian countries (especially Finland) using EM as a part ofenforcement of prison sentences in liberty.
Electronic monitoring is clearly an expanding practice. It also seems to enjoy growing popularity among
politicians in Europe – presumably due to its high profile as a means to protect the public. At the moment,
the Commission of the European Union is planning a recommendation for all Member States to include
electronic monitoring as a part of their criminal justice system. It offers both prospects and risks. In thisrespect, experiences from Scandinavia are worth observing while expanding the scope of this new technique
as a penal alternative.
As a front door alternative, electronic monitoring is classified in sentencing statistics as a prison sentence
which is enforced outside prison.
2. EM in Scandinavia: General Structure
Both front-door and back-door alternatives follow a more or less similar general structure. In all cases,
offenders who are basically eligible for EM must nevertheless apply for this option. Whether the candidates
will be approved depends on a number of conditions. Content differs slightly in the front and the back-door
versions. Still, common features include:1.

In all cases, the offender must have permanent housing (address). This includes the risk of excluding
the worst marginalized offenders from the scope of application. On the other hand, the probation andsocial welfare services are obliged to find a dwelling for those in need of such. To what extent this isaccomplished may need a separate examination.

2.

Secondly, in case the offender is living with someone (wife, husband etc), consent of that otherperson is required. No-one can be obliged to stay indoors with another person without asking them
too!

3.

Thirdly, the offender must have an occupation or work. This refers to the fact that the offender has tohave something to do. EM is always associated with some sort of activities (in order to avoid idle
‘house arrest’). For those offenders lacking regular work or occupation, the probation service isobliged to arrange corresponding activities, either in the form of community-service type of work orother programmes.

4.

Fourthly, the offender has to agree to abstain from all alcohol and substance abuse. One major
element in the supervision in EM is checking that this condition is being observed. This is ensured
by using both breath analysis and urine tests.

The detailed content of the enforcement, additional formal requirements, and consequences of thebreaches of these conditions vary depending the type of EM (front-door or back-door alternative).

B. Electronic Monitoring as a Front-door Alternative to Imprisonment
1. Sweden(i) The structure
The front-door version of EM started in Sweden in the mid 1990s. First EM replaced short prison
sentences of up to three months. In 2001, the scope of the application was widened from three to six
months. The number of days to be served under monitoring is the same as would have been served inprison.

45

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

In EM the person is to remain at home except for the time allowed by the probation service for
employment, training, health-care, participation in probation programmes, shopping for necessities, andother similar tasks. A detailed schedule is drawn up by the probation service, and monitoring is carried out
principally by means of an electronic tagging device. Checks are also made in the form of unannounced visits
to the person’s home. In addition, the convicted person must visit the probation service at least once a week
and take part in the programmes they provide.11
If the person leaves or arrives at home at times that do not correspond to the schedule, an alarm istriggered at the probation service office, and the individual concerned will immediately be contacted in orderto establish the reason for the discrepancy. Checks are also made in the form of unannounced visits to theperson's home, in practice two to three times a week (while the manuals require more frequent contacts).
However, the offenders are in a regular contact with the probation service due to the programmes. Home
visits include as a rule breath tests to determine whether the person is observing the ban on alcohol
consumption. Drug use is checked for by means of urine and/or blood tests at the beginning of theimplementation period and subsequently when necessary. Supervision at the person's place of work is
performed by a contact person employed by the probation service. There are no electronic checks todetermine when the person is present at his or her place of work.
Abuses of EM are met with a swift and palpable response, which usually entails removal from theprogramme and a transferral to a prison for the remainder of the sentence.

(ii)Practical experience
In 2005 EM was offered to 61% (6,547) of offenders receiving a prison sentence of a maximum of six
months. Of these 68% (4,455) applied. Of these 81% (3,631) were approved. The most common reason for
not granting EM was that the convict did not co-operate in the investigation carried out by the probation
service. Of those approved, 84% (3,061) started the sentence. In all, this means that EM replaced 29% of all
prison sentences of a maximum of six months.
Of those sent to EM, 35% have been previously sentenced to imprisonment.
Front-door EM in Sweden 1.4. 2005-31.3. 2006
• Sentences max 6 months• EM offered• EM applied• EM approved• EM started

10694
6547
4455
3631
3061 = 30 %• EM interrupted• EM reconvicted in 1 year

8-9 %
26 %

The failure rate is around 8-9 %. Practically all interruptions relate either to alcohol or drugs. About 6%of the convicted offenders were forced to quit EM, usually as a result of violations of the ban on drugs or
alcohol, or because they had otherwise broken the rules.
The recidivism rate among EM offenders is extraordinarily low, around 4% (new conviction within one
year, KOS). This, however, reflects to a large extent also the fact that only small risk offenders are accepted.
No updated study on recidivism with a control group has been carried out. An earlier study revealed arecidivism rate in EM group was 26% (any crime within three years) compared with 28% of a control groupwith prisoners (Brå 1999). A cautious interpretation might be that EM does not increase re-offending.
Certain results indicate, in addition, that EM may have a somewhat restraining effect on the tendency torelapse into drunken driving.
Half of the EM sentences are imposed on drunken driving. Other major categories are violent crime 15%
as well as property and drug offences (7-8 % both).

11 For more information: Intensiv-overvakning med elektronisk kontroll, see Brå-reports 1999:4, 2005:8. and 2006:2.

46

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

EM in Sweden 2005 (court statistics)
Drunken Driving 1504
Violence
429
Property
195
Traffic
158
Drugs
193
Sexual offenses
56
Other

351

All

2886

Interview studies indicate that both convicts and their families were positively disposed towards EM. A
majority (two thirds) of victims have a positive view of EM, for example on the grounds that EM allows theoffender to uphold his or her contact to the outside world. A minority of victims expressed the view that thesentence was too lenient. On the other hand this view was not only related to the EM, these victims would
have preferred a longer prison term for the offenders.
As a corrective measure, EM is considerably cheaper than prison. The cost to the correction authorities
for EM is lower than the cost of keeping convicts institutionalized (from SEK500 to SEK850 (Swedish
Krona) less per day). Furthermore, EM yields substantial economic gains for society as well as for theindividual, since the convicted person can usually continue working at his ordinary place of work, thereby
avoiding the loss of income.
Those who served their sentences under EM had a somewhat more favourable social background andcurrent social situation, even with respect to criminality, than the group who of their own volition or on thebasis of the probation service's assessment did not serve their sentences under EM.
2. Other Countries
Denmark started to use EM as front-door option in April 2005. The original idea was to cover 150 prison
places with this option. As the first experience indicated slightly smaller participation, the Danish
government loosened the conditions somewhat. Now all prisoners below the age of 25 (irrespective the typeof crime) and with a sentence of not more than three months may apply to serve the sentence under EM.
Those belonging to this group are sent a written offer for participating in the EM. For those who apply toEM, a personal inquiry report is prepared. To be approved, the offender must fulfil the general conditions
stated above. The enforcement plan, where the offender agrees to all conditions, is prepared with theprobation service. Breaches of these conditions lead the sentence to be commuted back to imprisonment.
The technique in use is basically the same as that in Sweden.
Norway is planning to pass a proposal in spring 2007 on EM. The sanction would substitute prison
sentences of under four months. In Finland, a working group is drafting a proposal on the subject to bepresented for the Ministry of Justice in 2007.

C. EM Release as a Back-door Alternative
1. Sweden
EM is used as a back-door alternative in Sweden, Denmark and Finland. Sweden was also the first to
apply the back-door model. Experiments with EM began in Sweden in 2001. In 2005 this option was madepermanent. At the same also the scope of application was widened. Today, all offenders serving a sentence ofat least 18 months may apply for the possibility to serve the last six months under EM. This means that the
maximum benefit of EM for a prisoner in Sweden consists of the following elements:

47

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Prison term

2 years

Early release after serving 2/3

18 months

EM option

After 18 months, a max 6 months’ EM

Earliest release

Serving 1 year, EM 6 months, normal parole 6 months

The main objective of back-door EM is to reduce levels of re-offending by providing offenders with anopportunity to spend time in the community with more support and control than they would receive
following their conditional discharge from prison.
Statistics shows that over the course of 2005-2006, 1,600 prisoners were released from prison serving asentence of a minimum of 18 months. Of these, 5,000 applied, which is comprises 32% of those released
serving a prison term of at least 18 months. Of these, 80% (400) were granted. Of these 77% (311) started
EM, which corresponds to 20% of the entire group of long-term prison inmates.
Supervision has been fairly intensive. In addition to the control by EM, the clients were also monitored
by means of visits at home, at the workplace and by means of telephone controls. Usually checks wereconducted two to four times per week. In the course of these control visits, breath tests were conductedroutinely, and urine samples were taken on occasion. Only 6% of the clients were in breach of their releaseconditions during the period of electronic monitoring. Again, the main reason was use of alcohol or otherdrugs.
EM-release in Sweden 1.4. 2005-31.3. 2006
All prisoners released serving over 18 mths
• EM applied• EM approved• EM started

1579
502
402
311
= 20 %EM interrupted
8-9 %Reconvicted within 1 year
• Whole EM-goup
11 % (EM) 15 % (Control) n.s.
• Age *-*
6 % (EM) 16 % (Control) sig.

The effects on recidivism were measured with the help of a control group of similar size (260 prisoners).
The groups have been matched in terms of criminal record and the estimated risk for re-offending. Five
different measures of recidivism have been employed: any subsequent conviction, any subsequent prison
sentence, the number of subsequent convictions, the number of offences included in subsequent convictions,and the time-lapse between release and re-conviction. The follow-up period was one year.
11% of EM-released were re-convicted during the follow-up period. The corresponding figure for thecontrol group was 15%. Dividing the samples in sub-groups, the EM group re-offended somewhat later thanthe control group. Due to the low number of cases the difference is not statistically significant. However,when the samples were split in two sub-groups on the basis of age, more marked differences emerged. Oldermembers of the EM-group had a recidivism rate of 6% compared to 16% in the control group. Thisdifference was also statistically significant.
The EM-release group had more favourable backgrounds than other long term inmates. Most of those in
EM-release were first offenders. Virtually none had abused alcohol or other drugs during the six months
immediately preceding the application. They were better educated and were also married or cohabiting to agreater extent. Most had a place of their own to live or lived in a house or flat belonging to a family member.
They also had a forward-looking form of employment, and could support themselves financially as a result of
their own work or studies or a labour market initiative to a greater extent than the others. This all meansthat EM has targeted the ‘safe population’ in terms of success. This is obviously politically easier. However,this may also lead to a situation where support is offered to those least in need, while the more difficult
prisoner groups are left on their own (a dilemma familiar to those working in social services).

48

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

The total impact of EM-release on prisoner rates can be estimated on the basis of the present figures.
The average time for released offenders in EM has been little less than four months. With 300 persons in
EM during one year this means about 100 prisoners in EM-release on any given day. Thus EM-release
reduces the daily prison population by about 100 prisoners.
2. EM-Release with Mobile-Control in Finland
The New Finnish Prison law in 2006 introduced a new form of early release programme “Probationary
Liberty under Supervision.” This new early-release programme is designed especially for long term
prisoners, who need more support and more intensive programmes. Probationary liberty may be available atthe most six months prior to normal conditional release. In Finland first offenders are released routinely
after half of their sentence and the other after two thirds.
The preconditions for probationary liberty are defined in detail in law. They include: 1) probationary
liberty promotes the pre-drafted individual plan for the term of sentence; 2) all information of the prisoner
indicates that the conditions of the probationary liberty will be met; 3) the prisoner abstains from alcohol andsubstance use and agrees to alcohol and substance abuse control.
Supervision is taken care by using electronic monitoring. However, the technique developed in Finlanddiffers from that in most countries. Instead of bracelets attached to the offender’s ankle, each offender under
supervision is given a mobile phone with a GPS detection system. The offender is required to make regularcalls, which also enable the location of the offender’s whereabouts. Prison administration, in turn, makes
random calls with similar results. The method is less stigmatizing and considerably cheaper that the original
EM techniques.

IX. CONCLUDING REMARKS
European sanction policies are characterized by two diverting trends: an increasing use of prison and theadaptation of new community sanctions. The first one reflects the growing punitive and populist trends innational crime policies; the latter seeks to counteract this development by offering more constructive,
rational and humane substitutes to incarceration. The Scandinavian countries have been fairly successful intheir efforts to regulate the number of their prisoner rates.
Combining the lessons from different countries, it may be possible to draft a list of some pre-conditions
for the successful introduction of community sanctions as alternatives to imprisonment.

A. Community Sanctions as Alternatives to Imprisonment?
The key questions are: (1) how to ensure that these sanctions are applied in the first place; (2) how toensure that they come to replace imprisonment (instead of replacing other non-custodial sanctions); and (3)how to uphold and maintain the general credibility of these sanctions. The following list summarizes some of
the main points, developed elsewhere in more detail.
1. Extra barriers should be constructed in order to ensure that the new alternatives are really usedinstead of imprisonment. In most countries, community service seems to substitute prison sentences only inroughly 50% to 60% of cases (Kalmthouth 2000 p.127). This rate can be improved by demanding directly –as is the case in Finland – that only prison sentences may be commuted to community service (leading to a‘replacement rate’ of over 90% in Finland). Another way would be to define new alternatives as modes ofenforcement of prison sentences, as has been done in Sweden with electronic monitoring. The expanding
practices of EM as a condition for earlier release in Scandinavia provides another version of the samearrangement.
2. Effective use of new alternatives and coherent sentencing practices require clear (statutory)
implementation criteria. The courts should be given clear guidance as to when and for whom new sanctions
are to be used. They should also be provided with all the necessary material, including social inquiry reportsthat they need, in order to be able seriously to consider the use of these sanctions. The role and position of
new alternatives in the existing penal system (how they relate to other sanctions) should also be clarified.

49

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

3. The overall success of any community sanction requires resources and proper infrastructure.
Community based sanctions can only be applied within a community orientated infrastructure geared to thespecific requirements of these sanctions. Their implementation is dependent on the existence of anorganization like the probation service. Often co-operation with private, semi-public and public organizations
or institutions is also required. The State and the local communities should provide the necessary resources
and financial support.
4. Supervision, support and swift reactions are needed in order to keep the failure rates down and tomaintain the general credibility of new sanctions. There is a clear relationship between the failure rate andthe quality and intensity of supervision: the less control and supervision, the higher also the dropout rate.
There should also be a clear and consistent practice when the conditions of the sentence are violated.
Varying and sloppy practices create mistrust and resistance on the part of public prosecutors, the judiciaryand the public.
5. New alternatives usually require the offender’s consent and co-operation. Treating the offender not asa passive object of compulsory measures, but as an autonomous person, capable of reasoned choices, is avalue by itself, and as such, it should be encouraged whenever possible. In addition, experience indicates,that explicit and well-informed consent is a highly motivating factor for the offender. Through his or her
consent, the offender has also become committed to the required performance in a manner that gives hopefor good success rates. Arrangements should be made in order to enhance the motivation of the offender for
co-operation and mutual trust.
6. Issues of equality and justice must not be neglected. Community sanctions may often lead todiscrimination, since they are easily used for socially privileged groups of offenders. Accusations of social
discrimination are weighty counter-arguments. Measures must, therefore, be taken in order to shield thesystem from these errors. Clear and precise implementation rules and procedures are one important means
to this end. Another way is to tailor the system of community sanctions to meet the demands of different
offender groups with their different problems. Sweden, for example, has a specific sanction –‘contract
treatment’– for those who suffer from drug or alcoholic addiction as a substitute for short- term prison
sentences. Finland plans to start a similar experiment where emphasis will be placed on using this sanction
for those offenders who are excluded from community service due to their addiction problems.
7. The idea has to be sold over and over again. If it happens that new alternatives prove to be a success,there are no guarantees that this state of affairs will continue by itself. Prosecutors and judges may lose theirconfidence, the enforcement agencies may lose their motivation and the general public may withdraw its
support. Maintaining the general credibility of community sanctions and demonstrating theirappropriateness is an ongoing process which does not end with the adoption of the requisite legislation andthe arrangement of an initial training phase.
The key groups responsible for the implementation of the sanctions must be given constant training andgeneral information of the general benefits of community sanctions and the drawbacks of the wide use ofcustodial sanctions. Taking care of community relations is also important: The community should be
informed of the benefits and crime control potential of community sanctions. Also the value of volunteer
work needs clear recognition. Finally, the practices must be subordinated to impartial scientific evaluation inorder to obtain necessary information for further development.
8. Be aware of net-widening: avoid excessive and cumulative community sanctions and too inflexible
back-up sanctions. The increasing number of community sanctions testifies to their political attractiveness.
Unfortunately, political desire to show both ‘toughness’ and ‘progressive effectiveness’ has lead to excessive
combinations where different elements have been added up. The results may be overly demanding andexcessively severe sentences with high failure rates. The desire to add community sanctions as ‘extra
ingredients’ to custodial sanctions (custody plus) is one example of this. Also, too-demanding community
sanctions (too many hours of community service, unrealistic behavioural restrictions, etc) with too inflexible
backup-sanctioning may easily backfire and lead to increased use of imprisonment.

50

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

B. Punishment and Public Opinion?
We are left with one final obstacle, often referred to in political discussions and public debates: The
punitive demands of the public and the politicians’ need to listen to ‘the voice of the people’.
As it seems, policy choices are been determined more and more by the expressed or assumed demandsof the public. This phenomenon is most visible in those countries with the most dramatic increase inprisoner rates – the UK, New Zealand and the US – but similar signs are to be seen also in other countries.
Due to its increasing importance, public opinion needs to be analysed in much more detail. Such an
examination would reveal that the concept of ‘punitive public opinion’ turns out to be much more
problematic and nuanced than usually assumed. This is largely due to poor research design of regular public
opinion polls. The available space allows only a few comments (see in more detail my third lecture in
UNAFEI Resource Material Series No. 61 (September 2003), “Enhancing the Community Alternatives –Getting the Measures Accepted and Implemented” ).
1. The first fault in opinion polls is oversimplification: simple questions produce punitive responses.
The ways in which attitudes are measured tend to exaggerate popular appetite for punitive measures.
Questions are too vague and too general. As a consequence the respondents fill the gaps of information with
their own imagination which, in turn, is coloured by the information given in the media.
For example, the questions concerning of proper sentencing levels are answered specifically withpersistent or violent criminals in mind, while the clear majority of offenders who appear before the courts,
are poorly educated, unemployed young men charged with property offences. Answers about penalties fordrunk drivers are given with ‘killer drivers in mind,’ while a normal drunk driver (in Scandinavia) issomeone who had too many drinks the night before and got caught in an early morning roadside traffic
control on his or her way to work. If the questions are rephrased to correspond more accurately to the reallife situations, the strength of the punishment decreases.
Questions should be more specific and they should avoid value-laden terms. Asking “are courts toughenough on persistent criminals?” is guaranteed to elicit disagreement from the vast majority of the
population. Including more information and more details in the question, produces much more lenient
responses.
2. The second problem relates to the factual knowledge behind the views expressed in the polls. People,
in general, have poor knowledge on issues related to crime and punishment. More precisely, people
underestimate the factual severity of sanctions, overestimate the effectiveness of criminal sanctions andhave overly pessimistic view of the development of crime. Empirical research, further, shows that those whoknow less of the facts of crime and crime control also have the highest fears and most punitive demands(Hough & Roberts 1998).
In other words:• people, in general, think that crime is rapidly rising, when it is not;• offenders are receiving much more lenient sentences than they actually do; and• tougher sentences are an effective means of preventing crime, which they are not.
This leaves us with the difficult question, how should we react to public demands, which, on allprobability are based on mistaken facts and assumptions. After all, in these cases we may well conclude that
if people would have had correct information of the facts then they would also had shown different views on
the appropriate penalties.
3. The third problem deals with the alternatives presented for the respondents in these polls. Opinion
polls ask usually only people’s opinions on punishments, as if punishments were the only alternative society
has on its disposal. Again, there is evidence that once people are provided with also other measures, thepopularity of punishment quickly starts to decline.
If one is worried about juvenile crime and the only alternative offered is punishment, it should be nowonder if people in general need more to be ‘done’ (in this case, more punishments to be delivered). But if

51

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

other alternatives are offered, such as are giving more support for parents to raise their children, andresources for schools to improve teaching, as contrasted with the building of more (expensive) prisons, mostsensible people would have no difficulties in making other kinds of choices.
4. Putting this all together: the way public appetite for punishment is presented portrays a far too onesided and much too punitive picture of people’s true views and feelings. Carefully designed studies showthat public opinion is much more complex and nuanced than is generally assumed. Many people havesophisticated views about punishment; many are ambivalent about the appropriate response to offending.
Whilst the majority think that the courts are generally too soft, majorities also tend to recognize that prison
is expensive and damaging (Hough & Roberts 2001).
One interesting finding relates close to the idea of community sanctions. People are ready to forgive evenserious crimes, if the offender is willing to change. There is an element of ‘forgiveness and redemption’, anidea that people must be given a second chance, if they are willing to make a honest effort. And this may bemuch closer to our own experiences of how people really think, compared to affirmative answers given to
simple question such as, should there be more punishment -and more pain- in this world.

52

METHODS OF DIVERSION USED BY THE PROSECUTIONSERVICES IN THE NETHERLANDS AND OTHER WESTERNEUROPEAN COUNTRIES
Dr. Peter J.P. Tak*I. INTRODUCTION
One remarkable feature of present day criminal law enforcement in the Netherlands is that only a small
percentage of all the crimes recorded by the police are actually tried by a criminal court. Although thenumber of registered crimes increased more than fivefold between 1970 and 2005, the number of cases triedin court merely doubled.
One important reason for the discrepancy between the number of registered crimes and crimes tried by
the courts is that public expenditure for the law enforcement agencies at large has not kept pace with therising crime rate. Consequently, the police have been increasingly forced, because of resource
considerations, to fix priorities in detecting and investigating cases. This is clearly illustrated by the sharp
decline in cases which are solved. Between 1970 and 2005, the percentage of all registered crimes whichwere cleared up fell dramatically from 41% to 19%.
A second reason why relatively few cases are tried by criminal courts is that an increasing number ofcases are settled out of court by the prosecution service. While this movement originally was driven byefforts to socialize, humanize and rationalize the administration of criminal justice, the emphasis has
increasingly shifted towards the need to reduce the pressure on the criminal law administration. One
consequence has been that the prosecution service has been gradually allocated adjudicatory powers, whichwere formerly the exclusive domain of the judiciary.
The prosecution service plays a pivotal role in the administration of criminal justice. That role derives
from the prosecution service’s power over the police, its prosecution monopoly and the expediency principle
underlying its decisions on (non-)prosecution.
When utilizing these powers the prosecution service exercises discretion. The discretionary
prosecutorial power has been considerably expanded over the past twenty years in the Netherlands, both inlaw and in practice.
The police do not make an official report of every established offence, but may confine themselves todismissal with a warning, or to the issuing of a formal caution. They, too, have discretionary powers. This
practice is not based on an explicit provision in the law. On the contrary, the law contains the principle thatthe making of an official report by the police is obligatory. The discretionary powers exercised by the police
are derived from the discretionary powers of the public prosecutor not to prosecute.
The department of public prosecutors can issue general and special directives on the detection andinvestigation of the entire range of offences. Obviously, it is impossible to detect and investigate all crimes.
Thus, priorities have to be established. Investigative activities must be concentrated on certain types ofcrime, while police activities in respect of other types of crime will have a low priority.
The detection and investigation policy of the police and the prosecution policy of the public prosecutor
are complementary. In respect of the investigation of criminal offences, all investigating police officers are
subject to the prosecution service. Formally, the public prosecutor is the senior investigator (Sects. 148 CCP
and 13 Police Act). In practice, however, the police deal with most cases without prior consultation with the
public prosecutor, except in more important criminal cases, where they may give detailed instructions.
* Professor of Law, Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

53

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Otherwise, consultation takes place at a more abstract level, in order to determine the policy for theinvestigation of certain types of crime and for the use of special investigation methods (undercover agents,
infiltrators etc.). This is due to the rather restricted strength of the prosecution service as well as to therecognition that with regard to investigative techniques and tactics the police possess more expertise thanthe prosecution service.

II. THE FILTER FUNCTION OF THE PROSECUTION SERVICE
The present report deals with the ‘filter function’ of the prosecution service. It is concerned with theextent of the service’s discretionary powers to divert a case out of the formal flow of criminal justice.
The prosecution service generally receives its cases from the police. Many offences, primarily petty
cases, do not come to the attention of the police and in fact remain outside the criminal justice system
entirely, to be absorbed by society.
This is also the case when the prosecution service decides to waive a case and not to proceed further
with it. Thus, although such acts deviate from the norms of acceptable social behaviour, and go beyond theboundaries of tolerance set by society for acts and actions, society is nevertheless able to deal with such acts
without formal legal procedure. Society is capable of absorbing some types of crime without harm.
The offence can also be dealt with outside formal court procedures. For example, the offence can bediverted to a settlement or reconciliation between the victim and the offender, without the further
involvement of the criminal justice system.
Other such methods include the use of a caution, an oral or a written admonition, a transaction, a
simplified procedure, a referral to legal bodies other than the criminal courts, and various other forms ofdiversion. These methods aim at diverting the suspect out of the criminal justice system at the earliest
possible stage. Once such an alternative method has been applied in a case, prosecution can no longer takeplace.
The extent to which the prosecution service diverts cases away from the criminal justice system
primarily depends on the legal basis for the prosecutorial power.
Two basic principles provide the basis for prosecutorial policies: the legality principle, and theopportunity principle (the expediency principle).
The primary premise of the legality principle is that prosecution must take place in all cases in which
sufficient evidence exists of the guilt of a suspect, and in which no legal hindrances prohibit prosecution.
The principle of opportunity, on the other hand, does not demand compulsory prosecution. Instead, it
allows the prosecution service discretion over the prosecutorial decision, even when proof exists as to theoccurrence of the criminal offence and the identity of the offender, and when there is no legal hindrance bar
proceeding with the matter.
In the Netherlands, the expediency principle has only recently (1926) been expressed in the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
Section 167 subs. 2 of the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure reads: “the public prosecutor shall decide toprosecute when prosecution seems to be necessary on the basis of the result of the investigations.
Proceedings can be dropped on grounds of public interest”.
In the Netherlands the alternatives to prosecution are diverse but two major methods of diversion areused by the prosecution service: non-prosecution and transaction, which will be discussed.

A. Non-Prosecution
The prosecution service may decide not to prosecute in a case where a prosecution would probably notlead to a conviction, due to lack of evidence or for technical considerations (technical or procedural waiver).

54

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

The prosecution may also decide not to prosecute under the expediency principle. The expediency
principle laid down in Section 167 CCP authorizes the prosecution service to waive (further) prosecution“for reasons of public interest”.
In appropriate cases, the prosecutor can decide to suspend prosecution conditionally. The suspended nonprosecution has no statutory footing, and is therefore theoretically dubious, but it is generally accepted thatthe prosecution service is allowed to suspend a prosecution. Explicit general or special conditions for asuspended prosecution do not exist, but in practice the prosecutor imposes conditions similar to theconditions attached to a suspended sentence.
To harmonize the utilization of this discretionary power the top of the prosecution service, the Board of
Prosecutors-General, issued national prosecution guidelines. Public prosecutors were directed to follow
these guidelines except when special circumstances in an individual case were spelled out.
Under these guidelines, a public prosecutor could waive prosecution for reasons of public interest if, forexample:• a response other than penal measures or sanctions is preferable, or would be more effective (e.g.
disciplinary, administrative or civil measures);• prosecution would be disproportionate, unjust or ineffective in relation to the nature of the offence(e.g. if the offence caused no harm and it was inexpedient to inflict punishment);• prosecution would be disproportionate, unjust or ineffective for reasons related to the offender (e.g.
his age or health, rehabilitation prospects, first offender);• prosecution would be contrary to the interests of the State (e.g. for reasons of security, peace andorder, or if new applicable legislation has been introduced);• prosecution would be contrary to the interests of the victim (e.g. compensation has already beenpaid).
The grounds for non-prosecution due to technicalities may be:• wrongly registered as suspect by the police;• insufficient legal evidence for a prosecution;• inadmissibility of a prosecution;• the court does not have legal competence over the case;• the act does not constitute a criminal offence; and• the offender is not criminally liable due to a justification or excuse defence.
Public prosecutors are not obliged to motivate their decisions not to prosecute due to technicalities ordue to policy considerations. They are, however, obliged to categorize their decisions under one of thereasons or grounds for non-prosecution previously mentioned. This categorization is no guarantee of a
uniform application of the reasons for non-prosecution. However, it provides information on the prosecution
policy pursued in each of the nineteen prosecutorial jurisdictions and provides insight into the difference inthese prosecution policies. It is one of the means to harmonize these prosecution policies.
In 2000, the proportion of unconditional waivers on policy considerations was relatively high.
Approximately 14% of all crimes cleared were not further prosecuted for policy reasons. The rationale wasthat prosecution should not be automatic, but should serve a concrete social objective. Such a highproportion of waivers on policy grounds was seriously criticized. The prosecution service was instructed toreduce the number of unconditional waivers by making more frequent use of conditional waivers, reprimands
or transactions.
Today the percentage of unconditional policy waivers has dropped to around 3%.
The decrease in the percentage of unconditional waivers did not lead to an increase in the number ofcases tried by a criminal court. This is because an increasing number of cases were either waived
conditionally or settled out of court with a transaction.

B. Transaction
Transaction can be considered a form of diversion in which the offender voluntarily pays a sum of money
to the Treasury, or fulfils one or more (financial) conditions laid down by the prosecution service in order to55

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

avoid further criminal prosecution and a public trial.
The opportunity to settle criminal cases by way of a transaction has long existed. Until 1983 thisopportunity to settle a case financially was exclusively reserved for misdemeanours in principle punishable
only with a fine. Following the recommendations of the Financial Penalties Committee, the Financial
Penalties Act of 1983 expanded the scope of transactions to include crimes which carry a statutory prison
sentence of less than six years (Sect. 74 CC).
The restriction that the transaction is excluded for crimes carrying a statutory prison sentence exceeding
six years has a limited impact. The overwhelming majority of crimes carry a statutory prison sentence ofless than six years.
The following conditions may be set for a transaction:a. the payment of a sum of money to the State, the amount being not less than €3 and not more thanthe maximum of the statutory fine;b. renunciation of title to objects that have been seized and that are subject to forfeiture or confiscation;c. the surrender of objects subject to forfeiture or confiscation, or payment to the State of theirassessed value;d. the payment in full to the State of a sum of money or transfer of objects seized to deprive theaccused, in whole or in part, of the estimated gains acquired by means of or derived from thecriminal offence, including the saving of costs;
e. full or partial compensation for the damage caused by the criminal offence;f. the performance of non-remunerated work or taking part in a training course lasting 120 hours.
Acceptance of the public prosecutor’s offer to settle a case financially out of court is, as a rule, beneficial
for the offender: he or she avoids a public trial, the transaction is not registered in the criminal record, andhe or she is no longer uncertain about the sentence. On the other hand, by accepting the transaction he or
she gives up the right to be sentenced by an independent court with all legal guarantees (Sect. 6 ECHR).
The almost unlimited power given to the prosecution service in 1983 to settle criminal cases by atransaction without the intervention of a court has been strongly criticized. The most important criticism
was that the increased transaction opportunities introduced a kind of plea bargaining system, represented areal breach of the theory of the separation of powers, undermined the legal protection of the accused,favoured certain social groups, and entrusted the prosecution service with powers which should remain
reserved for the judiciary. Furthermore, it was feared that with nearly ninety percent of all crimes brought
within the sphere of the transaction, the public criminal trial, with its protections for the accused, would
become the exception and not the rule.
Despite this criticism, the introduction of the broadened transaction was a great success. More than one
third of all crimes dealt with by the prosecution service are now settled out of court by a transaction. This is
in line with the criminal policy plan, which formulated the target that one-third of all prosecuted crimes besettled by way of a transaction.
Transactions for crimes seem to be very popular both for the prosecution service and the offender. Theysave the prosecution service and the offender time, energy and expenses and furthermore protect theoffender against stigmatization. Quite often high transaction sums for environmental crimes committed bycorporations are accepted in order to avoid negative publicity.
To minimize the risk of arbitrariness and lack of uniformity in the application of transactions, the Board of
Prosecutors-General has over the years issued guidelines for the common crimes for which transaction ismost frequently used, relating to the principles to be taken into consideration regarding transaction andprosecution.
The role of the prosecution service in the Netherlands has changed considerably in the last decades.
Increasingly, the prosecution service has been vested with dispositionary powers. Whenever a prosecutor
dismisses a case under conditions or settles a case through a transaction, the decisions of the publicprosecutor are similar to the decisions of the judge.

56

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

So far these have been the Dutch experiences with processes aimed at avoiding the need to go to trial.
Some of these processes have a beneficial effect on the reduction of the prison population but the main aimof the development of these processes was to reduce the caseload of the courts.
In the second part of this report I will deal with the experiences of diverting cases in other prosecutorialservices in continental Europe.

III. PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION IN EUROPE
As you may know, there are more than 50 States in continental Europe, each with its own criminal
procedural law system. In almost each one of these criminal procedural law systems there are processes
aimed at avoiding the need to go to trial; in short, diversion processes are applied.
Dealing with all these countries and with all the various diversion processes would lead to a very lengthy
text or almost to a book. Therefore I have selected some European countries whose systems in particular
are interesting. The selected countries are Austria, England and Wales, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, andSweden.
In England and Wales the Crown Prosecution Service has a wide discretionary power to divert cases fromcourt. The system of England and Wales in particular is interesting because unlike in other European
criminal justice systems, the Crown Prosecution Service has a weak position, compared to the police,
concerning settlements out of court or diversion.
The second group of systems I would like to deal with are the French and Finnish systems, in conjunction
with the Italian system, where criminal mediation and various ways of imposing penalties without a court
trial have been developed.
Other major criminal justice systems in Europe are German procedural law oriented systems like thesystems of Sweden, Austria and Germany itself. It is interesting to see that in these systems little diversion
is known, with the exception of Austria which has recently developed a comprehensive package of new
diversion measures.
This makes a total of seven criminal justice systems to address. As we will see, there is a large variety ofdiversion processes.

A. England and Wales
Let us start with England and Wales.1 England and Wales have a common law-based adversarial criminal
justice system, in contrast with most European systems which are civil law-based inquisitorial systems. The
police have complete discretion regarding prosecution decisions and can independently decide not toprosecute or to prosecute. In the latter case, prosecution is carried out by the Crown Prosecution Service,established in 1985. The CPS may continue the prosecution or may drop it. Both the police and the CPS may
divert a case from court through a caution.
Under which conditions may the CPS or the police divert a case and what are the criteria for diversion?
The preconditions and criteria for diversion have been modified by recent legislation (Sect. 23 CJA 2003).
The first requirement is that the authorized person has evidence that the offender has committed an offence.
The second requirement is that a relevant prosecutor decides:a) that there is sufficient evidence to charge the offender with the offence; andb) that a conditional caution should be given to the offender in respect of the offence.
The third requirement is that the offender admits to the authorized person that he or she committed theoffence.
The fourth requirement is that the authorized person explains the effect of the conditional caution to the
1 See J. Sprack, Emmins on Criminal Procedure, Oxford University Press 2004, p. 64 ff.

57

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

offender and warns him or her that failure to comply with any of the conditions attached to the caution may
result in being prosecuted for the offence.
The fifth requirement is that the offender signs a document which contains:a) details of the offence;b) an admission by him or her that he or she committed the offence;c) his or her consent to being given the conditional caution; andd) the conditions attached to the caution.
These pre-conditions are intended to ensure that, because a caution is a statement of guilt (which can becited in court), the offender really is guilty and would be convicted if prosecuted. They are due process
safeguards, intended to inhibit the police from cautioning whenever they adjudge a suspect to be guilty but
they cannot, or would rather not, collect sufficient evidence to support a prosecution.
Caution is in England and Wales the most frequently used method of diverting a case from court. It isapplied on a very large scale. Almost 30% of all suspects are cautioned by the police. What is the position of
the CPS in this situation?
One of the functions of the CPS is to exercise control over the ‘public interest’ dimension ofprosecutions, although it cannot do anything about cases which were cautioned by the police when theyshould have been prosecuted. Indeed, the police can even tie the hands of the CPS by promising that a casewill be dropped. Although discontinuance is the prerogative of the CPS alone, it has been held to be an abuseof process for prosecution to be continued after a promise, even from the police, that it will be dropped (R v
Croden Justice ex p Dean, 1993, QB 769). In this case the ‘deal’ was discontinuance in exchange for thesuspect giving evidence for the prosecution in a murder trial. This illustrates both the structurally weak
position of the CPS compared to the police, and the way the police use prosecution and non-prosecution inthe ‘public interest’ as part of broader policing strategies.
The CPS can, in principle, ensure that cautionable cases are not prosecuted by discontinuing them.
Nearly one-third of discontinuances are on ‘public interest’ grounds. However, the CPS only rarely
recommends that a caution be substituted. A realistic view of the proportion of cases discontinued by the
CPS that should be cautioned by the police on public interest grounds (rather than marked for prosecution)
would be somewhere between around 6% and a third.
How is the substantial number of ‘public interest’ discontinuances to be explained? Well over half of them
are because a nominal penalty is expected, the defendant is charged with other serious offences or theoffence is in some other way too trivial to be prosecuted. At a time of managerial-style constraints on public
expenditure, Crown Prosecutors have become increasingly focused on issues of cost-effectiveness inprosecutions.

B. Finland and France
In Finland and France mediation is widely applied as settlement out of court but in both countries
mediation has a very different meaning.
1. Finland
In Finland some 5,000 cases annually are referred to mediation and about half of these cases have been
sent to mediation by the prosecutor.
Mediation has been used since 1983, starting from local experiments and slowly expanding from there.
However, the system does not cover the whole country. Today, all towns with a population over 25,000 andmost over 10,000 offer mediation services. Eighty percent of Finns live in a municipality that has an agency
for mediation.
Mediation does not form part of the criminal justice system but co-operates with the system as far as thereferral of cases and their further processing is concerned. There is no legislation on the organization ofmediation, but plans and proposals are being prepared. The Criminal Code has also been revised recently, sothat it now mentions an agreement or settlement between the offender and the victim as a possible ground58

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

for non-prosecution, non-punishment by the court or mitigation of the sentence.
Mediation is based on volunteer work. Participation in mediation is always voluntary for all the parties.
The municipal social welfare authorities usually assist in co-ordinating the mediation services, but mediators
are not considered public officials.
Mediation can start at any time between the committing of the offence and the execution of the sentence,and can be initiated by any one of the possible parties. Three-quarters of all cases are referred to mediation
either by the prosecutor (44%) or by the police (30%).
In cases where the initiative for mediation comes from the prosecutor, he or she sends the case to themediation office with an announcement that the decision whether or not to prosecute will be made within ashort period of time (usually one to three months). In other respects, the prosecutor remains fairly passive
during the mediation process.
Once the process has started, it normally leads to a written contract. The contract contains the type ofoffence, the content of a settlement, e.g. how the offender has consented to repair the damages, place anddate of the restitution as well as the consequences for a breach of the contract.
2. France
In France,2 the law of 4 January 1993 created the médiation pénale. There are two kinds of mediation:
one for crimes and another for misdemeanours. Since the law of 23 June 1999, Sect. 41-1 CCP states that:
Where it appears that such a measure is likely to secure reparation for the damage suffered by the victim, or
to put an end to the disturbance resulting from the offence or contribute to the reintegration of the offender,
the district prosecutor may, directly or by delegation:1) bring the duties imposed by law to the attention of the offender;2) direct the offender towards a health, social or professional organization;3) require the offender to regularize his situation under any law or regulation;4) require the offender to make good the damage caused by the offence;5) with the consent of the parties, initiate mediation between the offender and the victim.
The 1999 law created another system called composition pénale as mediation for misdemeanours (Sects.
41-2 and 41-3 CCP). This is not a kind of mediation in the strict sense but a kind of financial settlement outof court as also is known in the Netherlands under the technical term ‘transaction’.
Section 41-2 CCP states that prior to any public prosecution being instituted, the district prosecutor may
propose, directly or through an authorized person, criminal mediation to an adult person who admits having
committed one or more designated misdemeanours such as destruction, domestic violence and abuse oftrust. This would involve one or more of the following orders:
1) to pay to the Public Treasury a mediation fine. The amount of such a mediation fine, which may notexceed either €3,750 or half of the amount of the maximum fine for the offence, is fixed inaccordance with the gravity of the facts as well as the income and expenses of the offender. Payment
may be made by instalments, in accordance with a schedule of payments fixed by the district
prosecutor, within a period which may not exceed one year;2) to hand over to the State the object which was used to or intended to be used to commit the offence
or which is the product of it;3) to surrender a driving licence for a maximum period of six months, or a permit to hunt for a
maximum period of four months to the clerk’s office of the first instance court;4) to perform unpaid work for the benefit of the community for a maximum of sixty hours, over a period
which may not exceed six months or to follow training within a health, social or professionalorganization for three months maximum.
Where the victim is identified, the district prosecutor must propose to the offender that he or she
compensates the damage caused by his or her offence, unless the offender can show that the damage has
already been compensated. The prosecutor must require that this happens within a period which may notexceed six months. He or she informs the victim of this proposal.
2 See J. Pradel, Procedure Pénale, Editions Cujas, 13 édition, 2006.

59

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The district prosecutor’s proposal for criminal mediation may be brought to the attention of the offenderthrough a judicial police officer. Here it takes the form of a written decision signed by the prosecutor, which
specifies the nature and the measures proposed and which is endorsed on the file.
Criminal mediation may be proposed in a public centre for legal advice. The person to whom criminal
mediation is proposed is informed that he or she may be assisted by a lawyer before giving his or her
consent to the district prosecutor’s proposal. This consent is recorded in an official record. A copy of theofficial record is given to the offender.
Where the offender consents to the measures proposed, the district prosecutor addresses the Presidentof the Tribunal de Grande Instance by way of a petition seeking approval of the mediation. The district
prosecutor informs the offender of this and, where necessary, the victim. The President of the Tribunal may
proceed to hear the offender and the victim, assisted, where necessary, by their lawyers. The decision of the
President of the Tribunal de Grande Instance, which is notified to the offender and, where necessary, thevictim, is not open to appeal.
Where the offender does not accept mediation or, after having given his or her consent, does not fullycomply with the measures decided upon, or where the approval required is not given, the district prosecutor
decides what further action to take. In the case of prosecution and conviction, account is taken, whereappropriate, of the work already accomplished and sums already paid by the offender.
Prosecution is suspended between the dates when the district prosecutor proposes criminal mediationand the expiry of the time granted for the mediation to be carried out.
Successful completion of criminal mediation terminates prosecution.
Finally, the law of 9 March 2004 created a French kind of plea bargaining. This principle is contained in
Sect. 137 and the procedure of plea bargaining in the Sects. 495-7 to 495-16 CCP. According to this Section,
the offender can ask for the use of this procedure. The public prosecutor receives the offender’s declarationof guilt and proposes a penalty to him or her:
if he or she accepts, the judge can approve the penalty and his or her decision will be read during apublic hearing. If the judge refuses to approve the punishment, the public prosecutor will theninitiate prosecution according to the normal rules;
the offender should have ten days to give an answer to the public prosecutor;
if the offender refuses, the public prosecutor can present the offender in court or before the liberty
and custody judge.

C. Italy
Similar diversionary measures have been developed in the 1988 Code of Criminal Procedure of Italy3
which has been a model for many diversionary measures in other Codes of Criminal Procedure in Europe.
In Italy, according Sect. 112 of the Constitution, the prosecutor is obliged to prosecute whenever there issufficient evidence to charge the offender. According to this section the prosecutor has no other choice thanprosecution or dismissal due to lack of evidence. It follows that the prosecutor cannot be vested with theright to settle a case out of court. Nevertheless room for discretion of the prosecutor is left with regard to
the cases in which the penalty can be imposed without trial: the sentence agreement (patteggiamento) andthe penal order (procedimento per decreto).
The sentence agreement consists of an agreement between the prosecutor and the offender on thesentence to be imposed. This form of diversion is characterized by an exchange between a sentence
discount and the defendant’s waiver of the right to stand trial. In other words, by means of a sentence
discount, the accused is encouraged to waive his or her right to have his or her case dealt with in a public
trial. This saves time and expense for the system. Since the policy criteria according to which the prosecutor
should give his or her consent are not defined by the law, the decision depends on his or her choice, which is
not always based only on technical reasons. Anyway, it is important to underline that, once the parties have
3 See G. Conso/V. Grevi, Compendio di Procedura Penale, 3a Editione, CEDAM, Padova 2006.

60

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

reached an agreement, the judge must verify whether the conditions to pronounce the requested sentence
have been met.
There are three prerequisites for this proceeding without trial: the request of one party (prosecutor or
defendant), the consent of the other party, and judicial supervision. In order to reach an agreement, theinitiative can be taken both by the prosecutor and the defendant. If the request is made by the defendant, it isnecessary to get the consent of the prosecutor and vice versa. The request must express the will of ending
the proceeding with a sentence, the contents of which must be specified. In particular, the parties must
indicate the legal basis of the offence, the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and their balancing, thetype and level of penalty.
The penalty may be a fine, a non-custodial sanction or a custodial sanction. The defendant’s request orconsent can be tied to the pronouncement of a suspended sentence. In any case, the sanction is to be
reduced up to a maximum of one-third as regards the applicable one, provided that the sentence does notexceed five years’ imprisonment; but, if the sentence exceeds two years’ imprisonment, the patteggiamento is not admitted for Mafia crimes and organized crime. Once the request has been made by one party,
the other party must declare to accept it.
Of course, neither the prosecutor nor the defendant is bound by the other party’s request. Nevertheless,
it is important to underline that the prosecutor’s dissent, unlike the defendant’s, shall be justified.
In order to avoid the collapse of the trial and a useless waste of time and expense, the request shall bemade and the consent be given during the investigation stage or at the latest within the preliminary hearing;it can be said that the law presses the parties to reach an agreement at the earliest stage, as that allows the
maximum saving for the system.
Once the parties have reached an agreement concerning the appropriate level of penalty, the judge mustverify whether there are the conditions to pronounce the requested sentence or not. The powers of thejudge are substantial.
First, he or she must check that there is sufficient evidence. Otherwise, the accused must be acquitted
ex officio, notwithstanding his or her request or his or her consent to be sentenced. It means that theagreement between the parties is not exactly like a plea bargain. In fact, the defendant is not required toplead guilty, as his or her request to be sentenced, or his or her consent to the prosecutor’s request, does
not involve a guilty plea.
Secondly, the judge must verify that the charge corresponds to the facts alleged; that the application of
the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and their balancing have a legal basis; that the requested
penalty does not exceed five years’ imprisonment and its level is commensurate with the seriousness of theoffence.
Only if both tests are satisfied does the judge pronounce the requested sentence, otherwise, unless there
are conditions for an acquittal, the judge rejects the request and the proceeding will continue.
If the request is granted, the agreed sentence is imposed. The judge can refuse to impose the sentence
but cannot change it.
A trial is also avoided when the proceeding ends with the issuing of a penal order to pay a fine(procedimento per decreto).
There are two conditions required by law. Firstly, the offence shall be prosecuted ex officio. Secondly, thefine must be commensurate with the actual offence.
If the prosecutor considers these conditions met, he or she may request the judge to issue such a penal
order. The request shall be motivated and shall indicate the level of the fine, which can be reduced up to one
half of the minimum fixed by law.

61

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

As in the case of the sentence agreement the judge must check the sufficiency of the evidence and verify
that the charge corresponds to the alleged facts and that the fine is commensurate with the seriousness ofthe offence.
Only if both tests are satisfied the judge pronounces the penal order as requested by the prosecutor. The
judge has no power to change it. The order shall contain the charge and a reasoned motivation for thedecision, including those related to the penalty discount.
The order is notified to the accused, who instead of paying the fine can ask to be tried in a public court
trial.
Let us now turn to the systems which are German procedural law oriented and start with Germany4
itself.

D. Germany
Leaving the ample option of conditional dismissal (Sects. 153a ff CCP) aside, the German prosecutor has
no authority to settle the case with a suspect or defendant out of court. The prosecutor is neverthelessfrequently involved in negotiations designed to dispose of a criminal case by consent. Such negotiations withthe defence can occur in the context of preparing a penal order (Strafbefehl), i.e., a written judgment draftedby the prosecutor and issued by the court without a hearing (Sect. 407 CCP). Penal orders can be used for
adjudicating Vergehen when the sanction consists of a fine, the suspension of a driver’s licence, and/or asuspended prison sentence of not more than one year. The defendant’s prior consent is not required, but heor she can make the penal order ineffective by filing an appeal and demanding a trial. It is therefore useful, atleast in non-routine cases, for the prosecution and the defence to discuss the possible sanction in advanceand to make sure that the defendant will accept the penal order. Many defendants are strongly interested inhaving their cases resolved without a public trial, and defence lawyers then approach the prosecutor in
charge of the case and raise the possibility of a penal order. Especially in cases where there is a white-collar
defendant, there can be extensive negotiations before a penal order acceptable to all sides is drafted andsubmitted to the court. Courts have the authority to reject a proposed penal order and order a trial but very
rarely do so.
Prosecutors are also involved in negotiating consensual judgements before, or during, trial. Since the1980s, a German version of plea bargaining has developed and quickly proliferated although there is no legal
basis for it. The Federal Court of Appeal in 1997 effectively approved of the practice if certain conditions aremet (Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Strafsachen, Band 43, p. 195). In many cases, defence
counsel and the court engage in negotiations either in advance of a contested trial, or when the trial has
progressed to some extent, with a view toward finding an amicable settlement, the defendant offering a(partial) confession and the court indicating its willingness to impose a lenient sentence. Although thesenegotiations are conducted mainly between the defence and the professional judge(s), the prosecutor usuallytakes part and in effect has a veto power. If he or she decides to file an appeal against a negotiated judgment
he or she can negate most of the efficiency benefits associated with the proposed ‘deal’. This kind ofnegotiated justice has been heavily criticized by scholars but has been embraced by practitioners. ‘Deals’
occur in all kinds of cases, most frequently in drug and white-collar cases. This, however, is not a process
aimed at avoiding the need to go to trial and the conclusion is that in Germany there is little opportunity tosettle cases out of court.

E. Sweden
The same is applicable to Sweden. Like Germany, in Swedish law, the principle of legality is applied, butthere are many exceptions to this principle.
The prosecution service has possibilities to waive prosecution or to terminate a case, more or lesssimilar to those in Germany. All possibilities are based on the absence of public interest to prosecute orwhere prosecution would be in conflict with public interest, for example: if continued inquiry would incur
costs not in reasonable proportion in relation to the importance of the matter and the offence, if prosecuted,
would not lead to a penalty more severe than a fine. Like in Germany, in Sweden a kind of penal order isknown but applied in a different way.
4 See L. Meyer-Gossner, Strafprozessordnung, in Beck’sche Kurz-Kommentare, 47. Auflage, 2005.

62

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

According to chapter 48 Sect. 1 – 12a CJP, a prosecutor may impose a punishment on the suspect bymeans of a summary penal order (strafföreläggande). A summary penal order means that the suspect is,
subject to his or her approval, ordered to pay a fine according to what the prosecutor considers the offence
deserves. A summary penal order may even concern a conditional sentence or such a sanction coupled witha fine. The conditional sentence according to the Swedish law differs from the punishments with similarnames in other legal systems.
The summary penal order may be used as a sentencing form as regards all the offences in respect ofwhich fines are included in the range of penalties. There are no limits as to the severity of the fine, whichmeans that the prosecutor may impose the same sum as permitted by a court. A conditional sentence may
be imposed even for more serious offences, which is for offences which do not have fine in the range ofpenalties, but only imprisonment, provided that it is obvious that the particular offence does not deserve amore severe punishment than a conditional sentence.
The summary penal order may also include a decision on compensation of damages to the victim of thecrime, that is, a decision on a civil law matter, provided that the compensation consists of a payment.
The summary penal order is a final decision in a particular case and has the same validity andconsequences as a judgment of the court. It may be issued only if the offender confesses to the offence andaccepts the order. Otherwise, the prosecutor has to bring the case to court after all.
There is no legal possibility for a settlement out of court in Swedish law. Something which could be called
the first step in this direction is perhaps represented by the Mediation Act 2002 (Lag, 2002:445, om medling
med anledning av brott). The Act contains basic rules concerning mediation between victim and offender. A
possible agreement on compensation for damages, reached on the basis of mediation, cannot replace a
sentence for the crime. However, the fact that the offender has undergone mediation may influence thedecision of the prosecutor in waiving prosecution. The prosecution service itself is not engaged in mediation
activity.

F. Austria
Unlike Germany and Sweden, Austria5 in 2000 reformed the Code of Criminal Procedure and introduced
a comprehensive package of new diversion measures to be applied under general criminal law.
Diversion as understood in Austria means the early termination of criminal proceedings by the publicprosecutor or the court, in minor or, at least, less severe cases. Diversion is possible from the moment the
public prosecutor has official knowledge of the offence, until the end of the main trial. Laws do not allow
diversion by the police. The main agent in the field of diversion is the public prosecutor, but it may also be
applied or offered by the court.
I concentrate on diversion by the public prosecutor because this report deals with measures enabling the
avoidance of a court trial.
Legal prerequisites for application of diversion are:the crime in question is not a petty offence and also not one requiring traditional criminal penalties in
the interest of special and general prevention;
the offence has to fall within the jurisdiction of the district court or of the single judge at the regional
court (Landesgericht); this basically means that the offence is to be sanctioned by not more than five
years of confinement;
the offence falls under the remit of the public prosecutor;
crimes resulting in fatalities are excluded from diversion;
the guilt of the suspect should not be severe;
the public prosecutor deems the circumstances of the case clear and settled with no outstanding
evidence; andthe suspect should voluntarily accept the diversion offer.

5 See E.E. Fabrizy, Die Österreichische Strafprozessordnung, Manz Verlag, Wien 2004, p. 173-198.

63

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The CCP provides four different measures of diversion:• payment of an amount of money (diversion fine);• community service;• determination of a probationary period (1-2 years) possibly combined with supervision of theprobationer and/or the compliance with obligations; and• victim offender mediation (which actually means out of court conflict resolution).
According to the CCP, the consent of the victim is an essential precondition for Victim Offender Mediation(VOM). This declaration of consent, however, is not necessary if it is refused on grounds that are not to betaken into consideration within criminal proceedings, like retribution or revenge.
Conflict resolution is carried out by specially trained social workers (mediators). The mediator informs
the public prosecutor about the progress made as well as about the outcome of the conflict resolution. The
decision whether the VOM has been successful as a prerequisite for the waiver of the prosecution, has again
to be made by the prosecutor. The public prosecutor does not demand in advance a specific procedure or a
specific outcome of the VOM. The participants, as well as the mediators, are free to decide upon their way ofsolving the conflict. Apart from the monetary payment, VOM is the only diversion measure where the publicprosecutor may additionally require the payment of a lump sum up of up to €145,-.
To stress the importance of restorative elements within criminal proceedings, the Austrian legislature
has decided that the other diversion measures (the diversion fine, community service and the probationary
period) must be combined with a compensation order.

IV. CONCLUSION
As we have seen, there exists a large set of diversionary measures in the various procedural criminal law
legislations of the Western European countries. The main aim of these diversionary measures is to reducethe caseload of the courts by avoiding court trials for trivial or less severe criminal cases. It gives criminal
courts more room for an in-depth investigation of the truth at the court session in the most serious cases.
Many of the diversionary measures also aim to serve as an alternative to imprisonment. This is inparticular the case for diversionary measures such as mediation, community service, financial settlement or
the order to participate in a training course which in many systems can be imposed by the public prosecutor
or which may be proposed by the public prosecutor and imposed by a judge in a non-full-fledged court
procedure.
In many cases indeed diversionary measures may lead to a reduction of the prison population but it isdifficult, if not impossible, to determine whether these non-custodial sanctions actually have this function.
Other circumstances such as increased crime could lead to more, and to more severe, prison sentences sothat an overall reduction in incarceration cannot be determined.
Another question is whether the measures applied in order to avoid a trial have an effect on crime rates.
Some would argue that the diversionary measures, because of their leniency, do not deter people fromcommitting offences. Others would argue that there is no clear empirical evidence that the degree of
imprisonment is decisive for the general level of crime control in society. Based on published research it
may thus be that high rates of imprisonment do not curtail crime in general nor do low rates encourage
crime.6
But one conclusion may be drawn from the use of diversionary measures: reducing the number of casesthat have to be processed in the trial phase decreases the workload of the courts which in many countries
are overburdened. Diversionary measures give the courts room to concentrate on cases which deserve fullcourt attention.

6 See U. Zvekic, Alternatives to Imprisonment in Comparative Perspective, UNICRI, Nelson-Hall Publishers, Chicago 1994, p. 8-9.

64

INTERVENTIONS WITH DRUG MISUSING OFFENDERS ANDPROLIFIC AND OTHER PRIORITY OFFENDERS
Mr. Peter Wheelhouse*

I. INTRODUCTION: BACKGROUND
In England and Wales, there is a long history of supervising offenders and trying to reduce reoffending by
the use of programmes and interventions.
Any offender serving a sentence of 12 months or longer and all offenders aged 18-21 are subject tosupervision on licence by the National Probation Service following their release. All additional licenceconditions have to be ‘necessary and proportionate’ in order to comply with Human Rights legislation. The
Probation Service manages a very large number of offenders on licence - around 50,000 offenders aredischarged from prison on licence every year with licence conditions which, in the case of ‘lifers,’ may lastfor many years.
Any offender given a community sentence – (the Community Order, introduced by Section 177 of the
Criminal Justice Act 2003 replaced other community sentences) will be managed by the Probation Service.
The Order consists of one or more of twelve requirements determined by those passing sentence from a‘menu’ of available options.
The same requirements can also be applied to a suspended prison sentence. Around 135,000 offenders
each year are given a community sentence that requires supervision in the community by the Probation
Service. A number of 16 and 17 year olds who are sentenced under pre-Criminal Justice Act 2003 legislation
can be sentenced to Community Rehabilitation Orders, Community Punishment Orders, Community
Punishment and Rehabilitation Orders and DTTOs. These orders may be supervised by probation
authorities; otherwise, sentences for those under 18 are managed by the YOT.
In addition, about 13,000 high risk offenders are managed under the Multi Agency Public Protection
Arrangements (MAPPA), of whom about 1,500 are considered very high risk.
But significantly, there is a ‘gap’ in these supervision arrangements relating to those offenders sentenced
to periods in custody of less than twelve months and a significant number of offenders who are criminallyactive or at risk of being active but are not being routinely detected and are not being managed in thecriminal justice system. This was particularly true in relation to drug misusing offenders (defined in thiscontext as those offenders who commit significant amounts of crime to support their own substance misuse)and prolific and other priority offenders.
In addition, a study conducted by the Social Exclusion Unit on behalf of the Prime Minister in 2002 to
explore how to cut rates of reoffending by ex-prisoners reported that prison sentences were not succeedingin turning the majority of offenders away from crime. Of those prisoners released in 1997, 58% wereconvicted of another crime within two years; 18-20 year old male prisoners were re-convicted at a rate of72%.
The report concluded that there was considerable evidence of the factors that influence reoffending.
Building on criminological and social research, the SEU identified nine key factors:* Programme Director, Home Office, United Kingdom.

65

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

education
employment
drug and alcohol misuse
mental and physical healthattitudes and self-control
institutionalization and life skills
housingfinancial support and debt
family networks.

The evidence showed that these factors can have a huge impact on the likelihood of a prisoner
reoffending. For example, being in employment reduced the risk of reoffending by between a third and a half;
having stable accommodation reduced the risk by a fifth.
Many prisoners had experienced a lifetime of social exclusion. Compared with the general population,prisoners are thirteen times as likely to have been in care as a child, thirteen times as likely to be
unemployed, ten times as likely to have been a regular truant, two and half times as likely to have had afamily member convicted of a criminal offence, six times as likely to have been a young father, and fifteentimes as likely to be HIV positive.
Many prisoners’ basic skills are very poor: 80% have the writing skills, 65% the numeracy skills and 50%
the reading skills at or below the level of an 11 year old child. 60-70% of prisoners were using drugs before
imprisonment. Over 70% suffer from at least two mental disorders. And 20% of male and 37% of female
sentenced prisoners have attempted suicide in the past. The position is often worse for 18-20 year olds,
whose basic skills, unemployment rate and school exclusion background are all over a third worse than thoseof older prisoners.
There is a considerable risk that a prison sentence might actually make the factors associated with
reoffending worse. For example, a third lose their house while in prison, two-thirds lose their job, over a fifth
face increased financial problems and over two-fifths lose contact with their families. There are also real
dangers of mental and physical health deteriorating further, of life and thinking skills being eroded, and of
prisoners being introduced to drugs. By aggravating the factors associated with reoffending, prison
sentences can prove counter-productive as a contribution to crime reduction and public safety.

II. DRIVE FOR CHANGE
The absence of supervision arrangements for a very significant number of offenders and the identificationof the wide range of unmet needs of many offenders, raised the question of whether programmes directed
specifically at the needs of targeted groups of offenders might deliver significant and disproportionately large
reductions in offending and reoffending by those groups. Further research into those groups supported this
proposition. The key research findings are summarized below.

A. Research Findings Relating to Drug Misusing Offenders and Crime
1. General
Drug-related crime has been the subject of considerable attention in recent years. As well as imposing
substantial economic and social costs upon society and victims of crime, it has a high profile among the
public, the media and politicians. The question of how addiction treatment influences criminal behaviour isimportant for the implementation and evaluation of drug treatment programmes and the development ofpolicies to tackle drug misuse. Although clinical services mostly focus on tackling drug misuse and its
associated health problems, the reduction of crime is also seen increasingly as a goal of drug misusetreatment.
Drug misusers frequently come into contact with the law, as the use of illegal drugs makes them liable toarrest. There are also other links between drug misuse and crime. The regular use of illicit drugs places anexcessive economic burden upon the user which, in most cases, cannot be met by legitimate means. Two
common ways of obtaining drugs, or obtaining money for drugs, are through acquisitive crimes and throughdrug dealing or supply. Some drug users support their habit through prostitution, though this is lesscommon.

66

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

2. Economic Costs
The economic costs and consequences of drug misuse and treatment were investigated among 549
clients recruited from 54 residential and community treatment programmes to the National Treatment
Outcome Research Study (NTORS). This update to a previous analysis using NTORS showed that addiction
treatment had an estimated cost of £2.9 million in the two years prior to treatment and £4.4 million in thesubsequent two years. Economic benefits were largely accounted for by reduced crime and victim costs ofcrime. Crime costs fell by £16.1 million during the first year and by £11.3 million during the second year.
The ratio of consequences to net treatment investment varied from 18:1 to 9.5:1, depending on assumptions.
In short, the most conservative estimate suggests that for every £1 spent on treatment, £9.50 is saved in thecosts of reduced crime. Thus there are clear economic benefits to treating drug misusers. The original costsavings analysis using NTORS had shown a ratio of consequences to net treatment investment of 1:3.1
3. Link Between Drugs and Arrestees
The New English and Welsh Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (NEW-ADAM) programme is a national
research study of interviews and voluntary urine tests designed to establish the prevalence of drug use
among arrestees (suspected offenders arrested by the police). This rolling programme covers 16 locations in
England and Wales and each data collection cycle lasts two years (eight sites were visited in the first year
and the remaining eight sites in the second year). The first eight sites were revisited in the third year.
The survey data collected provided information on the characteristics, drug use and offending behaviourof adults entering the criminal justice system. Summary data are presented from the 16 custody suites
visited in the first two years. As interviewed arrestees are also asked about their offending behaviour(focusing on acquisitive crime), the relationship between drug use and certain types of criminal activity canbe explored. The key points were:• Urine tests of arrestees revealed that 69% of arrestees tested positive for one or more illegal drugs,
and 36% tested positive for two or more such substances;• 38% of arrestees tested positive for opiates (including heroin) and/or cocaine (including crack);• 18% of the interviewed arrestees were repeat offenders, regularly using heroin and/or cocaine
and/or crack;• average expenditure on drugs, by those who had reported using drugs and spending money on themin the last 12 months, was highest for those consuming heroin and cocaine and crack, at £323 in thelast seven days compared with £190 for drug users generally;• arrestees who reported using heroin and cocaine and crack in the last 12 months represented justover one-tenth of the arrestees interviewed, yet they were responsible for nearly one-third (31%) of
the illegal income reported. On average, arrestees who had generated illegal income and who usedheroin and cocaine and crack in the last 12 months reported an average illegal income of more than
£24,000 per year (median £12,490);• 60% of arrestees who reported using one or more illegal drugs in the last 12 months and committing
one or more acquisitive crimes acknowledged a link between their drug use and offending behaviour.
This proportion rose to 89% among arrestees who said that they had committed one or moreacquisitive crimes and that they had used heroin and cocaine and crack in the last 12 months.
4. Changes in Crime after Treatment
The reductions in crime are among the more striking findings from NTORS. One year after starting
treatment, there were substantial reductions in the numbers of crimes, and these reductions weremaintained through to follow-up after four to five years. There were also reductions in the use of heroin andother illicit drugs, reduced injecting and sharing of injecting equipment and improvements in psychologicalhealth.
There were substantial reductions both in the numbers of crimes committed and in the percentage ofclients engaged in crime. At the one year follow-up, acquisitive crimes were reduced to one-third of intake
levels, and the rate of involvement in crime was reduced to about half of intake levels. The number ofshoplifting crimes was reduced to about one-third of intake levels, and for the more serious offence ofburglary, offending was reduced to less than one-quarter of intake levels. Many of the greatest reductions incriminal activity occurred among the most criminally active drug misusers. Among high-rate offenders,
crimes were reduced to 13% of intake levels. This represents a huge reduction in criminal behaviour.
1 Godfrey, C., Stewart, D. and Gossop, M. (2004). Economic analysis of costs and consequences of drug misuse and its

treatment: two year outcome data from the National Treatment Outcome Research Study (NTORS). In Addiction 99(6): 697-707.

67

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Similarly, for drug-selling crimes, one year after starting treatment, there were substantial reductions in
the numbers of drug-selling crimes committed and in the percentage of clients engaged in drug-selling
crime. The number of drug-selling offences was reduced to less than one-fifth of intake levels. In view of themassive number of offences committed prior to intake, this represents a large and important reduction. The
percentage of NTORS clients who were involved in drug-selling was also reduced to less than two-thirds ofthe level at intake.
The reductions in crime were found among clients from both the methadone and the residential
programmes and reductions were found for acquisitive crime and for drug-selling offences.
Among the methadone patients, the number of acquisitive crimes after one year had fallen to less than
one-third of intake levels and this type of crime remained low throughout the follow-up period. After four tofive years, rates of acquisitive crime fell to less than one-quarter of intake levels. Drug-selling crimes werealso significantly lower during the full follow-up period than at intake. For drug-selling offences, the numbers
after four to five years fell to 17% of intake levels.

B. Research Findings Relating to Disproportionate Impacts by Groups of Offenders
Research carried out in 2001 concluded that, of a total offending population of around one million, only
approximately 100,000 offenders (10% of all active offenders) were responsible for half of all the crimecommitted in England and Wales (Home Office, 2001). In other words it appeared that a small number ofoffenders were far more criminally active than others, contributing disproportionately to the overall crimerate. Indeed, further analysis showed that the most active 5,000 people in this group were estimated to be
responsible for one in ten offences (Home Office, 2002). Although some of the assumptions behind thisfigure have been challenged (e.g. Garside, 2004), it is generally accepted that focusing additional resourceson these most active offenders could bring about a better outcome in terms of reduced crime rates and could
improve public confidence in the criminal justice system.
The Persistent Offender Programme was launched in 2002 as part of the Narrowing the Justice Gap
programme (Narrowing the Justice Gap, 2002) with the aim of targeting resources from across CDRPs atoffenders in the community with six or more convictions over the previous 12 months. These schemes were
evaluated in 2003 (Home Office, 2005c). However, this evaluation was primarily focused upon staff andoffender perceptions of the scheme and did not conduct a full reconviction analysis.
Other research on the effectiveness of similar schemes, such as the Burnley/Dordrecht Initiative(Chenery and Pease, 2000) and Intensive Supervision (Gendreau, Goggin, and Fulton, 2001) showed mixed
findings but indicated little evidence of a reduction in reconviction due to the schemes.
Some schemes did report promising early results on convictions (Chenery and Deakin, 2003; Worrall,
Mawby, Heath and Hope, 2003). However, such research was limited by small sample sizes and the lack ofwell matched comparison groups. Other PPO research has had more of a focus on implementation issues
such as emphasizing partnership working (Mawby and Worrall, 2004; Worrall and Mawby, 2004). For a fuller
discussion of effectiveness please refer to Moore et al. (2006).
The Home Office evaluation (Home Office, 2005c) reported that the selection criteria for the Persistent
Offender Programme were seen by practitioners as being too rigid. They felt the scheme did not take into
account important factors in an offender’s pattern of behaviour, such as:• the number of crimes that an offender could be responsible for without a conviction;• offences that were left unreported; and• the type of offence committed.
As a result, areas operating the scheme felt that offenders who were included were not necessarily thosecausing the greatest harm to their communities. Areas involved argued for a more flexible and localized
definition that could include a wider definition of ‘other priority’ offenders.
These themes – tackling the most active offenders, local criteria for selection and local delivery of
programmes to address offending – were central to the development of the Prolific and other Priority
Offenders Programme.

68135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

III. A NEW POLICY APPROACH
The above findings and other factors – such as the unwillingness of drug misusing offenders to referthemselves to drug treatment services – pointed to the need for a new policy response. A response that
focused on groups of individuals with specific characteristics rather than a response directed at crime types.
Most importantly an approach would be required that took account of some of the reasons for some of thehighest harm-causing individuals and addressed those reasons as well as the specific offending. Such aholistic approach would need the involvement of a wide range of agencies. Two programmes were designed
to meet these needs – the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP) and the Prolific and other Priority
Offenders (PPO) Programme.

A. The Drug Interventions Programme (DIP)The Drug Interventions Programme (DIP) began in 2003 as a three-year programme to develop andintegrate measures for directing adult drug-misusing offenders out of crime and into treatment. The
Programme involves criminal justice and drug treatment providers working together with other services toprovide a tailored solution for adults - particularly those who misuse Class A drugs - who commit crime tofund their drug misuse. Its principal focus is to reduce drug-related crime by engaging with problematic drug
users and moving them into appropriate treatment and support. It aims to break the cycle of drug misuseand offending behaviour by intervening at every stage of the criminal justice system to engage offenders in
drug treatment.
The programme took as its premise two key facts: a) significant numbers of drug misusing offenders
were not referring themselves to drug treatment services and their Class A drug use (and accordingly levelsof offending) were escalating; and b) those same offenders were in constant contact with the criminal justicesystem. The programme set out to use the criminal justice system as a way of coercing offenders into drug
treatment and at the same time ensuring they were closely managed and connected to the other services ofwhich they were in need.
The Programme was constructed around a combination of new laws (described in more detail later in thispaper), new working practices, new investment and a renewed emphasis on partnership working and multiagency delivery. It was supported by very strong political sponsorship, being amongst the Prime Minister’s
top projects.
Drug testing on charge had been originally introduced on a pilot basis in 2001 and had been successful inengaging offenders. Extended extensively as part of the Drug Interventions Programme, drug testing iscentral to the Programme and is used to identify problematic drug misusing offenders in order to try to
encourage them to enter drug treatment. It is also a key component that enables other measures such as
required assessment and restriction on bail to be implemented.
Key partners to the Home Office are the criminal justice agencies such as the police, prisons, probation
officers and the courts, along with the Department of Health, the National Treatment Agency, treatment
service providers and those who provide linked services such as housing and job-seeker support.
The Programme is continuing beyond the original three-year period, with the aim of gradually ensuringthat the constituent interventions and processes become the established way of working with drug-misusing
offenders across England and Wales.

B. The Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPO) Programme
The PPO Programme was announced by the Prime Minister in March 2004. The Programme wasconceptualized as being an end-to-end process that specifically targeted the small number of most active
and/or problematic offenders. In essence, it was designed to give offenders a choice between the cessation of
offending with the acceptance of support in the form of rehabilitative programmes or to carry on offending
resulting in prompt arrest and punishment.

69

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The PPO programme is comprised of these three complementary strands.
• Prevent and Deter
This strand is aimed at those young offenders who are most at risk of becoming the next generation of
prolific offenders. Principally, the Prevent and Deter strand aims to stop the supply of new prolific offenders
by reducing the opportunities for reoffending, so that those who are already criminally active do not graduate
into prolific-offending lifestyles; and more generally reducing the numbers of young people who become
involved in crime in the first place.
• Catch and Convict
The goal of this strand is to prevent PPOs from offending through apprehension and conviction, throughlicence enforcement, and by ensuring a swift return to the courts for those PPOs continuing to offend. Catchand Convict (C&C) reflects the need for robust and proactive criminal justice processes to ensure that thereis effective investigation, charging and prosecution of PPOs.
• Rehabilitate and Resettle
This strand aims to rehabilitate PPOs who are in custody or serving sentences in the community throughcloser working between all relevant agencies and continued post-sentence support. Rehabilitate andResettle (R&R) provides support and priority access to services in the community, and pre-release support
for those serving custodial sentences.
The essential feature of the PPO programme was that it should tailor responses to local problems andshould avoid a prescriptive approach regarding implementation. In doing so, the PPO programme embraces
the use of local knowledge, practitioner expertise and previous experience of similar schemes. The
individual stakeholders, practitioners and specific agencies are responsible for all the decision-making
aspects of the programme throughout; from how to choose the prolific offenders through to whichinterventions they may receive and how often they may receive them. These factors were all designed witha specific intention: to reduce the crime levels of the offenders on the PPO programme.

IV. LEGAL FRAMEWORK
A. Drug Interventions Programme
Although the overall intention of the programmes was to work in co-operation with drug-misusing
offenders, it was recognized that these were a difficult group to access and that many of them were resistantto any form of intervention. There was accordingly a need to have a set of powers to form a structure that
increased the chances of offenders engaging with drug treatment workers and moving out of crime and into
treatment. These powers are set out below.
1. Drug Testing in Custody Suites
The power to drug test in custody suites was first introduced in the 2000 Court Services Act andrequired individuals charged with certain offences (‘trigger offences’ – see below) to undergo a drug
screening test for crack, cocaine and heroin. The intention of the provision was to identify those offenders
who had Class A drug habits and move them into treatment.
Following successful early pilots, the 2005 Drugs Act included a provision to move the point at which adrug test may be carried out to a time post-arrest rather than post-charge. Drug testing on arrest has
become the preferred alternative to drug testing on charge. Testing on arrest enables us to identify adults
misusing specified Class A drugs earlier in their contact with the criminal justice system, so that they may
be steered into treatment and away from crime as soon as possible. It has also increased the volume of drugmisusing arrestees identified – approximately three times more offenders are arrested than charged. This
provides an opportunity to screen more people at some stage of their detention - and ensures that those who
misuse drugs but are not charged with an offence are nevertheless helped to engage in treatment and otherprogrammes of help.
Testing on arrest has been implemented in individual police stations through notification letters to theChief Constables of the affected forces from the Home Office. Only police stations named in thesenotification letters can test on arrest. If, for operational reasons, the police in an affected police force area
wish to set up an additional police station with drug testing facilities the Home Office must be consulted in70135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

advance.
Section 63B of Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) (as amended by Section 7 of the Drugs Act
2005) provides for a sample of urine, or a non-intimate sample, to be requested by a police officer and takenfrom persons in police detention for the purpose of ascertaining whether they have a specified Class A drug
(crack, cocaine or heroin) in their body if:(a) the person concerned has been arrested or charged with a ‘trigger’ offence; or(b) the person concerned has been arrested or charged with an offence and a police officer of the rank ofInspector or above, who has reasonable grounds to suspect that the misuse by the person of any
specified Class A drug caused or contributed to the offence, has authorized the taking of the sample.
Trigger offences are primarily drawn from the Theft Act 1968, the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and the
Vagrancy Act 1824. The Theft Act offences are generally concerned with acquisitive property crime, of thekind often committed by drug users to finance their drug habits. The Misuse of Drugs Act offences concern
heroin and crack/cocaine. The Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 (Amendment) Order 2004 (S.I.
2004/1892) added new trigger offences to Schedule 6: handling stolen goods, begging, and persistent
begging, as well as attempts at the existing trigger offences, where relevant.
Under Section 63B(6) of PACE a sample may only be taken by a person prescribed by regulations madeby the Secretary of State. The persons so prescribed are set out in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act
1984 (Drug Testing of Persons in Police Detention) (Prescribed Persons) Regulations 2001 (S.I. 2001/2645)
which came into force on 19 July 2001. The persons so prescribed are:
a)
b)
c)

a police officer;
a person employed by a police authority or police force whose contractual duties include taking
samples for the purpose of testing for the presence of specified Class A drugs;
a person employed by a contractor engaged by a police authority or police force whose duties include
taking samples for the purpose of testing for the presence of specified Class A drugs.

Under the Drug Interventions Programme, the sample taken will be oral fluid and not urine.
Persons are requested to give a sample for testing and cannot be forced to do so. However, persons
commit an offence under Sections 63B and 63C of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 where theyrefuse without good cause to provide a sample for which they are liable, on summary conviction, to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level four on the standard scale(£2,500), or both.
An individual’s detention without charge may be extended up to 24 hours of the relevant time solely forthe purpose of conducting a drug test.
2. Required Assessment
In the early days of the Drug Interventions Programme, an individual offender would have been asked
whether they wished to see a drugs worker based in the custody suite. Accepting this offer was voluntary on
the part of the individual. This caused some problems as many offenders would refuse the offer andengagement accordingly failed.
Part 3 of the Drugs Act 2005 introduced a new power for the police to require persons who have tested
positive for a specified Class A drug when tested on arrest or charge to attend two assessments of their druguse, an initial assessment (Section 9) and a follow-up assessment (Section 10) with a suitably qualified
person. A “suitably qualified person” is somebody who is competent to carry out the initial assessment andwill, in almost all instances, be a Criminal Justice Integrated Team worker, who will also be employed tocarry out voluntary assessments in the same area. All such workers will have, or be working towards, therelevant Drug and Alcohol National Occupational Standards (DANOS) competencies.
The person is required to attend and stay for the duration of either assessment in question. If they fail todo so, without good cause, they commit an offence and may face criminal sanctions. While the expectation is

71

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

that competent drug workers will be able to gain the co-operation and active engagement of the individuals
they assess, the legislation does not actually require input from the individual. This avoids the potential
difficulties of workers having to make subjective judgements in each case about the degree of theindividual’s engagement.
These powers can only be exercised in respect of persons aged 18 and over, (with provision for the
Secretary of State to amend this minimum age by an order, which must be approved by both Houses ofParliament). In addition the powers can be exercised only where the relevant Chief Officer of police has been
notified that arrangements for conducting initial and follow-up assessments have been made for the agegroup concerned.
The initial assessment is to enable the assessor to establish the person’s dependency upon, or propensity
to misuse specified Class A drugs and whether they might benefit from further assessment, or fromassistance or treatment (or both). In addition the assessor will provide harm minimization advice and, as
appropriate, an explanation of the types of assistance and treatment available. The Drugs Act 2005 (Section10) provides that where a police officer requires a person to attend an initial assessment and remain for its
duration [and where the age and notification conditions are met] that officer must at the same time also
require the person to attend a follow-up assessment and remain for its duration (although this requirement
will cease, if the person is informed at the initial assessment that he or she no longer needs to attend afollow-up assessment). The purpose of the follow-up assessment is to provide a further opportunity for theindividual to discuss their drug misuse with a drugs worker and to obtain advice relating to that misuse and,if the follow-up assessor considers it appropriate, to draw up a care plan.
The requirement to undergo a required assessment and remain for the duration ceases if the person ischarged with the related offence and the court grants conditional bail under the Bail Act to undergo a
relevant assessment and participate in any relevant follow-up. If an individual is remanded in custody before
the required assessment has been carried out, this will constitute “good cause” for not attending and they
will not therefore be liable to prosecution for failure to attend.
3. Restriction on Bail
Section 19 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 amended the Bail Act 1976 to provide for a Restriction on Bailfor adults who have tested positive for specified Class A drugs (heroin, cocaine or crack). The purpose of theprovision is to reduce reoffending whilst on bail. Given the compelling research evidence linking the use ofcrack, cocaine and heroin with acquisitive crime there is a real concern that if such offenders are placed onbail they will reoffend in order to fund their drug use. It is also important to take every opportunity toencourage drug-misusing offenders into treatment, where their drug use can be addressed.
Where the relevant conditions are met the defendant will be asked at the initial bail hearing to undergo anassessment of their drug problem (a relevant assessment) and agree to participate in any follow-up
recommended by the assessor. If the defendant agrees, they will, in most cases, be released on conditional
bail. However, if they refuse, the normal presumption for bail is reversed and the court will not grant bailunless satisfied that there is no significant risk of the defendant committing an offence whilst on bail. It acts
as an incentive for those charged with offences to address any drug misuse or lose the right to be considered
for bail pending trial. Restriction on Bail was extended to all Local Justice Areas in England from 31 March
2006. This means that any adult defendant who is brought before any court in England with a positive drug
test result following testing on arrest or charge could have the provision applied to them irrespective of thearea in which they live, within England.
Section 19 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 amends the Bail Act 1976 by placing on the courts a new
qualified obligation when considering bail applications, in cases where a defendant has tested positive for a
specified Class A drug.
Subject to the notification to the courts by the Secretary of State, the provision applies when a defendant:a) is aged 18 or over; andb) has tested positive for a specified Class A drug either:i)under Section 63(B) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (drug testing after charge)

72

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

in connection with the offence; orunder Section 161 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (drug testing after conviction of an offence
but before sentence)2; andeither the defendant has been charged with an offence under Section 5(2) or 5(3) of the Misuse ofDrugs Act 1971 (possession or possession with intent to supply) relating to a specified Class A drug,or the defendant has been charged with any offence which the court is satisfied was caused, whollyor partly, by the defendant’s misuse of a specified Class A drug or was motivated, wholly or partly, by
his or her intended use of a specified Class A drug.
ii)c)

It is the accepted view that the combined evidence of a positive test and trigger offence amounts to“substantial grounds for believing that the offence in question was caused or motivated by the intended useof a specified Class A drug”.
It does not apply when a defendant has refused to provide a sample for drug testing; a positive test is aprerequisite for the provision’s application and even if the reason for it not being available is as a result of
the defendant refusing to provide a sample the provision does not apply.
Where the person has either• been offered and agreed to undergo a relevant assessment; or• undergone a relevant assessment and been offered and agreed to participate in the relevant follow-up
the court, if it grants bail, shall impose as a condition of bail that the person undergo the relevant assessment
and any proposed follow-up or, where the person has already undergone a relevant assessment, participate in
the relevant follow-up.
Where the person has been offered but refuses to undergo a relevant assessment or, where the person
has already undergone the relevant assessment, has been offered but refuses to participate in any follow-up,
the court may not grant bail unless it is satisfied that there is no significant risk of the person committing an
offence while on bail.
4. Conditional Cautioning
Conditional Cautioning was introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 2004 and allows, for the first time in
England and Wales, for a condition that is conducive to restoration or rehabilitation to be attached to a police
caution. Where the condition is not met, the offender may be charged and prosecuted with the original
offence. Until Conditional Cautioning was introduced there was no statutory provision for cautions to haveconditions attached, though some police forces had used voluntary schemes to encourage offenders into
drug treatment (eg. deferred cautioning and “Caution Plus”). These schemes, although useful, had nostatutory sanction in the case of non-compliance.
Conditional Cautioning with a Drug Interventions Programme drug rehabilitative condition provides an
early opportunity in the criminal justice process to identify drug-misusing offenders. Individuals receiving a
DIP drug rehabilitative Conditional Caution can be engaged and moved into appropriate treatment services
before their lifestyle spirals into a more serious cycle of drug misuse and crime. Conditional Cautioning is
not a soft option as it calls for a genuine and practical commitment to an individually-tailored programme.
There is a sanction of prosecution for the original offence if the offender does not comply. National uptake ofthe scheme has so far been low across all conditions but the disposal is now being rolled out across Englandand Wales.

B. Prolific and other Priority Offenders Programme
No new legal arrangements have been constructed to support the Prolific and other Priority Offenders
Programme. The designation of an offender as a “PPO” is purely administrative and has no specific statutory
definition. Depending on the individual status of the offender there may be statutory provisions available (forexample if the offender has been released from prison on licence or is on a community sentence); otherwise
the levers with the offender are drawn more from the skills of the officers involved and the concept of ‘legal

2 Section 161 is not in force.

73

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

audacity’. In some circumstances, the absence of a legal status specifically defining a PPO can cause
difficulty, for example during Court proceedings.

V. MAKING IT HAPPENThe Drug Interventions Programme and the Prolific and other Priority Offenders Programme are both
ambitious programmes. Key to delivery of both programmes is the ability of a range of agencies both within
and outside the criminal justice system to work together at a national and local level. This is quite simply
because the research evidence suggested that although the programmes were targeted at reducing crimeand reoffending, the delivery of those reductions would only be achieved if there were a holistic approach tooffenders. This meant that as well as involving traditional law enforcement agencies such as the police
service, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Courts, there was a need to include drug services, healthprofessionals, housing support workers, training experts and social workers.

A. Delivery Structures
The need for the involvement of such a wide group of agencies and stakeholders meant that it was not
appropriate to ask a single agency to deliver the Programmes. It was decided that structures that had thebest chance of engaging the widest range of agencies should be used.
1. Drug Interventions Programme
Drug Action Teams (DATs) are the partnerships responsible for delivering the Government’s drug
strategy at local level. DATs are partnerships combining representatives from local authorities (education,social services, housing), police, health, probation, the prison service and the voluntary sector. They werechosen as the key delivery route for the Drug Interventions Programme.
DATs ensure that the work of local agencies is brought together effectively and that cross-agency
projects are co-ordinated successfully. Their work involves commissioning services, monitoring andreporting on performance and communicating plans, activities and performance to stakeholders.
Each DAT has a DAT Chair and Co-ordinator. The DAT Chair is the most senior official within the DAT
and will also have a senior position within one of the constituent agencies. The DAT Co-ordinator is
responsible for the day-to-day management of the DAT and has a team working for him or her. The DAT coordinator works alongside community safety managers in Crime and Disorder Partnerships (CDRPs). In
some areas DATs and CDRPs are merged into one organization. Both DATs and CDRPs are accountable to
the Home Secretary.
2. PPO Programme
For the PPO programme, every Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (or Community Safety
Partnership in Wales) was responsible for setting up and implementing their PPO scheme. Occasionally,neighbouring CDRPs would collaborate to deliver a joint scheme. Additionally, there was a responsibility toestablish a PPO scheme with the police and the probation service as lead partners in the delivery. In order toensure that at least 5,000 offenders were identified for the programme across the country, CDRPs/CSPs
were required to identify, as a minimum, between 15-20 offenders in their area for targeted monitoring andintensive management. In the high crime areas (such as some inner London boroughs), or in CDRPs thatcovered two or more police Basic Command Units, a larger number of offenders were required. Within thefirst two months of the programme’s implementation (September and October 2004) a total of 7,801
individuals were identified as PPOs (Home Office, 2005a).

B. GovernanceAlthough the delivery of both the DIP and PPO Programmes is concentrated at the point of delivery (thefront line), the importance of successful implementation meant that central Government wished to ensure

74135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

The New Look: A clear line of command.

PM
Ministerial Organised
Crime and Drugs
Committee
ACPO/HO
CJIP
committee

DH

HO

OGDs

NTA

GO
Drugs & Crime TeamNTA Regional Managers

Delivery‘Compact’
Drug Action
Team Chair
DAT/Drugs Partnershipthat some form of central influence was retained. The diagram below shows how the line of control wasestablished.

C. Case management
1. Drug Interventions Programme
As indicated previously, an essential objective of the Drug Interventions Programme is to ensure that,while individual interventions are expanded, there is a step-change in the delivery of an end-to-end system
for those drug misusers in the CJS and those leaving treatment, and that there is appropriate support in thecommunity and in prisons.
‘Throughcare’ has been developed as the term used to describe arrangements for managing thecontinuity of care provided to a drug misuser from the point of arrest through to sentence and beyond.
Those areas across England and Wales with the highest levels of drug related crime – commonly referred toas ‘intensive areas’ – have received additional resources to build capacity and establish Criminal JusticeIntegrated Teams (CJITs) to provide a more intensive response, using a case management approach. They
provide a clear focus in the community for referrals and assessments. Although non-intensive areas may nothave an integrated team in place, the DATs are ensuring delivery of key parts of the Programme such as‘Throughcare’ and ‘Aftercare’ and are working towards the integrated approach.
The Drug Interventions Programme, the National Treatment Agency, prisons and probation havedeveloped a national framework, setting out arrangements for continuity of care between the CJIT andcustody. In many cases, the throughcare process begins in the police custody suite or, increasingly, at court,
where an offender is given the opportunity to see a specialist non-police drugs worker. The aim is to provide
information and, where appropriate, referral to treatment or other means of assistance.
This approach, known as arrest referral, had existed, in a variety of models and with varying degrees ofeffectiveness, for a number of years and arrest referral has been available across all police force areas inEngland and Wales since April 2002. Under the Programme, arrest referral has become part of theintegrated programme of interventions. Arrest referral workers work in partnership with, or increasingly as
part of, the CJITs. Their work goes beyond the initial model of simple assessment and onward referral toinclude a basic level of treatment services (known as ‘Tier 2’), delivered as part of the case management
approach described above. This is key to bridging the gap between referral and entry into treatment, a phaseat which a high proportion of people are at risk of being lost from the system.
‘Aftercare’ is the package of support that needs to be in place after a drug-misusing offender reaches theend of a prison-based treatment programme, completes a community sentence or leaves treatment. It is not
one simple discrete process involving only treatment but includes access to additional support with issues

75

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

which may include mental health, housing, managing finances, family issues, learning new skills andemployment.
2. Prolific and other Priority Offenders Programme
A similar ‘case management’ approach has been developed with PPOs. Once suitable individuals are
identified, schemes are expected to manage offenders through a combination of enforcement measures andincentives to change behaviour and by multi-agency working. The aims of the schemes are to:• enhance arrest, investigation, detection, charging and prosecution of offenders, bringing to justice asmuch of the criminality committed by the targeted PPOs as possible (by proactive police work suchas increased supervision and tracking);• reduce reoffending of PPOs, and consequently reduce the number of victims of crime;• develop a rapid and effective partnership intervention which enables effective supervision andmonitoring of PPOs; and• address non-compliance/reoffending speedily and effectively.
The individual stakeholders, practitioners and specific agencies are responsible for all the decisionmaking aspects of the programme throughout; from how to choose the prolific offenders through to whichinterventions they may receive and how often they may receive them. In doing so, the PPO programmeembraces the use of local knowledge, practitioner expertise and previous experience of similar schemes.
These factors were all designed with a specific intention: to reduce the crime levels of the offenders on the
PPO programme.

D. Workforce Development – Drug Interventions Programme
A key to the success of the Drug Interventions Programme is the quality and co-ordination of caredelivered by the Criminal Justice Integrated Teams (CJITs) in the community, the CARATs teams in prisonsand the role of key partners such as treatment providers. With the increased demand placed on the sector, it
was vital that we both increased the workforce in real terms and ensured the continuing professional
development of its members.
Specific work-streams to support those objectives included targeted recruitment campaigns, whereappropriate; for example, a successful one in London helped recruit 34 new workers. A DIP Advanced
Apprentices Scheme aimed at 18-24 year olds who do not currently work in the sector was developed andduring the two-year scheme apprentices will work towards achieving a level three National Vocational
Qualification. A DIP Drug Strategy Workforce Working Group reported directly to the Drug Strategy
Workforce Steering Group covering apprenticeship schemes, the workforce HR monitoring tool, the DIP
recruitment micro-site, and retention and validation studies.

E. Performance Management
Prior to the introduction of the Drug Interventions Programme, there were no reliable data about drugmisusing offenders and any interventions used with them.
DIP introduced the Drug Interventions Record (DIR) as a single form used by both community agencies
and prisons to improve information sharing, avoid duplication and thereby improve continuity of care of
drug-misusing offenders. It gathers comprehensive and accurate information from all areas, particularly byformalizing and standardizing arrangements in non-intensive areas. The DIR is providing comprehensive
and reliable information for the first time. This is producing a much fuller and more accurate picture of thereal work being carried out at a local level than was previously possible. The data gathered are also key tothe wider work being undertaken on the effectiveness of the over-all Programme and individualinterventions.
DIP performance management uses the data provided by the Drug Interventions Record (DIR), financial
information and drug-related crime data through a comprehensive data collection, analysis and reporting tool
– DIRWEB – into which all data are drawn from a wide variety of schemes. This product is fed into amonthly consolidated performance assessment (the DIP Performance Assessment Matrix) which also feeds
into the joint police, crime and drugs monthly performance analysis (the Joint Interim Performance
Assessment – JIPA). This enables schemes to be monitored for efficiency and effectiveness and for poor
performers to be identified so that appropriate action can be taken.

76135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

F. Key Success Criteria
The key elements that make successful local programmes can be summarized as:• strong local leadership;• committed staff with limited caseloads;• rapid information sharing;• effective management of treatment and care plans;• seamless and consistent messages for offenders;• wrap-around services fully involved;• consistency on breaches – i.e. follow up all RoB failures;• intensive police surveillance for offenders who are non-compliant;• convincing police commanders that drug offenders and PPOs can deliver their targets.
VI. DOES IT WORK? – RESULTS AND EVALUATION
A. Drug Interventions Programme
Approximately 3,500 people are now entering drug treatment every month as a consequence of the Drug
Intervention Programme, and this number has increased markedly since the introduction of Tough Choices
in April 2006. By November 2006, the quarterly average number of new clients entering drug treatment
through DIP had increased by 44% compared to the period preceding the onset of Tough Choices.
Home Office analysis shows that approximately eight out of every ten persons entering drug treatment
through DIP are being retained in treatment for 12 weeks or more, and this is true of those persons
committing the highest volume of crime. Tough Choices has boosted the overall number of persons entering
drug treatment, but this would appear to be particularly the case for low-level offenders. This would suggestthat these new measures are reaching offenders at an earlier stage in their offending careers. Analysis
suggests that well over half of this group are assessed as requiring drug treatment, indicating that significant
problems exist amongst these individuals. The vast majority of these individuals are also likely to have hadprior contact with DIP or go on to have a subsequent contact, again suggesting that there are significant
treatment needs for these offenders that were not previously being addressed.
Drug Interventions Programme
Number into Treatment per month trajectory
5000

Number into treatment

4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000

Anticipated Number into Treatment

Mar-08Jan-08

Feb-08Dec-07

Oct-07

Nov-07

Sep-07

Jul-07

Actual Numbers into Treatment

Aug-07

Jun-07

Apr-07

May-07Mar-07

Jan-07

Feb-07

Dec-06

Oct-06

Nov-06

Sep-06

Jul-06

Aug-06

Jun-06

Apr-06

May-06Mar-06

Jan-06

Feb-06

Dec-05

Oct-05

Nov-05

Sep-05Jul-050

Aug-05500

Rolling average

Figure 1. Number of persons into treatment each month under the Drug Interventions Programme
A number of high-level outcome measures have been developed to monitor the progress of the Drug
Strategy. The Drug Harm Index (DHI) was developed as the overarching measure of the progress of the
Drug Strategy and attempts to measure the overall harm caused by Class A drug use in relation to its socialand economic cost. The overall cost of drug harm is calculated using data that describes a variety of health,77

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

crime and community outcomes known to be associated with Class A drug use. These include information
on new HIV and new hepatitis (B and C) cases, drug related deaths, acquisitive crimes known from research
to be related to Class A drug use, and community or neighbourhood perceptions of the problems of drug use
in local areas. It is not possible to collect data on all the harms caused by Class A drug use, only those forwhich sufficiently robust and reliable data exist. The overall costs of these harms are summed and expressedas an index and overall changes monitored on a yearly basis. A more detailed discussion of the methodology
underpinning the Drug Harm Index can be found in Macdonald et al. (2005).
The latest calculation of the DHI shows that between 2003 and 2004 the DHI has fallen in value from
104.8 to 87.9, a drop of 16.9 points or 16.1% (Figure 2). This compares to a 9% drop between 2002 and 2003.
The previously reported fall in the DHI between 2002 and 2003 was primarily driven by reductions in thenumber of drug deaths, Hepatitis C episodes, commercial and domestic burglaries, BCS perceptions of drug
nuisance and thefts of (domestic) vehicles. Taken together these accounted for 75% of the change in DHI
value between 2002 and 2003. The 16.9 point change in the DHI value between 2003 and 2004 is mostly due
to substantial falls in a number of drug-related crime types (e.g. burglary, shoplifting, robbery and vehicle
theft). The only significant health-related factor is drug-related deaths, but between 2003 and 2004 theseincreased from 1,255 to 1,427.
117.0

120.0

115.8

112.0

DHI value (1998 = 100)

110.3

100.0

104.8

100.0

87.9

80.0
60.0

Drug Strategy
April 1998

Updated Drug
Strategy
December 2002

Drug Interventions
Programme
April 2003

40.0
20.0
0.0
1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Year
Drug Harm Index

Provisional Trajectory

Expected value (partial data)

Figure 2. The Drug Harm Index and updated trajectory
One of the drawbacks of the DHI is that it has limited use as a performance management tool since muchof the data is only available on a yearly basis and some measures have a substantial time lag. For example,
new cases of HIV infection may be describing the harms that were generated several years previously andnot in the year for which the data was recorded. As an alternative, a proxy measure of drug-relatedacquisitive crime has been developed to monitor trends on a monthly basis. This involves calculating the
proportion of police recorded acquisitive crime that may be drug-related using data from the Arrestee
Survey - a representative study of some 7,500 arrested persons in 60 police custody suites across Englandand Wales undertaken on a yearly basis. The survey asks a series of questions relating to offending
behaviour and drug use, and participants are asked to undergo saliva testing for the presence of Class A
drugs. In this way, drug-related fractions are calculated for each acquisitive offence type and these fractions
are then applied to police-recorded crime data for the same offence categories. The totals are then summed
to provide an overall estimate of the level of drug-related acquisitive crime.
Figure 3 describes the overall level of drug-related acquisitive crime for England and Wales. It would
appear that, overall, since the onset of the Drug Interventions Programme drug-related acquisitive crime
has fallen by around 22%. This downward trend has slowed in the last 12 months so that the average

78

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

monthly year-on-year reduction is just over 3% in the 12 months to November 2006.
Down by 3.3%

160,000
150,000

Trajectory

140,000
130,000
120,000

Target: 15.3% reduction on April
02 baseline by March 2008

110,000
0
Ap

r-0
Ju 2
lO 02
ct
Ja 02
nAp 03
r-0
Ju 3
l-0
O 3
ct
Ja 03
nAp 04
r-0
Ju 4
l-0
O 4
ct
Ja 04
nAp 05
r-0
Ju 5
lO 05
ct
Ja 05
n0
Ap 6
r-0
Ju 6
lO 06
ct
Ja 06
n0
Ap 7
r-0
Ju 7
lO 07
ct
Ja 07
n08

Drug related recorded acquisitive crime

170,000

Chart prepared by RDS (CRCSG)

Figure 3. Drug-related recorded acquisitive crime: rolling 12 monthly average to November 2006
Of course, it is not possible to be certain as to what extent these overall changes can be attributed solely
to the Drug Interventions Programme. Nonetheless, the accumulation of research evidence demonstrating
the impact of treatment on reduced offending and performance data showing increasing numbers entering
treatment through DIP and being retained in treatment for a minimum of three months would indicate thatsome positive outcomes on offending will have undoubtedly accrued from DIP.
This is confirmed by emerging findings from a Home Office evaluation of DIP. This showed significant
reductions in self-reported offending, drug use and drug expenditure amongst those clients engaged in the
DIP caseload for three months or longer. This is based on a comparison between the month prior to contact
with CJIT and the month following engagement with CJIT for a period of three months or longer. The
analysis indicates that these reductions are, in part, due to the provision of case management and treatment
under DIP. However, in the absence of an appropriate control group we cannot say for certain that these
reductions are solely attributable to CJITs. The key findings for self-reported offending and drug use are as
follows:• Self-reported crime amongst DIP clients engaged in the caseload for at least 3 months fell by 12%,from 36% of clients reporting crime in the month prior to contact with DIP to 24% in the monthfollowing engagement with DIP for a period of three months or more;• The odds of DIP clients engaged in the caseload committing crime almost halved during this period,
with a reduction in the mean number of crimes per client from 7.2 to 2.7;
• The use of heroin amongst clients engaged with DIP for three months or longer fell from 77% in themonth prior to contact with DIP to 46%, a reduction of 31%. Frequent use of heroin fell from 63% of
DIP clients to 15%, a reduction of 48%;
• The reported use of crack cocaine amongst clients engaged with DIP for three months or longer fell
from 59% in the month prior to contact with DIP to 35%, a reduction of 24%. Frequent use of crack
fell from 24% of DIP clients to 5%, a reduction of 19%;
• The proportion of clients spending £1,000 or more per month to fund their drug dependency fell by
38%, from 56% of DIP clients to 18%.

B. Prolific and Priority Offenders Programme
There are approximately 10,000 individuals currently subject to the PPO scheme in England and Wales, anumber which tends to fluctuate as offenders leave the scheme and new offenders join. Home Officemonitoring data shows that the most common reason for leaving the PPO scheme is an observable reduction
in offending (54% of persons leaving), while a further 24% leave to join other schemes, such as the Drug
Intervention Programme. Indeed the overlap between these two programmes has led to a decision to alignthe two schemes more closely to ensure greater co-ordination in the management of offenders.

79

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Home Office analysis suggests that approximately 30% of PPOs have drug dependency problems. These
people are markedly more likely to be high crime-causing offenders both in relation to the volume ofoffences committed and their seriousness. These individuals are also more criminally versatile with offences
spanning a broader range of categories when compared to DIP clients who are not PPOs, and PPOs who are
not dependent on drugs (see Figure 4).

Characteristics of caseload

DIP caseload

Drug misusing

PPOs

40,0002,900

10,000

Average age

31

29

25

% of male offenders

81

96

96

Average number of convictions

42

67

47

… of which % acquisitive

50

52

37

% High Crime-Causing Users(HCCU)

18

36

Not known

47

72

82

34

68

Not known

Estimate size of caseload% with serious offences(burglary, robbery, violence,
sexual)Figure 4. Comparison of offending characteristics of DIP and PPO caseloads, and drug misusing PPOs
A national evaluation of the PPO scheme examined the offending behaviour of a cohort of 7,500 offenders
who entered the PPO programme in the two months following its launch in September 2004. The evaluation
also involved detailed interviews with PPO staff and offenders engaged on the programme. The main
findings were as follows:•

The PPO cohort exhibited a sharp reduction in offending following entry onto the PPO programme.
In the first 17 months of the scheme the PPO offenders had a reduction of 62% in the overall level ofconvictions compared to the beginning of the scheme. This is shown in Figure 5.
4500

PPO sample

When the sample became PPOs

Number of criminal convictions

4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1_2001 5_2001 9_2001 1_2002 5_2002 9_2002 1_2003 5_2003 9_2003 1_2004 5_2004 9_2004 1_2005 5_2005 9_2005 1_2006

Date (month_year)

Figure 5. PPO cohort’s criminal convictions leading up to and following the PPO scheme•

80

Comparing the total number of convictions in the 17 months before and following the PPO

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS••

programme shows that there has been a 43% reduction in the offending of the entire cohort;
The PPO cohort had a reduction in the rate of their offending following entry onto the programme.
The average rate of offending fell from 0.51 convictions per month per PPO in the 12 months prior toentry onto the scheme to 0.39 for the 12-months following entry, a reduction of 24%;
The PPO cohort had a marked decrease in the number of days between committing their offence andbeing sentenced in court in the year following entry to the programme. PPOs were, on average,
likely to be processed 13 days quicker in the first 12 months of the programme than thecorresponding period prior to their entry onto the scheme.

The evaluation attempted to generate a robust control group (using a statistical technique known as
propensity score matching). This was judged to have been less successful than originally hoped andultimately limited the conclusions that could be drawn about the specific impact of the PPO initiative onlevels of offending, as distinct from other interventions and factors that may also have influenced offending
levels amongst PPOs. Thus it is not possible to state the extent to which the reduction in offending
observed in the PPO cohort is solely attributable to the PPO intervention. However, the interviews withboth PPO staff and offenders engaged in the programme were positive.
• The majority of PPOs were largely positive about the programme and reported a reduction or had
stopped offending altogether since engaging with the scheme;• PPOs were aware of the additional enforcement aspects of the scheme and the consequences of noncompliance. The PPO programme was viewed by offenders as more stringent than their previous
criminal justice experiences;• Regarding the rehabilitative elements of the programme, the majority of PPOs welcomed the
additional support and interventions they had received whilst on the scheme;• Staff were largely positive about the scheme, and were able to discuss instances of success for the
programme in terms of both ‘Catch and Convict’ and ‘Rehabilitate and Resettle’.
While no firm conclusions could be drawn around the specific impact of the PPO scheme on levels ofoffending at this stage, (as distinct from other interventions targeting this group of individuals), the results
are nonetheless encouraging.

VII. SUMMARY AND WHERE NEXT
A. Summary
The success of the Drug Interventions Programme and the PPO Programme has been well recognizednationally and at local level within partnerships who have seen the impacts on local offending and offenders.
That success has undoubtedly been the result of empowering those local partnerships and of taking a holistic
approach to the needs of offenders and ensuring that all agencies are engaged and can deliver as part of a coordinated system. The introduction of new powers has also been key to getting drug-misusing offenders
engaged in treatment and for prolific offenders the intensive use of intelligence, surveillance and legal
audacity have changed the way offenders are managed.
The current state of Drug Interventions Programme includes:• drug testing in over 175 custody suites – 98 BCUs;• drug workers in all custody suites and many courts;• testing at the point of arrest and required assessment for those testing positive implemented in all
DIP ‘intensive’ areas in England;• Restriction on Bail rolled out to all Local Justice Areas in England;• ‘integrated teams’ in intensive and non-intensive areas;• Conditional Cautioning powers in place;• targeted interventions for children and YP;• better integration with CARATs staff;• more DRR (community sentences) commencements and completions;• over £500m spent.
The current state of Prolific and other Priority Offenders Programme includes:• schemes operating in every area;• over 10,000 prolific adult offenders being intensively managed;• 4,000 young people on the Prevent and Deter scheme;• Premium service for PPOs in the criminal justice system – e.g. in the courts;• Schemes being aligned with DIP programme;• Evaluations evidencing significant crime reduction for PPOs.

81

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

B. Where Next?
The key challenge for the future is to convert these Programmes into an accepted way of working as astandard business model. The dangers of such a move are that the focus and enthusiasm that surround theProgrammes dissipates into much wider ways of working. As we are already seeing, the local partnerships
and agencies are taking the Programmes individually and jointly to new levels within their own areas.
In order to support this, the Home Secretary has given instruction that the Drug Interventions
Programme and the Prolific and other Priority Offender Programme should be closely aligned at local level.
This will provide an opportunity for offenders to be managed within and between both Programmes,
depending on the nature and risk of their offending profile at any one time. For example, a drug-misusing
offender who is using a very significant amount of Class A drugs and whose offending levels are escalating,
and who shows little sign of voluntarily complying with the DIP model, may be moved on to the PPO model
which contains a much more intense scrutiny regime with a much stronger enforcement component.
Conversely, a PPO who has developed a more controlled life and who is no longer considered suitable for the
PPO scheme, may be taken off that scheme and moved to the DIP scheme. A diagram of how this mightwork is given below.
••

self reports £1500 drug
usage a week on his DIR•

postcode matches crime
hot spot•

not known to PPOs
scheme or force intel
needs DIP interventions
but resistant and non compliant••

Moved to PPO scheme for
DIP treatment but
delivered in tougher
compliance environment

DIP•“X” is a PPO•

is coming to end ofcustodial sentence•

has had drug treatment
programme in prison
assessed as reduced
risk of reoffending••

but possibility of relapse
and needs continued
support•priorities mean should
leave PPO caseload•

Move to DIP caseload
for less intensive but
effective supervisionDe-escalation to DIP

Escalation to PPO•“X” is arrested for a trigger
offencetests positive for Class A
drugs

PPO

Beyond the alignment of the two Programmes, there is a wider ambition to move the two Programmes
into the wider offender management schemes. The United Kingdom is developing the National Offender
Management Service, which will be responsible for the statutory supervision of both the Prison and
Probation Service and the aspiration is to work towards a position where the DIP and PPO schemes can be
integrated with the National Offender Management Service approach. This will be supported by the new
Crime Reduction Strategy which, for the first time, will specifically focus on people as well as products, anda new Reducing Reoffending strategy which similarly recognizes the importance of case-managing individual
offenders.
In a further exciting development, some larger police forces are adopting offender management as a keyrole at the centre of their force strategy. This is all in recognition of the fact that so much work takes place incrime reduction and target hardening of individual types of crime or circumstances, that all crime isconnected by individuals and that the circumstances which drive those individuals to commit crime cannot
be addressed simply by making it harder for them to steal cars or burgle houses.

82

EFFECTIVE CORRECTIONAL PROGRAMMESBrian A. Grant, Ph.D*

I. INTRODUCTION
There are a wide variety of programmes that purport to provide effective treatment for the needs ofoffenders. However, only programmes that have been evaluated with appropriate research methodologies
and which demonstrate a reduction in recidivism should be considered for implementation. Many
programmes have been designed without adherence to the principles of risk, need and responsivity, as
defined by Andrews and Bonta (2002), and therefore may not provide the most effective treatment.
To determine which programmes are most likely to produce reductions in recidivism a number of authors
have conducted extensive reviews of the programme outcome literature through the use of meta-analysis(for example, Andrews et al. 1990; Gendeau, Little & Goggin, 1996; Lipsey, 1995; Lösel, 1995). The resultsfrom these reviews suggest a set of characteristics that can be used to judge the quality of a programme.
While research has shown positive effects of treatment on offender behaviour there remains a need forhigh quality research to support and further guide programme developers. In particular, programme researchis needed to demonstrate which programmes are effective across cultures and to identify those programmecharacteristics that may be sensitive to cultural differences. In addition, not all correctional jurisdictions areable to put in place extensive programming regimes and research is needed to demonstrate the best
approaches to use when resources are limited.

II. WHAT WORKS IN PROGRAMMING
Meta-analysis has also been used to identify the programme elements that are most likely to have an
impact on recidivism. A number of meta-analyses have shown similar results (Andrews et al. 1990; Gendeau,
Little & Goggin, 1996; Lipsey, 1995; Lösel, 1995), but the study by Andrews et al. (1990) illustrates theconclusions.
Andrews et al. (1990) reviewed 154 correctional treatment evaluation studies and classified theprogrammes they evaluated into one of four treatment groups:(i) Criminal sanctions:
Studies in which there was a variation in the sentence, but no variation in the rehabilitation component.
In these studies, options comparing more vs. less probation, or probation vs. incarceration were compared todetermine which produced a lower rate of recidivism.
(ii) Inappropriate correctional service:
These studies were not consistent with the risk/need principles. These studies provided intervention for
low risk offenders and used non-directive relationships based on psychodynamic counselling. Other kinds ofinterventions included in this group were group counselling programmes that did not use pro-social
modelling, non-directive educational and vocational programmes and programmes like Scared Straight,
designed to discourage continued criminal activity by showing what prison is like.
(iii) Appropriate treatment:
These options included delivery to higher risk offenders and used behaviourally oriented interventions.
They also compared rates of response and included a small number of non-behavioural studies that
* Director, Addictions Research Centre, Correctional Service Canada.

83

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

addressed criminogenic needs.

(iv) Unspecified treatment:This was the fourth category and was used where the treatment was unspecified, or could not beclassified as either appropriate or inappropriate.
The authors compared the recidivism results across the different programme types and the results of theanalyses are summarized in Table 5. The effectiveness measure used was the Phi coefficient, a measure of
association, in this case demonstrating the impact the programme type had on recidivism. A positive number
indicates the programme decreased recidivism, while a negative number indicates the programme increased
recidivism. As can be seen in Table 1, programmes that followed the risk/need principles and werestructured and behavioural in content have the highest Phi coefficient. Studies that evaluated the use of
criminal sanctions or used programme elements that were described above as being inappropriate either had
no effect, or increased recidivism.

Table 1: Type of Intervention and Impact on Recidivism
Type of treatment

Number of studies

Mean Phi

Appropriate

54

.30

Unspecified

32

.13

Inappropriate

38

-.06

Criminal sanctions

30

-.07

Summarizing the outcome of a number of meta-analyses, Gendreau (1996) has proposed a set of eight
principles of effective programme design. Listed below are the principles, with examples of how they areapplied in programmes currently being delivered at the Correctional Service of Canada:

1. The risk and need levels of offenders are specified and used in selection of participants and criminogenic
needs are targeted.
Offenders admitted to the Correctional Service undergo an extensive assessment of their risk and needs.
Risk is assessed by both dynamic and static risk factors to identify those offenders most in need ofprogramming. The areas of programming they require are identified by the needs assessment and only thoseneeds identified as relevant to the offender are addressed through programming. The assessment takes
between two and three months and includes a review of court and police documents, interviews with theoffender, and specialized assessment in areas such as substance use, education and learning, mental health,sexual offences and violence.
2. Programmes are highly structured with content and contingencies under the control of the facilitators,
not the participants, and antisocial attitudes are not reinforced.
All programmes have structured manuals that define the objectives and activities for each session.
Programme facilitators must follow the defined programme and must not change how the components aretaught. All of the programme components are covered consistently every time the programme is completed
and participants are unable to lead the programme off-track to meet personal goals that may be inconsistent
with the programme goals. Examples of pages from a well-structured programme manual are presented in
Figure 1.

84135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Figure 1: Example from the Aboriginal Offenders Substance Abuse Program Manual(Correctional Service, 2006)

85

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

3. Account for the response rate of participants.
For example, highly structured programmes are most appropriate for offenders who are not effective atconceptualizing ideas; higher levels of interpersonal interaction are required for high anxiety offenders; andadditional contingencies are put in place for offenders who have low motivation.
Core programmes are cognitive behaviourally based to meet the learning needs of offenders. They
include skill development exercises that make use of role playing and practice. In addition, specialized
programme options are available for women and Aboriginal offenders. These programmes address thedifferent impacts that criminal behaviour has on these groups and provide programming that is socially andculturally appropriate for the offenders’ needs. Offenders requiring high-intensity programming are often
less motivated to participate. Therefore, to encourage their continued participation more than one facilitator
is used to better engage the offender in the programme. These programmes also make use of one-on-one
counselling, in addition to highly structured group work, as a method of maintaining the motivation of theoffenders.

4. Offender characteristics are matched to staff; including personal characteristics (gender, age, life
experiences, training) and relationship styles (empathy, fairness, firmness, spontaneity).
Through training, programme facilitators are encouraged to show empathy and understanding of theoffenders’ challenges while at the same time remaining firm on the programme objectives and avoiding thereinforcement of antisocial attitudes. In the case of Aboriginal programmes, Aboriginal people are used as
facilitators to better match offenders and facilitators in terms of cultural backgrounds.
5. Positive reinforcers outnumber punishers by a ratio of 4:1.
Training sessions demonstrate how to deliver positive reinforcers during group sessions to encourageboth positive change in behaviour and participation in the programme activities.
6. Intervention periods of three to nine months are used since shorter periods do not provide sufficient time
for relationships to develop and there is need for time in the treatment setting to practice theinterventions learned.
High intensity programmes last three to four months, or longer, to provide sufficient time for the offender
to integrate the ideas that are discussed. For moderate and low intensity programmes the duration is lessthan recommended here, but this is overcome by the use of maintenance programmes that are delivered
after the completion of the main programme. The maintenance programmes may be delivered in theinstitution or in the community to reinforce the concepts learned in the programme and to further encourage
the offender to make the changes needed to address their needs.
7. Programme staff are adequately trained with an understanding of the theory behind the intervention;
they are provided with time to become experienced and familiar with the programme content before
delivering it; and smaller programmes (number of locations where the programmes are being delivered)are often observed to be more effective.
Training of facilitators can take up to two weeks and refresher courses are also offered. The programmemanuals and training plans outline in detail the theoretical models for the programmes and explain the
programme details. Training usually requires that facilitators deliver sample lessons from the training
manual and participate, as would an offender, in the programme lessons taught by other facilitators. The
hands-on experience with the programme materials ensures in-depth knowledge. All facilitators areevaluated at the end of training to determine if they have achieved sufficient knowledge and understandingof the programme prior to being able to deliver the proggramme in an institution or in the community. Ongoing follow-up monitoring of the facilitators is part of the programme quality control.

8. Assessment and evaluation of the programme is on-going and integral to the programme so changes inbehaviour and attitudes can be measured, skill development can be assessed and programme outcomescan be demonstrated.
Prior to the start of most programmes an assessment battery, consisting of a structured interview,questionnaires and standardized assessment tools are completed. During the programme and at its end,

86

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

these assessment tools are completed again to determine if there have been changes in the offenders’knowledge, attitudes, beliefs etc. Results of these assessments are used first by the facilitators to ensurethat the programme is achieving its objectives. These assessment results are also accumulated and used inresearch, with additional data on release outcome, to determine if the programme is effective in changing
recidivism and improving the release options of offenders.
In addition to these principles, Gendreau argues that the following components are important forsuccessful interventions:(i) Pro-social attitudes and behaviours are reinforced during treatment sessions;(ii) Pro-social behaviours are modelled, or demonstrated, in treatment;(iii) Role playing and practice of learned behaviours is needed;(iv) Focus on skill development;(v) Relapse prevention is included in the programme training.
In addition to identifying the characteristics of effective interventions, Gendreau offers the following
summary of interventions that are not effective with correctional populations:(i) Programmes that rely on psychodynamic therapies requiring high levels of introspection, self
evaluation and good verbal skills;(ii) Nondirective therapies in which antisocial attitudes are not challenged and groups in which criminal
attitudes and behaviours are reinforced;(iii) Treatment strategies that rely on punishment, such as ‘boot camp’, intensive supervision, and shock
incarceration;(iv) Programmes that externalize blame, fail to develop empathy for the victims of crime and are directed
at venting anger towards the system, or that only accept self-motivated offenders;(v) Programmes that provide intensive services to low risk offenders.
A final point on the effectiveness of programming: a study recently completed for the Correctional
Service (French & Gendreau, 2003) looked at the impact of correctional programming on offenders’behaviour while offenders were still in custody. The findings demonstrate that with increased programme
options institutional incidents decline. That is, with programming, correctional institutions become safer
places.

III. EXAMPLES OF TREATMENT APPROACHES
Four treatment approaches will be presented in this section, stages of change, relapse prevention,
motivational interviewing and harm reduction.

A. Stages of Change
Prochaska and DiClemente (1992) propose a model of readiness to change that allows treatment
providers to match treatment to an individual’s willingness to change. In their model, they propose fivestages of change and provide examples of what should be addressed at each stage and what is required forthe person to move to the next stage (Connors, Donovan & DiClemente, 2001). These stages are meant tobe representative of what happens and individuals will not pass through the stages as if they were discrete
events.
(i) Pre-contemplation
In the pre-contemplation phase an individual has no intent to change his or her behaviour and the
behaviour may be viewed as being both positive and negative for the individual. During this phase it is notuseful to focus on changing behaviour, but rather to use motivational techniques that will move the person to
the next phase. The person may need to acknowledge that there is a problem, develop a better
understanding of the negative consequences of the behaviour, and develop an understanding of the factorsthat trigger it. An individual at this stage may believe they are in control and can stop anytime and believethat the benefits of using outweigh the benefits of not using.
(ii) Contemplation
In the contemplation stage the individual is thinking about their problem and is looking for informationthat will help them to understand it. They are looking at the positive and negative characteristics of the
behaviour, but they are not yet prepared to stop it. Intervention at this stage involves providing increased

87

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

understanding of the effects of the behaviour, evaluation of life goals and consideration of the context inwhich the person may be living. In the case of offenders, if they are incarcerated it is a good opportunity topoint out the negative impacts that being in prison have on their life and what the alternatives might be.
At this stage, the person must make a decision to act if they are to move to the next stage. They might
begin to take some preliminary action such as meeting with a counsellor, changing their behaviour, or
reducing the risks associated with it.

(iii) Preparation
The third stage is preparation for change. Persons in this stage are prepared to change both theirattitudes and their behaviour. They may have taken some early steps to monitor their behaviour with thegoal of reducing the frequency of it. They are ready to be encouraged to participate in treatment sointervention should work to increase their commitment to stopping the behaviour. This can be done byfurther development of information on the consequences of the behaviour and the positive benefits they may
experience by reducing it or stopping completely.
At this stage individuals will need to establish goals and priorities that can be set to help them stop thenegative behaviour. They will need to develop a change plan that can guide their efforts to change.

(iv) Action
In the action stage individuals have begun to change their behaviour. They are learning new skills that
help them to remain free from the negative behaviour. Their desire to change at this stage makes them ideal
candidates for programmes that apply behaviour change practices in treatment. Treatment needs to provide
skills development that will assist in the cessation of the behaviour while providing alternatives to theirformer lifestyle. Participants also need to learn about what may trigger their negative behaviour so that they
can avoid these situations.
Prochask and DiClemente (1992) suggest that interventions in this stage should last for an average of six
months, and work is needed with the individual to increase their belief that they can maintain the desiredchanges in behaviour.

(v) Maintenance
The final stage in this model is maintenance, the process by which the individual maintains his or her
desired behaviour. This is a critical phase as it is the one that must last for the remainder of a person’s life ifthey are to avoid resuming their former ways. They must have in place practices that will allow them toavoid substance abuse and continue to practice the skills learned in treatment. Very often, treatment
programmes do not provide for maintenance support. Rather, the programme is delivered, the person
successfully completes it and then is expected to maintain the change without any additional support.
Effective programmes have maintenance components that provide support and skills reinforcement during
the maintenance stage.
An individual does not move through these stages in a straight line. They may move from precontemplation to preparation, only to slip back to the contemplation stage. Or, they move all the way tomaintenance, but as a result of life circumstances, may find themselves starting the process again (Connors,
Donovan & DiClemente, 2001). This is both expected and normal and is one of the reasons that effective
programmes stress the need for understanding of lapses in drug and alcohol use during and after treatment.

B. Relapse Prevention
Relapse prevention should be an important component of treatment programmes. As noted earlier,relapse is a common occurrence and the individual needs to be prepared for it when it occurs. The goals of
relapse prevention are to provide information useful in recognizing high risk situations that may lead torelapse and providing the skills needed to deal with the relapse when it does occur. At the time of a relapse,
it is important that the client does not give up.
Seven models of relapse are identified by Connors, Donvovan and DiClemente (2001), but there is aconsistency across the approaches they present. The model presented by Marlatt and Gordon (1985) isbased on cognitive behavioural principles and is a good example to use here. In this model, relapse is seen as

88

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

the interaction between the high risk situations associated with the behaviour and the individual's
perceptions of his or her ability to control the situation and therefore to avoid the behaviour. The individual’s
expectations about the usefulness of the behaviour in the particular situation will also play a role in whether
or not they choose to relapse (Connors, Donovan & DiClemente, 2001).
When the high risk situation arises, the individual who has learned coping skills to deal with the event or
environment will be more likely to resist the relapse. The coping skills that have been learned will provide
alternative courses of action which hopefully will avoid the relapse. Individuals who have not learned
appropriate coping skills will be less able to choose alternative behaviours and therefore will be more likely
to return to the undesired behaviour.
For the Marlatt model, there are two key components that must be addressed during treatment;
identifying high risk situations and developing coping skills to deal with them in a positive way. Treatment
programmes that use relapse prevention spend time helping the offender to identify their unique high risk
situations through review of past events and their outcomes. Events that consistently lead to the behaviour
become the targets for developing coping strategies.
Developing coping strategies follows the identification of the high risk situations. For each high risk
situation the offender must identify a number of alternative ways of dealing with the risk created. For
example, if meeting with friends in a large group is a high risk situation, then coping strategies might include
avoiding being with friends in large groups, leaving the group when it gets large, or finding alternative
activities that are normally done only in small groups of two or three people. Other coping strategies thathave been identified in the research literature include: reminders of the consequence of the behaviour,
thinking about the positive effects of avoiding the behaviour, recalling positive periods without the behaviour,and remembering that avoiding the behaviour is an important personal goal.
The coping strategies are identified on an individual basis following discussion in groups. After
identification of coping strategies, they must be practiced in role play activities. Through the identification ofhigh risk situations, development of coping strategies and practicing the strategies, the offender is better
prepared to deal with the situations when they occur.
Relapses are to be expected and may be viewed as learning experiences. Analysis of the relapse events,
the antecedent behaviours and the results, will assist in the development of more effective coping strategies
that can be used during the next high risk situation. Following the relapse, or lapse, the client needs to bereassured that they can continue without the behaviour. The treatment programme should include
discussion of what to do after a relapse and how to restart the process of avoiding of the behaviour. This is
one of the main reasons for the importance of treatment maintenance programmes. It is during themaintenance sessions that lapses and relapses can be addressed in a supportive environment.

C. Motivational Interviewing
Miller and Rollnick (1991) state that “motivational interviewing is a particular way to help people
recognize and do something about their present or potential problem. It is particularly useful with people
who are reluctant to change and ambivalent about changing.” (p. 52)
Many offenders are not willing to commit to changing their negative behaviour. There are too many
positive features associated with their lifestyle. They are in the pre-contemplative stage of change.
However, treatment providers must work to encourage these individuals to move forward along thecontinuum towards change. Motivational interviewing is one of the methods that have been shown to beeffective for starting the change process.
Miller and Rollnick (1991) present five general principles of motivational interviewing.

(i) Express empathy
For motivational interviewing to be effective the counsellor must express empathy with the client. The
client is accepted for what he or she is at the time of counselling, there is no judgment about how they
arrived at that point, or the consequences of their behaviour. Accepting the individuals as they are reduces
their resistance to the counselling setting. Ambivalence about change is acceptable for the client.

89

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74(ii) Develop discrepancy
Developing discrepancy has to do with gently demonstrating the conflicting values in a person's life andguiding them towards the more appropriate goals. This is different from confrontation that may result in
resistance to change. While discussing the current situation with the client the counsellor looks for positive
personal goals that the individual has and contrasts these with the current behaviours that prevent theachievement of these goals. The object is to encourage the client to see the importance of the alternative
goals they have and to give these greater priority than the desire to use drugs and alcohol.
(iii) Avoid argumentation
The counsellor needs to avoid argumentation to maintain a positive therapeutic relationship with theclient. However, this does not mean that the therapeutic interview follows the clients’ thoughts. Rather,inconsistencies are detected and used to correct judgments and beliefs. Miller and Rollnick (1991) refer tothis as “soft confrontation”. They also note that in many treatment settings argumentation can occur aroundthe need to admit to having a problem. This is unnecessary at this early stage of change, and may only berecognized as a goal much later. Recall that the purpose of motivational interviewing is to prepare the client
for change, to move them along the continuum so they are ready to start the change process, or in somecases after a relapse, to restart the process.
(iv) Roll with resistance
It is to be expected that the offender will be resistant to change, and it is the job of the counsellor inmotivational interviewing to work with this resistance to find ways to reframe and redirect the resistance.
Redirecting the resistance can motivate offenders to find their own solutions, which is the ultimate goal of
the programme.
(v) Support self-efficacy
The offender will often feel that they are unable to succeed in treatment so it is pointless for them to try.
Motivational interviewing helps the offender to believe that they can change; it works with their desire tochange and develops confidence that change is possible. The counsellor may encourage small steps towards
change to assist the offender to build on success.
Motivational interviewing is often used as an adjunct to other therapies. An offender who is in the precontemplative or even the contemplative stage of change is not ready for a directive behavioural programme.
Motivational interviewing can move them along so they better understand the need for change, see thevalue it may provide for them, and provide the belief that they have the ability to maintain the behaviour ifthey desire. Miller and Rollnick (1991) also point out that results from an assessment process can be aneffective tool during motivational interviewing. A parole officer reviewing the results of objective testing canprovide the offender with concrete evidence of how his or her behaviour compares to that of other offenders.
The report produced by the Correctional Service of Canada's Computerized Assessment of Substance
Abuse (CASA) is designed to be shared with the offender for this reason. It is our intention, in the near
future, to include normative data in the report, so offenders can see how their problem compares to that ofother people. This approach should help to address problems of denial that are common among drug andalcohol abusers.

D. Harm Reduction
Harm reduction is a concept that grew from awareness of the deadly consequences of injection drug use
following the appearance of HIV/AIDS. Through the very common practice of sharing syringes and otherdrug paraphernalia it became possible for an individual to suddenly have an incurable, fatal disease. People
working with drug abusers recognized the need to take some action that would lessen the probability of the
spread of disease without passing judgment on the drug using behaviour. From those origins, harm reduction
has become a strategy for dealing with the behaviour and consequences of all types of substance abuse and isapplicable to other behaviours as well. The approach is often misunderstood and rejected outright by somedecision makers and programme delivery experts due to a lack of understanding of the approach.
Harm reduction is more than a number of specific interventions. It is an approach to intervention thatseeks to reduce the negative consequences of substance abuse to the individual and to the society. Rather
than looking at drug or alcohol misuse as an inherently bad thing, harm reduction takes no position on the90

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

acceptability of the behaviour. However, it recognizes that substance abuse has negative effects andtherefore actions can be taken to reduce those harms. Simply reducing the harms may help to stabilize thebehaviour of individuals, assist in keeping them alive, and reduce the negative consequence for thecommunity in which the substance-abusing individual lives.
Harm reduction is not a treatment programme, but an intervention. However, one of the values of harm
reduction is that it can provide opportunities for further intervention with addicted individuals that may leadto their participation in more traditional programming, thereby leading to a reduction in their use of drugs
and alcohol, and in many cases to their total abstinence from drug and alcohol use, if that is warranted.
Marlatt (1998a) provides a more detailed picture of harm reduction approaches in different countries as it
relates to different substances, populations and challenges. Marlatt (1998b) provides a set of five principles
for harm reduction (pp. 49 - 58):(i) Harm reduction is a public health alternative to the moral, criminal and disease models of drug use andaddiction.
Harm reduction does not presume that substance abuse is morally wrong and must therefore be punishedusing criminal sanctions, nor does it take the view that substance abuse is a disease that requires treatment.
However, given the negative consequences of substance abuse, encouraging people to stop using is a goal as
indicated in the next principle.
(ii) Harm reduction recognizes abstinence as an ideal outcome, but accepts alternatives that reduce harm.
Harm reduction can be viewed as having a continuum of responses. At one end of the continuum is the
cessation of all substance-abusing behaviours, thereby eliminating all of the harm associated with substanceabuse. At the other end of the continuum is any small reduction in the harms caused by substance abuse.
Frequently, harm reduction becomes associated with only the most controversial options such as safe
injection sites. While safe injection sites are at the leading edge of harm reduction, they are not the place tostart developing a harm reduction policy. Correctional systems can take a harm reduction approach byensuring that its policies and procedures go as far as they can to reduce the harms associated with substanceabuse.
(iii) Harm reduction has emerged primarily as a ‘bottom up’ approach based on addict advocacy, rather
than a ‘top-down’ policy promoted by drug policy makers.
As a result of how the harm reduction approach was developed, it is well accepted and meets the needs ofpeople who require intervention.
(iv) Harm reduction promotes low-threshold access to services as an alternative to traditional, highthreshold approaches.
Traditionally, many programmes required a commitment to total abstinence before a person could be
accepted into treatment. If there was drug or alcohol use during the programme the person was removed
from treatment. These types of strict rules set a high threshold for participation. Programmes that have lowthreshold access have very few rules for initiating and participating in the intervention. Effective needle
exchange programmes do not require anything of the substance abuser other than collecting clean syringes.
It is easy to imagine a needle exchange programme that required participation in treatment, completion offorms, etc. to obtain clean needles. Experience has shown that any of these requirements reduces theeffectiveness of needle exchange. Another example of a low threshold programme is a methadone treatment
programme offered in Halifax, Canada, in which there are a minimum number of requirements forparticipation, unlike most methadone programmes. Individuals in this programme must obtain theirmethadone each day, and must undergo urinalysis to check for the presence of other drugs. The presence ofother drugs results in counselling, and cessation of methadone only occurs if the level of use of other drugs
is seen as a threat to health.
(v) Harm reduction is based on the tenets of compassionate pragmatism versus moralistic idealism.
Making condoms available in correctional settings is one example of compassionate pragmatism. We
recognize that sexual activities will occur in prison, we want to prevent the spread of diseases, and providing
condoms does not provide any security risk, therefore they are made available.

91

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Harm reduction approaches are not only applicable to treatment after an addiction or problem behaviour
has occurred. Harm reduction approaches can be applied to prevention programmes as well. Recognizingthat there is safe and unsafe behaviour associated with an activity and promoting the safer action is one way
to reduce harm. Programmes to reduce drinking and driving are an example of harm reduction programmes
at the prevention level. These programmes recognize that people will consume alcohol away from home, andto reduce the likelihood of accidents, provide alternatives to driving. These alternatives include taking a taxi,
arranging for a designated driver, or staying overnight at the location of the event.

IV. PROGRAMME RESEARCH
Determining what works and developing an evidence based correctional approach requires anunderstanding of research and its importance. Ideally, a correctional agency will have, at least, a small
number of research staff who can carry out research projects and maintain knowledge of new and developing
trends in the research world. Where research staff are not available, efforts are needed to build relationships
with universities and colleges to encourage research in corrections that is consistent with local cultural andsocial norms.

A. Research Needs
Research requires the systematic collection of information, but this information can serve more than one
person. Basic information on when offenders are admitted to an institution and when they leave can be
useful for research. Assessment information for offenders may not only assist in ensuring services aredelivered appropriately, but can assist correctional management in planning and developing their correctional
systems.
To conduct research on an intervention, it is necessary to know what is being evaluated. That is, it must
be possible to describe the programme or intervention and the intervention must be applied consistently so
all participants receive the same service. It is not possible to effectively evaluate programmes that are
constantly changing since one will never know what is producing the observed results.
With knowledge about the offender population being studied it is possible to subset the population to lookat how the intervention impacts different groups. Under the responsivity principle we would expect
differential effects for subgroups of the population. Therefore, knowing the population allows one todetermine who the programme works for. Examples of characteristics one might look at are age and gender,
risk and need, type of crime committed and level of motivation.
The third requirement is for measures of outcome. Outcome measures are the things that you hope tochange through the intervention. Early in the programme development cycle the behaviours that are being
targeted for change should be clearly identified and these behaviours should be monitored. In correctionalsettings, the easiest behaviour to measure is recidivism. While this is often a relatively crude measure, it is
the goal of most programming to reduce the commission of new offences. Measuring recidivism then is the
key element in evaluating correctional programmes.
However, waiting until recidivism occurs can take a long time and often estimates of the effectiveness ofprogrammes are needed earlier. In addition, there is value in determining if there are immediate impacts of aprogramme on attitudes and behaviour, impacts that may be reduced over time. Intermediate measures ofoutcome can be very effective in understanding which parts of a programme or intervention are effective,
and in new interventions, can identify problems early in the development process. Intermediate measures ofoutcome might include assessment of attitudes to determine if there was change, assessment ofunderstanding and learning to determine if the information presented has been understood, and assessmentof the level of programme participation and programme performance.
For a correctional organization without a strong history of research support it can be challenging toconvince senior managers of the value that research can provide. When resources are limited, and funds
used to pay for research must be taken from programme funds, it is easy to decide that research is an
unnecessary luxury. However, research helps to answer fundamental questions, and can actually lead toincreased efficiencies in the operation of the correctional system. Providing programming is expensive andknowing who it works best for, under what conditions, and what intensity of programming is needed,
increases the probability that resources will be used in the most efficient manner.

92

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Research helps to eliminate programmes and interventions that do not have an impact on the offender.
Many interventions have little or no impact on offender behaviour and yet are continued at great costbecause management does not know the impact.

B. Measuring Recidivism
The effectiveness of a correctional intervention is frequently measured using recidivism. However,defining what is meant by recidivism is important as there are a number of factors that influence the rate ofrecidivism that is observed.
In the United States recidivism is often measured by using arrest information. This is available in anational database from their national police, but it must be remembered that arrest does not meanconviction. Therefore, in the U.S., recidivism rates may appear higher than in other countries that use
convictions as a measure of recidivism. In Canada, recidivism is usually measured in terms of convictions
because the national police force maintains an extensive database containing all convictions for criminal
offences. It is necessary when reading research reports, and when writing reports, to be clear about the typeof measure being used to calculate recidivism.
Other factors that can affect the recidivism rate include the length of the follow-up period, the status of
the offender during the follow-up period, and the types of offences included in the measurement ofrecidivism. The length of the follow-up period is the most critical factor in studies that report recidivism
rates. Short follow-up periods will often result in evaluations making a very weak programme look
successful, as the offenders have not had time to commit additional crimes, or more accurately, to be
detected by official sources (the police) for having committed a new crime. For this reason, studies thatreport recidivism with a follow-up period of less than six months are not very useful. The minimum period of
follow-up should be one year, and two years is much better. To determine the length of the follow-up period
needed one must also consider the type of offender being studied. For example, sex offenders who havechild victims must be followed for extended periods of time, as their recidivism generally takes longer toshow in official records.
The status of the offender during the follow-up period is also important. An offender who is being
supervised in the community on parole will be more likely to be detected for having committed new offences
than one who is not being supervised. Therefore, studies using supervised and unsupervised offenders must
be careful to correct for the different probabilities of detection.
Finally, there must be a determination of what types of offences will be included in the recidivism
measure. Frequently, offences that receive fines only, or very short sentences (less than 30 days), are notincluded in follow-up data collection, particularly if the group being studied has in the past been convicted ofserious offences. It is necessary to ask if a conviction for a minor assault that results in five days in jailshould be considered a failure, or a slip that does not help to understand the problem being investigated.
Follow-up periods may be fixed or variable. Studies with fixed follow-up periods may include periods after
the sentence has been completed. Variable follow-up periods are often used when a group of offenders withdifferent release dates are used in a study, but the study must conclude on a particular date. The problem
with variable follow-up periods is that those released last will have the shortest follow-up periods andtherefore, will have lower recidivism rates. If the type of offender is associated with the time of release in
the study and variable follow-up periods are used, then results could be biased.
Alternative measures of recidivism have been used in many studies such as return to custody and failureof conditional release. While these are not truly recidivism measures, as they do not require that a crime becommitted, they are useful measures of criminal tendencies for research on programme outcomes. It may bethat keeping an offender in the community for an additional three or four months is a positive outcome.
Return to custody as a measure of outcome is very simple to obtain with a correctional system where alladmissions are recorded centrally. An alternative to return to custody is a measure of failure on conditional
release such as parole. This outcome measure is intermediate, and may not result from new offending, but it
does reflect deterioration in behaviour in the community.
In research conducted by the Correctional Service a combination of measures of outcome are frequently

93

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

used. The most basic measure is return to custody, and this provides information on how well the offender
did after release. However, it is also useful to know if the return to custody occurred as a result of parole
violation or as a result of a new criminal conviction, therefore we also collect this information. It is possible
to refine the measure of recidivism by looking at the type of new offence, such as whether it was a new
violent offence, or non-violent offence. Sometimes it is useful to know if the new offence is similar toprevious offences or reflects a change in behaviour that may be indicative of positive outcomes.
Measuring recidivism as a percentage of offenders committing new offences in a fixed period of time isuseful, but there are more effective measures that provide additional information. For example, survival
analysis provides information on how long offenders remained in the community, the rate of failure over thefull range of the follow-up period and provides statistical tests for comparing different groups. How survival
analysis helps in the evaluation of a treatment programme can be seen in the following example. A
programme is evaluated and the final recidivism rate is the same for both groups after two years. However,survival analysis might reveal that failures in the untreated group occurred mostly in the early part of thesentence; while for the treated group failure occurred in the latter part of the follow-up period. If one only
looks at the overall rate it would appear that the intervention had no effect, but the survival analysis would
reveal a very real effect, keeping some offenders out of prison for a longer period of time.

V. PROGRAMME EXAMPLES
A. Women Offenders Substance Abuse Programme
The Women Offenders Substance Abuse Programme (WOSAP) has been developed over two and halfyears and will be implemented in women’s correctional facilities in Canada in June of 2003. The programme
has a number of unique characteristics that represent attempts to design a programme consistent withevidence based programme development (Hume & Grant, 2001).
First, the programme was designed through consultation with women offenders, experts in women
offender treatment, and operational staff at correctional facilities. Early consultations with international
experts indicated the programming we had available did not adequately meet the needs of women offenders.
Following a decision to develop a new programme, additional consultations were held to determine theprogramming model that was to be used and the structure of the programme (Hume & Grant, 2001). In its
design and development, the programme was to be women-centred, not a derivation of a programme formen, and was to address the unique characteristics of women with substance abuse problems.
The second feature of the programme is that it takes account of the entire sentence. Rather than aprogramme that lasts for set period of time, the programme is designed to deliver elements throughout theentire sentence, and do this in a consistent manner. While we refer to it as a single programme it is actuallyfour programmes.
The third feature of the programme is that it tries to combine two approaches to treatment that have inthe past been seen as incompatible. To meet current standards of effective correctional programming the
programme needed to have a cognitive behavioural component that would encourage skill development foraddressing substance abuse problems. However, experts in women’s programming advised that the
problems of substance abuse for women are often entangled with relationship issues and if these are notaddressed then it is likely the programme would not be successful. The challenge has been to combine these
two approaches within one programme.
As noted above, the programme has four major components:(i) Education
The education component of the programme has eight sessions designed to teach women about thenegative effects of substance abuse on their lives, both long and short-term effects; to provide basic
information on how to deal with triggers that cause cravings; and to motivate them to continue the processof change. It is anticipated that all women offenders will be assigned to participate in this component of the
programme as almost all women offenders have a connection to the problems of substance abuse either
through their own experience, or through a spouse or family member.

94

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS(ii) Intensive treatment
The intensive treatment component consists of two parallel programmes; one designed from a cognitive
behavioural perspective and one based on relational theory. These programmes proceed in parallel so issues
discussed in one part are also discussed in the other, ensuring consistency of message and learning. Each
programme is 20 sessions in length.
(iii) Maintenance
The maintenance component is a 20 week follow-up programme with sessions offered once a week. To
ensure continuity with treatment in the community the same maintenance programme is available after
offenders are released. This approach ensures there is a consistent experience in both the institution and thecommunity. One of the major challenges we face with the programme is how to deliver the maintenancesession in the community when the women participants are widely dispersed across the country.
(iv) Community building
The community building component of the programme is designed to create an environment within theinstitution that promotes a drug and alcohol free lifestyle and provides support to those offenders who aretrying to change their behaviour. This component has two characteristics; peer led discussion groups andinstitution-wide activities. The peer led discussion groups have programming material available, but theparticipants choose the topic to be discussed each week. The community-building exercises include healthactivities involving correctional staff, social activities, and community activities in which individuals fromoutside the prison come to present information of relevance to the women.
A preliminary analysis of the results from this programme was very favourable. The research indicatedthat the women in the programme believed the programme met their needs, the retention rate in the
programme was high, and there were changes in knowledge and attitudes observed after the programme
was completed (Furlong & Grant, 2006; Grant, Furlong & Hume, 2007). Results associated with release
have not been completed yet.

B. Intensive Support Units
In an attempt to provide environments for offenders that will support their efforts to reduce drug andalcohol dependency, Intensive Support Units (ISU) have been established in all prisons (Grant, Varis &Lefebvre, 2004). These units are part of the regular prison environment, but they provide increased
assurance that drugs are not available. Offenders wishing to live in the units must sign an agreement inwhich they accept increased testing for the presence of drugs and increased searching for drugs and alcohol.
The staff of these units receive additional training in the problems of substance abuse and the challenges
faced by offenders with an addiction. With the training, staff can provide additional support to the offenders
when they experience problems.
To evaluate the effectiveness of the units, participants completed a number of surveys when they firstjoined the units and again when they moved to other prisons or were released. Intermediate measures of the
impact of the units indicate that both staff and inmates believe the units will make a difference in their ability
to stay away from drugs and alcohol, that the units will have a positive effect on their lives after release from
custody, and that the units have fewer drugs available. Analyses of misconduct and search data for the units
indicates that there are increased searches, but few drugs are found and misconduct by offenders in the units
is lower than that of offenders in other units (Varis, 2001). Release outcome measures indicate that offenders
who participated in the ISU were released earlier, remained in the community longer, and were less likely tobe readmitted to prison (Grant, Varis & Lefebvre, 2005).

C. Methadone Maintenance Treatment
Methadone maintenance treatment has been available to offenders in the Correctional Service for anumber of years. However, until recently only those offenders who had been prescribed methadone in thecommunity could receive it in an institution. Recently, a study was conducted to compare the releaseoutcomes of offenders who had participated in the methadone maintenance programme and a comparisongroup consisting of those offenders who had not participated in the methadone programme.
Previous research has indicated that methadone maintenance treatment can produce reductions in illicit
opiate use (Marsch, 1998), reductions in other drug use (Fischer et al., 1999), HIV risk behaviours (Darke,

95

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Kaye & Finlay-Jones, 1998), criminal behaviour (Coid et al., 2000; Maddux & Desmond, 1997), and access tohealth care (Marsch, 1998). The purpose of this study was to determine if we could identify a reduction incriminal behaviour after release from prison for those offenders who participated in the MMT programme.
One of the challenges in research of this type is to determine who should be in the comparison group.
The offenders who receive MMT are the most seriously addicted offenders and generally the mostproblematic. They have a high rate of recidivism so comparing them to the general population of offenders
would certainly indicate that MMT had no effect. We were able, within our data systems, to identify a groupof offenders who tested positive for opiates in random drug testing and who were identified at admission as
having a substance abuse problem. This group served as a comparison for the MMT group.

Figure 2. Survival analysis for MMT study: readmission rate
MMT Groupc2 (1) = 6.02, p < 0.05

30

28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

Proportion not readmitted

Non-MMT GroupMonths

The results of the study are summarized in Figure 2 in the form of a survival analysis. The survival
analysis indicates that both groups had a high probability of failure in the community. While more than 50%of the MMT group was readmitted to prison within 24 months of their release, almost 65% of thecomparison group were readmitted. The observed differences are statistically reliable. Similar results wereidentified when new offences were used as the outcome measure, but the results were not statisticallyreliable.

D. High Intensity Substance Abuse Programme (HISAP)1
The HISAP is an example of a programme that was designed to meet the needs of offenders with themost serious problems, in this case, serious substance abuse problems. The programme includes 90
sessions and takes three to four months to complete. It takes the work of two facilitators to maintain theattendance of offenders in the programme as these offenders are some of the most resistant to treatment.
The research on the programme indicated that most participants remained for the full programme, and thatthose who left the programme early were the most likely to reoffend (Grant, et al., 2003).
Outcome results from the research indicated that programme participants were released earlier in theirsentence than a comparison group, were more likely to have received a discretionary release (day parole orfull parole), and spent more time in the community after release. They were less likely to commit a newoffence after release than those in the comparison group.

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Correctional treatment programmes have been shown to be effective in reducing recidivism. By reducing
recidivism, programmes can reduce the cost of correctional operations by shortening the time that offenders
1 HISAP is now known as the high intensity component of the National Substance Abuse Program (NSAP-High).

96

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

need to remain in prison. In addition, reducing recidivism reduces the overall number of crimes that arecommitted and makes communities safer.
Not all programmes will be equally effective in reducing recidivism and research is needed to determine
which programmes will actually reduce recidivism. Using meta-analysis, researchers have identified thecharacteristics of programmes that are most likely to have a positive impact on recidivism. Ensuring that
programmes have these characteristics is one means by which correctional administrators can increase theprobability of finding effective programmes.
This paper presented the results from a number of studies of effective programmes that are consistent
with the characteristics of effective programmes, and that were designed with the principles of risk, need
and responsivity (Andrews & Bonta, 2002). These programmes illustrate both how to design effective
programmes and how to conduct research that will demonstrate their effectiveness. When resources are
scarce, it is necessary to find those interventions that will have an effect and use these only. Unproveninterventions should be discontinued, or used on a very limited basis while they are being evaluated.
Finally, some caution needs to be exercised in transferring programming interventions from one culturalcontext to another. It is expected that the principles presented here will apply across a wide variety ofcultures, but this has not been demonstrated empirically. As new programmes are developed, based on theprinciples presented, they should be evaluated and the results of these evaluations should be shared throughresearch and management networks.

97

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

REFERENCES
Andrews, D.A.; Zinger, I.; Hoge, R.D.; Bonta, J.; Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F.T. (1990). Does treatment work? A
psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.
Andrews, D.A. and Bonta J. (2002). The Psychology of Criminal Conduct . Cincinnati, OH, Anderson
Publishing Co.
Coid, J.; Carvelli, A.; Kittler, Z.; Healey, A. & Henderson, J. (2000). “Opiates, criminal behaviour, andmethadone treatment.” http:/www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/index.htm.
Connors, G.J.; Donovan, D.M. & DiClemente, C.C. (2001). Substance abuse treatment and the stages ofchange. New York: Guilford Press.
Darke, D.; Kaye, S. & Finlay-Jones, R. (1998). Drug use and injection risk-taking among prison methadone
maintenance patients. Addictions, 93, (1169-1175).
DiClemente, C.C. & Prochaska, J.O. (1998). Towards a comprehensive, transtheoretical model of change:
Stages of change and addictive behaviours. In W.R. Miller & N. Heather (Ed.s), Treating addictive
behaviours, 2nd edition, pp. 3 - 24. New York: Plenum Press.
Fischer, B.; Glicksman, L.; Rehm, J.; Daniel, N. & Medved, W. (1999). Comparing opiate users in methadone
treatment with untreated opiate users: Results of a follow-up study with a Toronto opiate user cohort.
Canadian Journal of Public Health, 90, (299-303).
French, S; & Gendreau, P. (2003). Safe and humane corrections through effective treatment (R-139). Ottawa:
Correctional Service Canada.
Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism:
What works! Criminology, 20, 575-607.
Gendreau, P. (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In A. T. Harland (Ed.), Choosing
correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (pp. 117-130).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Grant, B.A.; Kunic, D.; MacPherson P.; McKeown C. & Hansen, E. (2003) The High Intensity Substance
Abuse Programme (HISAP): Results from the pilot programmes (R-). Ottawa: Correctional Service
Canada.
Grant, B.A.; Furlong, A. & Hume, L. (2007) Preliminary results from the Women Offenders Substance
Abuse Programme.
Grant, B.A. & Furlong, A. (2006) The Women Offenders Substance Abuse Programmes: Preliminary results.
Forum on Corrections Research.
Grant, B.A.; Varis, D.D. & Lefebvre, D. (2004). Intensive Support Units (ISU) for Federal Offenders with
Substance Abuse Problems: An Impact Analysis (R-151). Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.
Hume, L. & Grant, B.A. (2001). Substance abuse programmeming : A proposed structure (R-120). Ottawa:
Correctional Service Canada.
Johnson, S.L.; van de Ven, J.T.C. & Grant, B.A. (2001). Institutional methadone maintenance treatment :Impact on release outcome and institutional behaviour (R-119). Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.
Lipsey, M. (1995). What do we learn from 400 research studies on the effectiveness of treatment withjuvenile delingquents? In J. McGuire (Ed.) What works: Reducing reoffending (pp. 63-78). Chichester,
England: Wiley.
Lösel, F. (1995). Increasing consensus in the evaluation of offender rehabilitation? Lessons from recent
research syntheses. Psychology, Crime & Law, 2, (19-39).

98

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

Maddux, J.F., & Desmond, D.P. (1999). Outcomes of methadone maintenance 1 year after admission. Journalof drug issues, 27, (225-238).
Marlatt, G.A. (1998a). Harm reduction: Pragmatic strategies for managing high-risk behaviours. New York:
Guildord Press.
Marlatt, G.A. (1998b). Basic principles and strategies of harm reduction. In G.A. Marlatt (Ed.), (1998a).
Harm reduction: Pragmatic strategies for managing high-risk behaviours. New York: Guildord Press.
Marsch, L.A. (1998). The efficacy of methadone maintenance interventions in reducing illicit opiate use, HIVrisk behaviour, and criminality: A meta-analysis. Addictions, 93, (515-532).
Marlatt, G.A. & Gordon, J.R. (Ed.s) (1985). Relapse prevention. New York: Guilford Press.
Miller, W.R. & Rollnick, (1991). Motivational interviewing: Preparing people to change addictive behaviour.
New York: Guilford Press.
Prochaska, J.O. & DiClemente, C.C.(1992). Stages of change in the modification of problem behaviour. In M.
Hersen; R.M. Eisler, & P.M. Miller (Ed.s), Progress in behaviour modification. Vol. 28, pp 183-218.
Sycamore, Illinois: Sycamore Publishing Co.
Varis, D. (2001). Intensive support units for federal inmates: A descriptive review. Forum on Corrections
Research, 13 (3). Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.

99

MOBILIZATION OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES
AND SUCCESSFUL REINTEGRATION OF OFFENDERS
Mr. Kwok Leung-ming*

I. INTRODUCTION
This paper gives an account of the philosophy of the Hong Kong Correctional Services (HKCS) to
facilitate the reintegration of offenders into the community as law-abiding citizens and the various initiatives
taken by the HKCS to that end and to help reduce crime, including continuous improvement of rehabilitative
services, involvement of the community, and mobilization of community resources.

II. REHABILITATIVE PHILOSOPHY
While penal custody is the primary sanction against people who have breached the criminal code, andserves the purposes of deterring offenders and others from committing the same crime, we should neverforget that offenders come from our communities. Eventually, most of them will return to live with us. It istherefore essential that they are not caught in a vicious circle of reoffending. Correctional systems are
expected to make those who pass through become better persons when they leave than when they enter,and to pose less of a threat to society. As asserted by Elliott Currie (1998), if the system neglects tosuccessfully help offenders achieve a productive lifestyle, a steadily increasing cohort of ex-offenders withlimited life chances will be on the street. Their chances of success in the legitimate world have, if anything,
been severely diminished by their prison experiences. Though punishment may produce short-term
reductions in the crime rate, only rehabilitation and treatment can produce long-term gains.
HKCS recognizes that the goal of rehabilitative philosophy is to change an offender’s character, attitudes
or behaviour patterns so as to diminish his or her criminal propensities (Hirsh 1976). In recent years,
numerous international researches (Andrews et al. 1990; McGuire et al. 1995; Day & Howells 2002) revealthat rehabilitation programmes can be effective in reducing reoffending. Rehabilitation of offenders has since
become higher on the agenda of the correctional administrators. Thanks to globalization and professional
exchanges of best practices with overseas counterparts, HKCS has been able to learn and develop arehabilitation policy that fits the local context.

III. PARADIGM SHIFT TOWARDS REHABILITATIONA correctional administration and its staff have to believe in offender rehabilitation before they walk thetalk and commit to the cause. HKCS has undergone a major transformation in the last three decades, which
can be highlighted by the following events:(i) we changed our name from the original “Prisons Department” to “Correctional Services
Department” in 1982, signifying an important aspect of our work on offender rehabilitation in
addition to custodial service;(ii) we formulated our “Vision, Mission and Values”1 (VMV) statements in 1996 to strengthen ourcommitment to rehabilitation of offenders and updated them subsequently by benchmarking with thebest practices of other advanced correctional administrations, ensuring that HKCS is geared up to
meet the new challenges ahead. To bring our staff on board, we implemented a corporate culturalchange project in 1999 to develop, resonate and reinforce an appropriate corporate culture across the
Department in order to match with our VMV statements;*Commissioner, Correctional Services Department, The Government of Hong Kong SAR, China.
1 See Appendix 1 for details.

100135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS(iii) we established a Rehabilitation Division in 1998 to co-ordinate the delivery of comprehensive
rehabilitative services and have since adopted a proactive approach to encourage community
participation in providing and improving rehabilitative services;(iv) we adopted a new service emblem in 1999. The design of the emblem centres on the motto “Wecare” which represents our teamwork to pursue the ultimate goal of offender rehabilitation throughthe combined process of safe custody and care;(v) we officially replaced the Chinese term of “discharged prisoners” with “rehabilitated persons” in2000 to reduce stigmatization and to encourage greater community support and acceptance of
rehabilitated offenders; and(vi) we restructured the Rehabilitation Division last year to prepare for a new assessment system2 thatclassifies offenders according to reoffending risks and rehabilitative needs for better programme
matching. The idea is to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of rehabilitation services to address
the needs of offenders and the diverse expectations of the community, apart from building thecapacities of the Division. The restructuring is also aimed at further strengthening the organizational
culture and mindset of our correctional officers towards the rehabilitation of offenders throughinnovative and strategic initiatives.
Apart from organization and staff, we also strive to foster cultural changes among prisoners andrehabilitated offenders. They are encouraged to equip themselves and participate in cultural activities, hobby
classes and community education programmes during their detention. To demonstrate their talents and help
reinforce their confidence in turning over a new leaf, we produced in the past few years a series of music
CDs and video CDs collecting songs composed and performed by prisoners for free distribution to the
public. Prisoners with talents for music, dancing and other performing arts are encouraged to stage
performances. Serving prisoners and rehabilitated offenders share their personal experience with students
and young people under the Personal Encounter with Prisoners Scheme, Green Haven Scheme and“Options in Life” student forums.3 These arrangements have encouraged prisoners and rehabilitatedoffenders to come forward voluntarily, telling the public about their experience of losing freedom underincarceration, the problems encountered during their reintegration, their remorse for causing harm to theirfamilies as well as to the victims, and their determination to turn over a new leaf. Apart from educating the
public on crime prevention, all these measures aim to assist prisoners to recognize their own values andpotential, as well as to develop their positive self-image and confidence in reformation.

IV. REHABILITATIVE SERVICES AND PROGRAMMESApart from carrying out the mission of detaining offenders in a decent and safe environment, we are also
tasked with providing comprehensive rehabilitative services and programmes with a long-term objective of
reducing crime. The purposes of these services are to prepare offenders for their eventual release byhelping them to address their criminogenic issues, develop a socially acceptable behaviour, strengthen theirconfidence to cope with difficulties upon discharge, and enhance their potential for securing decent
employment. These are mainly achieved through discipline building and various services including presentence assessment, programme services, psychological services, education, vocational training, andsupervision services rendered to the discharged offenders.
To facilitate effective planning and delivery of rehabilitative services and to arouse public awareness on
the problems and needs of rehabilitated offenders, HKCS conducted a survey covering some 1,600
discharged offenders and serving prisoners in 2000. The survey revealed that the most immediate problems
at the initial stage of their release were securing employment, improving family relationships, seeking
financial assistance and looking for a dwelling place. In response to the findings of this survey, measures andinitiatives were taken to address the identified needs. Internally, we organized more structured familyrelated activities for offenders to rebuild relationships, conduct suitable job training techniques to assist
offenders in securing employment after release, and provide financial assistance to needy prisoners for

2 See para. 13 for details.
3 See Appendix 2 for details.

101

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

various educational pursuits. Externally, we established a telephone hotline to provide timely guidance andcrisis intervention services for discharged offenders, provide information on non-government organizations(NGOs) and trust funds which discharged offenders with pressing financial needs can approach for shortterm cash assistance, identify those offenders in need of longer-term aid and refer them to the Social
Welfare Department for financial support under the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance Scheme,4 andprovide financial assistance to discharged offenders under statutory supervision to pursue education
programmes and employment-related courses. Working on the foregoing measures, we further developedand improved the various rehabilitative services on an ongoing basis, which are highlighted in the following
paragraphs.

A. Education and Vocational Training
Apart from making ex-offenders productive, employment can also help them take care of their families,
develop valuable life skills and strengthen their self-esteem and social connectedness. Research has
indicated that having a legitimate job lessens the chances of reoffending following release from prison(Sampson and Laub 1997; Harer 1994). HKCS is conscious of the importance of employment to rehabilitatedoffenders and has been strengthening employment service support for offenders through education andvocational training.
For offenders under 21 years of age, they receive half-day vocational training on industrial or commercial
skills, and half-day education programmes. It is comparatively easier to reform young offenders since they
are not yet hardened in criminal ways and could be steered in the right direction. More importantly, it could
prevent huge damage and social costs that would be incurred to the community if offenders could
successfully turn over a new leaf at an early stage.
All adult prisoners are required to engage in useful work unless physically unfit. This arrangement
enables prisoners to develop good work habits and a sense of responsibility on top of learning the spirit of
teamwork and acquiring concepts and basic skills in specific trades. After all, engaging prisoners in industrial
activities fosters a stable penal environment which is conducive to effective implementation of different
rehabilitative programmes. Having said that, HKCS also arranges market-oriented vocational training
courses for prisoners on an ad hoc basis, such as exhibition-booth setting, cleaning and pest control, beauty
care and manicure, etc. In 2007, we plan to provide 450 such training places in adult correctional institutions.
To further enhance prisoners’ employability upon release, we have taken a proactive effort by setting up avocational training centre at Lai Sun Correctional Institution in July 2006, which will eventually provide 260
full-time training places for local male prisoners. The training programmes cover a wide range of trades
including computer skills training, mechanical craft, food and beverage services, kitchen assistant training,
printing and desktop publishing and hairdressing, with clerical training and commercial studies, painting anddecorating, air-conditioning and refrigeration, and electrical fitting and installation to be introduced at a later
date. Participants who have completed the courses and passed skills certification examination will obtainaccredited certificates issued by the relevant authorities.
We encourage adult prisoners to participate in self-studying courses or distance learning programmes
run by the Open University of Hong Kong and other tertiary institutions to make optimal use of theresources and expertise from external accredited educational organizations. We have embarked on a new
project entitled “Continuing Education for Offenders” in collaboration with the School of Continuing andProfessional Education of the City University of Hong Kong, aiming at arousing participants’ interest in
pursuing further studies. “A Taste of University”, one of the programmes under the project, was launched in
September 2005 and March 2006 wherein ten two-hour lectures on a variety of subjects were given by
university lecturers to offenders. The topics included sociology, psychology, business, environmental
protection, computer and social skills. A reading programme to promote reading culture has since beenlaunched in October 2006.

B. Risks and Needs Assessment and Management Protocol for Offenders
Our latest initiative to improve rehabilitative services is the adoption of a scientific and evidenced-based

4 The Scheme provides a safety net for those who cannot support themselves financially.

102

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

approach to offender management and rehabilitation. Supported by automation and specialized clinicalmeasures, we introduced last year a “Risks and Needs Assessment and Management Protocol for
Offenders” for evaluating the custodial and reoffending risks and rehabilitative needs of offenders. From
January 2007, we will start to arrange programme matching for serving local inmates to address theirreoffending risk and rehabilitative needs in phases. These integrated procedures, in addition to shaping ourrehabilitation strategy in the foreseeable future, will take us to the forefront of the field together with otheradvanced penal administrators. Periodical programme evaluation will be carried out to ensure theeffectiveness of the programmes.

V. FOSTERING REINTEGRATION THROUGH COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
While HKCS is committed to providing the best possible opportunity for all offenders to make a new startin life upon release, the efforts made by the government and the offenders themselves are not adequate.
Their successful reintegration also depends on how ready the community is to support and accept them. The
common misconceptions about offenders and, to a certain extent, the prison regimes, are mainly due to lackof information and public education. This not only creates obstacles to the smooth reintegration ofrehabilitated offenders but also leads to wastage of resources devoted to their rehabilitation.
Recognizing the importance of community acceptance and support of the successful reintegration ofrehabilitated offenders, HKCS established a “Committee on Community Support for RehabilitatedOffenders” in late 1999. Comprising community leaders, employers, education workers, professionals andrepresentatives of NGOs and government departments, the Committee’s terms of reference are to advise
HKCS on rehabilitation programmes, and reintegration and publicity strategies. Having regard to the adviceof the Committee, a series of publicity activities addressing the general public have been organized to help
the community better understand, and to appeal for their support of, the needs and problems of rehabilitatedoffenders. These include special TV and radio programmes, roving exhibitions at district level, a TV docudrama on rehabilitated offenders – “The Road Back,”5 appointment of local celebrities and public figures as
Rehabilitation Ambassadors and television and radio announcements in the public interest.
To assess the effectiveness of the publicity activities, we carried out two opinion surveys, in 2002 and2004. The findings were encouraging as the percentage of respondents who advised that they had comeacross at least one of the publicity activities increased from 65.7% in 2002 to 82.2% in 2004, and those who
considered it worthwhile for the government to conduct publicity activities to appeal for community support
for rehabilitated offenders rose from 83.6% in 2002 to 91.9% in 2004. Obviously, these figures illustrated thegrowing awareness and support of the general public for offender rehabilitation.
Another new initiative to enhance the public’s understanding and support of our work is theestablishment of the Hong Kong Correctional Services Museum. Opened in late November 2002 withmonthly admission of about 5,000 visitors, the Museum serves to preserve and showcase the history of
HKCS and the evolution of local corrections from a closed system that focused on punishment to thecontemporary model that emphasizes rehabilitation and community partnership. In essence, the Museum
helps lift the veil of correctional work, dispel the misconceptions held by the public about prisons, andenhance our public image.
To enhance the cognition of prospective employers of the rehabilitated offenders, HKCS organized inconjunction with the Centre for Criminology of the University of Hong Kong a “Symposium on Employment
for Rehabilitated Offenders” in 2001, 2003 and 2004. Through discussions and experience sharing, wemanaged to cultivate a deeper understanding among employers of various trades in this regard and appealed
to them to provide equal job opportunities for rehabilitated offenders. Subsequent to these promotional

5 The HKCS, in collaboration with Radio Television Hong Kong, produced three 10-episode TV docu-drama series “The Road

Back” in 2000, 2002 and 2004 and all of them were well received. The first series was awarded the Silver Award for Best
Television Programmes and the New Television Programme Award in 2000. The second series in 2002 was awarded the Gold
Award in Entertainment Programme and Silver in the Best Television Programmes Award, while the third series in 2004 wasawarded the Gold Remi Award at The Houston International Film Festival and the Bronze Plaque in the 53rd Columbus
International Film & Video Festival. The fourth series was telecast from May to July 2006.

103

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

activities, we have received more enquiries from employers concerning employment of rehabilitatedoffenders. So far, we have a database of over 320 employers who have offered more than 670 job vacancies in
100 different trades to rehabilitated offenders. Most importantly, some 280 rehabilitated offenders havesuccessfully secured a job. Enthusiastic business organizations have also conducted a “One Company One
Job” campaign6 since 2004 in local districts to promote fair job opportunities for rehabilitated offenders.

VI. EXPANSION OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
Community involvement and participation in various aspects of offenders’ correctional and rehabilitative
process narrows the gap between the public at large and the offenders. It helps change the negative attitude
of society towards offenders. To help diversify and enrich our service delivery, we need regular and active
participation of non-government organizations and religious bodies. As a result of the Department’s
incessant publicity efforts, supportive connections and partnerships conducive to offenders’ reintegration
have been established. At present, there are more than 60 religious bodies and non-governmentorganizations partnering with us to provide services to help prisoners reintegrate into the community. These
organizations, through enlisting social workers, volunteers and rehabilitated offenders, offer counselling,
recreational, and religious services to persons in custody. They also provide social service, employment andaccommodation assistance for their clients. With a view to strengthening co-operation amongst NGOs andproviding all NGO partners with an opportunity to exchange views on matters relating to rehabilitation
services, HKCS conducts forums with NGO representatives annually. Besides, a web-based messaging
platform has been set up to provide members of NGOs with an interactive forum for sharing. Anotherremarkable example of partnership between HKCS and NGOs is the implementation of a “Continuing Care
Project” since early 2004 wherein seven NGOs provide follow-up services for supervisees who are assessed
as being still in need of, and are willing to receive, counselling services after completing the statutory
supervision. As at the end of December 2006, a total of 314 cases have successfully been referred torespective NGOs for the service.
To further broaden the scope of public involvement, we have decided to invite dedicated individuals towork with the Department to pursue the rehabilitation cause. A Rehabilitation Volunteer Group, comprisingmostly university students and serving teachers, was formed in 2004. Volunteers of the Group conduct
interest groups on language, computer and other cultural pursuits for offenders in various correctional
institutions and on occasions assist in publicity campaigns to promote the acceptance of rehabilitatedoffenders. With more than 220 volunteers, the Group has hitherto conducted over 370 classes and servedsome 4,000 inmates.
To ensure co-ordinated channels for disseminating our messages, we need to establish a network at
different local districts to deliver the message far and wide that rehabilitation can help prevent crime andreduce reoffending, a message signifying social responsibility on the issue. The Department accordingly cooperates with all of Hong Kong’s 18 District Fight Crime Committees7 by inviting them to organize publicity
activities relating to offenders’ rehabilitation. Senior correctional officers are appointed as Regional Liaison
Officers to facilitate the co-ordination of these activities and to provide necessary support. With this networkof channels functioning, we organize year-round activities in all districts and sustain a broad and pervasive
permeation of the rehabilitation message to the public.
Responding to our call for support and assistance to rehabilitated offenders, the involvement of andsponsorship from renowned community organizations such as the Lions Clubs, Rotary Clubs, Zonta Clubs,
and local charitable organizations in various programmes for prisoners and rehabilitated offenders have been
6 The campaign is about promoting the members of those business organizations to employ at least one rehabilitated offenderin each of their companies.
7 The District Fight Crime Committees, which are district bodies appointed by the Government to advise on means to combat
crime, consist of both members of the public and government officials. They help monitor the crime situation at district level;
co-ordinate community resources to assist in fighting crime; and make recommendations to the Central Fight Crime
Committee with regard to fight crime measures and community involvement. Chaired by the Chief Secretary for
Administration of the Hong Kong SAR Government, the Central Fight Crime Committee draws up plans to reduce crime; coordinates efforts in fighting crime; monitors the results; and determines ways in which the public can be stimulated tocontribute to the reduction of crime.

104135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

increasing in recent years. Between 1999 and 2006, we have received donations of over $8 million Hong
Kong dollars (equivalent to over US$1 million) towards rehabilitation and welfare of offenders. Coupled withother non-monetary support, such community care, this conveys a positive message to rehabilitatedoffenders and reinforces their motivation to turn over a new leaf.

VII. CONCLUSION: LOOKING AHEAD
Reoffending adversely affects public security, traumatizes victims, and increases government spending on
the criminal justice system, not to mention the problems associated with prison over-crowding resulting
from the perpetuation of this vicious circle. In Hong Kong, the provision of secure and safe custodialservices is critical and conducive to a stable and optimal environment for rehabilitative work. HKCS strives
to enhance its custody services to sustain the solid foundation of our rehabilitation programmes. We firmly
believe that the main objective of detention is to prepare offenders for reintegration into the community as
better citizens, not as recidivists. Rehabilitative work, being the collective responsibility of the wholecommunity, requires joint participation across different social sectors rather than the sole effort ofcorrectional jurisdictions. Whether rehabilitated offenders can successfully reintegrate into the community
will depend on the wide acceptance, recognition and support from members of the community in addition to
offenders’ determination to turn over a new leaf. Over the past years, we have adopted a proactive approach
to appeal for public acceptance of rehabilitated offenders. By promoting community involvement, wemanaged to reduce public myths of prisons, increase transparency of our services, improve public
understanding of correctional work and establish close partnerships with community organizations. We arepleased to note that members of the public increasingly share the view that the community as whole would
benefit from the successful reintegration of rehabilitated offenders.
In the midst of an ever-changing environment, HKCS, like our overseas counterparts, encounters
numerous challenges in the local context. These include, among others, providing appropriate and updated
facilities along with our improving education and vocational training, incorporating rehabilitation progammes
in the compact daily routine of penal institutions, nurturing a rehabilitation culture for staff and community,and balancing the diverse views of the public on the conservative and liberal continuum in terms of various
philosophies of criminal justice. After all, there are indeterminate factors that will affect the effectiveness of
our rehabilitation services, such as the sentence lengths, age profile and responsivity of offenders towards
different programmes. That said, we will enlist stakeholders to strengthen community acceptance andsupport for offenders’ rehabilitation, establish a wider community network for mobilizing public
involvement, and look for ways and ideas for continuous service improvement. We are confident that ourefforts are instrumental in helping to reduce crime and ensuring Hong Kong remains safe and becomes
Asia’s world city.
To conclude, our publicity slogan, “Support rehabilitated offenders for a more inclusive society”, inessence, prescribes our commitment to enlist community involvement for the reintegration of offenders.

105

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

REFERENCES
Andrew, D.A. & Bonta, J. (1998). The Psychology of Criminal Conduct. Cincinnati OH: Anderson.
Andrews, D.A.; Zinger, I.; Hoge, R.D.; Bonta, J.; Gendreau, P.; Cullen, F.T. (1990). ‘Does correctional
treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis’, Criminology, 28(3): 369-429.
Correctional Services Department. Annual Review 2005, Hong Kong Correctional Services Department.
Currie, Elliott (1985). Confronting Crime: An American Challenge (New York: Pantheon).
Currie, Elliott (1998). Crime and Punishment in America (New York: Henry Holt).
Day, A. & Howells, K. (2002). Psychological treatments for rehabilitating offenders: Evidence based practicecomes of age. Australian Psychologist, 37, 39-47.
Harer, M.D. (1994). “Recidivism among Federal prisoners released in 1987.” Journal of Correctional
Education 46(3): 98-127.
Hirsh, Andrew v. (1976). Doing Justice: The Choice of Punishments (p.12). New York: Hill and Wang.
Hollin, C. (2002). Does punishment motivate offenders to change? In M McMurran (Ed), Motivating
Offenders To Change: A Guide To Enhancing Engagement In Therapy (pp 235-249). Chichester: John
Wiley & Sons.
McGuire, J. & Priestley, P. (1995). ‘Reviewing “What Works”: past, present and future’, in J. McGuire (Ed.)
What works: Reducing reoffending, Chicester: Wiley, pp 3-34.
Sampson, R. & Laub J. (1997). “A life-course theory of cumulative disadvantage and the stability ofdelinquency.” Advances in Criminological Theory 7: 133-161.
White T. (1991). “Prison Should Rehabilitate”, in Tipp S. (Ed.), America’s Prisons, Opposing Viewpoints.
Greenhaven Press.

106

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

APPENDIX 1
Vision, Mission and Values of Correctional Services Department
VisionInternationally acclaimed Correctional Service
MissionAs an integral part of the Hong Kong criminal justice system, we detain persons committed to our custody ina decent and healthy environment, and provide comprehensive rehabilitative services in a secure, safe,
humane and cost-effective manner, so as to enhance the physical and psychological health of prisoners,
protect the public and help reduce crime.
ValuesIntegrity• We value honesty, humility, uprightness and personal responsibility.
Professionalism• We take pride in our profession and are committed to continuous improvement in efficiency, competenceand quality of service.
Humanity• We recognize that all persons have the right to correct and fair treatment with dignity, whether they are
members of the public, members of staff or persons in our custody.
Discipline• We respect the rule of law, orderliness and harmony.
Economy• We optimize the use of resources and emphasize sustainability.

107

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

APPENDIX 2
Personal Encounter with Prisoners Scheme
CSD runs the Personal Encounter with Prisoners Scheme as part of the community’s fight crime campaign.
Youths and students visit one of the several designated institutions to meet with reformed prisoners inexperience sharing sessions. The purpose is to help prevent delinquency through the deepening ofparticipants’ understanding of the untoward consequences of committing a crime. A total of 3,399 young
people and students visited the institutions under the Scheme in 2006.

Green Haven Scheme
CSD started the Green Haven Scheme in January 2001 to promote the anti-drug message and theimportance of environmental protection among young people. Participants meet with young inmates of the
Drug Addiction Treatment Centre to gain insight into the detrimental effects of drug abuse. They also takepart in a tree planting ceremony to indicate their support for rehabilitated offenders and environmental
protection, and vow to stay away from drugs. During this year, 33 visits were arranged for 904 participants.

“Options in Life” Student ForumTo demonstrate the willingness of rehabilitated offenders to making a contribution to society, CSD conductedfrom late 2003 to 2005 a round of district-based student forums in all 18 districts to provide opportunities forsecondary students and rehabilitated offenders to interact and discuss the untoward consequences of crime.
In 2006, in line with the Department’s community involvement strategy, we invited 12 non-governmentorganizations to organize similar forums so as to continue this public education initiative of deterring
youngsters from committing crimes and abusing drugs. Resource kits for conducting the activity were also
distributed via the NGOs to interested schools and youth agencies.

108PARTICIPANTS’ PAPERSCONTEMPORARY RECIDIVISM AND ITS CONTROLIN CHINA
Yu Tongzhi*
I. INTRODUCTION
Recidivism is a complex social problem which has caused worldwide concern. The recidivism rate
reflects the public security situation of a country or a district, and directly reveals the effectiveness of thecriminal justice system, especially the corrections system. Nowadays, due to its serious social
perniciousness, reducing recidivism has become the emphasis of punishment and prevention in eachcountry’s system of criminal justice. However, promoting public safety and controlling recidivism requires
complicated engineering of social systems, which must co-ordinate the strengths of the whole society andmake use of various means and methods in executing a comprehensive plan.

II. CONCEPT OF RECIDIVISM IN CHINA
Generally, recidivism is defined as the criminal actions of released prisoners who return to prison for a
new crime committed within a certain period after release. The Criminal Law of the People’s Republic ofChina, Article 65 stipulates: “If a criminal commits another crime punishable by fixed-term imprisonment ora heavier penalty within five years after serving his sentence of not less than fixed-term imprisonment or
receiving a pardon, he is a recidivist and shall be given a heavier punishment. However, this shall not apply
to cases of negligent crime. If a criminal convicted of endangering national security commits the same crime
again at any time after serving his sentence or receiving a pardon he shall be dealt with as a recidivist.”
According to the law, there are two types of recidivism: general recidivism and recidivism of crimes ofendangering national security.

A. General Recidivism
General recidivism is when a criminal commits another crime punishable by fixed-term imprisonment ora heavier penalty within five years of serving his sentence of not less than fixed-term imprisonment or
receiving a pardon. Its constituent elements are as follows:
1.
2.
3.

The first crime and the subsequent crime are intentional crimes;
The punishments of the first crime and the subsequent crime are fixed-term imprisonment ora heavier penalty;
The subsequent crime is committed within five years of serving the first sentence or receivinga pardon.

B. Recidivism of Crimes of Endangering National Security
Recidivism of crimes of endangering national security occurs when a criminal convicted of endangering
national security commits the same crime again at any time after serving his sentence or receiving a pardon.
Unlike general recidivism, it doesn’t require either the first or subsequent crime to be intentional crimes,
nor specifies the type of punishment to be imposed or the length of time between the occurrences of thecrimes. However, both must be crimes of endangering national security. By legislating for this type of special
recidivism, it is clear that Chinese criminal law will punish crimes of endangering national security more
severely.
According to our criminal law, recidivism is defined as above. In practice, however, the scope of thedefinition is more extensive. Generally speaking, as a judicial concept in China, it means committing crime
frequently, and doesn’t strictly require certain kinds of crime, types of punishment, or lengths of time
between criminal actions etc.

* Judge, Beijing High People’s Court, China.

109

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

III. THE CURRENT SITUATION OF RECIDIVISM IN CHINA
Compared to western countries, the rate of recidivism in China is very low. However, the current
situation of recidivism doesn’t make people optimistic. On the contrary, especially in this period of social andeconomic transition, the character of recidivists and the trends of recidivist crime have caused many people
to be seriously worried.

A. Quantity Characteristics
The Ministry of Justice organized a continuous study in 27 provinces, municipalities and autonomous
regions throughout China lasting for five years (from 1986), to investigate and study the behaviour ofprisoners released from 1982 to 1986. In five years, a total of 137,000 released adult prisoners were
investigated, and the recidivism rate of these people three years after release from prison was 5.19%. In thesame period, however, the recidivism rate of western countries was up to 50% or so. This demonstrates thatthe recidivism rate of China at that time was very low.
At the beginning of the 1990s, China began to pursue a market-oriented economy; with this transition insociety and economy, manpower and financial and material resources increased on an unprecedented scale.
These changes induced released prisoners to recommit crime, but the powers of restriction and prevention
were weakened, so public security did not change for the better, and the crime problem became more andmore serious. The Chinese Ministry of Justice investigated more than 27,000 criminals from across thenation taken into custody in 1996. Among them 13.27% had been sentenced at least twice. However, thisfigure was only 6.34% in 1984 and 8.55% in 1990. These statistics show clearly that the recidivism rate of
our country in the middle and later years of the 1990s rose to twice that of ten years previously.
Next, what about the recidivism rate in China in recent years? I do not have the nationwide data, but I do
have some information of specific provinces. In 2002, Zhejiang Province Prison Administration Bureau
calculated that 13.27% of the total number of prisoners of that province had been sentenced at least twice inthe past four years. The details of these four years are as follows: it was 13.2% in 1999, 13.64% in 2000,
14.23% in 2001, and 14.4% in 2002. This information proves that the rate of recidivism in China today has
increased to some extent compared to several years ago, and is also indicative of the trend of annual
increases in the problem.

B. Quality Characteristics
Not only has the rate of recidivism increased, the gravity of recidivist crime has also intensified in recent
years. According to statistics from the Chinese Ministry of Public Security, homicide cases at the beginningof the 1980s (1980-1983) increased on average 2.6% every year, but rose unexpectedly by 15.32% from 1984
to 1990, with a particular increase in serious and major cases. In 1985 were only 80,000 such cases,
thereafter increasing sharply to 450,000 cases in 1990, 540,000 cases in 1993, and 700,000 cases in 1995.
Important and major cases as a proportion of the total number of crimes was only 9% in 1985; but rose to
21% in 1990; 33% in 1993; and 42% in 1995. A great deal of these serious crimes was committed by released
prisoners. An investigation of the autonomous region of Guangxi shows that 19.7% of recidivism cases
caused death, severe injury or slight injury, and more than quarter of the cases involved amounts of money
greater than 10,000 RMB. It proves that the social harmfulness of recidivism is noticeable.
C. Recidivist’s Characteristics
1. AgeA sizable proportion of recidivists are young or middle-aged, and they have become younger in recent
years. Among recidivists, the 20-40 years old age group accounts for more than 85% of the total number ofoffenders. Compared to first-time offenders, recidivists are generally older. An investigation shows that the
18-25 years old age group accounts for 53.5% of all first-time offenders, and the 26-35 years old age groupaccounts for 30%; while the 18-25 years old age group accounts for 33.3% of all recidivists; the 26-35 years
old accounts for 45%. Most first-time offenders are 18-25 years old, and most recidivists are 26-35 years old.
2. Educational Level
Recidivists’ educational level is generally on the low side. According to the investigation conducted in
Guangxi, 94.7% of all recidivists are educated to middle or junior high school level only.

110135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

3. Occupation
Among recidivists, the number of unemployed and peasant class persons is huge, accounting for 86.7% of
the total amount.
4. Sex
99.1% of recidivists are male.
5. Living Environment
An investigation of the Ministry of Justice shows that in China most released prisoners live in the
countryside or in small towns, and many of them have no jobs. Compared to first-time offenders, recidivists’occupational status and employment histories are generally humble. Because of unemployment and social
discrimination, the majority of offenders return to crime after release from prison.
6. Recidivism Timeframe
A majority (57.1%) of recidivists recommit crime within three years of release from prison. This factdemonstrates that the first three years after release is a key period in establishing an effective return tosociety.

D. Case Characteristics
Regarding case characteristics, the types of recidivist crime are relatively concentrated. The majority ofcases involve infringing against property, particularly stealing and robbery. The investigation from the Prison
Administration Bureau of the Autonomous Region of Guangxi shows that in almost six years, of recidivists of
the whole province, 39.7% were reincarcerated for stealing, and another 23.9% were reincarcerated forrobbing. The number of cases involving these two types of crime is higher than those of other crimes in
China.
At present, the average number of reoffences is increasing; nearly 40% of persons reoffend three or moretimes, and there has been an emerging tendency for ‘professional’ crime. Moreover, the phenomenon of
repeat offenders facing two or more charges is becoming more and more frequent. An investigation showsthat in 8.4% of recidivism cases the offender was simultaneously charged with two or more offences. Thosefacing three or more charges account for 1.1% of the total number of cases; the highest number of charges
faced by a repeat offender was six.
In addition, recidivism in China also appears to have become more sophisticated and technical in recent
years. Organized crime committed by released prisoners is rising. More and more criminals make use ofmodern communications and means of transportation to implement crimes, and plan elaborately andtactically in advance of criminal acts.
With reference to revivalism, like many developing countries, China faces difficult situations and difficult
problems, so it seems to be very necessary to strengthen research projects and co-operation with thesecountries in this respect.

IV. THE CURRENT MEASURES AND POLICES TO CONTROLRECIDIVISM IN CHINA
A. System of Punishment
1. Principal Punishments
The principal punishments in Chinese criminal law are as follows: public surveillance; criminal detention;
fixed-term imprisonment; life imprisonment; and the death penalty. The principal punishments are the major
ways of punishing criminals, of which the term of public surveillance shall not be less than three months andnot more than two years; the term of criminal detention shall not be less than 15 days and not more than six
months; the term of fixed-term imprisonment shall not be less than six months and not more than 15 years.
The death penalty is the heaviest penalty and can only be applied to criminals who have committed
extremely serious crimes. If the immediate execution of a criminal punishable by death is not deemednecessary, a two-year suspension of execution may be pronounced simultaneously with the imposition of the111

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

death sentence. For anyone who is sentenced to death with a suspension of execution and who commits nointentional crime during the period of suspension, the punishment shall be commuted to life imprisonment
upon the expiration of that two-year period; if the criminal has truly performed major meritorious service,
his punishment shall be commuted to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 15 years and not more than
20 years upon the expiration of that two-year period. In judicial practice in China, the overwhelming majorityof criminals who are punishable by death with a suspension of execution are spared the death penalty.
2. Supplementary Punishments
The supplementary punishments are as follows: fines, deprivation of political rights, and confiscation ofproperty. Apart from this, deportation is a supplementary punishment, which may be imposed independently
or complementarily upon a foreigner who commits a crime. Supplementary punishments may be imposed
independently. The above punishments are major judicial methods of controlling crime and recidivism inChina. When a criminal commits crime, a punishment shall be imposed upon him or her based on the facts,
nature and circumstances of the crime, the degree of harm done to society and the relevant provisions ofcriminal law. By means of the punishments, we hope to realize the prevention and/or reduction of crime andrecidivism.

B. Penalty Policy
The Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, Article 65 stipulates that recidivists “shall be givena heavier punishment”. So recidivism is an official reason for heavier punishment in accordance with theprovisions of Chinese criminal law.
To crack down on serious crimes and recidivism is China’s traditional penal policy. China has launchedseveral successive large-scale movements against serious crimes since 1982. Considering the harsh natureof criminal acts, a ‘strike-hard’ policy against serious crimes is still in place. In recent years, the focal point ofthe ‘strike-hard’ policy has been organized crime and gangster activities which are rampant at present.
On the whole, China maintains a high-tension approach to crime because it is accepted as an effective
way to prevent and control crime (and recidivism). In the past nine years (from 1998 to 2006), 6,201,191
criminals were pronounced guilty by the Chinese court system and 22.23% of them (1,378,525 people) weresentenced to imprisonment for more than five years. It is evident that quite a lot of criminals were given
serious penalties and need to receive correctional treatment for a long time.
In recent years, the Chinese penalty policy has begun adjusting to some extent; while placing anemphasis on sternly combating serious crime, we have begun to pay attention to implementing a light andmore lenient criminal policy for less serious offences. Some criminals, whose social harmfulness andsubjective evil is slight, are given non-custodial penalties such as fines, public surveillance, suspension ofsentence and parole, etc. China attempts to balance severity and leniency in its criminal policy. This is agreat adjustment of the Chinese penalty philosophy, and is an important social policy which China ispresently advocating and pursuing vigorously.

C. Policy of Correction
China firmly believes that people, including most criminals, can be rehabilitated. It is the basic target of
China’s policy of correction that criminals should become law-abiding citizens who can lead independent
lives.
Directed by this thought, China’s criminal punishment policy is focused on corrections rather thanstraightforward punishment. During the process of correction, the focus is on the implementation of theprinciples of humanism and education, and great attention is paid to the criminals’ conscious correction
through labour, morality, culture, technology and so forth. By these means, criminals can become law-abiding
citizens, giving up the intention to commit crime to fulfil their greed. China adopts the measure of combining
special State penal organs with civic society organizations. The main task of correction is undertaken by thepenal executive organs in prisons. At the same time, other departments and social strata contribute theirefforts to support and co-ordinate criminal correction throughout the whole process, which extends tomatters such as living arrangements after release and employment of the released prisoners. The
experiences of China, I think, show that an effective way to prevent and control recidivism is by paying great
attention to the education and correction of criminals.

112

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

D. Policy of Social Education and Employment
The Policy of Social Education and Employment mainly refers to the education, employment, assistanceand management of released criminals. When the released criminals return to society and cannot establish a
residence and employment without assistance and regulation from society, they will tend to reoffend.
Therefore, China has always paid great attention to the task of assisting and educating released prisoners,
and has taken multigradation, multichannel and multiform measures to arrange post-release life, andfurthermore incorporates this work into the government public security system. In many places, special
factories and enterprises were established as the employment bases for released prisoners. These
enterprises provide employment for quite a long period. At the same time, based on the units and districts inwhich those people live, deposed by the government, we can mobilize civic organizations at primary levelsuch as residents’ committees, village committees, etc, to take part in the work of assisting, supervising,educating and managing released prisoners. In this way, we can comprehend and gain firsthand information
about their living conditions and employment, and settle their practical problems and difficulties actively.
Through such protective and precautionary measures, we effectively control and reduce recidivism to someextent.
V. CHALLENGES AND PROBLEMS IN CONTROLLING RECIDIVISM
A. Increase of Social Elements Which Can Induce Recidivism
Today, China is in the process of economic and social transformation. In the course of transition from theold structure to the new, there is likely to be some innovation required in the legislation, institutions andregulations which provide opportunities for criminals. In the presence of imperfect legislation andinstitutions, the negative aspects of a market economy will be more likely to appear and directly influence
the number, method, form, character and object of criminal acts. Particularly in recent years, with the wave
of urbanization and flourishing development which has pushed innumerable peasants and vagrants into
cities, the change in living circumstances in cities has induced or obliged many people to select the path ofcrime.
B. Tradition and Practice of Severe Punishment
In traditional Chinese legal culture, the idea of severe punishment for crimes has always been important.
Whenever crimes were rising and social security was deteriorating, the direct policy would be severe
punishment. For a long period, we were more likely to believe in striking hard against crimes and in theeffectiveness of penal deterrence. As a result, there were frequent large scale movements to severely
punish criminal acts. With the implementation of this policy, many criminals were sentenced to long term
imprisonment. Maltreatment in prisons was exposed as much as possible.
C. The Decrease of the Function of Correction in PrisonFirstly, the circumstances of criminals are becoming more and more complex at present, which increases
the difficulty of correction. Secondly, the quality of policies in prison cannot satisfy the development ofcorrections and meet fully the requirements of the task. Thirdly, the traditional method of correction cannot
meet the challenge of new pattern crimes emerging nowadays. Fourthly, the change in social circumstances
has meant that prison officers cannot focus their whole energies on the work of criminal correction. Last but
not least, the market economy and the opened society require a more socialized execution of criminal
penalties, but this fact is contrary to the reality that prison is still closed to the outside world. The
resocialization of criminals is more difficult than before, and criminals are more likely to reoffend after
release from prison. To sum up, the function of corrections in prison has slowed to a certain extent.
D. Ineffective Execution of Social Education and Employment Policy
China’s economy has recently become extremely competitive, and the employment situation is rather
harsh. Most released prisoners have a grave drawback in the areas of quality and technology demanded by
the employment market. Furthermore, taking their special personal experiences into account, they find it isvery difficult to obtain employment. At the same time, the government also cannot solve this problem
soundly because many State-owned or group-owned companies have transformed into private companies. As
a result, in addition to the stigmatizing of released prisoners, the pressure on them to manage their own
living is rising. Some of them will take up their old criminal habits, especially larceny and plunder.
Simultaneously, because of the enforcement of the market economy, there are vast and fast flows of people
through society. As a result, social organizations find it is very difficult to supervise, regulate and educate
released prisoners effectively because even these organizations cannot track where those persons are.
113

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Particularly, the aim of effective supervision and regulation cannot be achieved because so many peasantsand vagrants have migrated to cities.

VI. NEW CHOICE: COMMUNITY REHABILITATION
Community Rehabilitation is a type of penalty without imprisonment. The Special Judicial Administrative
Department, with the aid of other administrative departments, non-governmental community groups andsocial volunteers, helps to rehabilitate the criminals’ psychology and vices. Eventually, criminals can return
to society smoothly. This is China’s exploration for a more humane penal system. In it, more attention will
be paid to the function of education and rehabilitation, and respect for and preservation of the rights ofcriminals will be fully demonstrated. This is an important component of China’s judicial reform. As of August
2006, there are 18 provinces, 85 big cities, 375 county districts, and 3,142 streets (villages or towns)
promoting community rehabilitation. Nationwide, there are about 7,778 full-time judicial assistants ofcommunity rehabilitation, 4,415 full-time social workers, and 60,004 social volunteers currently participatingin this scheme. Under the leadership of the Judicial Administrative Department and with the co-ordination ofpolice departments, civil administration, fiscal departments and so on, this kind of model has come into
being successfully.
Those subject to community rehabilitation in China comprise five kinds of criminals: those put underpublic surveillance, those whose sentences have been suspended, those sentenced to parole, thosepermitted to temporarily serve their sentences outside prison, and those only deprived of political rights.
Different plans are made for each person made subject to a Community Rehabilitation order. In doing so, thecriminals’ relatives, social volunteers, experts and so on together provide the criminals in the community
with psychological consultation, training courses, and duly solve the problems and difficulties of
employment, life, psychology, education, etc. The above measures help released prisoners successfully
integrate with society.
This system affords more opportunity for non-violent, non-threatening and truly remorseful criminals to
repay their debt to society with a non-custodial penalty such as probation and parole, etc. Non-custodial
sentences avoid the negative physiological and psychological effects of prison life and allow fuller
participation in educational and rehabilitative programmes. According to statistics of the Ministry of Justice,until August of 2006, this new rehabilitative system has accepted 65,616 persons and has succeeded with
15,092 of them. Excepting some special cases in Beijing and Guizhou province, the recidivism rate is zero.
Obviously, the effects of community rehabilitation are very noticeable.

VII. CONCLUSION
Promoting public safety and controlling recidivism is a complex and systematic project. From the resultsof the Chinese system, I believe deeply that the following process should be adopted: first, the mostimportant work should be in establishing better societal circumstances to achieve harmonious relationships
between society, economy, politics and culture, etc. Better societal circumstances are a key factor incontrolling and reducing the crime rate. Second, enforcing all aspects of the judicial and corrections systems,
and fulfilling in full the functions of retribution, deterrence, correction and rehabilitation are acomprehensive way to prevent and reduce crime and recidivism. Third, encouraging and including morecitizens in the education, assistance, supervision, and rehabilitation of offenders is also a good method ofcontrolling recidivism and promoting public safety. In the new century, criminal justice should be a processcontributed to by all citizens. In our new criminal system, government, non-government organizations,
volunteers, and community workers should co-operate closely and harmoniously to realize our mutual
dream.

114

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS SEARCHING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION IN PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY
AND CONTROLLING DRUGS DEPENDENT RECIDIVISM1
Diah Ayu Noorsinta Hidayati*
I. INTRODUCTION
Indonesia is an archipelago country with an area of 1,919,404 km2 and a population of 245,452,739 people,
spread over 981 islands from a total of 17,500. Geographically, Indonesia is located in the South-East Asian
region close to Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, and Timor Leste. Because of its archipelago form,
demographics and geographical position, Indonesia has a strategic place in the trafficking and smuggling ofinternational illegal drugs. Therefore, it is not surprising that in the last few years Indonesia has
experienced a huge problem with international drug trafficking. Nowadays, Indonesia is not only used as atransit country, but has also become a real potential market for drug traffickers.
According to data released by the National Narcotics Board, in the year 2005 cases of drug misuse inIndonesia were calculated at around 3 – 4 million for the entire population. This number has increased inpast years. Based on the data of drugs crime in Indonesia for the period 2001 – 2005 it is apparent that in thelast five years the number of cases has increased, although the law has been strictly enforced.

Table 1: Number of Drugs Seizures Cases2
YEAR
NO.

CASES

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

TOTAL

AVERAGE
PER
YEAR

1

Narcotics

1,907

2,040

3,929

3,874

8,171

19,921

3,984

2

Psychotropic

1,648

1,632

2,590

3,887

6,733

16,4903,298

3Addictive Substances

62

79

621

648

1,348

2,758

552

3,617

3,751

7,140

8,409

16,252

39,169

7,834

Source: Dit. IV/Drugs, February 2006

A remarkable increase in the suppression of drug dealing has also occurred if you consider the number ofdrug perpetrators arrested by the police in the period 2001 – 2005. If it is compared as a whole to thenumber of perpetrators arrested in 2004 (11,323), the 2005 figure (22,780 people) represents a 101.2%
increase. This indicates that although Law No.5/1997 on Psychotropic Substances and Law No.22/1997 on
Narcotics have been strictly implemented by law enforcement agencies, the economical value of drugs is far
more profitable. Moreover, the number of addicted drug abusers makes the matters more complicated.

Table 2: Number of Drugs Offender Cases3
YEAR
NO.

NATIONALITY

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

TOTAL

AVERAGE
PER
YEAR

1

Indonesian

4,874

5,228

9,638

11,242

22,69553,677

10,7352Foreigner

50

82

79

81

85

377

75

4,924

5,310

9,717

11,32322,78054,054

10,811

Source: Dit. IV/Drugs, February 2006

* Directorate General Of Correction, Ministry Of Law And Human Rights, Republic Of Indonesia.
1 This paper is based on facts and correct data. However, thePredicate
analysis isOffences
based on the author’s judgment.
2 National Narcotics Board, Data of Drugs Offender Cases in 2001 – 2005. Jakarta: 1.
3 Ibid.

115

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Along with an increasing number of drug crime perpetrators, numbers of drug-related prisoners also
increased significantly from 2002 until November 2006.

NUMBER OF PRISONERSGraphic 1: Number of Drugs Prisoners in Indonesia4
120,000
100,000

111,357

80,00060,00088,88767,96089,70871,587
31,46540,00020,000
0

7,211
2002

11,973

2003

17,0602004

21,082TOTALNUMBER OF
PRISONERSDRUGSPRISONERS

2005

Nov-06YEARS

Based on statistics of prisoners in Indonesia provided by the Directorate General of Corrections of the
Ministry of Law and Human Rights in November 2006, the number of prisoners in Indonesia was 111,357,
among which 31,465 were drug-related prisoners. Compared with the number of prisoners in 2005, the total
number of prisoners increased by about 19.4%, but drug-related prisoners increased by 33%. Unfortunately,
the increase in the number of prisoners was not followed by the expansion of capacities and facilities ofprisons and detention centres. This created a problem of overcrowding in prisons and detention centres inIndonesia. In the meantime, the overall existing capacity is 74,000. It means that the overcrowding rate is
34% of the existent capacity.
Compared with the current capacity of prisons and detention centres, the number of corrections officers,which is only 24,337, is not sufficient to handle all prisoners’ problems and grievances. Drug-related
prisoners require special attention in security matters because of drugs smuggling into the institutions.
Besides, we can assume that not all corrections officers have sufficient knowledge and skills for treating andrehabilitating drug-related prisoners, especially drug-dependent prisoners. Therefore, it is not surprising if
drug abuse occurs in prisons. In relation to the transmission of HIV/AIDS, the World Health Organization(WHO) emphasizes drug abuse in prisons. The WHO notes that ... “there are prisoners who become
infected with HIV while in custody because of the usage of unsafe needle syringes for drug injection, sharing
needles or unsafe sexual activity.” 5
The overcrowding, the limitation of facilities, and the limitation both in quantity and quality of humanresources in correctional institutions make it more difficult to maintain security and to prevent drug abuse inprisons and detention centres. As occurs outside prisons and detention centres, drugs are often injected(Injecting Drug Use) in correctional institutions. Sharing of needles and syringes accelerates thetransmission of HIV/AIDS. Moreover, overcrowding aggravates HIV/AIDS transmission in prison.
Therefore, it is important to develop special treatment and rehabilitation programmes for drug-dependent
prisoners. Educational programmes and referral system programmes are also necessary. These threeprogrammes are currently being implemented simultaneously in Indonesian prisons and detention centres.
The long-term purpose of these programmes is to reduce drug-dependent recidivism and to develop a safer
public environment. Drug-dependent prisoners who recover from their drugs dependency have a healthierand a more normal lifestyle after release.

4 Directorate Registration and Statistics, Directorate General of Correction, Number of Detainees and Prisoners in Indonesia,

November 2006.
5 Evidence for Action on HIV/AIDS and Injecting Drug Use, Policy Brief: Reduction of HIV Transmission in Prison. WHO,UNAIDS & UNODC, 2005: 1.

116

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

II. THE STRUCTURE OF THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF CORRECTION
The Directorate General of Correction is one of six directorate generals in the Ministry of Law and
Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia. The Directorate General of Corrections is one of theorganizations which has Technical Operating Units in all regions. The number of Correction Technical
Operating Units is 525 (including prisons, detention centres, and branches of detention centres, parole andprobation institutions, and the State of Confiscated Goods Institutions) and they are distributed at district or
local level (Kecamatan/Kabupaten).

Table 3: Number of Correction Technical Operational Units
NO.

CTOU

TOTAL

1

Prison207

2Detention Centre

132

3

Branch of Detention Centre

58

4

Parole and Probation Inst.

67

5

State Confiscated Materials Inst.

61

TOTAL

525

The Directorate General of Correction consists of one Secretariat Directorate General and six technicaldirectorates. It has the vision and mission to recover the unity of life, living and way of life of prisoners as
individuals, members of society and God’s creatures, through treatment, education, management of seizedmaterials, crime prevention, and promotion and protection of human rights.
In achieving its vision and mission, the Directorate General of Correction specifies purposes that the six
technical directorates must meet. These six technical directorates are:
1. The Directorate of Security and Orderliness2. The Directorate of Registration and Statistics
3. The Directorate of Grounding and Production
4. The Directorate of Correctional Guidance
5. The Directorate of Treatment
6. The Directorate of Narcotics Affairs.
These six technical directorates are responsible for formulating policy related to the fundamental duties
and functions of each directorate according to the vision and mission of the Directorate General of
Correction, which will be implemented at the Correction Technical Operating Units.

III. INDONESIA’S CORRECTIONAL SYSTEMAs the final institution in the Criminal Justice System continuum, during the last 40 years, Indonesianprisons have been transformed from organizations of punishment and deterrence into institutions of social
reintegration. This paradigm shift occurred with the introduction of the Treatment of Offenders method,
better known by the term ‘correction’. Prison is part of the correctional system. The correctional system ofIndonesia consists of four institutions: prison; detention centres (remand prison); the parole and probation
board; and rumah penyimpanan barang sitaan negara (the State Confiscated Goods Institution).
The vision of the correctional system is to restore the unity of relationships, life and ways of living
between the offenders, the public and the environment, under the unity of a relationship with God as
according to the Five Principles of the Nation (Pancasila), while at the same time holding on to the principles
of protection to produce well-rounded individuals. The mission of the correctional system is to improve theimplementation of offenders’ treatment including guidance and counselling programmes for the Correctional
Treatment Members (prisoners), as well as the administration of State confiscated materials, in order tostrengthen law enforcement and human rights in Indonesia.
Therefore, to achieve its vision and mission the correctional system aims to produce law-abiding citizens

117

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

who realize their mistakes; improve their behaviour so they will not repeat their criminality; are accepted bysociety; actively participate in their own development; and are able to live as good and responsible citizens.
In order to attain this goal, correctional institutions, especially prisons, are responsible for implementing
various treatment and rehabilitation efforts for prisoners. The treatment and rehabilitation programme for
prisoners engages all aspects of their person based on an interactive process supported by appropriate
construction programmes.
Correctional institutions as social reintegration institutions have a responsibility to deliver service to twoparties: prisoners and the public. The form of service given to prisoners is treatment and rehabilitation,
which aim to ensure that prisoners can lead independent and law-abiding lives after release. For the public,
the service given by correctional institutions is to offer protection and security from wrongdoers.
Public protection should be guaranteed not only during an offender’s period of incarceration but also after
he or she is released and returned to society. It is important to develop comprehensive treatment
programmes and activities, which not only address offenders’ morality, but also their cognitive, physical, andskills abilities. The final purpose of treatment programmes shall be to change the behaviour and cognitive
patterns of prisoners so they will harm neither the public nor themselves.
In Indonesia, most of the planning and implementation of various treatment programmes in prisons anddetention centres is based on policies developed by the Directorate General of Correction. The Directorate Generalof Correction has the authority to formulate policies to overcome various problems related to drug-dependent
prisoners and drug abuse in prisons. These policies must be implemented in prisons through comprehensive
programmes, so that there will be changes in prisoners’ behaviour and way of thinking in general. Particularly
for drug-dependent prisoners, rehabilitation programmes are required to bring about their awareness not to
use illegal drugs, which, if prisoners continue to use, will eventually lead to their re-incarceration.

IV. CORRECTIONAL PROCESS IN INDONESIA
A. Reception of the Offender
Correction can be a therapeutic process in which the offenders realize that there is a lack of harmony intheir relationship with their community. This should be apparent to them at the beginning of their treatment.
After that, the offenders have to undergo a continuous treatment programme that involves different aspectsof the community. In short, correction is the process of changing an offender’s negative way of living to amore positive one.
Ideally, in order to make sure that the treatment process is implemented properly, the institution should
perform a risk, need and response assessment of individual offenders. This process should find out thereasons for the offender’s entry into the correctional institution, their weaknesses, etc. Based on theinformation collected, the institution can plan and implement a suitable treatment programme. In theacceptance process, the institution must also ascertain the attitude and conditions of the community to which
the offender will return after release. Such information is collected from their family, former employers,
coworkers, the victim of their crime, the police, prosecution office, court, etc. By knowing these things, thetreatment of the relationship between the offenders and the community can produce positive results.
Unfortunately, because of the overcrowded condition of prisons and detention centres, and the limited
number of correctional officers, this stage is rarely included in the need assessment process. When new
prisoners enter prison or a detention centre, they are currently interviewed only for registration oradministrative matters. There is no further assessment process, except for drug-dependent prisoners. They
are interviewed about their drug-use history and receive a basic medical check-up. Based on the result of
the interview and health test, medical officers will advise them to participate in treatment or rehabilitation
programmes, but participation in the treatment programme is voluntary.

B. The Classification of Prisoners
Treatment starts in the correctional institution and the offender is gradually introduced to life in a freer
environment. This aims to develop their sense of social responsibility and to avoid the negative impacts ofimprisonment which include becoming institutionalized and stigmatized, which in the end will result inrecidivism.

118

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

That is why, in the Indonesian correctional system, the classification of offenders is based on how longthe offender is placed in the correctional process, as stated in Government Rule No. 31, 1999, regarding
treatment and guidance for the offenders.
1. Initiation StageAll offenders who have just entered correctional institutions should be observed carefully and should be
gradually introduced to the new environment for a period of one month. During this period, the authority shouldcollect information concerning the prisoner, including the reasons for their commission of crime. It is also
important to know about the situation of the community to which the offender belongs and his or her attitudes.
With all the information collected, suitable treatment programmes can be planned and executed. Suchtreatment programmes include the personality and self-reliance development programme. The personality
treatment focuses on mental and character development so that the offenders can be responsible forthemselves, their families, and the community. The self-reliance development focuses on talent and skills sothat offenders can become active community members. During this stage, prisoners are placed in a
maximum-security setting.
2. The First Instalment Stage
By this stage, all offenders have undergone one third of their sentence, and have made some progress interms of the opinion of the correctional observer team. The offenders should show regret, discipline, andobedience to the rules of the institution. Prisoners are given more freedom and responsibility and medium
control is applied to this group. Occasionally they are given a chance to work outside the institution. In themeantime, the institution also improves the offenders’ behaviour and etiquette so that the community willregain its trust in the offenders and change their attitude towards them.
At this stage, drug-dependent prisoners are advised to participate in therapy and rehabilitation
programmes. There are two types of programmes implemented in treating and rehabilitating drugdependent prisoners; the drugs abstinence treatment and rehabilitation programme and methadone
substitution therapy.
In the meantime, some correctional institutions have provided health programmes focusing on HIV/AIDS
prisoners. The prisoners receive counselling and testing which continues on to care, support and treatment(CST) programmes where they can easily access Anti-Retroviral Drugs (ARV).
3. The Second Instalment StageIn this stage, the offenders have undergone half of their sentence, and according to the correctional
observer team’s opinion, they have made substantive progress in their physical and mental conditions, aswell as in their ability. The scope of the treatment in this stage encompasses not only the institution but also
the community. The offenders take part in various kinds of activities, such as praying, sports, educationalcourses, working in government or private offices, working by themselves, visiting their family, etc.
However, they are still under supervision by prison staff.
At this stage, drug-dependent prisoners and HIV/AIDS prisoners may continue their treatment andrehabilitation programmes. Some drug-dependent prisoners who had been involved in drugs abstinence
programmes can become trainers for new participants. Drug-dependent prisoners are also obliged tocontinue their involvement in methadone maintenance treatment. The obligation to continue the treatment
is also emphasized for HIV/AIDS prisoners who received ARV. Hence, they can be supporters and peer
educators for the other HIV/AIDS prisoners.
What is important at this stage is that the offenders should be mature enough to do the things required ofthem without harming the people around them. They also need support from their community. This stage
applies minimum control.
4. The Third Stage
In order to enter this stage, the offenders must have undergone two-thirds of their sentence and theyneed to have spent at least nine months in the institution. If the treatment process goes smoothly, they may

119

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

be paroled. The correctional observer team can recommend pre-release treatment.
At this stage, the main treatment activities are administered in the community. Control and guidance is
far more relaxed than in the previous stages so that in the end, the offenders can live in the community
harmoniously and independently.
Based on the developed referral system, drug-dependent prisoners and HIV/AIDS prisoners can continue
their treatment in the community, particularly drug-dependent prisoners who had been involved in
Methadone Maintenance Treatment and the HIV/AIDS prisoners who had been treated with ARV.

C. Treatment Strategies for Drug-Dependent Prisoners
The strategy employed in the treatment of offenders in the Correctional system is through treatment
programmes. The programme is adjusted according to the stages of their sentence, from initial incarceration
to release.
In the matter of drug dependency treatment and HIV/AIDS prevention in Prisons and Detention Centres
in Indonesia, The Directorate General of Corrections, through The Directorate of Narcotics Affairs,
developed the National Strategy of Drug Abuse and HIV/AIDS Prevention in Prisons and Detention Centres
in Indonesia 2005 – 2009. This national strategy has three main pillars:
1. Enforcement and guidance of the law
2. Rehabilitation and social services
3. Prevention and treatment.
Those three main pillars are supported by co-ordination and co-operation with multi-sector stakeholders
and research, development and observation. The pillars are implemented comprehensively based on three
approaches of drug abuse and HIV/AIDS prevention: demand reduction, supply reduction and harm
reduction. These three approaches and pillars are related to each other and must be executed concurrently
so that prevention strategies in prisons and detention centres in Indonesia can be achieved effectively andefficiently.
In order to eradicate drugs smuggling into prisons and detention centres, all efforts in the enforcement
and guidance of the legal pillar, such as the routine search of cells and investigation of visitors, areimplemented intensively.
In order to reduce the demand for drugs from prisoners, prisons and detention centres also provide drug
abstinence treatment and rehabilitation programmes, such as therapeutic communities and NA/AA, torehabilitate and deliver social services for drug-dependent prisoners, IDUs or HIV infected prisoners.
In order to prevent or reduce the harm impact of drug abuse, prisons and detention centres are
implementing prevention and also, care, support and treatment (CST) programmes based on the twelve
harm reduction programmes of WHO, which are classified into three main programmes:
1. Education Programmes
2. Health Service Programme
3. Referral Programme.
1. Education Programme
The programme is an initial prevention programme for new drugs users in prisons and detention centres.
This education programme consists of two sub-programmes:
1. Communication, Information and Education (CIE); and2. Infection Prevention Programmes.
Information dissemination and education about HIV/AIDS and drugs are submitted with a changed
communicative method to two parties: correctional officers and prisoners. The purpose is to make themunderstand basic information about HIV/AIDS and drugs. Therefore, they can engage in preventive, curativeand rehabilitative efforts in overcoming HIV/AIDS and drug abuse by providing condoms for prisoners whowant to have sexual intercourse with other prisoners and application of a disinfectant dilution (bleaching) toclean used syringe needles, which can prevent HIV transmission.

120

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

The implementation of CIE is expected to be able to change the behaviour of prisoners. Prisoners begin
to have awareness of their high-risk behaviour in drug usage, and adjust their behaviour by refusing to use
syringes and needles, not sharing needles, and following the substitution therapy programme or even the
drug abstinence programme.
2. Health Services Programme
The programme aims to increase health services quality for prisoners in general as well as drugs casesand HIV/AIDS prisoners. The Health Service Programme consists of some sub-programmes:
1. Counselling and Testing (CT)
2. Care, Support and Treatment (CST)
3. Basic Health Services
4. Substitution Programmes (Methadone Maintenance Treatment)
5. Risk Reducing Counselling.

(i) Counselling and Testing (CT), Care, Support and Treatment (CST) and Basic Health Services
Because of the terrible quality of health services for prisoners in prisons and detention centres, theincreasing numbers of HIV/AIDS prisoners, and the increasing mortality numbers of prisoners caused by
HIV/AIDS, a qualified clinical service for basic health needs and also for HIV/AIDS prisoners is an urgent
requirement. This is particularly true in the case of treatment and therapy of prisoners who have entered
the third and fourth stages of AIDS.
The accomplishment of good quality clinical services in prisons and detention centres begins withcounselling and a HIV test. It has a strategic importance as this phase can increase the likelihood of earlyintervention in the treatment of HIV. Early intervention in the treatment of HIV prisoners can reduce theburden on the health system and its budget. Besides, early intervention in the treatment of HIV is in linewith the concept of ‘construction/treatment/rehabilitation’, where prisoners can positively contribute to theirown care after release.
Hereinafter, the counselling and HIV test shall be followed by the execution of Care, Support andTreatment (CST) for prisoners who have been proved to be infected by HIV. CST services for prisoners,
which is administered by a medical doctor or a paramedic in a health facility unit of prisons and detention
centres, must provide the same treatment as that available in civil society. For prisoners who are notinfected by HIV/AIDS, but are infected by other diseases, good quality treatment and clinical services should
also be provided for them until recovery.

(ii) Risk Reduction Counselling and Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT)
One of the applicable harm reduction programmes in Indonesia is Methadone Maintenance Therapy(MMT). Based on the experience of other states it is mentioned that methadone substitution therapy on along-term basis is an effective way of preventing the transmission of HIV through shared needles.
Before prisoners become involved in this MMT programme, they usually undergo risk reduction
counselling beforehand. In this counselling session they are informed of everything about MMT. Aftervolunteering to enter this programme (by filling the consent form), they can obtain methadone every day
until they feel they do not require it anymore.
The substitution programme is an easier programme to implement and has been proven fully
advantageous for prisoners who are drug dependent. In the year 1992 more than ten states implemented thisprogramme. They reported a reduction in the frequency of illegal drug usage in prisons. The literature also
indicates that methadone lessens the frequency of injection. It was also reported that there were few IDU
prisoners who did not follow this programme.
Sharing needles has also reportedly decreased, indicated by the significant reduction of HIV
transmission. Assorted drug dependency treatment methods have been implemented in prison including
therapeutic community methods and group counselling.

(iii) Referral Programme
The referral programme is a key programme which determines the success of whole harm reduction

121

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

programmes implemented in prison and detention centres. This is based on the idea that in overcoming
drugs and HIV/AIDS problems prisons and detention centres cannot operate independently. Therefore,
prisons and detention centres must co-operate with public health services units, either local hospitals and/or
Puskesmas, when they do not have enough resources to implement harm reduction programmes. Prisoners
who have serious health problems which can no longer be handled by doctors or paramedics in correctional
institutions should be referred to the public system.
Besides that, it is also important for prisons and detention centres to strengthen the referral network for
prisoners who will be released or have already been released. The purpose is to continue the services of
CST or MMT, received during imprisonment, at public health units outside prisons. Therefore, ex-prisoners
with HIV can still easily access ARV, so their quality of life will remain stable. For ex-prisoners who wereaccessing methadone in prison, they can continue their treatment, so that they will not inject drugs
anymore.
As a whole, the implementation of these three main programmes has the long-term aim of reducing
recidivism. By improving prisoners’ understanding and knowledge of HIV/AIDS and drugs, they are
expected to adjust their lives and behaviour and to avoid conflict with the law in pursuit of their addictions.

D. Co-ordination and Collaboration with Stakeholders in the Treatment of Drug-Dependent
Prisoners
1. Government Institutions
Some institutions that have worked together in the implementation of correctional treatments are The
Ministry of Health, The Ministry of Social Affairs, The National Narcotics Board (NNB) and the National
AIDS Commission (NEC), which have interest in the treatment of drug-dependent prisoners.

(i) The Ministry of Health
The co-operation involves medical treatments for prisoners and offenders, the assignment of doctors andparamedics, as well as medication for ill prisoners. It also covers research on prisoners involved with drugs
in various correctional institutions in Indonesia. The results are used by the Directorate General of
Corrections to formulate policies for the treatment of offenders in drug cases.
(ii) The Ministry of Social Affairs
The Ministry of Social Affairs has established a co-operative relationship with the Ministry of Law
and Human Rights in order to rehabilitate drug-dependent prisoners in which The Ministry of Social Affairs
supplies some modules on the Therapeutic Community Method based on a fixed standard.
(iii) The National Narcotics Board
This organization provides assistance in handling offenders who are involved in drug cases, as either
users or dealers. It realized that handling drug problems requires solid teamwork among many parties,
including correctional institutions. This is because illegal practices related to drugs have spread widely inmany places and reached many people, including prisoners in correctional institutions, and lately, thenumber of prisoners who happen to be users or dealers has been increasing significantly.
In order to overcome drug smuggling inside prisons and detention centres, The Directorate General of
Correction and the NNB developed task forces in central and provincial districts and even in prisons anddetention centres. They conduct ransacking activities regularly in prisons and detention centres. In themeantime, both organizations are in the middle of developing a drug database system in correctional
institutions. This data can be used as a basic rationalization in making comprehensive programmes forhandling the drug smuggling problem in prisons and detention centres.

(iv) National AIDS Commission
Based on evidence of an increasing number of HIV/AIDS prisoners, the Directorate General of
Correction developed a collaborative relationship with the National AIDS Commission to overcome thisproblem. Many programmes were developed for the fiscal years of 2006 - 2010, including the development of
a comprehensive database system in all prisons and detention centres. Training of correctional institutions
human resources, development of referral systems, and equipping the basic health facilities in correctional122

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

institutions are also the main programmes for those years. The programmes aim to develop independency ofcorrectional institutions in handling HIV/AIDS related problems. In order to realize the aim, the National
AIDS Commission and Directorate General of Correction develop HIV/AIDS task forces at central,provincial and district level.
2. Social Organizations/Non-Government Organizations
Social organizations have played a significant role in the treatment of offenders. Their concern for the
future of inmates has lessened the burden on correctional institutions in administering treatment. Various
social organizations have participated in providing some treatments for drug-dependent prisoners and
HIV/AIDS prisoners. The drug abstinence programmes are mostly provided by social organizations, such as
CRIMINON INDONESIA, YAKITA, etc. They also conduct some drug abstinence training for prisoners andcorrectional officers. Many of them are also involved in HIV/AIDS prevention efforts using the harm
reduction approach, such as UNAIDS, UNODC, FHI/ASA, IHPCP, Burnet Indonesia, etc. They, with otherinstitutions, also assist the Directorate General of Correction and the correctional institutions in thedevelopment of the referral system.
3. The Third Party
From 2002 – 2006 a co-operative relationship between correctional institutions and provincial hospitals inovercoming the problem of drug-dependent prisoners was developed. In 2002, Kerobokan Prison of Bali
Province co-ordinated with Sanglah Hospital (Bali) in implementing Methadone Substitution Treatment. In
2006, to accelerate Methadone Substitution Treatment, some correctional institutions developed similar cooperative relationships with provincial hospitals which provided methadone clinics. Those were Cipinang
Narcotics Prison, Bekasi Prison, and Salemba Detention Centre with Jakarta Drug Dependency Hospital;
Banceuy Prison (west Java) with Hasan Sadikin Hospital; and Yogyakarta Prison with Ghrasia Hospital.
The Directorate General of Correction also tries to maintain relationships with these hospitals, and many
more, as reference hospitals for ex-prisoners in accessing ARV and methadone. This measure is taken to
determine the sustainability of programmes after the prisoners are released.

E. Recidivism in Indonesia
Table 4: Rates of Recidivism in 2001 – 20066
120,000
111,357

100,000
87,162
92,898Total

80,00069,316
61,18365,247

Prisoners

60,000Recidivist

40,00020,000
1,020

901

956

2002

2002

2003

1,276

1,350

1,547

2004

2005

2006

0
Years

Recidivism in the Indonesian context is understood as the rate of prisoners who have been released but
who re-enter (the same) correctional institution because of their misconduct. During the last six years thetotal number of prisoners has increased rapidly. However, the number of recidivists has not increased
accordingly. In 2002, the number of recidivists had decreased, though it increased the following year. The slow
reporting of data from prisons and detention centres all over Indonesia caused this fluctuation. The reports
from all prisons, detention centres and provincial offices to the Directorate General of Corrections were notonline, but used a manual system (sent via mail). Therefore, required data often came late to the Directorate.
6 Directorate of Registration and Statistics, Directorate General of Correction, Statistic Data of Recidivism 2001 - 2006.

123

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

However, since 2003, with the availability of fax machines at all prisons and detention centres inIndonesia, the Directorate General of Correction can receive all data about prisoners, including that ofrecidivists, faster. For that reason, we can see a significant increase in the total number of prisoners and inrecidivists since 2003. Numbers of recidivists in 2004 had increased by 75% from year before. This wasfollowed by successive annual increases of 95% and 87.27%. However, this is the only data regarding
recidivism in the country. It is very difficult to know the number of drug-related recidivists.
The obtacles in measuring recidivism are recognized because many recidivists will not be sent to thesame correctional institution at the second time of incarceration. Therefore, the offender who commits acrime after being released from other institutions will not be classified as a recidivist at the registration oradministration stage. Based on this fact, it can be stated that the current statistics on recidivism in Indonesia
show only the tip of the iceberg, as only small number of recidivists are recognized.
Recidivism may occur because of several other factors, including inadequate needs assessment when theprisoner is received. Needs assessment is an important part of the correctional process as subsequent
treatment is based on this inforamtion.
The next possible cause of recidivism in Indonesia may be the voluntary nature of its treatment
programmes. This is not a good solution for drug-dependent prisoners. Many of them know that recovery
from drug dependency is a hard thing to attain and it is easy to access drugs in prisons. Therefore, theywould prefer to continue their drug use rather than begin treatment.
Moreover, the effectiveness of treatment and rehabilitation programmes for drug-dependent prisoners
has never been evaluated. Therefore, it is difficult to say whether treatment and rehabilitation programmes
for drug-dependent prisoners work or not. Despite not knowing the exact number of drug-dependent
recidivists, the increase in the total number of recidivists in Indonesian prisons and detention centres
indicates an increase. We regret to state that generally the treatment and rehabilitation programmes for
drug-dependent prisoners may not be effective enough to overcome the problem. Unfortunately, eventhough the number of recidivists is increasing, the Directorate General of Correction has not developed
special treatment programmes for recidivists. In order to reduce recidivism, a special treatment programme
for recidivists is a necessity.

V. CONCLUSION
1.

The Indonesian correctional system’s vision is to recover the life, existence and earnings (social
integration) of the offender as responsible individuals, members of society and God’s creation, whileat the same time holding on to the principles of protection, to produce independent individuals.

2.

In order to achieve this vision, corrections institutions develop treatment programmes which are
implemented at each stage of the correctional process.

3.

The most important part of the correctional process is the needs assessment process at the prisoner
reception stage. Executing this process correctly can influence the success of treatment
programmes. Unfortunately, the needs assessment process is rarely implemented, especially inovercrowded prisons and detention centres. Therefore, it is important that the Directorate Generalof Correction monitors the implementation of needs assessment processes at the reception stage.

4.

The recidivism rate should be used as an indicator in measuring the effectiveness of treatment andrehabilitation programmes. Based on the increasing rate of drug-related recidivism, we do not knowwhether or not the current treatment programmes are effective in reducing recidivism. To be
precise, it is important to develop evaluation and monitoring instruments for treatment programmes,
especially drug treatment programmes.

5.

The treatment programmes are followed voluntarily and there is no special treatment for drugdependent recidivists. Therefore it is important to develop such treatment and to make itcompulsory for all drug-dependent prisoners.

124

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

PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AND CONTROLLING RECIDIVISM USINGEFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS AMONGST ILLICIT DRUG OFFENDERS:
AN EXAMINATION OF BEST PRACTICES.
Raja Shahrom bin Raja Abdullah*
I. INTRODUCTION
Malaysia has been developing steadily for almost 50 years and has become a nation that is able to sustain
a high level of economic growth, political stability and most importantly, a sense of social safety and security.
Nevertheless, crimes against women and children, drug trafficking, housebreaking and vehicular and otherthefts paint a frightening portrait of the changing dimensions and scope of crime facing the community. Insuch an environment, the Royal Malaysia Police (RMP) has to recognize that its countermeasures may notkeep pace with rapidly changing society and the criminal activities within it. Therefore, the RMP strives tocontinually enhance co-operation with all government agencies, non-governmental organizations,community leaders, and communities in the fight against crime. As the prime organization responsible for
upholding the law in the country, the RMP needs to develop the flexibility and skills necessary to respondrapidly and appropriately to differing and frequently changing needs and expectations. Obviously, thequestion of creative and innovative ways of solving problems of crime requires changes in thinking, action,
approach, system, procedure, rules and regulations. Therefore the RMP support promoting public safety
through controlling recidivism by using effective interventions with offenders. Nevertheless, it needs
thorough examination to avoid the public becoming victims of any failure in the implementation of thesystem.

II. OBJECTIVES AND AGENCIESS
The drug problem remains one of the most serious in Malaysia. The Malaysian Government views theillicit drugs problem with grave concern. To give fresh impetus to the combating of drugs, the National Drug
Council was replaced by The Cabinet Committee on Drugs chaired by the Hon. Prime Minister who is also
the Minister of Internal Security. It has been actively monitoring the development of the drug situation andthe efforts made by the various agencies to combat the problem. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is toshare Malaysia’s experiences pertaining to the policies and efforts of the Government agencies and the RMP
to curb recidivism among illicit drugs offenders. Since 1983, Malaysia has declared drug abuse to be thenation’s ‘number one enemy’. Drug abuse not only reduces the potential human resources of the country but
has also contributed to an increase in crime, as such creating fear of crime amongst communities. Evidence
has shown that drug abusing offenders also involved themselves in criminal activities such as vehicle thefts,
housebreaking, robbery, minor offences, and rape and murder cases. Unofficial records have shown thatabout 30% to 40% of those people arrested for all categories of crime offences in the country were abusers if
illicit drugs. Reducing the relapse of drug abusers, especially amongst the younger generation, will reduce
crime. Therefore, using the justice system to intervene effectively to control recidivism and curb the use ofillicit drugs amongst young people has always been high on the national agenda. Malaysia has spent billionsof dollars to build rehabilitation centers for drug abusers all over the country in an effort to control
recidivism with the intention of promoting public safety.

A. Drug Laws and Government Agencies
Drug abuse is not a new issue. Public opinion of the activity changes depending on the perspective of thetimes. At one time, drugs were a trading commodity. But since the Geneva Convention (No. 1) in 1925, theGeneva Convention (No. 2) in 1931 and the New York Narcotics Declaration in 1961, the Government of
Malaysia has been rethinking the issue and has considered the impact of drug abuse on societies. Under the
Malaysian judicial system, use of illicit drugs is an offence under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. To avoid
recidivism amongst drug dependents, Section 15 of the said Act mentions that, “any person who:(a) administers to himself or suffers any other person, contrary to the provisions of section 14, toadminister to him any dangerous drug specified in Parts III and IV of the first schedule; or(b) is found in any premises kept or used for any of the purposes specified in section 13 in order that any* Deputy Head of Criminal Investigation Department, Johor Police Contingent, Royal Malaysia Police.

134135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

such dangerous drug may be administered to or smoked or otherwise consumed by him,shall be guilty of an offence against this Act and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding five
thousand Malaysian Ringgit (RM5,000) or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.”
Provisions under Section 6 of The Drug Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1983 have given
power to a Magistrate to:(a) “order such person to undergo treatment at a Rehabilitation Centre specified in the order for aperiod of two years and thereafter to undergo supervision by an officer at the place specified in theorder for a period of two years; or(b) order such person to undergo supervision by an officer at the place specified in the order for a periodof not less than two and not more than three years.”
Given the police and executive’s powers in the Acts, the Narcotics Investigation Department (NID) of theRoyal Malaysia Police is the main agency for the enforcement of drug laws. The Royal Malaysian Customs isanother department involved in enforcing the drug laws and the task is carried out by its Narcotics Division.
To a lesser extent, The Pharmaceutical Services Department of the Ministry of Health also enforces the
drug laws, in particular the Poisons Act 1952 which controls the sale, import and export of poisons,precursors and essential chemicals. The National Anti-Drug Agency under the Internal Security Ministry as
the focal point, is responsible for the formulation of policies relating to drugs, especially preventive
education and treatment and rehabilitation of drug dependents.
1. Narcotics Investigation Department, Royal Malaysia Police (RMP)
Drug law enforcement is the responsibility of every officer of the Royal Malaysian Police, irrespective ofrank or the division to which he or she is attached. This is in line with the provision of Section 3(3), Police
Act 1967 which emphasizes that it is the responsibility of a police officer to apprehend and prosecute any
offenders.
However, the task of combating the drug menace became increasingly challenging. Thus, on 2 January
1996, the Narcotics Investigation Department of the Royal Malaysia Police was formed to replace the Anti
Dadah Branch (NID) of the CID. By virtue of the formation of the NID, it became the main drugs law
enforcement department in Malaysia.
The main mission of the NID of the RMP is to reduce demand and suppress the supply of drugs in
Malaysia. As such, special emphasis and attention to the drug menace is given by planning and integrating
law enforcement programmes and activities with various government inter-departments, also with the drug
enforcement agencies at the regional and international level. The terms of reference of the NID are as
follows:i) to gather intelligence related to drug trafficking;ii) to investigate, apprehend and prosecute drug traffickers and syndicate members;iii) to freeze, seize and forfeit properties of suspected drug traffickers;iv) to co-ordinate and supervise movements and activities of former addicts and drug offenders;v) to stop the trafficking of drugs, including chemicals used to process drugs;vi) to maintain records, details and statistics regarding addiction, smuggling and trafficking;vii) exchange of intelligence with local and foreign agencies to provide local and overseas training.
2. National Anti-Drugs Agency
The National Anti Drugs Agency under the Ministry of Internal Security was set up in 1996 to monitor
and control the drug situation in Malaysia. Its functions and powers have now been formalized under the
National Anti Drugs Agency Act 2004.
The objective of the National Anti Drugs Agency is to ensure that national efforts in combating the drug
menace are carried out in a planned, integrated and co-ordinated manner to create a drug-free society. The
National Anti Drugs Agency operates at the Federal, State and District levels. The terms of reference of the
National Anti Drugs Agency are as follows:i) to implement preventive programmes;ii) to implement drug treatment and rehabilitation programmes;

135

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

iii) to upgrade the system for data collection and to carry out evaluation on the effectiveness of allnational anti drug programmes;iv) to enhance regional and international co-operative efforts to combat drug problems; andv) to serve as a Secretariat to the Cabinet Committee on Drugs and its Action Committees.

III. OVERVIEW OF THE DRUG ABUSE SITUATION
From 1988 to October 2006, 298,391 drug addicts were identified throughout the country. The total
number of addicts detected from January to October 2006 was 19,369 persons. 8,628 (44.55%) were newcases and 10,741 (55.45%) were relapse cases.

A. Types of Drugs Used
Of the 19,369 addicts identified from January to October 2006, 7,042 were heroin users, 4,856 usedmorphine, 4,414 used cannabis, 528 used psychotropic pills, 2,040 used syabu or methamphetaminehydrochloride, 130 used ecstasy/MDMA, 187 used amphetamines, 157 used codeine, nine used inhalants,
and six used opium.
inhalant
0.05%

metamphetamine
10.53%

amphetamine
0.97%

ecstasy/MDMA
0.67%

codeine0.81%
heroin36.36%

psychotropic pills
2.73%
cannabis22.79%
morphine
25.07%

opium
0.03%

B. Trends and Types of Drug Users
Method of use

2005

Percentage (%)

Chasing/sniff

24,939

76.01

Smoke

5,064

15.44

Swallow

1,529

4.66

Inject

854

2.60

Drink

412

1.26

Inhale

10

0.03

TOTAL

32,808100%

Source: National Drug Information System

1. Injecting Drug Users (IDU) Infected By Aids and HIV
As of June 2006, the number of HIV cases reported was 6,120 and the number of AIDS cases reported
was 1,211. 78.5% of HIV/AIDS patients are injecting drug users. The accumulated total at 30 June was73,427 persons.
2. Drug Seizures
Seizures of psychotropic pills showed an increase compared to 2005. Seizures of all types of drugs by thevarious authorities in 2006 are as follows:136135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERSSEIZURES IN
JAN - OCT. 2005

SEIZURES IN 2006
JAN - OCT. 2006

193.34 kgs

213.19 kgs-

1.13 kgs

0.29 kgs

2.82 kgs

Cannabis2,238.76 kgs

998.46 kgs

Psychotropic pills

54,454 kgs

346,194 kgs

Ecstasy pills

2.80 kgs

93.94 kgs

Syabu

138.47 kgs

35.48 kgs

TYPE OF DRUGS
HeroinRaw opium
Prepared opium

Source: National Drug Information System, National Anti-drugs Agency

C. Arrests of Drug Offenders
The number of arrests of drug offenders in 2006 showed a decrease compared to 2005 when 37,631
persons were arrested under the Dangerous Drugs Act (DDA) 1952 and the Dangerous Drugs (Special
Preventive Measures) Act 1985. For the previous year the number was 39,425. In 2006 the number of
persons arrested under Section 39B, which carries the mandatory death penalty, was 1,316. That same year,
the number of offenders under Section 39A (possession of illicit drugs) was 2,473. The number of offenders
under the various other sections of the DDA in 2006 was 31,822.
IV. INTERVENTION TO CURB RECIDIVISM AMONG ILLICIT DRUG OFFENDERS
A. Legislative Review
In a recent development the Government of Malaysia has undertaken a review of drug laws andlegislation covering prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. This reflects the seriousness of the national
effort to curb drug trafficking and recidivism relating to drug abuse amongst the young. Existing laws areunder continuous scrutiny to identify weaknesses and consequently to enhance their effectiveness.
Malaysia’s drug laws are to be found in five major statutes. They are:i) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952ii) Poisons Act 1952iii) Drug Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1983
iv) Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985v) Dangerous Drugs (Forfeiture of Property) Act 1988.
1. Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
The Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 is the key piece of legislation in relation to drug control in Malaysia. ThisAct is very extensive, covering aspects of offences, procedures and evidence. It provides, inter alia, amandatory death sentence for drug trafficking offences. This legislation has been amended several times inorder to keep abreast with the upsurge in drug trafficking activity and abuse of illicit drugs.
2. Poisons Act 1952
The Poisons Act 1952 is aimed at controlling the import and sale of poisons. The term ‘poisons’ refers to
any substance specified in the Poisons List and includes any mixture, preparation, solution or natural
substance containing substances other than an exempted preparation or an article or preparation included forthe time being in the Second Schedule of the Act. The types of poisons that fall under the control of this Act
include substances used for industry, medicine and agriculture. Some poisons have been classified as
psychotropic substances and can only be obtained through prescription by medical practitioners,
veterinarians or dentists. Lisensed pharmacists can sell or supply psychotropic substances. Doctors cannot
supply these psychotropic substances for the treatment of their patients.
3. Drug Dependents (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1983
The Drug Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1983 is a comprehensive piece of legislation
covering all aspects of treatment and rehabilitation. This Act came into force on 15 April 1983. The Drug

137

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1983 provides for both compulsory treatment andrehabilitation of any person who has been certified as dependent as well as for voluntary treatment andrehabilitation. The period of treatment and rehabilitation at rehabilitation centres is for two years. Thisinstitutional treatment and rehabilitation is followed by aftercare for another two years.
4. Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985
This preventive detention law that came into force on 15 June 1985 replaced the Emergency (Public
Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969. It is aimed at enhancing the effectiveness ofcountermeasures taken by the relevant authorities against those who are involved in drug trafficking. It
empowers the government to detain anyone suspected of being a trafficker without having to bring thesuspect to any court of law. As ‘sunset’ legislation, it was given an initial life of five years, from 15 June 1990
to 15 June 1995. This legislation was further extended, till 15 June 2005. Until December 2002, 25,908
persons had been detained under this Act.
5. Dangerous Drugs (Forfeiture of Property) Act 1988
Drug trafficking remains rampant despite provision for a mandatory death sentence on those convicted ofdrug trafficking. Despite the penalty, many are still willing to take the risk because drug trafficking remains
lucrative. In cognizance of this, the Government has introduced the Dangerous Drugs (Forfeiture of
Property) Act 1988, which came into force on 10 June 1988. It empowers the relevant authorities to trace,
freeze and forfeit assets of convicted drug traffickers.

B. The National Anti-Drug Agency Bill 2004
New legislation has been passed by Parliament. The new legislation provides for the establishment of the
Agency. It confers powers upon officers of the National Anti Drugs Agency to execute preventive measures,
treatment, rehabilitation, enforcement, investigation, special preventive measures and to forfeit property
under the relevant Acts.
C. Cabinet Committee on the Eradication of Drugs and its Sub-Committees
The new Cabinet Committee on the Eradication of Drugs has been formed, chaired by the Hon. Prime
Minister. Under the Cabinet Committee there is an Action Committee and Sub-Committees. The aim ofthese committees is to oversee and review the implementation of the National Drug Control Strategy and toensure effective implementation. There are three sub-committees that act as the working group. Theysuggest new policies for implementation or review existing policies and make recommendations and reports
to the Action Committee. The Action Committee decides on the recommendations and reports to the
Cabinet Committee accordingly. If policy changes are required, it makes recommendations to the Cabinet
Committee on the Eradication of Drugs for a final decision. The three Cabinet Sub-Committees currently
focus on the core areas, i.e.:i) Prevention Education and Publicityii) Lawiii) Treatment and Rehabilitation.
V. OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGYThe National Drug Control Strategy is focused on eliminating the demand for and the supply of drugs
through the following strategies:i) Preventionii) Enforcementiii) Treatment and Rehabilitationiv) International Co-operation (supporting strategy).

A. Demand Reduction Programmes
Primary prevention programmes involve prevention education in schools and dissemination of
information to the public. The programmes are aimed at insulating members of society, especially youths,
from falling prey to the drug scourge. The activities carried out in 2004 and ongoing in 2005 fall into threebroad categories:i) Advocacy and Information programmesii) School based programmes

138

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERSiii) Community involvement programmesiv) Parents based drug prevention programmesv) Workplace based drug prevention programmes.

B. Overview of Drug Treatment and Rehabilitation - One-Stop Centre Concept
The philosophy of this initiative is that ‘...addicts are not criminals but persons who are in need oftreatment and rehabilitation, love, care and guidance rather than punishment and rejection.’ Malaysia is oneof the few countries in the region that has developed a compulsory rehabilitation programme for drug
dependents. Every dependent can be ordered to undergo treatment and rehabilitation for his/her addiction
for a specific period of time as provided for under the laws and regulations relating to treatment andrehabilitation. The objective of the treatment and rehabilitation programme is to enable drug dependants toovercome their physical and psychological addiction to drugs and to thereafter live a drug-free lifestyle. It isa strategy to avoid recidivism among illicit drug abusers. The National Drugs Agency implements two
methods of treatment and rehabilitation:i) Rehabilitation in an Institution - a controlled environment whereby the addict will undergo treatment
and rehabilitation for two years.
ii) Rehabilitation in the Community - aftercare supervision for ex-addicts following release from theInstitution. They continue to receive treatment, rehabilitation and supervision for two to three years
in the community.
The objectives of the treatment and rehabilitation are as follows:i) to treat and rehabilitate the drug addicts;ii) to make the drug addicts free from physical and psychological dependency on drugs;iii) to reintegrate former drug dependents into society as functional, productive and drug free
individuals.
A suspected addict can be detained for a period of 14 days for urine testing and medical examination toascertain his or her status. If certified to be an addict, a magistrate, guided by advice contained in the Social
Report, can either commit him or her to an institutional rehabilitation programme or place him or her under
the supervision of a Rehabilitation Officer. Currently there are about 5,000 addicts who are undergoingtreatment and rehabilitation at the 29 government managed centres. There are also about 66 privately
managed drug treatment and rehabilitation centres. The Government has established 18 Anti-Drug Service
Centres. The role and functions of these centres are as follows:i) to plan and implement drug preventive programmes at the district level;ii) to provide facilities for drug treatment and rehabilitation for volunteering drug addicts;iii) to provide counselling and advisory services to those who require such services;iv) to manage and determine the rehabilitation programme that would best suit the addicts who arereferred to the centre by the police or by addicts who volunteer for treatment and rehabilitation;v) to provide follow-up services to those addicts who have been placed under the Supervision
Programme and for those who have finished their programme at the Government Treatment andRehabilitation Centres.

C. Multi-Disciplinary Approach
The psycho-social model practiced in institutional rehabilitation is multi-disciplinary in approach, where
the emphasis is on behavioural change through emotional and psychological rehabilitation. The rehabilitationteam consists of social counsellors, medical officers, religious teachers, education and military personnel,
vocational instructors, and security officers.
D. Emphasis on Discipline
The discipline component of the rehabilitation programme consists of drills and physical exercises.
Physical rehabilitation is based on the ‘tough and rugged’ concept which includes physical training and drills
aimed at instilling discipline. The regime is intended to ‘beef-up’ the often fragile physical make-up of an
addict and improve his or her personal discipline, which is imperative in changing the lifestyle of an addict.
Since the introduction of the discipline component, the administration of the rehabilitation programme in the
ONE-STOP CENTRES has become more manageable. There is notable decrease in problems such as failure
to attend counselling sessions or religious and academic classes, malingering, improper behaviour, etc.
Generally there is better control in the administration of these centres.

139

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

E. Overview of Intervention Activities with Non-Government Organizations, Private Sector andMass Media
Activities with non-governmental organizations are carried out in drug prevention activities, aftercare
and in the social reintegration of addicts into society. Some of the organizations are: PEMADAM, involved
with prevention; PENGASIH, assisting HIV/AIDS infected addicts; and PENDAMAI and Malaysian Care,assisting addicts. Other community based organizations like the Neighbourhood Committees, Village
Development and Security Committees, women’s organizations and youth organizations also participate in
drug prevention activities.
Private sector involvement is through their support of national level anti-drug campaigns and particularly
in supporting drug prevention programmes in the workplace. Private sector participation has also beenencouraged in the production of posters, leaflets and billboards promoting the anti-drug message. Media
involvement in Malaysia has been through the participation of the Ministry of Information providing
coverage for national and international conferences and events, campaign launches, television and radio talkshows. Controlling recidivism through collaboration has always been supported by the NGOs, hand-in-handwith Government agencies. Examples of NGOs actively involved in such efforts are listed below.
i)

MERCY Malaysia, together with the National Anti-Drug Agency (Agensi Anti Dadah Kebangsaan AADK), in Kuala Lumpur are organizing a series of Mobile Clinics as part of MERCY Malaysia’s
Drug Rehabilitation and Assistance Programme. The mobile clinics provide basic medical
examinations for those trying to reform. By providing this basic medical aid, MERCY Malaysia hopes
to increase their standard of healthcare thus helping to improve the reformers’ path to recovery.
Since it was launched in April 2006 a total of 341 patients have been treated, with symptoms
including coughing, skin diseases, hypotension and abdominal discomfort. This collaboration is tocomplement the National Anti-Drug Agency’s efforts to ease the pain of reformers recovering fromtheir addictions.

ii)

SPENGASIH Malaysia Association reaches out to all communities through awareness campaigns. It
provides services ranging from prevention efforts to help for those who have fallen into drug
addiction. PENGASIH offers opportunities for much needed knowledge, skills and support toreforming addicts during their treatment and rehabilitation. At the same time PENGASIH also
strengthens the programme by giving treatment to the families of recovering users as well. Families
need to know how to manage recovering users when they return home. They must know the right
way to monitor recovery, amongst other things. Family support has a major impact on the
rehabilitation of former users.

Continuous recovery from addiction is the main goal of all former drug users. It is not an easy path totake, filled with a haphazard assortment of challenges and difficulties. Only those who are steadfast enoughwill continue with the recovery path. They are usually well equipped with the right knowledge, skills
support and genuine sincerity. Nevertheless aftercare and supervision is very important to ensure thesuccess of the programmes. Counselling and guidance for the individual, group and their family are given.
Community plays an important role in rehabilitation programmes and serves as a guide, motivation and help
for the ex-addict to integrate themselves in the community.

VI. CONCLUSIONThe Government continues to improve its machinery, especially the Narcotics Investigation Departmentof the Royal Malaysia Police and the National Anti-Drugs Agency, to combat the drug problem in Malaysia,
which is still considered a security issue. Illicit drug abuse is related to the increase in crime in Malaysia.
Malaysia believes by reducing the recidivism of drug abusers it will also reduce crime in the community.
Therefore, solving the recidivism of drug abusers requires a multi-disciplinary approach in partnership withall sectors of society. It is only with concerted efforts that we can achieve the objective of having a global
drug free society.
Governments of all nations need to educate their people about controlling the recidivism of drug
offenders in order to get full public support for their policies. Without full public support, offenders face thedifficulties associated with being unaccepted by society. To achieve even better and faster results, local
communities and all government agencies must co-operate and assist the reduction efforts with moral

140

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

support, material support, logistical support, and financial support. Only then we will experience thesuccessful reduction of recidivism of drug offenders and the promotion of safe communities. This goal
requires a body of reliable knowledge of what works, in what contexts, by what mechanisms and at what
cost. Indeed, we believe interventions targeting the factors that contribute to behavioural problems are
effective in reducing recidivism among drug abusers. Nevertheless, assessment is a cornerstone of drug
abuse reduction. This must be built up through systematic evaluation and a sound conceptual framework.
Nevertheless, in any efforts to control recidivism through several interventions, public safety must be given
the first priority. Therefore the opportunity for criminal behaviour must be prevented through multiple
interventions.

141

IMPROVING THE REINTEGRATION OF OFFENDERSINTO THE COMMUNITY:
THE CURRENT SITUATION OF THAI CORRECTIONSSomphop Rujjanavet*
I. INTRODUCTION
Placing offenders in custody alone is not sufficient to solve the problem of crime. Imprisonment only
temporarily removes criminals from the community. Most prisoners are freed and many of them relapse into
the cycle of crime afterwards. The ultimate goal of corrections is offenders’ successful reintegration into thecommunity. Unsuccessful reintegration and recidivism have been alarming problems confronting the
Department of Corrections. Previously, there were hardly any pre-release programmes, preparation or
support provided for prisoners. After the key purpose of the system was shifted from punishment to that ofrehabilitation, the Department of Corrections has been committed to the principle of through care and has
implemented various rehabilitation initiatives to generate safe and successful re-entry into the community.

II. PRISON POPULATION & NUMBER OF RECIDIVISTS
A. Prison Population
Chart 1: Prison Population 1997 - 2006
300,000

245,973
250,000
210,395

244,397
200,000

217,697

166,760

199,673
150,000

162,293

164,451

154,486
100,000

125,955

50,000

0
1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Regarding the overall statistics of the last decade, from 1997 – 2002 Thailand experienced a dramatic
growth in the total number of prison inmates, rising from 125,955 in 1997 to 245,973 (the highest figure on
record) in 2002. Since then, after the moment of crisis, the rate has seen an annual gradual decline. As ofJanuary 2007 about 154,486 inmates are incarcerated in 139 correctional institutions throughout the country.

* Director of Academic Group of Correctional Study, Department of Corrections, Ministry of Justice, Thailand.

142

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

Chart 2: Number of sentenced and remand prisoners in Thailand(as of 12 January 2007)
Unsentenced Prisoners
28%

Sentenced Prisoners
72%

In Thailand, an unsentenced inmate or remandee means a person who is awaiting investigation or
awaiting trial or pending appeal. As of 12 January 2007, of all 154,486 prisoners in Thailand, the average
number of remand and sentenced inmates was 41,960 (28%) and 111,114 (72%) respectively. Compared to
the figures for July 2005, this reflects a growing number of remand inmates, which at that time stood at 25%(41,194) of all 162,293 inmates.

Chart 3: Number of male and female prisoners in Thailand(as of 12 January 2007)
Female Prisoners
16%

Male Prisoners
84%

At present, the number of female prisoners in Thailand is approximately 23,816 (approximately 15.5% of
the total number) while the number of male prisoners stands at 130,670. In contrast to the statistics of thelast 12 months, the numbers show a slight decline of about 1%. Next year it is expected that it should stay
constant, in the range of 15 – 16%.
The Department encountered an overcrowding crisis in 2002 when the total number of prisoners reached245,973. This number has been gradually decreasing, and it could be said that by comparison, the current
total number of prisoners (154,486) is not considered to constitute an overcrowding situation. Furthermore,
the overall extended capacity of all correctional facilities allows a possible 205,436 inmates to beaccommodated. As a result of the reduction in the number of prisoners, the Department can shift theorganizational policies to focus mainly on the sustained improvement of prisoner standards of living, basedon respect for humanity.
However, the growing difficulty that the Department of Corrections is encountering is the unequal
dispersion of prisoners which in turn creates mass imprisonment in only some areas. A good example of thisis the number of prisoners in Bangkok which is more overcrowded than other regions due to a large numberof remand prisoners who cannot be moved to other facilities outside Bangkok until they are convicted incourt. Apart from this situation in Bangkok, correctional institutions having an overcrowding problem mustmove prisoners to other facilities which have the standard of space designated as sufficient by the Thai
Department of Corrections.

143

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

B. Number of Recidivists
Table: 1 Number of Convicted Prisoners Classified by Instances of Imprisonment(as of October 2006)
Instances of Imprisonment

Male

Female

Total

Percentage

First-time Offender

79,966

15,36895,334

86.02

Second-time Offender

9,628

1,428

11,056

9.98

Third-time Offender

2,359

230

2,589

2.34

Fourth-time Offender

987

94

1,081

0.98

Fifth-time Offender or more

740

27

767

0.69

Total Number of Multiple Instance
Offenders

13,714

1,779

15,493

13.98

Total

93,68017,147

110,827100

As of October 2006, the number of convicted prisoners in Thai correctional institutions who were
imprisoned for the first time was 95,334 (86.02%) of all 110,827 convicted inmates. The number of offenders
with multiple instances of imprisonment was 15,493 or about 13.98% of all convicted inmates.

Table 2: Number of Re-Offending Convicted Prisoners
October 2005 – September 2006
Type of Offence

Male

Female

Total

Percentage

Offence against Property

547

18

565

35.60

Offence against Life

23

-

23

1.45

Offence against Bodily Harm

69

1

70

4.41

Offence against Sex

32

-

32

2.02

Offence against Social Security

8

-

8

0.50

Note: 1. The number of released prisoners from October 2003 – September 2004 was 78,360
2. The number of released prisoners from October 2004 – September 2005 was 24,961

From October 2003 – September 2005, the total number of released prisoners was 103,321. The numberof reoffending convicted prisoners from October 2005 – September 2006 was 1,587 or about 1.53% of all
released prisoners during two fiscal years. In addition, drug offenders still represent the majority of all
released prisoners in Thailand who reoffended and were reimprisoned. The number stood at 791 (49.84%).

III. POLICY FRAMEWORK
It is widely recognized that mechanisms to enhance the chances of an offender’s reintegration into
society are an essential part of any strategy to reduce recidivism. The word reintegration appears to assume
that the offender was well integrated in society prior to his or her imprisonment. The idea of reintegration iswell recognized by the Department of Corrections as it widely appears in many of its formal documents. An
example of this is the Department’s vision statement “to become an outstanding agency in ASEAN
countries on the treatment of offenders and to return productive citizens into society”. In addition, several
strategies specified in the Department’s five-year strategic plans (2004 - 2008), such as the promotion of
public and private sector involvement and the improvement of treatment of offenders as well as thecollective strength to overcome substance abuse, are all put into action to prepare both the community andprisoners to achieve the common goal: smooth reintegration of offenders.

144

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

Since 2002, emphasis has been placed on the development of effective rehabilitation programmes toaddress the special needs of different types of prisoners, such as sex offenders and violent offenders. In sodoing, the Prisoner Rehabilitation Programme Development Centre has been established with responsibility
for developing model rehabilitation programmes and providing resources and training for prison staff incharge of instructing rehabilitation programmes. Many schemes, including the Annual Rehabilitation
Programme Contest have been launched to encourage more innovations in the area. More importantly, a key
performance indicator has been set so that every facility must select at least one model rehabilitation
programme to be applied to its setting.

IV. KEY FOCUS AREAS
Before designing any strategies on prisoner reintegration, it is a good idea to first identify factors that arelinked to relapse and desistance. The Department of Corrections has focused on four elements in developing
appropriate programmes and service for prisoners. First, released prisoners have similar essential needs, forexample, accommodation, employment and good family relationships, as do other people. Second, apart fromessential needs, a number of prisoners also have criminogenic needs that require specific treatment
programmes. Third, even if prisoners are adequately prepared for release, reintegration can never be
successful unless there is community acceptance of offenders returning to the community. Fourth, thecontinuity of service delivery has to be taken into account to ensure that released inmates do not fall throughthe gaps of service provision. Based on these elements, rehabilitation programmes and services are
therefore implemented with the key focus placed on the areas of inmates’ essential needs, criminogenic
needs, community acceptance and continuity of support.

V. FOSTERING REINTEGRATION
A. The Period in Prison
Offenders are sent to prison not only temporarily as a punishment for their wrongdoing, but also toreceive the rehabilitation necessary to address their needs and problem behaviour before being released in
the community. In the Thai Corrections System, prison is something more than just bricks and bars, rather
the facility has been converted into prisoners’ homes where various meaningful activities to target
offenders’ criminogenic needs take place.
1. Home of Intellect
Being marginalized and disadvantaged in terms of education is a factor connected to offending. During
incarceration, inmates can attend educational programmes, provided in three categories, appropriate for
their interest and skills.
• Formal Education
Starting from illiterate level to primary level, which is compulsory education in Thailand, prisoners
can choose to continue their secondary level schooling through the adult curriculum in prisons. They
can even study in undergraduate programmes provided by Sukhothai Thammathirat Open
University.
•

Vocational Education
With close co-operation from the Department of Vocational Education and the Department of NonFormal Education, various types of vocational education programmes are provided for prisoners inevery prison facility. Most programmes emphasize enhancing work skills for life after release andshort-term training. The prisoners who pass the exams receive a Vocational Certificate or an
Advanced Vocational Certificate for their study and practice.

•Non-formal Education
Apart from formal and vocational education, prisoners are also allowed to study according to theirown interest. Many prisons hold special study programmes such as short-term computer courses,
computer or engine repair courses, boy scouts and girl guides training, and the “Art for All”
programme.

Moreover, their time can be spent productively by learning and researching in Prom Panya Library,which was initiated by HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhon, who graciously considered that prisoners

145

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

should have the learning opportunity afforded by a standard library that contains numerous and various
books, with a librarian to give advice and essential assistance. The Prom Panya Library project was firstestablished in 2003 at Thanyaburi District Prison and then in other prisons across the country. The project
has been supported by Matichon Newspaper, which is the main organization drawing public interest tocontribute new books to Prom Panya Library. By 2008, there will be 103 libraries all over the country. At
present, the Crown Princess has presided over the opening ceremony of the Prom Panya Library at four
correctional facilities. In addition, they are allowed to self-study using a range of learning materials, such as
computers and CD-ROMs supplied in the Knowledge Centre, which is being established in every prison.
2. Home of Rehabilitation
There are three kinds of rehabilitation programmes in practice. Firstly, the Fundamental Programme, an
education programme similar to that provided by the Home of Intellect Strategy, is operated with theintention to provide inmates with sufficient education and skills. Secondly, Rehabilitation Programmes for
specific types of offender are also conducted to adjust prisoners’ attitudes and behaviours by employing
various therapeutic modalities, such as musical, art and family therapy. Lastly, Welfare Programmes,
including treatment programmes for the elderly and initiatives for prisoners with physical and mental healthissues are implemented to maintain offenders’ safe and sound custody.
3. Home of Sport and Recreations
Several kinds of sport and recreations are offered in prisons for at least two reasons. As imprisonment
can cause considerable stress and tension, playing sports can keep inmates mentally and physically fit.
Additionally, inmates can learn favourable interpersonal skills and sportsmanship through sport andrecreational activities.
4. Home of Dharma
Recognizing that religion is an important factor in improving inmates’ mental status, every correctional
facility provides opportunity to all inmates to practice their religious activities without discrimination. Since
most of inmates in Thailand are Buddhists, there are several Buddhist activities arranged in the facilities;
the “Prison as Home of Dharma for Inmates” programme is one among them. For five days and four nights,
inmates have time to perform religious activities, to pray, and meditate supervised by professional
preachers. The programme aims to keep the inmates calm and to help them regain consciousness.
Several factors are necessary for the success of the aforementioned programmes. First of all, inmates areprovided with careful and thorough preparation for their re-entry, thanks to a wide variety of education
programmes, ranging from computer to business administration, which are offered from elementary toundergraduate level. For that reason, inmates should find something they are interested in to keep
themselves occupied and equipped with knowledge and skills necessary for their future work. Another key
to success is the support, love and understanding that inmates receive from their families, who areoccasionally invited to participate in family activities held inside prison. Furthermore, despite facing afinancial constraint and overcrowding, the initiatives are deemed to be successful because of the tremendous
support received from outside agencies.

B. Staged Release to the Community
Aimed to bridge the period of transition of offenders between prison to the community, three schemes
have been put into operation.
1. Vivat Polamuang Rajatan School Project
The project is a four-month intensive treatment programme specially provided to classified prisoners
who can receive special parole after finishing the school programme. The curriculum has been applied fromthe military’s Vivat Polamuamg School which provides intensive treatment programmes for drug addicts.
Short-term vocational training, behavioural change and disciplinary training have been added to theprogramme in order to help them to resettle during their conditional release. At the end of the programme,
prisoners passing the evaluation would receive special parole and return to the community as decent
citizens. Since 2003, there have been about 2,700 inmates graduating from the school.

146

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

2. Pre-release Program
Every prison facility runs Pre-release Programs twice a year for inmates whose remaining term is lessthan six months. It aims at fostering successful reintegration and reducing the chance of reoffending. The
emphasis has been on inmates’ basic and cognitive skills shortfalls to build up their immunity to crime.
Thus, offenders are provided with education and job training as well as behavioural skills, such as living andparenting skills.
3. Pre-release Centre
Currently, there are 10 Pre-release Centres being operated in correctional institutions countrywide.
Convicted prisoners whose remaining sentence term is not more than five years and who have agricultural
backgrounds will be voluntarily classified and transferred to Pre-release Centres located in the prison
region. At this service hub, an array of support and services, formerly fragmented, are integrated in one
place, facilitating ease of prisoners’ access to services that match their personal needs.
In relation to early release, two parole systems have been implemented in the Thai Correctional System;
Regular and Special Parole. The former is to be granted to inmates who have served at least one third of
their whole sentence and those who have served not less than ten years of a life sentence. The latter is a
special scheme introduced for a certain type of prisoner, such as inmates with disabilities, the elderly andthose who complete intensive treatment programmes from Vivat Polamuang Rajathan School. Both systems
allow well-behaved inmates who have high chance of reintegration to restart their new lives in thecommunity, under some forms of supervision or monitoring, more quickly. Not only can a condition imposedwith parole ensure public safety, it also helps ex-prisoners in maintaining acceptable behaviour until theysuccessfully settle in the mainstream community. However, only a little research has been conducted on the
success of the parole system.

C. Removing Hurdles
Several efforts have been made to minimize the effect of the stigma confronting most prisoners and toenhance the acceptance of ex-prisoners by employers. At the moment, these attempts have been put
forward only unofficially by means of promoting employers’ positive attitudes towards released prisoners
and encouraging them to give these wrongdoers another chance. Some MOUs have been signed between
the Department and other agencies regarding the provision of post-release service for ex-offenders; forexample, there is such an agreement between Pattaya Remand Prison and Nong-pla-lai Sub-District Local
Administration.
This memorandum will enhance co-operation between prison and local government agencies to support
prisoner reintegration into the community. In addition, prison labour contracts will be signed between thelocal government offices and the prison to employ prisoners for public works such as drain cleaning,
repairing local roads and small construction projects in the areas where prisons are located. Prisoners will
receive some remuneration for this work when they are released. Moreover, members of the community
will be assigned as volunteer social workers to provide aftercare service such as home visits, counsellingand employment to released inmates, ex-inmates and their families.
Furthermore, the Department of Corrections always urges prisons to seek job placements for theirinmates by establishing networks with local labour markets and other relevant agencies. However, the mostimportant key for ex-prisoners to secure a job is perhaps their own knowledge and skills. Hence, it isimportant that prison vocational courses must be tailored to meet market needs and that inmates’ skills andtalent gained in prison are acknowledged by outside people.

D. Preparing the Community
For the success of reintegration, preparing the community is as important as preparing inmates. All of thehard work and rehabilitation in prison will be in vain if ex-prisoners are rejected by their respective
communities on re-entry. In Thai jurisdiction, several initiatives have been incorporated to promote
community acceptance.
1. Inmate Teacher ProjectOn special occasions, such as the Annual Prison Product Exhibition, skillful inmates are brought outside

147

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

to teach in career training classes provided free of charge for interested people. More than just a showcase
for inmates to demonstrate their skills, the project renders their confidence in earning a living after releaseand also improves public attitudes towards prisoners.
2. Community Service Scheme
Appropriate prisoners are sent outward on a daily basis to work for the local community. Participating inthis scheme, inmates learn how to work as a team and that they should do something for other people to
make up for their wrongdoing. The scheme directly contributes to public forgiveness for inmates andgrowing community acceptance.
This year the Department of Corrections implemented a new project titled “Enhancement of Traffic
Service and Accident Prevention during New Year Break”. Between 27 December 2006 and 5 January 2007
with the collaboration of three agencies, namely the Department of Corrections, the Highway Police
Constabulary and the Vocational Education Council of the Ministry of Education. The project aims to reduce
loss of life and property from traffic accidents and to prevent other crimes. This is also a chance for prisoners
to serve the community and for the community to accept the offenders. Around 400 well-behaved convictedprisoners from 18 correctional facilities were sent to eight Highway Police Service Stops spread across thenortheastern and central region of Thailand and the Bangkok area. These prisoners assisted with traffic
services, engine repair, first-aid units and foot massage parlours.
3. Restorative Justice Approach
A pilot initiative has been launched to apply the Restorative Justice Approach to a prison setting. It aims
at encouraging offenders to feel remorse, to accept responsibility for their actions and to seek ways torestore the harm done to victims and the community. The ultimate goal of this programme is satisfaction andunderstanding of all stakeholders, with which it is hoped to finally achieve an improved community
acceptance of ex-prisoners.

E. Continuity and Inter-Agency Collaboration
The collaboration of relevant agencies is essential in ensuring the continuity of service, which is key toboosting offenders’ chance of resettlement. Also, co-operation of every sector of the community is vital
since offender reintegration demands a great deal of resources and is a complex task that is unlikely to beaccomplished by a single agency. Considering the importance of collaboration, the Department ofCorrections always seeks opportunities to establish partnerships with both government and nongovernment agencies.
1. Skill Support and Safe Reintegration Project- SSSRThis project is a good example of how successful inter-agency collaboration can produce effective
prisoner intervention. The project is carried out in five locations to target inmates who attend Vivat
Polamuang Rajathan School. The project provides skill-based services, such as job training, and also
addresses other survival needs by granting inmates loans that can be used to start their own small
businesses.
In launching this project, partnerships were formally built by 11 Memorandums of Understanding signed
between Department of Corrections and other public and private agencies that provide post-release service,
such as employment and personal financial management organizations. These service providers work
closely together to set up a service plan for inmates. As a result, it can be ensured that inmates can start
making use of services in prison and, once released, are referred to an appropriate post-release service
according to the plan.
The active involvement of every sector of the community is highlighted and makes the project sooutstanding that it received The President’s Award from the International Corrections and Prisons
Association (ICPA). The award ceremony took place during the 7th ICPA Conference in Edinburgh, Scotland,in November 2005.

148

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

VI. CONCLUSION
The diversity of offenders’ needs and risks makes the transition from custody to community a complex
task. In response to this complexity, the Department of Corrections is aware that innovations have to becontinually injected into its through care service delivery. Its latest innovation is an initiative based on HM
King Bhumibol’s Philosophy of Sufficient Economy, which provides for his people guidance on appropriate
conduct aimed at sufficiency, self-containment and a self-supporting lifestyle. The project focuses onproviding inmates with advice on how to adapt the theory to several aspects of life, so that they will be able
to protect themselves from harm and to handle challenges arising from today’s changes in the outercommunity.
Another recently developed project is a rehabilitation programme for inmates whose alcohol use is linked
to their offending behaviour. Underpinning the project is the idea that if the alcohol issues of this group ofinmates are not suitably addressed, alcohol, despite not being an illicit drug, will continue to pose serious
harm to the community. At the beginning of this fiscal year, the pilot project will be starting in two prisonsand will be adopted in other facilities subsequently.
A variety of prisoner interventions discussed throughout this paper should accurately reflect a genuine
commitment of Department of Corrections to provide meaningful rehabilitation programmes, aiming tofacilitate smooth and successful reintegration. In this regard, the Department believes that when both
inmates and their community are sufficiently prepared, the outcome will be worthwhile as ex-prisoners’chances of reoffending will be minimized and public safety will be enhanced. As a service provider, theDepartment of Corrections will be especially proud that its clients eventually manage to establish
themselves as decent citizens in the community.

149

REPORTS OF THE SEMINARGROUP 1

THE USE OF EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS IN REDUCING RECIDIVISM
AND PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AT THE PROSECUTION
AND SENTENCING STAGE
Chairperson
Co-Chairpersons
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs

Mr. Raja Shahrom b. Raja Abdullah
Mr. Toshiaki Kataoka
Mr. Getachew Erena Negara
Mr. Abdul Baaree Yoosuf
Mr. Demostenes Chryssikos
Mr. Yu Tongzhi
Ms. Toshiko Suganuma
Mr. Chit Ko Ko(Malaysia)(Japan)(Ethiopia)(Maldives)(UNODC)(China)(Japan)(Myanmar)

Visiting Expert

Dr. Peter Tak(The Netherlands)

Advisers

Professor Kayo Ishihara
Professor Megumi Uryu
Professor Iichiro Sakata(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Members

I. INTRODUCTION
The group started its deliberations on the main theme indicated above on January 25, 2007 and elected
the members of the board as listed above. The group then decided to accept the proposed agenda provided
by UNAFEI, with an additional sub-topic proposed during the discussions, so that the final agenda underconsideration was as follows:(a) Problems and challenges facing current legal systems that aim to reduce recidivism and protect
society from recidivists;(b) Identification of other effective intervention models, including diversion mechanisms and specialized
court programmes (e.g. drug court programmes);(c) Agencies that provide and ensure such interventions;(d) Problems and challenges of collaboration among related agencies;(e) Monitoring and evaluation of selected interventions;(f) The adoptability of such models in respective countries; and(g) Recidivism and restorative justice.

II. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS
A. Starting Point of the Discussions: How to Define ‘Recidivism’?
The participants considered it appropriate to deal with the delineation of the term ‘recidivism’ as astarting point of the group deliberations. As one participant (from China) pointed out, a conceptual
clarification of recidivism was needed before assessing the effectiveness of interventions against reoffendingat the prosecution and sentencing stage for the promotion of public safety. The same participant identified
the following factors for consideration in this regard: type of crime, type of punishment to be imposed, andthe length of time between crime occurrences.
Three working definitions were proposed for further consideration. The first one was as follows:“recidivism: act of a person repeating an undesirable behaviour after having experienced negative
consequences of that behaviour or having been treated or trained to extinguish that behaviour” . Thisdefinition was criticized by the group members, who emphasized that it was structured in general terms andit was not compatible with criminal justice aspects. The second definition was an attempt to narrow down
the conceptual framework of the first definition and encompass a criminological component in it:“recidivism: act of a person who reoffends after he or she has undergone at least one stage of the criminal
justice process.” One participant suggested that recidivism only applies to the intentional commission of an

150

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

offence after the court trial. A third definition brought before the attention of the group was an attempt toaccommodate the argument raised by one participant that the element of compliance with the law that isviolated by recidivists should be reflected as appropriate. This definition was as follows: “recidivism: thecontinued, habitual or compulsive commission of law violations after first having been convicted on prioroffences.” However, this attempt to conceptualize recidivism was criticized by other participants who argued
that further analysis might be necessary in relation to the terms “habitual” and “compulsive” commission oflaw violations.
Despite the abovementioned efforts to reach an accepted definition of reoffending, the group was fully
aware of the fact that so far there seems to be no agreement among researchers over how reoffending should
be conceptualized and measured. It was acknowledged that, in addition to the debate over what qualifies asreoffending, there is divergence of views over how recidivist events should be counted and when follow-up
periods for measuring recidivism should begin and end. The group took into account all these considerations
to illustrate that answering the reoffending question is by no means straightforward.

B. Problems and Challenges Facing Current Legal Systems that Aim to Reduce Recidivism andProtect Society from Recidivists
The discussion then focused on the examination of the general aims and objectives of national sentencing
policies and particularly on whether such policies are conducive to reducing recidivism and promoting public
safety. In general terms, it was noted that sentencing policies followed at the national level serve thepurposes of deterrence (general and special), promotion of public safety, rehabilitation, treatment and/or
retribution. These objectives, however, are not treated in a homogeneous manner in different jurisdictions,as the purpose of the sanction may differ depending on national priorities or the specific legislation thatapplies in a given case. The group recommended, in this connection, that, despite this divergence in national
attitudes, rehabilitation should always be considered in conjunction with other objectives of sanctioning
policies to ensure that the interests of both the offender and the community are well served.
In exploring sufficient means to reduce recidivism, the participants agreed that priority should primarilybe accorded not to whether the objectives of the sentences are prescribed in the national laws, but to theway that these objectives are translated into practice in the daily criminal casework. Therefore it wassuggested that a more integrated approach be followed to ensure better co-ordination among national
agencies, as well as consistency of action and more effective case management in this area.
The participants further discussed the type of offences mostly committed by recidivist offenders in theirrespective countries. In this context, reference was made to such crimes as property offences (theft,
burglary, fraud), robbery, forgery, assault, abduction, as well as drug and sex-related offences. It was
generally agreed that in most national legal systems sanctions were in place to punish such criminal
behaviour. However, it was stressed that the imprisonment measures per se cannot be always fully effective
because of lack of adequate rehabilitative impact on the offenders (see also below under II.C.3). Problems in
implementation of national sentencing policies resulting in ineffective treatment of offenders were also
reported.
The need to combine traditional sanctions with non-custodial measures for the treatment of offenders
was stressed by one participant, who also listed a number of advantages in following such an approach,including the – quite possible – reduction of the risk of recidivism by increasing the offender’s links with thecommunity and the savings in government resources and costs. In the same vein, the group agreed that theUnited Nations can play an important role in promoting the use and application of the United Nations
Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules),1 including their wider distribution
to officials across sectors at the national level .
The group members also discussed factors that contribute to the increase of recidivism rates, including
the inconsistent application of criminal sanctions, as well as more general social factors such as education,
employment, drug and alcohol misuse, mental and physical health, attitudes and self-control,
institutionalization and life skills, housing, financial support and family networks. In this context, they took
1 Adopted by General Assembly resolution 45/110.

151

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

into account research findings and particularly the outcome of a major meta-analysis completed in 1996 in
Canada which identified factors that are associated with reductions in recidivism. 2
In the same vein, some participants argued that the prolonged detention of offenders due to lengthy
prosecution and investigation proceedings and delays in the adjudication of cases by courts does notcontribute to their rehabilitation and may well lead to recidivism. In this connection, one participant reported
that no threshold was defined in his country’s legislation to authorize the early release of prisoners uponcompletion of a certain imprisonment period and therefore cases of disproportionate incarceration to theseverity of crimes were reported. The same participant highlighted the problem of treating drug dealers as
drug users, thus enabling the imposition of more lenient measures to them, including early release that may
lead to the commission of new crimes. On the other hand, cases of exclusion of drug users from special
treatment programmes causing their increased vulnerability to recidivism were also reported. One
participant noted that in his country there was sometimes interference by other agencies in the process ofpolice investigation, which may obstruct the aim of reducing recidivism.
A number of participants made reference to specific problems encountered in their respective legal
systems in implementing policies that aim to reduce or control recidivism, including, inter alia, the lack ofappropriate legislation to govern investigation and prosecution proceedings, delays at the investigation andprosecution stage, capacity deficiencies and lack of resources. Some participants argued that such delays anddeficiencies, accompanied by lack of legal rules governing provisional measures (e.g. pre-trial detention),
hinder the efforts to control recidivism among offenders effectively. Furthermore, the prolonged period
between prosecution and adjudication of the case does not only violate the right of the offender to a speedy
trial, but it could also have detrimental effects on that offender, who may in the meantime have smoothly
integrated into the society.
Other problems identified by the group included:• The lack of diversely skilled and well trained personnel who would be able the meet the demandingneed to implement intervention strategies with a view to reducing recidivism;• The lack of appropriate equipment and proper facilities. It was explained in this regard that the lackof the necessary infrastructure and capacity is currently among the major obstacles in developing
effective crime prevention and reduction plans in many countries, mostly developing ones orcountries with economies in transition;• The lack of systematic action and the absence of task-oriented and effective social work with bothrecidivist offenders and victims;• The lack of knowledge and information about the whole range of criminal justice activities thatinvolve imprisonment and alternatives to it, as well as the absence of awareness-raising initiatives toenhance such knowledge.3 In this connection, it was stressed that the establishment of bestpractices in promoting public safety and controlling recidivism requires a body of reliable knowledgeof what works, in which context, by which mechanisms and at which cost.

2 The factors investigated in the study were divided into static risk factors (adult criminal history, pre-adult antisocial

behaviour, family criminality, family rearing practices, family structure, age, gender, intellectual functioning, race and socioeconomic status) and dynamic risk factors (anti-social personality, companions, criminogenic needs, interpersonal conflict,personal distress, social achievement and substance abuse).
The study demonstrated that the three factors which were most correlated with recidivism were criminogenic needs, criminal
history and social achievement. Other important factors were age, gender and race, and family background. These specificfactors are therefore the ones that should be assessed when determining who requires the most intervention. Other factors
such as socio-economic status, intellectual functioning and personal distress were not among the most predicting factors. The
results of the study also indicated that dynamic factors are slightly more effective at predicting recidivism than static factors.
However, both types of factors are very similar in their predictive effect.
3 The group took into account the findings of empirical research which show that people, in general, underestimate the factual
severity of sanctions, overestimate the effectiveness of criminal sanctions and have overly pessimistic view of thedevelopment of crime. Consideration was also given to the finding that those who know less of the facts of the crime and crime
control also have the highest fears and most punitive demands.

152

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

C. Identification of Other Effective Intervention Models, Including Diversion Mechanisms andSpecialized Court Programmes
1. Concept and Scope of Diversion in the Criminal Justice Field
The group further shed light on alternative intervention models that go beyond the conventional criminal
justice process of prosecution, sentencing and imprisonment with a view to examining their effectiveness incontrolling recidivism. In this context, diversion mechanisms and specialized court programmes (e.g. drug
court programmes) were identified as issues of particular importance that had to be examined thoroughly
and, as one of the advisers of the group noted, not necessarily separately, as they might be interrelated.
The understanding among the group members was that diversion mechanisms are geared towards rerouting to treatment and rehabilitation programmes offenders who would otherwise be convicted andpenalized through the traditional criminal justice process. The group agreed that the diversion schemes
should be prescribed by law, run at any point of the process, from police arrest to court sentence (diversion
before investigation/diversion from trial/diversion from sentencing), and used as alternatives toimprisonment.
A number of participants underscored that diversion is not applicable to all crimes and therefore it would
be important to take into account in the relevant discussions the nature and type of offences concerned.
Such an approach would also be useful for measuring recidivism in a more adequate and reliable manner
focusing on offending behaviour in targeted areas (for example, the effect of sex offender treatment
programmes on sex reoffending behaviour). Another group member argued that diversion mechanisms alone
may not be enough to address issues of recidivism and that appropriate monitoring and provision of advice tothe offenders should be available to that effect.
The group also took into account the usefulness of approaches focusing on prolific offenders that are far
more criminally active than others and contribute disproportionately to the overall crime rate.4 It was argued
in this regard that prioritizing resources on the most active offenders could bring about better outcomes interms of reduced crime rates and reoffending, as well as improve public confidence in the criminal justicesystem.
2. Diversion Mechanisms at the Pre-Trial Stage
Specifically with regard to the pre-trial stage, the participants recognized that the key question in national
criminal justice systems is how the discretion in deciding against whom action should be taken, whom toignore and whom to specially treat should be structured. At the policing level, law enforcement officers needto have clear instructions on when they can themselves issue warnings and take no further action, and when
they should refer alleged offenders to prosecuting authorities. Similarly, prosecutors need clear guidelines
on how to exercise their discretionary powers. The group was of the view that in both instances, the opinionof the victim of the alleged offences needs to be taken into consideration, although victims should not beallowed a veto over State action in the criminal justice sphere.
In China, many minor cases are settled by police. Usually, the diversion mechanism should include thefollowing factors: first, the types of offences should be traffic offences, minor injury, negligent injury and soon (according to Chinese criminal law, these offences should not result in sentences of more than three
years); second, offenders who compensate for the loss of the victim and come to reconciliation with thevictim; third, the victim agrees not to prosecute the offender. When these requirements are met, the police
can directly dismiss the case at the pre-trial stage.

4 The participants assessed concrete information and research findings presented during the plenary sessions which

demonstrate that, of a total offending population of around one million, only approximately 100,000 offenders (10% of all active
offenders) were responsible for half of all the crimes committed in England and Wales (U.K. Home Office, 2001). Moreover,the most active 5,000 of this group of prolific offenders were estimated to be responsible for one in ten offences (U.K. Home
Office, 2002). In this connection, consideration was given to the first positive results of a recently launched programme inUnited Kingdom (Prolific and Priority Offenders Programme) which was designed to give the most active or problematic
offenders a choice between the cessation of offending with the acceptance of support delivered by relevant agencies or to carryon offending resulting in prompt arrest and punishment.

153

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

One participant noted that a way to reduce recidivism is to use the prosecutorial powers to waive
prosecution as a means of diverting a case out of the formal flow of criminal justice, or to conditionallysuspend prosecution. The suspension of prosecution would require legislation, as in many cases there is no
statutory basis for such a measure. In practice, the prosecutor could impose conditions for a suspended
prosecution that would be similar to the conditions attached to a suspended sentence. The suspension may
also be combined with other treatment measures. It was further argued that, because of different political,
social, economic and cultural conditions and developments, particularly in developing countries, it would
take time to apply such measures in their entirety and to the greatest extent possible. However, processes
aimed at amending existing policies and practices need to be launched and gradually carried out, taking into
account the needs and characteristics of each society.
One group member reported on diversionary practices currently in place in his country. The mostsignificant of such practices include conferencing for young offenders with a view to educating them,informal and formal cautioning adopted by the police for juveniles and community based rehabilitation
programmes for drug users. In addition, house confinement and banishment have been two traditional
methods still widely used with offenders. The same participant noted, however, that difficulties have beenencountered in the supervision of house confinement, whereas banishment has worsened the drug problem
at the local level. The same participant raised concerns and doubts whether diversion could, in general, be
effective in drug-related cases.
One Japanese participant explained the diversion mechanisms used by the prosecutorial authorities inJapan. The public prosecutor issues guidelines to the police authorizing them to decide the termination of
the proceedings for certain petty cases. Also, the public prosecutor may suspend prosecution even when thesuspicion of an offence is proved, if such prosecution is deemed to be unnecessary in light of the character,age or circumstances of the suspect, the seriousness and nature of the offence and the situation after theoffence. Factors such as compensation to the victim and motivation are taken into serious consideration,
among others, in practice. Thus, the prosecution authorities may suspend prosecution, where, for instance,
mediation with the victim is settled, and it is widely utilized in order to divert offenders from the formal
court procedure; however, the participant is of the view that if they could suspend prosecution conditional
upon rehabilitative treatments, it would be more sufficient. The participant further explained that in practice,suspension of prosecution is widely used in order to avoid unnecessary stigmatization of suspects andbrought to the attention of the group statistics demonstrating trends in prosecution rates and suspended
prosecution rates over the last ten years. For example, in 2005, the prosecution rate was 44.8% and thesuspended prosecution rate was 53.4%. For overall cases, the prosecution rate has been on a downward
trend, while the suspended prosecution rate has been on an upward trend.
3. Diversion Mechanisms at the Sentencing Stage
With regard to the use of diversion mechanisms as alternatives to sentences of imprisonment, the group
took into account that the Tokyo Rules list a wide range of dispositions other than imprisonment that can be
imposed at the sentencing stage and which, if clearly defined and properly implemented, may also function
as measures that can facilitate the rehabilitation of offenders. Building upon the ad hoc presentationsdelivered during the plenary sessions, in which a comparative overview of the use of different sentencing
alternatives was offered, the participants exchanged views and opinions on policies and measures toimplement, separately or jointly, community sanctions ranging from conditional or suspended sentences,
probation or supervision and community service, to treatment orders and electronic monitoring.
While discussing this agenda item, the group members were asked to provide a brief overview of thebasic sanctions stipulated in their respective legal systems as a response to the commission of criminal
offences or reoffending.5 Imprisonment was reported to be the main criminal sanction for a broad range ofoffences and its length is subject to the seriousness of the crime or to recidivist incidents. The groupindicated that imprisonment should be combined and complemented with other measures geared towards
the rehabilitation of the offender and his/her reintegration into society (see also above under II.B).
5 One participant (Ethiopia) underscored that the national judicial authorities are empowered to impose aggravatedpunishment on recidivist offenders as far as the public prosecutor proves the guilt of these offenders and further explained that
this approach is essentially both a proactive and reactive way to ensure public safety.

154

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

In this regard, one participant (Ethiopia) referred to the existence in his country of rehabilitation centres
that provide basic education, vocational training and social services to offenders and may engage them inlabour aiming at their rehabilitation. One Japanese participant stated that although Japanese courts
deliberate on whether imprisonment is necessary for the defendant in light of preventing recidivism, as well
as retribution, the Japanese legal system does not provide for many options to the court at the sentencing
stage. In many cases, an increased punishment is imposed as the consequence of increased responsibility
due to the defendant’s repeated offences.
Another Japanese participant expressed similar concerns and, after explaining the different level ofsanctions applicable in the Japanese legal system, proposed that the judge should be given more options indeciding the most appropriate sanction considering such measures as probation, supervision, imposition offines, etc. The same participant stressed that in cases of minor offences, resort to community sanctions andfines would be the most appropriate option, whereas a combination of community sanctions andimprisonment could be productive with regard to mid-level offences.
4. Prison Overcrowding and its Impact on Controlling Recidivism
The group members devoted part of their discussions to the problem of prison overcrowding, despite its
little relevance to diversion mechanisms, on the understanding that this problem seriously affects therehabilitation of prisoners, thus undermining efforts to control recidivism. Furthermore, the participantsconsidered it appropriate to deal with this issue, although it falls within the agenda of Working Group 2, for acertain reason: the problem of prison over-population is exacebated by the sometimes excessive use of pretrial detention and/or the resort to imprisonment as the only available sanction to be imposed at thesentencing stage.
Building on this consideration, the group acknowledged the need to ensure the physical presence of the
defendant in the related criminal proceedings, but confirmed that the decision to detain an accused awaiting
trial is essentially a matter of weighing up the suspect’s right to liberty, on the one hand, and the interests of
the administration of justice, on the other. Taking into account Rule 6.1 of the Tokyo Rules,6 the group was ofthe view that pre-trial detention should be used with cautious deliberation. If an alternative measure to pretrial detention is chosen, it should be the one that will achieve the desired effect with the minimum
interference with the liberty of the suspect or accused person, whose innocence should be presumed at thisstage. The group members indicated that possible alternatives include the release of the person and theorder to appear in court on a specified day; not to interfere with the course of justice; to remain at a specificplace; to report on a regular basis to a court, police or other authority; to surrender passports or otheridentification papers; to accept supervision by an agency appointed by the court; to submit to electronicmonitoring; and to provide financial or other forms of security as to attendance at trial.
The group further underscored that the advantages and disadvantages of various alternatives to pre-trial
detention are often examined on the assumption that the authority deciding on whether detention isrequired is able to choose freely between various options. In reality, the competent State authorities should
be in a position to create a framework for such options to function. Some alternatives require merely aformal legal power that would enable them to be imposed while other alternative measures also need thesetting up of proper mechanisms and infrastructure for their implementation.
In general terms, the group members stressed that, in order to achieve the best possible results, there
needs to be in place a coherent strategy that constantly emphasizes the overall objective of using
alternatives to imprisonment with a view to reducing the prison population. Moreover, it would be importantto pursue the adoption of alternative models, given that correction costs have an impact on the amount ofpublic funds available for other basic services and public needs. In this connection, one participant (Ethiopia)
referred to a study conducted in his country which demonstrated that the costs of imprisonment, especiallyof those offenders that have received jail sentences ranging from one to six months, were too high and, as an
example, the expenditure for one single prisoner exceeded the salary of an average low level civil servant.

6 “Pre-trial detention shall be used as a means of last resort in criminal proceedings, with due regard for the investigation of

the alleged offence and for the protection of society and the victim.”

155

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The same participant pointed out that prison congestion, which is the outcome of lack of alternative to
imprisonment models, has adverse effects on the treatment and living conditions of prisoners and therefore
high priority should be accorded to policies addressing alternatives to imprisonment.
5. Diversion Mechanisms for Special Categories of Offenders(i) Offenders with Mental Disorders
One Japanese participant informed the group of the Japanese experience of introducing medical care andcommunity supervision for offenders with mental disorders (insane or quasi-insane persons who havecommitted serious offences) as possible treatment following non-prosecution, acquittal or a suspended
sentence. While some of these offenders pose a serious threat to public safety by repeating crimes, they are
not criminally responsible for their actions, or are criminally responsible to a limited extent, thus resulting in
non-prosecution, acquittals or mitigations of sentence. Before the new scheme was introduced, these
persons were often hospitalized after non-prosecution, acquittal or suspension of sentence, but there was noformal arrangement between criminal justice agencies and medical agencies. As a result, some offenders
committed further offences because of a lack of consistent inpatient or outpatient psychiatric treatment.
Under the new scheme, the prosecutor, the court, the designated test hospital, the designated inpatient or
outpatient hospital, the mental health agencies and the probation office co-operate to provide those offenders
with proper treatment, thus enabling the relevant authorities to take flexible measures aiming at preventing
these persons from committing acts against public safety.
In general terms, the participants recognized that, despite the little or lack of criminal responsibility ofmentally ill offenders, their recidivist acts could greatly infringe public safety and therefore such offenders
should be dealt with in a manner which also ensures that further commission of dangerous acts is prevented.
It was further acknowledged that diversion of the mentally ill raises wider issues than determining criminal
responsibility. Mental illness should be taken into account when deciding how to deal with this special
category of offenders. The police and the prosecuting authorities should make special efforts to divert such
persons from the criminal justice system.7 On the other hand, mentally ill offenders who remain within thecriminal justice system should be given special consideration to determine whether they would not be better
placed outside prison. It was argued that a community sentence with a treatment element for the offender’smental illness should be considered in appropriate cases.

(ii) Drug Offenders
The participants paid particular attention to diversion policies and programmes regarding drug
offenders.8 There was an agreement that diversion has a major role to play as an alternative to imprisonment
in the drug sphere. The main argument raised in this regard was that many offenders who violate drug laws
and/or other laws commit their crimes because they are addicted to drugs themselves. It would therefore be
more effective for these offenders to be treated for their addiction, rather than processed through theconventional criminal justice system and eventually punished.
The participants acknowledged that diversion of drug users may take different forms, but, in basic terms,
it can follow the same pattern as for other offences in that the police and prosecutors use their discretion not
to arrest suspects or prosecute them. This may be subject to the condition that drug offenders enter a drug
education programme or take part in more formal treatment programmes.
One participant (Malaysia) stressed that his country was one of the few States in the region that hasdeveloped a compulsory rehabilitation programme for drug dependents. Every dependent can be ordered toundergo treatment and rehabilitation for his or her addiction for a specific period of time, as provided for

7 The courts have a particularly important role to play in this regard. The United Nations Principles for the Protection of
Persons with Mental Illness (adopted by General Assembly resolution 46/119) encourage the creation of a legislative
framework that allows the courts to intervene where the sentenced prisoners or remand detainees are suspected of having amental illness. Such legislation “may authorize a court or other competent authority, acting on the basis of competent andindependent medical advice, to order that such persons be admitted to a mental health facility,” (Principle 20.3) instead ofbeing held in prison.
8 The term “drug offenders” in this report is meant to include drug abusers and dependants and not drug dealers,manufacturers and traffickers, who are different types of offenders and should be dealt with in the context of organized crime.

156

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

under the laws and regulations relating to treatment and rehabilitation. The objective of the treatment andrehabilitation programme is to avoid recidivism among illicit drug abusers and to enable drug dependents toovercome the physical and psychological addiction to drugs and thereafter live a drug-free life. The same
participant further specified that two methods of treatment and rehabilitation of drug dependents are
implemented at the national level: rehabilitation within an institution, a controlled environment whereby the
addict undergoes treatment and rehabilitation for two years; and rehabilitation in the community, two-year
aftercare supervision of ex-addicts following their release from an institution.
The group further noted that in a number of jurisdictions diversion is formalized through drug treatment
courts. The participants underlined the particular nature of these courts, which, although they are part of thecriminal justice system, operate following a diversion strategy. In this connection, the group members
examined the key feature of the drug courts to handle cases involving substance-abusing offenders throughcomprehensive supervision, drug testing, treatment services and immediate sanctions and incentives. They
noted that the establishment and operation of drug courts reflect a transformation of the way courts
traditionally dealt with criminal casework related to drug-abusing offenders. Thus, while the traditional
process is adversarial and emphasizes the backward-looking adjudication of claims, rights andresponsibilities of the few participants involved, the transformed process in drug courts is collaborative andput emphasis on the forward-looking adjudication of the problem with the involvement of a wide range ofstakeholders (judge, prosecutor, defence counsel, substance abuse treatment specialists, probation officers,
law enforcement and correctional personnel, educational and vocational experts, community leaders andeducational and community anti-drug organizations).
One participant also informed the group about classification models for drug courts and the various
approaches followed by them: pre-plea, pre-trial, and post-plea approaches, depending on the point at which
the drug court admits the participant. Emphasis was given to the need to establish clear eligibility criteria
for the participation of offenders in court-directed drug treatment and rehabilitation programmes.
The group noted that success factors for the effective operation of drug courts include, inter alia, theeffective judicial leadership of the multidisciplinary drug treatment programme team; the strong
collaboration of judges and team members; the existence of an operational manual to ensure consistency ofapproach and ongoing programme efficiency; the establishment of clear eligibility criteria and a screening
process for participation of offenders in a drug treatment programme; the fully informed and documented
consent of each participant offender; the speedy referral of participating offenders to treatment andrehabilitation; the existence of mechanisms to ensure ongoing evaluation of the programme; sufficient andsustained funding to support the process; and potential changes in substantive and procedural national laws.
The group members further stressed the importance of providing clear and timely information about drug
court directed treatment and rehabilitation programmes to the community, so that its members are wellinformed about their real benefits compared with punishment by imprisonment or other means. In thisconnection, effective use could be made of the initial results of studies conducted in previous years
suggesting that drug court programmes seem to be more successful than imprisonment in preventing
recidivism of drug offenders. This is particularly important in cases where the community has
misperceptions about these programmes being too soft on participating offenders. It is also essential toprovide comprehensive information to government leaders, officials and bodies with a view to overcoming
any initial reluctance to offer financial or other support.

D. Agencies that Provide and Ensure Interventions
The discussions of the group were further expanded to identify authorities and/or agencies operating at
the national level which can be engaged in diversion mechanisms and possible interventions with offenders.
It was agreed that such authorities or agencies involved in the prosecution and sentencing stage include thelaw enforcement, prosecutorial and judicial authorities, the prisons or correction and rehabilitation centres
and the probation officers, as well as non-governmental organizations dealing with criminal justice issues
and various community institutions.
One participant was of the view that non-governmental organizations that offer treatment to drug abusers
could be helpful, but there should be a mechanism to carry out follow-up evaluations regarding the157

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

effectiveness of their programmes. The same participant identified as related national authorities andagencies the Ministry of Justice, the police and the National Narcotics Control Bureau.
One participant (from Ethiopia) noted that religious institutions may play a role in the treatment ofoffenders, although that is dependent on the political, social and cultural context of each society. The groupagreed that targeted interventions of agencies such as hospitals, through the Ministries of Health, forensic
chemistry units, community and half-way houses could also be conducive to establishing comprehensive
treatment approaches for offenders within, or in parallel with, the criminal justice processes already in place.
One Japanese participant informed the group that there are two non-governmental organizations in the
country involved in outreach interventions with drug users in custody. These organizations work incollaboration with doctors, professionals in healthcare, lawyers, and probation officers with a view toproviding education to prisoners through correspondence or particular sessions in prison. Lectures atschools and communities, and workshops for professionals, are among the activities of these organizations.
Assistance in getting bail and pre-release support are also offered by one of these NGOs. Over the last six
years, around 150 defendants took advantage of such supporting schemes. The same participant also
expressed her opinion that, in general terms, the lack of legal framework and well established requirements
for action render such interventions of non-governmental organizations sporadic, piecemeal and fragmented.

E. Problems and Challenges of Collaboration Among Related Agencies
All participants were of the view that one of the main difficulties and challenges encountered in theirrespective countries relates to the lack of effective collaboration and co-ordination among theabovementioned authorities and agencies which leads to piecemeal and fragmented interventions withlimited chances to adopt and pursue a holistic approach to dealing with offenders and recidivist incidents.
Most of them reported that the need for collaboration has become even more acute due to individualinterventions of various stakeholders which may not be linked to a comprehensive plan of action for thetreatment of offenders.
The group agreed that initiatives geared towards institutionalization of inter-agency co-operation,
especially through forming inter-agency units with a common vision, goal and function, can provide solutions
to overcome barriers to collaboration. The need for putting in place the necessary legal or administrative
framework and ensuring the political will and commitment to initiating or streamlining joint efforts andaction was also emphasized. One Japanese participant noted that the means for establishing such aframework may vary, as other countries need legislation to that effect, while others may resort toadministrative schemes or arrangements. One participant specifically underlined the lack of co-operationand co-ordination amongst agencies involved in the investigation of crimes. He also noted that the sameproblems of lack of co-operation and communication between different actors are encountered in the field oftreatment programmes for offenders as well.
Other participants highlighted the absence of an integrated information system database on recidivist
incidents and rates. They further noted that this deficiency makes it difficult to carry out an in-depth
evaluation and assessment of the extent and impact of the problem. In general terms, the availability ofcomprehensive, timely and reliable data and information is one of the essential requirements for theformulation of appropriate policies and guidelines to tackle the challenges posed by recidivism.
Some participants proposed as a means of boosting co-ordination and concerted action the designation of
focal points in each authority or agency involved, as well as the establishment of a communication network
between them through regular meetings, posting of liaison officers, information-sharing etc. One participantsuggested that national crime information centres be established with the task to collect, store anddisseminate information related to crime and justice.

F. Monitoring and Evaluation of Selected Interventions
The group further considered efficient ways and means to monitor selected interventions with offenders
and evaluate whether such interventions can be conducive to reducing recidivism. All participants accordedhigh priority to the need for having in place a solid knowledge base and sufficient information about theoffenders and the whole range of interventions used with them. It was pointed out in this regard that theavailability of reliable data will enable and improve information-sharing among related agencies, thus

158

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

strengthening their co-operation and co-ordination, avoiding duplication, and ensuring the continuity
element of the intervention schemes. As a result, a much more accurate picture of the real work being
carried out can be produced, providing at the same time fertile ground for more streamlined future efforts
geared towards enhancing the effectiveness of the overall programmes and interventions.
The group members also underlined that the systematic collection of information is a key prerequisite for
conducting research, which would be important in developing an evidence-based approach and determining
what works in the area of counter-recidivism strategies. In addition, it was agreed that research is anextremely useful tool for management planning, as it allows for better allocation and use of available
resources and assists in eliminating programmes and interventions that do not have an impact on offenders.
For this reason, the need for research staff who can carry out research projects and maintain knowledge of
new and developing trends was emphasized. Moreover, it was noted that where research staff are notavailable efforts are needed to build relationships with universities and academia to encourage research thatis consistent with local, cultural and social norms.
The participants acknowledged that, in order to conduct research in an efficient manner, it is necessary toknow what is being evaluated and, thus, be in a position to describe the programme or intervention andfurther apply it consistently so that all participants receive the same service. On the other hand, it would not
be possible to effectively evaluate programmes that are constantly under review or change, because in thiscase no reliable and comprehensive information on which programme is operationally successful can bemade available.
Additional proposals made during the discussions included the introduction of case management systems
in criminal cases, the establishment of a system of consolidated performance assessments for the authorities
and/or agencies dealing with offenders, and the setting of benchmarks that have to be met by a specified
date. The translation of such proposals into practice would enable schemes to be monitored for efficiency
and effectiveness, as well as the identification of poor performers, so that appropriate action can be taken.
Other group members suggested that partnerships should be built to allow for effective supervision andmonitoring of relevant intervention schemes. Reference was made to the involvement and role of thecommunity in this regard. Thus, one participant (from Ethiopia) reported that there had been sporadic
attempts in his country to involve the community in crime prevention and control policies, including
through periodic evaluation of police performance and community patrols around vulnerable public
infrastructure. In the same vein, the group agreed that local communities and all government agencies
should co-operate and support efforts to control recidivism, including through monitoring of relevantinterventions with offenders.

G. The Adoptability of Intervention Models in Respective Countries
With respect to implementing policies to enable the adoptability of intervention models and schemes
against recidivism in their respective legal systems, the participants put emphasis on political will andcommitment as the driving force for introducing changes and developing a clear policy in this field. It was
further stressed that political initiatives on behalf of Governments will also enable the necessary
infrastructure to be put in place and resources to be made available as appropriate. Further to that,partnerships with elements of civil society such as community organizations, organizations of professionals
working in the criminal justice sector, and non-governmental organizations that are active in the field of
crime and punishment, could be productive and conducive to more integrated and multifaceted action against
recidivism.
Some group members identified legislative reform as a first element and component of focused andintegrated strategies aiming at achieving better results with the treatment of offenders and the control ofrecidivism. They emphasized that the availability of a comprehensive legal framework for diversion
mechanisms and alternatives to imprisonment at every level, and the existence of statutory requirements
for implementing them, could provide the necessary safeguards for clearly defining roles and responsibilitiesof the authorities concerned and preserving public safety while taking into consideration the specific needsof offenders.

159

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The lack of institutional capacity and experience in tackling the problem of recidivism would further
require, as the participants noted, the establishment and promotion of training programmes and activities forenhancing the expertise and skills of law enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges. From thisperspective, the provision of appropriate technical assistance to countries in need, especially developing
countries and countries with economies in transition, was considered to be vital. The relevant role of theUnited Nations in providing such assistance was highlighted by one participant.
The group also referred to the need to raise awareness of programmes in action and underscored that a
strategy should be developed for placing sufficient information in the public domain so that members of thecommunity are aware of the issues at stake and can make an informed input into the relevant debate on
improving counter-recidivism mechanisms. Furthermore, it was noted that the media have an important roleto play in informing the public about such issues. It is therefore necessary to brief representatives of themedia about the overall efficacy of diversion mechanisms and alternatives to imprisonment so that they areable to put occasional failures into a wider context.
One participant underlined that the lack of trust in rehabilitation and the perception that the treatment ofoffenders tends to spend too much time and resources on criminals and, in addition, is too lenient andminimally intrusive are challenges that need to be addressed by treatment providers. It was further argued thatthese kinds of views tend to discriminate against individuals who have completed the institutionalized part oftreatment and are attempting to reintegrate into the community. Lack of employment, educational
opportunities, and peer pressure, that lead to the commission of an offence in the first place, are doubled after aperson is labeled as an offender undergoing a treatment programme. These social miscarriages need to becorrected for treatment to be effective and initiatives to raise awareness are a first step.

H. Recidivism and Restorative Justice
At the beginning of the deliberations, the group agreed that this sub-topic should be incorporated in the
proposed agenda that was brought before its attention.
Starting point for the relevant discussions was the suggestion made by one participant (from Ethiopia)
that in seeking alternative models of effective interventions with offenders and dealing with problems ofrecidivism, the role of the community should be considered. It was argued, in particular, that many
restorative justice approaches provide for an expanded role for community members in the resolution of
conflict and in responding to crime problems, usually by resorting to customary law. The contribution ofsuch approaches to the conclusion of agreements to be adhered to by offenders, and sometimes also byother parties, may well strengthen social control capacities and preserve the social cohesion of thecommunity. For this reason, it was further pointed out that a systemic change in criminal justice agencies
and systems in order to empower community decision-making and responsibility in the response to crimeand harm could be a viable approach. Such an approach can be adapted to the circumstances, legal
traditions, principles and underlying philosophies of national criminal justice systems. It may also
encourage the offender to gain insight into the causes and effects of his or her behaviour and takeresponsibility in a meaningful manner. It may further be particularly suitable for situations where juvenile
offenders are involved and in which an important objective of the intervention is to teach the offenders
new values and skills.
In the same vein, the group took into account that there is a considerable variability in the nature andextent of community involvement in the various restorative justice approaches. For example, in victimoffender mediation,9 the community is absent and the process consists of a mediator, the offender and the

9 Victim-offender mediation or reconciliation programmes are designed to address the needs of victims of crime while

ensuring that offenders are held accountable for their illegal acts. These programmes can be operated by both governmental
agencies and non-profit organizations and are generally restricted to cases involving less serious offences. Referrals may comefrom the police, the prosecutors, the courts, and probation offices. The programmes may function at the pre-charge, postcharge/pre-trial, and post-charge stages and involve the willing participation of the victim and the offender. They can also offera pre-sentencing process leading to sentencing recommendations. When the process takes place before sentencing, theoutcome of the mediation is usually brought back to the attention of the prosecution or the judge for consideration.

160

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

victim. In circle sentencing,10 on the other hand, the process is open to all members of a local neighbourhood,village or indigenous group. In this connection, cases were mentioned regarding the function of quasi-formal
courts at the community level dealing with minor cases, or other instances where a village chief mediates
conflicting parties to settle their conflict and achieve reconciliation without reporting to the police. The
Chinese participant introduced the restorative justice system in his country. Restorative justice should atleast include three most important factors as follows. First, the victim should participate in the criminal
procedure dealing with the case. This is a conspicuous characteristic different to traditional justice.
Traditional justice stresses retaliation against the offender, but doesn’t attach the importance of theprotection of the victim’s rights. He was of the view that stressing the victim’s increased participation incriminal procedure is the major change in the criminal justice system at present. Second, restorative justiceunderscores that offenders should try hard to compensate the victims for loss, and seek for forgiveness fromthe victim. Third, more non-custodial penalties should be imposed, for example, a community penalty,suspension of sentence, parole, fines and so on. In recent years, China has begun to apply the basic
principles of restorative justice in dealing with criminal cases.
A number of participants acknowledged that many members of the community are likely at first to view
restorative justice processes as more lenient and less effective at preventing or controlling crime than the
traditional criminal justice system and its reliance on punishment. An innovative restorative justiceprogramme may be seen as an enabling factor for a ‘lighter’ treatment of the offender, particularly when amore serious offence is involved. Therefore the group stressed the importance of developing materials anddesigning initiatives to educate the community and raise awareness of the principles, objectives and practicesof restorative justice and the potential role that community members can play in responding to crime.
A number of participants further recognized that strategies of restorative justice may play a crucial rolein decisions about diversion. Where mechanisms are in place to allow for settlement of disputes by
restorative means, they may also encourage the use of alternatives to imprisonment. Meetings withoffenders, victims, and community members where techniques of mediation and alternative dispute
resolution are used to deal with matters that would otherwise be subject to criminal sanctions, have thepotential to divert cases which might have resulted in imprisonment both before trial and after conviction.
Moreover, the participants underlined that where the diversion is linked to full restorative justiceprocesses which interrupt the further operation of the criminal justice system in particular cases, it isnecessary to have a parallel structure to facilitate these alternative processes. This requires administrative
support that can be provided by the State authorities or by non-governmental organizations operating in
partnership with criminal justice agencies.
With regard to the link between restorative justice programmes and reoffending, a number of participants
noted that a growing number of empirical studies in this field have not so far provided a straightforward
answer. Some of them have not shown reduction in recidivism, while others indicated that restorative justiceinterventions are associated with small but significant decreases in reoffending, mostly in cases of low-risk
offenders. There are a few reasons for this which the group took into account. First, restorative justiceincludes a broad range of justice activities and processes, some of which aim to divert offenders away fromtraditional justice proceedings and others which run in conjunction with traditional processes. In addition,
restorative initiatives may also be placed at various levels of the criminal justice process: pre-court diversion(e.g. restorative cautioning and conferencing), pre-sentence and post-sentence. It was the opinion of thegroup that with so many variations, it is not surprising to come up with varied research outcomes on therelationship between restorative justice and reoffending. However, the participants also acknowledged that,

10 Circle sentencing is a characteristic example of participatory justice in that members of the community can be directly

involved in responding to incidents of crime and social disorder. In this process, all the participants, including the judge,
defence counsel, prosecutor, police officer, the victim and the offender and their respective families, and community residents,
sit facing one another in a circle. Circle sentencing is generally only available to those offenders who plead guilty. Discussions
among those in the circle are designed to reach a consensus about the best way to resolve the conflict and dispose of the case,taking into account the need to protect the community, the needs of the victims and the rehabilitation and punishment of theoffender. The sentencing circle process is typically conducted within the criminal justice system, includes justice professionals
and supports the sentencing process.

161

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

if restorative justice processes meet the key objectives of holding offenders accountable, encouraging themto accept responsibility for their wrongdoing, not stigmatizing them, and providing a forum that promotes
reintegrative and rehabilitative outcomes, then re-offending is less likely. The group highlighted theimportance of attempting to understand how and why restorative justice renders change in offenders,
including more detailed qualitative assessments of what offenders in restorative justice understand about theprocess and how this affects their future behaviour.

III. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Effective interventions through prosecutorial and sentencing decisions play an important role in bringing
about reduction of recidivism and ensuring public safety. The common denominator in the discussions ofWorking Group 1 was that alternative intervention models that go beyond the conventional criminal justiceprocess of prosecution, sentencing and imprisonment, such as diversion mechanisms at both the prosecution
and sentencing stage and drug court programmes or other schemes targeting specific categories ofoffenders, may well serve the objectives of preserving public safety and order and rehabilitating theoffenders with a view to controlling recidivism. In that sense, authorities and agencies involved in this area
should establish an effective collaboration network to avoid fragmented action and ensure that a holistic andintegrated strategy to address the problems posed by recidivism is pursued and effectively implemented.
Upon completion of the deliberations reflected above, the participants came up with the following
recommendations which intend to provide a set of key principles and factors for enhancing the effectivenessof interventions in reducing recidivism and promoting public safety at the prosecution and sentencing stage:
1.
2.

3.
4.

5.

6.
7.

8.
9.
10.

162

Where necessary, legislative reform should be pursued and carried out as a first element andcomponent of strategies aiming at achieving better results with the treatment of offenders andthe control of recidivism;
There should be various options such as suspended sentences and other non-custodial
measures to be applied at the pre-trial and sentencing stage, and the rehabilitation of theoffender should always be considered in conjunction with other objectives of sanctioning
policies to ensure that the interests of both the offender and the community are well served;
A more integrated approach should be followed to enable better co-ordination among national
and local agencies, as well as consistency of action and more effective case management inpreventing and controlling reoffending;
The designation of focal points in each authority or agency involved in intervention models
with offenders, as well as the establishment of a communication network between them andthe enhancement of information-sharing mechanisms should be prioritized as a means ofboosting co-ordination and facilitating concerted action among the various stakeholders;
An integrated information system of database on recidivism incidents and rates should be
developed to carry out an in-depth evaluation and assessment of the extent and impact of the
problem and formulate appropriate policies and guidelines based on comprehensive, timely
and reliable data and information;
In order to ensure the operational success of intervention models with offenders, primaryconsideration should be given to establishing the appropriate infrastructure and making
available the necessary resources for supporting such infrastructure;
In order to address the lack of institutional capacity and experience in tackling the problems
posed by recidivism, high priority should be accorded to training programmes and activities,
and the provision of technical assistance generally, aiming at enhancing the expertise andskills of law enforcement, prosecutorial and judicial authorities, as well as other staff involvedin criminal justice affairs;
Effective mechanisms primarily aimed at monitoring and assessing the effectiveness ofintervention should be developed;
Partnerships with non-governmental organizations and other elements of civil society should
be built and further encouraged to allow for multi-stakeholder involvement in theimplementation of intervention schemes;
In seeking alternative models of effective interventions with offenders and dealing withproblems of recidivism, the role of the community should be examined and restorative justiceapproaches can be considered as a response to crime problems, especially with regard to lessserious offences.

GROUP 2

PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AND CONTROLLING RECIDIVISM USINGEFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS WITH OFFENDERS WHILST SERVINGTHEIR SENTENCES: AN EXAMINATION OF BEST PRACTICES
Chairperson
Co-Chairpersons
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs
Members

Ms. Marcia Angela Reid
Mr. Nor Afifi Bin Sulong
Mr. Ken Ogushi
Mr. Somphop Rujjanavet
Mr. Rodrigo Bonach Batista Pires
Mr. Leiva Gamoneda Javier Francisco
Ms. Diah Ayu Noorsinta Hidayati
Mr. Goro Udo
Mr. Kazuki Ueda

(Jamaica)(Malaysia)(Japan)(Thailand)(Brazil)(Honduras)(Indonesia)(Japan)(Japan)Visiting Expert

Dr. Brian A. Grant, Ph.D

(Canada)Advisers

Professor Koji Yamada
Professor Masato Uchida
Professor Shintaro Naito(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCTION
It is agreed that mechanisms to enhance the opportunities for offenders’ rehabilitation and their re-entry
into society are an essential part of any strategy to reduce recidivism. However, the issues are extremelycomplex. It is not safe to assume that the offender was well integrated in society prior to his or her
imprisonment. Worldwide evidence is that many prisoners were not well integrated, and in fact in many
countries, the ‘average’ prisoner does not have good life skills, educational or trade qualifications, work
experience or stable housing.
According to Mr. Peter Wheelhouse, visiting expert from the United Kingdom, studies have revealed that
58% of offenders not being rehabilitated in prison are more likely to be convicted of another crime within
two years.
The process of reintegration begins at the time when the needs of the offender are assessed at reception
into Correctional Services. For an offender to be successfully reintegrated into the community, it isimportant to have strategies in play to address the needs and support required by the individual offender.

II. PROBLEMS AND CURRENT SITUATIONAt this point of the Workshop, individual country representatives spoke about issues that inhibit effective
rehabilitation in their respective jurisdictions.

A. Overcrowding
Overcrowding can severely inhibit the desired results when treating offenders for reintegration into
communities.
In Jamaica and Honduras most of the prison facilities are very old. No new penitentiaries have been built
and the prison population has increased over the years. They lack necessary infrastructural space forrehabilitation in keeping with twenty first century practices.
In the case of Malaysia, the increasing numbers of prisoners sentenced or awaiting trial for breaches of
the Immigration and other Acts, and for which the Prison Department has been assigned responsibility forincarceration and detention since 2003, is a contributory factor to overcrowding in that country.

163

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The total capacity of all prisons in Brazil is approximately 200,000, while the number of inmates is about
360,000. This denotes a great rate of overcrowding and the necessity for newly built prison facilities.
Moreover, a significant proportion of prisoners are remand inmates in trial custody. The Government alsoemphasizes repressive efforts against crimes instead of rehabilitation programmes.
Although the Directorate General of Correction has established more new prison facilities, still it is notenough to accommodate the increasing number of prisoners. Indonesia is also facing the same problem as
Malaysia and Brazil with the increasing number of prisoners on remand.
In contrast, it could be said that the current total number of prisoners in Thailand (154,486) does notpresent a problem of overcrowding. Furthermore, the overall extended capacity of all correctional facilities
can accommodate 205,436 inmates.
Before 1995, Japan’s prisons were not affected by overcrowding. However, since 1995 the prison
population has been increasing continuously, due to recession in the economy and other factors. Even
though the incarceration rate is still lower than other participating countries, one of the main causes for theincrease of the prison population is severe sentencing based on public anxiety about crime. The public prefer
offenders to be kept in prison. Serious crimes committed by probationers or parolees have also increased
public anxiety. It is said that probation and parole supervision is not sufficient.

B. Budget
In most countries, budgets for corrections are a last priority. All participating countries except Japan areallocated a limited budget for strategic and operational functions. Corrections departments are notconsidered to be revenue generating. Public sentiment often impacts on these decisions as budget
allocations come from tax earnings. When compared with other agencies in criminal justice systems, thecorrectional services tend to receive the lowest budget allocations.
A good example is the Japanese experience as shown in the following table:
AgencyBudget (US$ million)

Staff

Police28,038288,451

Prosecution

800

11,532

Court

2,562

25,349Correction

1,688

21,839Rehabilitation

156

1,429

C. Human Resources
All the participating countries shared their common problems with human resources, especially
professional staff, such as medical doctors, dentists, nurses, psychologists, social workers and vocational
instructors, and also discussed insufficient basic and advanced training for correctional officers.
1. Japan
In Japan, to deal with about 60,000 probation and parole supervision cases a year, about 50,000 Volunteer
Probation Officers and about 1,100 staff of Probation Offices operate the rehabilitation system in aframework of co-operation between Volunteers and Government Officers. However, in reality, there is aheavy dependence on the volunteers. Within this framework, problems, such as an inability to prevent
recidivism, exist and have contributed to present concerns.
In 2006 a new prison act came into force, but the number of staff members in charge of rehabilitation isvery low and a staff training system for implementation of the new programme is also not yet established.
Therefore, for the moment, the targets and contents of the rehabilitation programmes will be limited.

164

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

2. Brazil
Each one of the States of the Federative Republic of Brazil is in charge of its own Corrections
Institutions, which is regulated by a federal law. This situation proves difficult because each State pays
different salaries for officers and has different levels of public investment, infrastructure, equipment andnumbers of professionals. Low salaries for the officers result in a lack of staff for the treatment of offenders.
Also, there is no systematic training. The penitentiaries’ administrations are also facing problems withcorruption; lack of equipment, technology and appropriate spaces for lawyers and visitors; and clinics toguarantee adequate support for the proper work of the human resources.
3. Malaysia
The ratio of staff to inmates in Malaysia is about 1:16. This situation leads to problems for the
Corrections Department in carrying out necessary activities for the inmates, especially activities related torehabilitation. Basic training for the supporting staff lasts for three months before they start working in theprison institution. The Department encourages all staff to continue their studies in many fields. Currently
there are a number of senior staff with master’s degrees and two staff are pursuing Ph.Ds. The Department
is receiving good support from other agencies in giving training to the inmates.
4. Indonesia
Based on recapitulation data of correctional officers, it is known that the total number of correctional
officers in Indonesia in 2002 was 22,895. Around 85.23% of them were at staff level, the majority having highschool education. There is a shortage of professionals and experts to carry out treatment and rehabilitation
programmes. In the last two years, the Directorate General of Correction tried to overcome the humanresources problem by recruiting new employees and also developing and maintaining co-operation withseveral government institutions and non-government organizations.
5. Thailand
In Thailand, the number of correctional officers is about 12,000. The ratio of staff to inmates is about 1:13
whereas the international standard is 1:5.

D. Lack of Family and Community Support
Lack of family and community support is the most challenging reintegration problem shared by allparticipating countries. Positive family and community support is very important in terms of providing
accommodation and emotional and financial assistance to released prisoners. Moreover, a strong andsupportive family can psychologically influence released prisoners and hence are in a better position toassist them to be good citizens.
All participants agreed that the positive attitude and active involvement of the community are main
factors in the successful reintegration of prisoners. However, the community’s negative perception of exprisoners and inaccurate publicity in the media about ex-prisoners and correctional operations can result inpoor community involvement in the reintegration process.
In Japan, some prisoners do not have family accommodation to stay at when they are released fromprison. Half-way houses accept such kinds of offenders and provide them with accommodation and meals.
One of the problems that the half-way houses are facing nowadays is the insufficiency of treatment. Many
offenders who stay in half-way houses have problems such as alcohol dependence, drug addition, lack ofinterpersonal skills and so on. There is a risk of reoffending when offenders leave half-way houses without
solving these problems.
In Indonesia, many prisoners, especially drug dependent and HIV/AIDS afflicted prisoners, are rarely
visited by their family. Besides that, because Indonesia is an archipelago country, many prisoners, especiallyin big cities, are not placed in prisons close to their families.

E. Insufficient Education and Vocational Training for Offenders
Basic educational and vocational training programmes are provided for prisoners in every correctional
service, aiming to render prisoners with essential knowledge and skills to earn a living after release.
However, all participating countries agreed that prison overcrowding and inadequate budgets createddifficulties in the implementation of education and vocational training for prisoners.

165

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

1. Jamaica
In Jamaica, it is mandatory under the Juvenile Act that every juvenile in a Correctional Institution mustreceive basic education before his release. Limited resources make it difficult to improve training, but theinmates have agricultural and computer training, etc. There is a National Training Agency with responsibility
for accreditation of vocational training and skills. Inmates are sometimes accredited by that agency to enable
them to be certified for jobs.
2. Malaysia
In Malaysia, prisoners are given opportunities to participate in educational and vocational training. The
prisoners are given training in many fields, such as tailoring, carpentry, agricultural work, etc. Whenreleased, the prisoners are able to use the knowledge and skills received in prison.
3. Thailand
In Thailand, after the key purpose of punishment was shifted to rehabilitation and reduction of thenumber of prisoners, the Department of Corrections has been committed to the principle of through-careand has implemented various rehabilitation initiatives to generate safe and successful prisoners’ re-entry
into the community. However, there are still some problems in implementing educational and vocational
training programmes in some correctional institutions.
4. JapanJapan’s Department of Corrections has a programme with the public employment security office. This
involves corporative employees’ recruitment due to the fact that ex-offenders cannot gain optimum
employment immediately after release because they don’t have the high skills that are necessary. Juvenile
Training Schools have two goals of vocational training: to award vocational training certificates and to guidethe juvenile in the right direction.
One weakness of the Japanese system is insufficient co-operation between the public employment
security office and the probation office. It is necessary to establish strong links to help offenders in finding
employment.

F. Insufficient Health Services
All the participating countries provide basic medical treatment in a specific area inside the prison.
However, the health service staff, medical equipment and infrastructure need to be improved.
1. Brazil
Brazilian prisons seldom have sufficient health services to provide for the huge number of inmates.
There is a lack of correctional hospital equipment, medicines, medical and dental staff inside thepenitentiaries. However, in cases of grave illness or for further exams, prisoners are often taken to hospitals
outside prison.
2. Indonesia
In Indonesia, most of the correctional institutions, especially in rural and remote areas, do not haveappropriate health care facilities and medicine stocks. The room space and tools to deliver the services arevery limited. Because of the limited budget for supplying medicine, most of the time correctional institutions
apply one type of medicine for all kinds of health problems. The limited number of medical personnel is oneof the factors leading to an insufficient health care service in correctional institutions, besides the lack ofhealth care facilities and medicines.
3. Japan
In Japan, the situation is different, for example HIV/AIDS inmates are rare due to the low level of persons
with this disease in the wider population.
Concerning parolees who are drug offenders, in April 2004 urinalysis of stimulant drug offenders wasintroduced. This method is as follows. In the first interview, the parolee receives an explanation ofurinalysis. If the parolee consents to urinalysis a test date is fixed beforehand at regular intervals, such as

166

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

every two or three weeks. The parolee comes to the probation office at the fixed date to receive a urinalysis.
The point of this method is its voluntary basis. Officers do not carry out the urinalysis except on the fixed
date. Some might think it is nonsense, since it is natural for parolees not to use drugs before the set date.
However, we consider this training for drug offenders to refrain from using stimulant drugs. This
programme provides an opportunity for such offenders to stop drug use by obtaining a feeling of attainment
and praise from officers when they receive a negative urinalysis result.
4. Malaysia
In Malaysia, the Prison Department has been trying its best to give good health services, according to
the UN standards. Most of the prison institutions have health units to attend to any minor health problems.
However, there is still need to increase the number of medical staff. For severe health problems inmates
they are sent to local hospitals; as for the case of HIV/AIDS, there are quite a number of HIV positive
inmates in the institutions. However, they are well taken care of even though the number is increasing
gradually.
5. Honduras
In Honduras only two detention centres have a psychologist. There is no drug treatment programme.
6. Jamaica
In Jamaica efforts are being made to give the inmates comprehensive treatment but the employment of
more professionals would be ideal.
7. Thailand
In Thailand, there is one medical correctional institution for a long term treatment of sick inmates. In
addition to this, every prison has a small medical unit. However, the ratio of medical staff to inmates is still
very wide.

III. TREATMENTS
A. Effective Assessment to Select Appropriate Offenders for Appropriate Treatment1
Definition of treatment based on the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of
Prisoners, Part II, Section A (Prisoners Under Sentence) is that the treatment of persons sentenced to
imprisonment or a similar measure shall have as its purpose, so far as the length of the sentence permits, toestablish in them the will to lead law-abiding and self-supporting lives after their release and to fit them todo so. The treatment shall be such as will encourage their self-respect and develop their sense of
responsibility.2
Upon consulting various pieces of literature, the group came up with the following definition oftreatment: intervention measures to change offenders’ behaviour to lead law-abiding lives and to encourage
their self-respect, develop their sense of responsibility and self-supporting lives after release.
Identification of effective treatment models is important for three reasons:Firstly, some kinds of treatment models (for example, open or half-open institutions) make people
anxious. So it is necessary to show them the evidence and long-term benefits of effective treatment.
Secondly, to ensure an adequate budget for treatment, the evidence of effectiveness must be presented to
the respective government agencies.
Thirdly, to keep improving treatment, and to know “what works”. This can prove difficult if there is nocontrol group. According to Dr. Brian A. Grant, Visiting Expert, the assessment of offenders upon entry in
the institution is critical. So to begin with, we must start to develop measurement techniques.

1 Content of this section relies heavily on Bonta, James, Offender Assessment: General Issues and Considerations.

Correctional Service Canada – Research. http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca, http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca. 2000: 1.
2 Compendium of UN Standards and Norms in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice: 12.

167

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

These measurement techniques will help to determine what will work based on each offender’sindividual needs. This will ultimately guide research and testing of alternative approaches. It will also guideoutcome prediction through identification of some dynamic factors such as antisocial personality,
companions, criminogenic needs, interpersonal conflict, personal distress, social achievement and substanceabuse. Ultimately this will provide some determinant factors such as who to treat, what to treat, how totreat, when to treat and where to treat.
One prerequisite of effective treatment is classification and assessment of offenders. An accurate
assessment facilitates the fair, efficient and ethical classification of offenders. A failure to conduct a proper
assessment can lead to serious consequences such as placing an inmate within an inadequate security
setting with subsequent escape; the mistaken release on parole of an offender who was thought not topresent a danger; or the failure of a parole officer to recognize a parolee’s deteriorating situation. Therefore,
in general, the assessment of offenders has centred on issues related to security and release. However,through recent developments in effective classification and assessment of offenders, correctional institutions
can devise appropriate treatment for each offender. The classification and assessment of offenders for
effective treatment must be based on risk, needs and responsivity factors of offenders as the generalprinciples.
1. Risk Assessment
Risk assessment is one tool to predict an offender’s future criminal behaviour (probability of reoffending).
In order to improve the predictive accuracy of an offender’s future criminal behaviour, multi-methodmeasurement of theoretically relevant factors (e.g. sociological, psychopathological and general personality
and social learning) is the first necessary step. The second step to improving predictive accuracy is tocombine the individual factors to form more comprehensive offender assessment measures.
Risk assessment has implications for release and security decisions and also for treatment planning. By
conducting this assessment, the correctional officer will be able to match the levels of treatment services tothe risk level of the offender. The target of this assessment is the higher risk offenders, because reductions
in recidivism are found when intensive levels of treatment are directed at higher risk offenders.
2. Needs Assessment
In order to deliver effective treatment it is important to identify the offender’s needs because manyfactors identified as important are dynamic or changeable. For offender assessment, it is important to assess
dynamic risk factors objectively and systematically. Dynamic risk factors are also referred to as criminogenic
needs, which are those offender needs that, when changed, are associated with changes in recidivism.
This need principle of effective rehabilitation calls for the targeting of criminological needs in treatment
programmes. From the assessment perspective, the measurement of criminological needs is highly
important for directing treatment services and for the active supervision of offenders. Based on convincing
evidence (Andrew & Bonta, 1998), it is said that interventions targeting criminogenic needs are associatedwith reductions in recidivism. By this assessment, correctional institutions can provide the most intense
services to higher need offenders. Determination of risk levels of offender and appropriate sanctions andsupervision are arranged in risk management. Based on risk management, the determination of risk level
and criminogenic needs and the reduction of risk factors through effective treatment and appropriate
supervision can be fulfilled.
3. Responsivity Factors Assessment
How people learn from life’s experiences depends on their cognitive, personality and social-personal
factors, which may not be offender risk factors or criminogenic needs. These responsivity factors influence
the individual’s responsiveness to efforts to help them change their attitudes, thoughts and behaviours. It is
has an important role to play in choosing a type and style of treatment programme, consistent with theability and learning style of the offender, by identifying the offender’s characteristics. Finally, we can easily
recognize that offenders may be more responsive to certain staff members based on gender or ethnicity.

B. Best Practices Treatment Models
Some of the participant countries have adopted specific models of treatment of offenders which include

168

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

interesting concepts concerning rehabilitation, and which can be considered best practices in this field. Suchmodels provided interesting insights that can be useful in developing a comprehensive model suitable forother countries.
1. Brazil
A programme, created by the Association for Protection and Assistance of Convicts – (APAC), associatedwith the Prison Fellowship International – PFI (an United Nations collaborative organization), is based on
the concept of human valorization and consists of cost-effective non-governmental treatment of offenders.
This has been developed in Brazil from 1972, and has been able to reduce recidivism by measures suchas:(i) health assistance, based on the fact that an offender mentally and physically ill is not capable to reach
optimum rehabilitation;(ii) legal assistance, in order to guarantee a fair fulfilment of the penalty before Justice;(iii) motivational interviewing by means of valorizations classes to improve self-esteem;(iv) education, work, vocational and social skill training, improving pre-release measures;(v) community participation by means of volunteers, employers’ partnership and social services;(vi) cognitive behavioural therapy, aiming to improve self-discipline, respect for other people and society,human appreciation, achievement of a sense of responsibility and disciplinary evaluation;(vii) enhancement of family relationships, rebuilding the good image of the family, emphasizing its
importance, and engaging the family to support and take responsibility concerning the inmate’s
rehabilitation;(viii)religious assistance, in order to restore principles and moral values;(ix) the fulfilment of the sentenced sanction in small and proper facilities, near the inmate’s family or
original community.
The programme, based on the progressive system of sanction fulfilment stated by Brazilian law, is divided
in to four stages, each one focused on the progressive re-entry of the offenders into society, applying thereferred fundamental elements.
2. Jamaica
Jamaica has a national rehabilitation strategy and the core functions are carried out by the Rehabilitation
Unit of the Department of Correctional Services. This approach is not simply to help clients but also
facilitates public safety.
The Juvenile Act mandates that wards who are made subject to correctional orders must be assessed andplaced at appropriate institutions. It is mandatory that they be exposed to an educational or vocational
environment with optimal care and opportunities for behaviour modification.

C. Methadone Substitution (Maintenance) Treatment
In Indonesia the number of the HIV/AIDS infected population is increasing gradually. This is also
happening in prisons and remand prisons. In fact, the World Health Organization stated that the rate of HIV
infection among inmates in most countries in the world is higher compared to the general public. Based on
WHO data and the infection rate of HIV in prisons and detention centres in some states, there are inmates
who were infected by HIV before incarceration and there are also those infected while in custody as a resultof unsafe needle syringes for drug injection, sharing needles or unsafe sexual activity.
Realising the importance of intervention in overcoming drug abuse and preventing the increase of
HIV/AIDS prevalence in prisons, in 2002 the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, the Directorate General of
Corrections, through the Directorate of Narcotics Treatment, decided to make a connection between themethadone pilot service which was underway in the Centre of Methadone Treatment (CMT) in Sanglah
Hospital, Bali with Kerobokan Prison, Bali. Correctional institutions’ medical officers (doctors) withsupervision from Sanglah Hospital, conducted methadone therapy in prison. Based on the successful resultof the Methadone Substitution Treatment in Bali, in 2005 and 2006 the Directorate General of Corrections
expanded this programme to several prisons, such as Jakarta Narcotics Prison, Central Jakarta Remand
Prison, East Jakarta Remand Prison, Bekasi Prison, and also Bandung Prison, West Java.

169

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

The principal object of Methadone Substitution Therapy is reducing the harm of drugs use individuallyand in the community, which is related to opiate injection inside prison. The special objectives of theMethadone Substitution Therapy in prisons are:• Decreasing injecting heroin use in prisons;• Decreasing the spread of infection, especially through blood, in prison;• Decreasing the mortality rate among opiate user prisoners including released prisoners;• Decreasing the crime rate related to opiate usage;• Increasing the health and social skills of clients in the community reintegration process.

D. Vivat Polamuang Rajatan School Project, Thailand
The project is a four-month intensive military-style treatment programme specially provided to classified
prisoners who have already served one third of their sentences in prisons. After finishing the programme,
the prisoners receive special parole (two thirds of their sentences in case of normal parole). The curriculum
has been run from the military’s Vivat Polamuamg School which provides an intensive treatment programmefor drug addicts. Short-term vocational training, behavioural change and disciplinary training have been
added into the programme in order to help them to resettle during their conditional release in thecommunity. At the end of the programme, prisoners passing the evaluation receive special parole and returnto the community as decent citizens. Since 2003, there were about 2,700 inmates graduating from theschool.
This project aims to bridge the period of transition from prison to the community and allows wellbehaved inmates who have high chance of reintegration to restart their new lives in the community, undersome forms of supervision or monitoring, more quickly. Not only can conditions imposed with parole ensure
public safety, it also helps ex-prisoners in maintaining acceptable behaviour until they successfully settle inthe mainstream community.

E. Juvenile Training School (JTS), Japan
In Japan, juveniles accommodated in JTSs will return to society and will grow up in the community after
release. In order to ensure their rehabilitation, JTSs need to promote co-operation with other agencies,
including volunteer groups, and provide them with opportunities to participate in various activities within
their own communities. Volunteers from the neighbouring community also support various activities at JTSs
such as counselling and advice, lectures, seasonal events, games and sports, etc. Juveniles at JTSs are
greatly encouraged through these interactions with volunteers in their rehabilitation into society. In order topromote our activities, JTSs regard guardians and parents of juveniles as partners in correctional education.
JTSs need to help them trust in their various correctional activities and to feel that the institution is a secure
place for juveniles. JTSs need to promote guardians’ commitment to their educational activities. At JTSs,
guardians and parents are invited to the institution and meetings are held with juveniles and instructors to
discuss family environment, juveniles’ future plans after release, and so on.
F. Community Based Treatment
1. Classification System
This system divides probationers and parolees into two groups in accordance with the difficulty oftreatment. Probationers or parolees who were found to be difficult to treat receive intensive supervision andspecial attention by both professional and volunteer probation officers.
2. Categorized Treatment
There are a variety of types of offenders and juvenile delinquents. The type of treatment given depends
on the type of probationer or parolee, in order to be effective in supervision. There are 13 categories, as
follows: paint thinner abusers, stimulant drug abusers, alcoholics, organized crime offenders, ‘joy’ riders(motorcycle gangs), sex offenders, people with mental disorders, junior high school students, those who
commit school violence, aged people (65 and over), unemployed people, those who are violent towards
family members, and gambling addicts. Methods of assessing cases, problems of supervision, treatment
plans, and specific methods of treatment for each type are made and manuals published. Both professionaland volunteer probation officers should use the manuals and implement effective treatment.

170

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

G. Human Development Plan, Malaysia
The Malaysian Prisons Department has practiced the Human Development Plan as its sole rehabilitative
programme for all convicted prisoners. It is an integrated programme based on both spiritual and physicalaspects, balancing the elements of attitude (A), skills (S), and knowledge (K).
The rehabilitation plan is developed based on an integrated rehabilitation concept between physical andspiritual aspects through four main phases. They are:i) Phase 1: Discipline Development (three months)ii) Phase 2: Personality Enhancement Programme (6-12 months)iii) Phase 3: Skill/Trade Developmentiv) Phase 4: Pre-Release Programme (six months).
The main aim of this plan is to produce inmates who are rehabilitated with strong determination and who
possess skill either in the aspect of vocational training or excellence in sports.

IV. CO-ORDINATION AMONG AGENCIES
A. Agencies that Provide Treatment
Most prisoners will, at a future date, return to the community. Generally, a successful reintegration
process is one which provides a gradual, structured, supervised release which considers public safety andwhich involves public sector agencies and/or all community organizations as partners. In terms of public
sector agencies, reintegration is likely to involve a range of government services that go beyond theboundaries of prisons and corrections. Most countries rely heavily upon the goodwill of community
organizations (NGOs) to assist in the rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders. Generally, depending of
the type of public sector agency and community organization, the service and support they offer may extend
from the time in custody through to post-release.
In order to deliver the treatment programme a number of considerations must take place at theorganizational level and should include the following:
Types of offenders, such as:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Drug offenders
Sex offenders
First time offenders
Organized crime offenders
Drunken drivers

Prison authorities cannot manage an effective treatment programme without any collaboration from otheragencies. Due to budgetary constraints, human resources etc., this can be an opportunity to foster
community participation. Some critical agencies are:
1. Department of Public Health and related health services
2. Drug Rehabilitation Centres
3. Police Department
4. Parole Board
5. Department of Probation
6. Half-way Houses
7. Religious Organizations
8. Traffic Department
9. Educational Organizations
10. Employment Agencies
11. Local and International NGOs.

B. Problems and Challenges of Collaboration among Related Agencies
The collaboration of the above relevant agencies is essential to ensure the continuity of service, which is
key to boosting offenders’ chances of resettlement. Also, co-operation of every sector of the community isvital since offender reintegration demands a great deal of resources and is a complex task that is unlikely tobe accomplished by a single agency. However, if this integration process is not managed properly it can be

171

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

tedious and result in ineffectiveness of the programme. Some of the problems that commonly arise include
the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Competition among agencies – e.g.: display of superiority complex
Information not shared
Lack of political support – e.g.: no close support and oversight from central government necessary
Bureaucracy and splinter government agencies
Lack of integrated teams
Staff lack of knowledge and motivation
Staff not involved in planning process
Infrequent report back/debriefing sessions
No central database.

Mr. Peter Wheelhouse (Visiting Expert) mentioned that the success of the United Kingdom’s Drugs
Intervention Programme depended heavily on partnerships at the local level which worked throughintegrated teams created to work together and deliver case management of offenders.
In Jamaica the police and correctional services formed a partnership to carry out rehabilitation through a
music project which has been very successful so far.

V. MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF TREATMENT
The ultimate goal of corrections is offenders’ successful reintegration into community. It is important tohave the tools to measure success in prisoner treatment programmes and to conduct appropriate monitoringand evaluations. In principle, evaluation of effective programmes can be achieved as follows:3(i) Quality assurance processes:•
Internal processes to ensure that assessments, services and interventions provided by the
programme are delivered as designed;•
External processes to ensure services and interventions provided by outside providers aredelivered as designed.
This step can include case-file audits, videotaping groups, client satisfaction surveys or exit interviews,
clinical supervision, programme audits, site visits and observation and certification processes.
(ii) Assessing progress of offenders in acquiring pro-social behaviour:•
Assessing dynamic risk factors and then reassessing;•
Developing a treatment and supervision plan based on assessment, then closely monitoring
attainment of goals;•
Measuring behavioural indicators linked to recidivism and risk;•
Pre/Post testing on attitudes, knowledge and behaviour.
(iii) Outcome Studies which should include:•
Tracking of recidivism using as many measures as possible (e.g. re-arrest, reconviction,
incarceration);•
A comparison group;•
A report or published results to be compiled periodically (e.g. every five years).

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
A. Recommendations
The group members, after taking into consideration the diverse social, economic, cultural, legal andgeographical features existing in their respective countries, discussed the possible recommendations tochallenges concerning effective treatment programmes that can be adapted by individual countries in
reducing recidivism and promoting public safety whilst the offender is serving his sentence. These are as
follows:
1. The implementation of comprehensive assessment methods, to improve management of prison
systems. This should include measures such as:
3 Compendium of UN Standards and Norms in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice: 10.

172

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR•••

Establishment of a database;
Provision of centres for research;
Ensuring classification of offenders is in keeping with the United Nations Standards Minimum
Rules (UNSMR) for the Treatment of Prisoners.

2.

Identification of the most important treatment target:•
Ensuring that the highest risk offenders are given priority treatment;•
Making optimal use of the budget;•
Maximizing human resources;•
Enhancing community participation.

3.

Identification of the most effective treatment methods by providing comprehensive treatment,
to include:•
Motivational interviewing;•
Cognitive behavioural therapy;•
Education, work and social skills training;•
Enhancing family and community participation;•
Health, legal and religious assistance.

4.

Revision and concentration of resources on target groups:•
Preparation of an annual plan and budget;•
Review assessment and classification of offenders.

5.

Development and expansion of collaboration with other agencies:•
Formation of teams to reflect diversification of professional staff roles, Government andcommunity support;•
Dissemination of information through development of public relations plans;•
Establishment of Memorandum of Understanding with all stakeholders.

6.

Increase public awareness of the importance of family and community in the reintegration process of
ex-prisoners:•
Encouraging development of family relationships during an offender’s incarceration;•
Implementing strategies to keep families informed of the progress of prisoners;•
Strengthening networks with potential employers and keeping them updated on prisoners’
competences;•
Collaborating and maintaining relations with welfare agencies.

B. Conclusion
Over the past decade, key challenges in the reintegration of offenders have emerged due to increasing
and ageing populations, economic and unemployment issues, homelessness, mental health issues, publichealth issues, environmental problems and the limited acceptance of offenders returning to the community.
In order to solve these problems four basic principles have to be taken into account in developing
assessment and treatment services to meet the criminogenic needs of offenders and their cultural
diversities. These are the risk, need, responsivity, and professional discretion assessments. 4 Somejurisdictions have in place intervention strategies and programmes to address the needs of offenders,
including substance abuse, sexual offending, violent offending, education, and life skills for community
reintegration.

4 Dr. Brian A. Grant, Ph.D, “Reducing Recidivism by Applying the Principles of Risk, Need, and Responsivity”, contained inthis volume of the Resource Material Series.

173

GROUP 3

THE USE OF EFFECTIVE INTERVENTION IN REDUCING RECIDIVISM AND
PROMOTING PUBLIC SAFETY AFTER THE OFFENDER HAS SERVEDHIS OR HER SENTENCE
Chairperson
Co-Chairpersons

Mr. Young-Hoon Ha
Mr. Sukit Chau-Intra
Mr. Kenichi Oguri
Mr. Syed Waseem Raza Jaffery
Mr. Toshitaka Ito
Mr. Boketshu Mike Mbongo
Ms. Maria Magdalena Valdivieso Rodriguez
Mr. Daniel Manuel Jovez Zambrano(Korea)(Thailand)(Japan)(Pakistan)(Japan)(D.R.Congo)(El Salvador)(Venezuela)

Visiting Expert

Mr. Peter Wheelhouse
Dr. William L. Marshall(United Kingdom)(Canada)Advisers

Prof. Hiroyuki Shinkai
Prof. Tae Sugiyama
Prof. Haruhiko Higuchi(Canada)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs
Members

I. INTRODUCTION
The alarming rise in crime rates all over the world has forced the international community to explore
new avenues to save the public at large from criminals. In the pursuit of public safety, different effective
measures and models for the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into society after theirrelease are being vigorously examined.
Reintegration demands that the scope of the legal system be enlarged so that the future life of theoffender in the community is considered in sentencing and during the correctional phase. By now it should
be clear that the reintegration concept not only serves the social interest by preventing recidivism, but also
the personal life of the offender who benefits from the opportunities of a crime free life. Reintegration should
introduce the broader social issues into the criminal justice system, creating an area of convergence with thesocial welfare, public health and educational systems.
The group is comprised of two judges of District Courts, an Additional Secretary from the Public
Prosecution Department, a public prosecutor, an immigration officer, police officer, and two prison officers.
The group is grateful to the visiting experts and professors of UNAFEI especially Professors Shinkai and
Sugiyama who not only advised us during the discussion but also guided us to prepare this paper. The group
was assigned to study the topic and present a detailed report keeping in mind the following tentative points:• Problems and challenges facing current legal systems;• Identification of effective policies and models that reduce recidivism and promote public safety;• Continuation of treatment programmes offered while the offender served his or her sentence andprovision of new programmes;• The supervision of known offenders in the community;• Appropriate co-ordination among related agencies and the use of community resources;• Monitoring and evaluation of the selected interventions;• The adoptability of such models in the respective countries.

II. PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMSThe criminal justice system is comprised of police, prosecution, courts and corrections (prison, probationand parole) and is facing a number of challenges and problems, in particular in the implementation ofcorrectional programmes.

174

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

•

•
•

•
•
•

Corruption, being an international problem, is prevailing in all countries. However, some countries,
by enacting special laws and developing strong systems of checks and balances between the exercise
of powers, authority and accountability, have been able to control corruption. The relationship ofcorruption to recidivism is relevant to the extent of implementation of policies to control recidivism.
Lack of devotion to implementing policies can be regarded as corruption. Corruption is also one of
the major problems not only in criminal justice systems but also in other departments.
The courts are overburdened because of understaffing, the delaying tactics of defence lawyers andinefficient, insufficient and non-specialized prosecutors. Judges have no proper sitting arrangements
and are sometimes even without adequate staff.
There is massive overcrowding in jails and a preponderance of inmates under trial due to delays incompleting investigations, restrictive application of bail laws, and frequent adjournment of hearings.
Delay in submission of indictment results from inefficiency, non-availability of modern techniques ofinvestigation, and lack of integrity on the part of police in the investigation.
The police-public ratio is extremely low which results in the inefficiency of the existing police
personnel. Frequently, they are to exercise their duties round the clock.
The group observed the extent to which the participating countries exercise correctional
programmes; however, they were not considered adequate. In particular, programmes for offenders
who have satisfied their legal obligations are non-existent.
Existing classification of offenders and rehabilitation or correctional programmes may notnecessarily be based on established principles of risk, needs and responsivity.

III. EXISTING CORRECTIVE MEASURESThe group was of the view that rehabilitative programmes for released ex-offenders should begin on thevery first day of custodial and non-custodial sentences. The programme cannot meet success unless thefoundation is laid at the start on the basis of assessment of risk/need factors by a team of professionals. The
offender should be classified in one or two particular groups as per requirement and be admitted to aparticular programme. Reassessment should occur before release, keeping in mind the response shown by
the offender to the programme. It was necessary to first analyse the existing system of classification ofprisoners on the basis of risk/need factors, responsivity at the end of the sentence, and the presently
available rehabilitation programme. There was also consensus on the proposal made by Mr. Mbongo that theoffender should not be exposed to society directly. There should be a system of rehabilitation where he or
she can be sent out for three months before release. The group found that the system of parole in somecountries, and half-way houses in Japan and in some other countries, caters for this purpose before release inaddition to providing residence and meeting other needs. We then discussed generally the present
classification systems, rehabilitation programmes offered to offenders, parole systems and systems of halfway houses in some of the participating countries. The issue of rehabilitation programmes for inmates andreleased offenders was discussed thoroughly, keeping in mind the knowledge gained through visiting
Kawagoe Juvenile Prison, Sapporo Prison, and a half-way house in Sapporo; and a presentation on the Hong
Kong system of corrections. It was agreed that rehabilitation programmes should be based on thesepatterns.

A. Classification Systems
In almost all the countries in Group 3 there is a classification system for categorizing prisoners. In somecountries, it is based on categories of crimes or the treatment programmes to be offered to the offender, i.e.
violent offenders, sex offenders, drug addicts, etc. and in some countries the offenders are classified on thebasis of the length of sentence, age, gender and work to be assigned in the prisons. Some of the countries
classify the prisoners in the categories of organized crime, major crime, middle crime or minor crime. The
group considered the classification systems of many countries and agreed that prisoners should be classified
on the basis of risk, need and responsivity factors.
B. Rehabilitation Programmes
Presently, different countries are running different rehabilitation programmes according to their systemof classification and their social environment. On the basis of classification, the inmates are provided thefollowing rehabilitation programme:(i) General academic education; and(ii) Skill development education such as carpentry, bakery, dressmaking, cosmetology, etc.

175

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

Some of the countries, in addition to providing formal and market based vocational education, also introduced
the following rehabilitation programmes:(i) Psychological treatment like anger management control(ii) Anxiety intervention treatment(iii) Creative thinking and resolution of problems(iv) Emotional control treatment(v) Sex offender treatment(vi) Drug addiction treatment.
Several kinds of sport and recreation are offered to prisoners to keep them mentally and physically fit.
Many countries, like Pakistan and Thailand, provide religious education to the inmates.

C. System of Parole
In Japan, Pakistan, Korea, and Thailand etc., prisoners are released after serving one third of sentences inprison, on the basis of good conduct. During the parole release period the offender is supervised and kept
under observation by probation or parole officers. During parole release, he or she enjoys full or limited
liberty according to the law of his or her country. In case they misuse their release, they are punished with
revocation of license and return to prison to undergo the remaining period of their sentence ofimprisonment.
D. Half-Way Houses
Half-way houses can be defined as community-based centres where offenders can obtain basic necessities
like food, clothing and shelter. They generally cater for probationers, parolees and fully released prisoners.
Half-way houses are generally run by private associations (such as the Juridical Persons for Offenders’
Rehabilitation Services). Half-way houses offer vocational guidance to discharged prisoners and help them tofind suitable employment. The half-way houses provide accommodation, money and food as well as training
and job referrals for the discharged prisoners. Most residents work outside the half-way house on a daily
basis. Employment offers them financial independence and builds in them good work ethics. The Japaneseand Korean systems have a nationwide special type of supervision and aftercare for discharged prisoners.
Thailand has only one half-way house which provides assistance including the offering of accommodation,
meals, job placement and counselling services.

IV. POST RELEASE REHABILITATION PROGRAMMES
A. Legal Framework
At the very outset of the discussion, consensus was reached that fully released offenders must be
rehabilitated to help their reintegration into society and that the assessment of offenders on the basis ofneed/risk factors should be made before their release. If required they should be sent to rehabilitation
centres for further treatment. In many countries, it was found that different post-release rehabilitative
programmes, especially for drug offenders, are being implemented successfully, but it was noted that most of
the offenders after their release do not come forward or volunteer themselves for rehabilitative
programmes. Many group members proposed that treatment should be compulsory for those who areassessed as requiring it. At this stage, lengthy discussion started on the point that after full release of theoffender, compulsory rehabilitation programmes violate constitutional protection against double jeopardy inmost countries and violate human rights.
Ms. Valdivieso, participant from El Salvador, vehemently opposed making rehabilitation programmes
compulsory for fully released ex-offenders on the aforementioned grounds. On the contrary, Mr. Jaffery
proposed that, for recidivists, it can be made compulsory, whereas for first time and juvenile offenders thiscan be voluntary. For achieving the objective of public safety, such provision can be enumerated in law. Ms
Valdivieso was of the view that in her country, the matters pertaining to offences and punishment are
constitutionally governed, therefore such a law cannot be promulgated in contravention of the constitutional
provisions.
The group was about to reach to a conclusion that in this context, practices of the United Kingdom
regarding compulsory drug treatment, and Hong Kong for all types of offenders, can be adopted as role

176

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

model by every country according to its circumstances.
However, there was strong dissenting opinion that such a model may not be applicable to some countries’
legal contexts. The group then discussed how we can motivate ex-offenders into programmes when there
are no legal provisions. In this controversy, Mr. Mbongo floated the idea of awarding of certificates after
undergoing a rehabilitation programme making the involvement of the offender in the programme indirectlycompulsory and to make it helpful in seeking employment. He stressed his idea on two points: firstly, it willserve as good behaviour certificate; secondly, it will motivate the offender to undergo the rehabilitation
programme in order to be accepted by society. Such certificates may be important for society: offenders who
have undergone rehabilitation have a good conduct certificate with which to find a job. However the idea was
not supported by the majority of members on the grounds that it may have a reverse effect on the exoffender due to the unco-operative attitude of society in their respective countries.
The group was advised by Dr. Marshall that in order to attract offenders to undergo the aftercare
programme motivation factors should be addressed carefully. Motivation can be formed externally orinternally. In some cultural contexts, motivation could be given in a form of incentive; e.g. provision of
vocational training, employment or the issuing of good behaviour certificates. Offenders may even becoerced into treatment by making an appropriate legal framework. However, motivation can also be formedinternally by offenders in order to lead a better life by receiving treatment.

B. Continuation of Rehabilitation Programmes
The group pondered the continuation of rehabilitation programmes after full release of the ex-offenderand also discussed various modes for rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The group considered
existing programmes in the participating countries. However, we did not find applicable ones except for avery modest example in El Salvador. In El Salvador, the provision of assistance to ex-offenders has been
assigned to the Prison Department. After release of the offender, the prison officers make occasional calls tothe ex-offender and ask about his or her activities. Consequently, the group agreed that the main stress wason the fact that continuation of rehabilitation programmes should not be for all ex-offenders but before
release a team of professionals should reassess the inmate on the basis of conduct during the sentence(prison, probation and parole) on the basis of need, risk and responsivity. Thereafter, the period, degree andkind of treatment to be continued should be decided.
The group also considered how to decide continuation of rehabilitation programmes, and who would makesuch decisions. Two proposals were put forward by Mr. Jaffery. First, the already existing departments ofprisons and parole boards may be assigned to assess and supervise the programme in consultation with eachother. Second, new departments may be established to carry out the aforementioned functions. After
deliberations the first option was accepted. During the discussions, the Hong Kong system of Corrections1
was also examined and was found more suitable. The salient features of the Rehabilitation Service of Hong
Kong are that:• The service has been divided into Assessment Services, Programme Services, Psychological
Services, Education Services, Vocational Training Services and Supervision Services;• Each service provides a complete programme for offenders preparing him or her during the sentence
period to become a useful and law abiding citizen according to assessments made by the Assessment
Service;• The supervision staff provide support to offenders and their families and advises the offenders
during and after release.

C. Problems and Needs of Offenders
When a prisoner is released from prison or released on parole or has his or her sentence suspended, heor she generally faces many problems or has different needs, requiring help. There is now considerable
evidence of the factors that influence reoffending. Building on criminological and social research, the Social
Exclusion Unit (SEU) of the United Kingdom, for example, has identified nine key factors:2
1 Kwok Leung-ming, “Mobilization of Community Resources and Successful Reintegration of Offenders”, contained in thisvolume of the Resource Material Series.
2 Peter Wheelhouse, “Interventions with Drug Misusing Offenders and Prolific and other Priority Offenders”, contained in thisvolume of the Resource Material Series.

177

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

education
employment
drug and alcohol misuse
mental and physical healthattitudes and self-control
institutionalization and life-skills
housingfinancial support and debt
family networks.

The group was also informed of the fact that the Canadian model of correctional treatment is based on theprinciples of risk, needs and responsivity. Prof. Don Andrews from Carleton University in Canada,3 in his
writing, has given four basic principles: risk, needs, responsivity and professional discretion, to be taken into
account while making assessment and recommending treatment to an offender. He presented two types ofrisk factors: static factors and dynamic factors. Assessment of risks can be made using two types of
information: static and dynamic. Static information is information that cannot change. For example, age andgender are clearly static factors. History of previous offences and type of crimes committed are also static
factors. It is not possible to change these factors through treatment. Dynamic risk factors are importantbecause these are the factors that are changeable. Risk factors are changeable, therefore they can be
reduced through treatment, and it is possible to measure changes that indicate a decreased risk of reoffending. For example, treating substance abuse problems can reduce the risk of drug use that is likely toresult in a return to prison, and educational and employment programmes can increase skills and work
opportunities, thereby supporting employment after release. The offenders with the highest risk require themost intensive treatment services
The need principle states that in a correctional system only criminogenic needs should be addressed.
The reason for this is that if one is trying to change criminal behaviour, it is only those factors that areassociated with criminal activity that should be addressed. Other factors may seem likely to be targets fortreatment, but they will not result in reduced crime by the offender. The principle of professional discretion
recognizes that assessment instruments cannot be designed to address every case. There are, at times,
unique characteristics of an individual or situation that must be taken into account when making decisions
about treatment. This means that there will be situations when the assessment tools might indicate an
offender has a low risk of reoffending, but special circumstances, such as behaviour since arrest, may
indicate that there is a high risk or probability of reoffending. The professional classification officer should
use this information when making decisions. Thus, addressing the criminogenic needs of the highest risk
offenders contributes to public safety by reducing the likelihood of new offences after release from prison.
The group debated each of the factors given above and came to the conclusion that rehabilitation
programmes are being provided to inmates during the period of sentence. The group has already resolvedthat post-release rehabilitation programmes for all of the above need factors should be continued after full
release, except the provision of housing facilities and financial support due to the resource constraints ofmost countries. However, the ex-offender can be helped in seeking a job. The idea of half-way houses has
also been supported as they also provide housing to fully released offenders. Instead of providing housing,ex-offenders can be accommodated in half-way houses as their capacity is increased.

V. UNHELPFUL SOCIETAL ATTITUDE
Society has inherent hatred for offenders and the public at large thinks that criminals should be punishedseverely for the crimes they commit. However, in order to grasp ‘true’ public opinion, we may need to create
more reliable and valid social surveys. In any case, the idea of rehabilitation is new for the general public of
the participating countries; therefore, as a general rule of resistance against change, the public shows its
discontent with such idea. Research shows that rehabilitative treatment has produced better resultscompared to strict incarceration. The group discussed how the community can be motivated and involved in
the genuinely required process of rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-offenders, as without the support of3 Quoted in Brian A. Grant, “Reducing Recidivism by Applying the Principles of Risk, Need and Responsivity”, contained inthis volume of the Resource Material Series.

178

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

society, the desired objective of public safety can hardly be achieved. The group discussed the Hong Kongmodel in detail and concluded that by motivating and involving society through different effective steps
society’s attitude can be changed to a great extent, if not totally.
The print and electronic media can be very helpful in creating awareness and modifying the attitude ofsociety to the reintegration of ex-offenders. Therefore, it was stressed that a media strategy should be
developed by the corrections system in collaboration with the information ministries of respective countries
to educate the public on the realities of the ex-offender population. The information ministries can launch
programmes showing documentary films, interviews of film stars and renowned sportspersons on television
through the co-operation of big industries and other business communities. The purpose can be further
achieved by arranging seminars and workshops and walks or rallies involving non-governmental institutions,notables from all walks of life, and students.
The group was unanimous on the point that religious institutions can play an important role creatingawareness in society for accepting and rehabilitating the ex-offenders as all religions preach that one shouldhate the sin and not the sinner.
Informal institutions like the Cooperative Employers of Japan, Volunteer Probation Officers, Juridical
Persons for Offenders’ Rehabilitation Services and Women’s Association for Rehabilitation Aid can play animportant role in mobilizing and motivating the community. These organizations can make efforts for
employment of released offenders in the construction, manufacturing, service, wholesale and retail sectors.

VI. SUPERVISION OF KNOWN EX-OFFENDERS
A. Legal Dispositions
On this issue, the group again entered into a very heated debate that after full release of the offender,
supervision is not possible on the following grounds:(i) Most of the Constitutions of the participating countries provide protection against double jeopardy;
and(ii) Supervision after release interferes with the liberty of the person and will amount to violation of thehuman rights of the ex-offender.
Ms. Valdivieso, participant from El Salvador, vehemently opposed the supervision of known offenders on
the aforementioned grounds. On the contrary, Mr. Young-hoon Ha and Mr. Jaffery were of the view that laws
can be amended as laws are made for the people and for the sake of the safety of the people at large laws canbe modified. The group predominantly concluded that for the greater interest of society laws may be made,where deemed necessary, and protection of society can not be sacrificed for the sake of the human rights ofhabitual and known ex-offenders. Mr. Peter Wheelhouse, Visiting Expert from United Kingdom, also
endorsed the proposition. So it was decided to examine the systems of different countries which havealready evolved some system of supervision of known ex-offenders which may be adopted by othercountries with due modifications according to their needs.

B. Supervision by Police and Other Related Agencies
During the discussion it was apprised that police functionaries of almost all the countries keep track of
the activities of known and habitual ex-offenders but it is not conducted in a systematic manner except inJapan and the United Kingdom.4
For instance, Japan5 has no comprehensive supervision system for prisoners who are released after
completion of their sentence in prison, under parole or probation. The police have recently created awatching system for known sex offenders. According to the system, the Ministry of Justice is informed of
the release of the sex offender by the prison authorities at least 28 days before release. Upon receiving suchinformation, the Ministry forwards the information to the National Police Agency which alerts the police of

4 Peter Wheelhouse, “Interventions with Drug Misusing Offenders and Prolific and other Priority Offenders”, contained in thisvolume of the Resource Material Series.
5 Based on the briefing given in the National Police Agency, Japan on 1 February 2007.

179

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74

the area where the offender resides. The concerned local police keep the offender under observation
indirectly. Till now, 237 sex offenders have been kept under observation. Sixteen have reoffended, including
sex crime. Although this indirect watching system is being criticized to some extent it has met success. Thismay be because the offender knows that the police are keeping track of his or her activities. This system isgood, but watching is confined to known sex offenders.
In the United Kingdom, the Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPO) Programme started in 2004 and it
specifically targets the small number of the most active and/or problematic offenders. It was designed to give
offenders a choice between the cessation of offending with the acceptance of support in the form of
rehabilitative programmes or to carry on offending, resulting in prompt arrest and punishment. The PPO
programme is comprised of following:• Prevent and Deter• Catch and Convict• Rehabilitate and Resettle.
The essential feature of the PPO programme is that it has been designed to tailor responses to local
problems and avoid a prescriptive approach regarding implementation. In doing so, the PPO programmeembraces the use of local knowledge, practitioner expertise, and previous experience of similar schemes.
The individual stakeholders, practitioners, and specific agencies are responsible for all the decision-making
aspects of the programme throughout, from how to choose the prolific offenders through to whichinterventions they may receive and how often they may receive them. These factors were all designed witha specific intention: to reduce the crime levels of the offenders on the PPO programme.

C. Vigilance Committees in Cities, Towns and Villages
While discussing the watching system conducted by the police and other agencies, it was realized thatpolice alone, unless the community gives full support, are unable to handle the gigantic task of supervisionof known ex-offenders because supervision is confined only to watching and to making the offender awarethat he or she is under observation. The police cannot watch the offender every moment and also cannot
interfere with his or her private life. Mr. Young-Hoon Ha informed the group that in Korea, the government
notifies the public bi-annually of the list of known sex offenders and the public and can check whether or nota sex offender is residing near their home. This helps the public to remain cautious. The role of noninstitutional organizations and volunteers was also discussed. Such groups can extend full co-operation andsupport to the police in observing the known ex-offenders. Many proposals were considered and agreement
was reached that in each city, town and village there should be a vigilance committee comprising of notablesof the respected area from all walks of life including lawyers, doctors, educators, students, andrepresentatives of the local police. In some societies, such vigilance committees could be made responsible
for observing the activities of known ex-offenders. In other situations such committees’ responsibility may
be limited to general crime prevention. However, all members agreed that it should be used to createawareness in the concerned community of adopting safety measures.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
The group considered the topic for discussion in detail, keeping in mind that rehabilitation of the offenderduring the period of sentence and after sentence is key to public safety. Reduction in the rate of recidivism ispossible only through rehabilitation of offenders; custodial or non-custodial sentences without rehabilitative
programmes are useless. The issues of detrimental societal attitudes and supervision of known habitual
offenders were discussed in detail and the following recommendations were made:1. Necessity of an Aftercare Programme• The group agrees on the general need for an aftercare programme when an offender completes hisor her sentence. It is advisable that the programmes are designed to make the offenders useful andlaw abiding citizens who can rehabilitate and reintegrate and have an objective to reduce recidivism.
• Such programmes should be based upon standard assessment of the offenders upon their entry into
prison. The programme should be based upon the risk, need and responsivities of each offender. The
specific programmes could address a wide variety of their criminogenic needs such as: sex offendertherapy, drug addiction treatment and treatment for their criminal style of thinking (cognitive
distortion) so that the chance of reoffending can be reduced.

180

135TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR•

Priority would have to be placed on programmes for high risk and high need offenders in order toreduce the chances of reoffending and to effectively utilize limited resources.

(i) Gradual Reintegration• Upon release, high risk offenders should not be exposed to society directly. There should be asystem of rehabilitation where the information of the offender may be sent out for short periods prior
to release, depending upon his or her risk.
• As a practical system, where applicable, there should be half-way houses and parole systems, notonly to provide board and lodging, but to offer mental care, living skills guidance and job placement
services.
(ii) Good Staff: Recruitment, Training, Integrity and Motivation• Aftercare programmes should be of employ specialized staff such as psychologists, social workers
and psychiatrists. Staff should high integrity in the execution of their work.
• To raise the level of efficiency, the conditions of service of personnel involved in the programme may
have to be improved to motivate them and also to attract highly qualified staff.
• Staff should be exposed to new techniques in carrying out their tasks. The staff should have accessto institutions where they can acquire more knowledge and higher qualifications.
• The current strength of correction officers should be enhanced to reduce the burden on the existing
officers.
(iii) Volunteers• Efforts have to be made to seek the involvement of volunteers with relevant competence toimplement specialized programmes at minimum cost. The Japanese Volunteer Probation system
could be a good model.
2. Post Release Rehabilitation Programme• For successful results of post-release rehabilitative programmes, offenders should be given
treatment from the very first day of custodial and non-custodial sentences.
• The standard classification/assessment system needs to be introduced to the custodial and noncustodial punishment system and used upon an offender’s entry into the system. Assessment should
consider the motives and circumstances of the crime and the degree of the criminal behaviour i.e.
assessment on the basis of need/ risk.
(i) Information Flow
• Management information systems may have to be improved to keep and maintain up-to-date records
of offenders. As far as practicable, computers should be utilized.
• In order to judge the success of the programme, assessments may be made regularly, duly
recognizing the risk of the offender.
(ii) Motivation of Offenders After Release• In order to attract offenders to the aftercare programme, motivating factors should be addressedcarefully. Motivation can be formed externally or internally. In some cultural contexts, motivation
could take the form of incentive; e.g. provision of vocational training, employment or the awarding ofa good behaviour certificate. Offenders may even be coerced into treatment by making anappropriate legal framework. However, motivation can be formed internally by offenders in order tolead a better life by receiving treatment.
3. Co-ordination among Related Organizations• Efforts to co-ordinate the work of not only related agencies such as prisons departments, parole andprobation departments, and police departments, but also private institutions like NGOs, religious
institutions, and charitable institutions should be made to enhance the capabilities of theseorganizations.
• The personnel in governmental organizations engaged in the delivery of programmes may exchange
information with each other freely to enhance better understanding of the offenders.
4. Community Involvement (Public Awareness)• Societal attitude may be changed by conducting seminars or workshops, media campaigns, walks or

181

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.74•

rallies, with the co-operation of non-governmental institutions, notables from all walks of life,
students, and religious institutions to create or develop awareness of rehabilitation and reintegrationof offenders and to reduce stigmatization of offenders by society.
Informal organizations performing rehabilitative activities for reintegration of ex-offenders should be
encouraged by the government.

5. Sustainability of Programmes (Political Support)• In designing programmes, factors such as consistency, adaptability, feasibility, suitability andaffordability ought to be given prime attention. Gaining political support by presenting theeffectiveness of such programmes is of vital importance.
6. Supervision of Known Ex-Offenders(i) Supervision by Police and Other Related Agencies• In order to protect the public, there would be a need to keep eye on high-risk known offenders.
Information on such offenders should be given to the police from correctional institutions upon theirrelease. Examples from Japan and the UK can be used as a model.
(ii) Vigilance Committees• Where applicable, a vigilance committee comprising notables of the respected area from all walks oflife including lawyers, doctors, educators, students and representatives of local police, may takeresponsibility for the supervision of known offenders.

182

APPENDIXCOMMEMORATIVE PHOTOGRAPH• 135th International Senior Seminar

UNAFEIThe 135th International Senior Seminar

Left to Right:
Above:
Dr. Lappi-Seppälä, (Finland), Dr. Tak (Netherlands), Dr. Marshall (Canada), Prof. Noguchi
4th Row:
Mr. Yamagami (Staff), Ms. Izui (Staff), Mr. Matsui (Driver), Mr. Saito (Chef), Mr. Iwakami (Staff), Mr.
Tanuma (Staff), Ms. Tanaka (Staff), Ms. Hosoe (Staff), Ms. Matsuoka (Staff), Mr. Mori (JICA), Ms. Matsuura(Staff), Mr. Inoue (Staff)
3rd Row:
Ms. Shibuki (Staff), Ms. Tomita (Staff), Mr. Abdul Baaree (Maldives), Mr. Getachew (Ethiopia), Mr. Lam(Hong Kong), Mr. Oguri (Japan), Mr. Ogushi (Japan), Mr. Afifi (Malaysia), Mr. Leiva Gamoneda (Honduras),
Mr. Raja Shahrom (Malaysia), Mr. Daniel Jovez (Venezuela), Mr. Ha (Korea), Ms. Suganuma (Japan), Ms.
Ishikawa (Staff)
2nd Row:
Mr. Udo (Japan), Mr. Chryssikos (UNODC), Mr. Mbongo (Congo), Mr. Chit (Myanmar), Mr. Ueda
(Japan), Mr. Yu (China), Mr. Pires (Brazil), Mr. Jaffery (Pakistan), Mr. Somphop (Thailand), Mr. Ito(Japan), Mr. Sukit (Thailand), Ms. Hidayati (Indonesia), Ms. Reid (Jamaica), Ms. Valdivieso (ElSalvador), Mr. Kataoka (Japan), Mr. Nishimura (Staff), Mr. Kawabe (Staff)
1st Row:
Mr. Ebara (Staff), Prof. Uryu, Prof. Yamada, Prof. Higuchi, Prof. Shinkai, Deputy Director Senta, Dr.
Grant (Canada), Director Aizawa, Mr. Wheelhouse (U.K.), Mr. Kwok (Hong Kong), Prof. Sakata, Prof.
Ishihara, Prof. Sugiyama, Prof. Uchida, Prof. Naito, Mr. Cornell (L.A.)