GROUP 2
RESPONDING TO ORGANIZED CRIME MEMBERS AND TERRORISTS
IN CONTACT WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PENAL SYSTEMS
Rapporteur: Mr. Soufiane Ahoujil (Morocco)
Co-Rapporteur: Ms. Li Pui Ling (Hong Kong)
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Members

Advisers

Mr. Carlos Vinicius Cabeleira
Mr. Adam Azim
Ms. Phoungpaka Wilson
Mr. Helder Cosme Marcal Belo
Mr. Karma Tshewang
Mr. Adachi Taku
Mr. Sakatani Tokuji
Mr. Tsukahara Akihiro
Mr. Yamane Sachio
Prof. Takeshi MatsumotoProf. Hiroyuki Watanabe(Brazil)(Maldives)(Thailand)(Timor-Leste)(Bhutan)(Japan)(Japan)(Japan)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCTION
Group 2 started its discussion on 4 September 2017. The group elected, by consensus, Mr. Carlos Vinicius
Cabeleira as its chairperson, Mr. Adam Azim as its co-chairperson, Mr. Soufiane Ahoujil as its rapporteur,and Ms. Li Pui Ling as its co-rapporteur. The group was assigned to discuss the topic of “responding toorganized crime members and terrorists in contact with the criminal justice and penal system”. Despite
differences in each countryʼs penal and correctional systems, the group undisputedly agreed that alternative
measures to incarceration have many advantages but are, nonetheless, difficult to implement considering thespecific requirements they entail. In addition, all participants concurred that offendersʼ reintegration throughalternative measures necessitates the support of several stakeholders as well as sufficient financial resources.

II. SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSIONS
Throughout the discussions, the group identified two major themes pertaining to organized crime
members and terrorists in contact with the criminal justice and penal systems, i.e. A) alternative measures toincarceration; B) reintegration into society: rehabilitation after release.
A. Alternative Measures to Incarceration
Through the discussions, most participants agreed that many forms of alternative measures need to betaken to divert offenders from jail into the community. Hence, to confront the underlying causes of crime, andensure offenders stay on track, it was suggested by all participants that courts should tailor sentences that fit
offenders, protect citizens and provide suitable rehabilitation programmes.
During the discussion, the group considered both the use of this measure in the extra judicial phase, as analternative to prosecution, and their assignment in the adjudication, as an alternative to imprisonment.
Alternative measures to incarceration may be used for some associates of criminal organizations or lowrisk offenders. For terrorists, however, some difficulties were pointed out. Indeed, some participants believethat they should be jailed, but depending on the crime they perpetrated.
Reasons why alternatives to incarceration are difficult implement:a) Potential risk to society (reoffending, radicalize others etc.)b) Ideology-driven crime (need to address ideology itself)c) Security issues for the suspects/accused.

69

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 104

Advantages of alternative measures:a) Preventing sympathizers from joining terrorist organizations.
b) Identifying low-risk offenders to avoid high-risk reoffending.
Upon discussion, the group concurred that alternative measures to incarceration can also involve
terrorists, while considering:






The severity of the crime charged
The kind of organization they are affiliated withAcceptance of alternative measures by the victim and the community
The level of radicalization to violence and commitment to violent extremism.
The offenderʼs receptiveness to intervention and treatment
The likelihood of the person reoffending

1. Procedural Considerations: Pre-assessment
The group debated the necessity of creating a pre-assessment procedure to implement appropriate
treatment of offenders. Some participants referred to one of the Global Counter Terrorism Forum (GCTF)
recommendations, stating that “alternative measures should be based on a comprehensive assessment process1”.
Likewise, a participant contended that in the case of juvenile offenders, it is necessary “to hold investigationsusing medical, psychological, pedagogical and other expert knowledge and, among other items, the findings ofthe assessment by the juvenile classification home2”. The above-mentioned participant also indicated that preassessment is not necessary for adult cases, considering that judges are entitled to decide a sentence based on
the nature of the act committed rather than the personʼs characteristics. Nevertheless, all participants agreed
that in some alleged terrorist-related crimes, pre-assessment is a viable means to help investigatingprosecutors and judges impose appropriate treatment for offenders. Most participants agreed that probation
officers involved in the implementation of alternative measures to incarceration should play a part in the preassessment process; given their ability to determine which alternative measures to incarceration best suits
the offender. In addition, many participants emphasized the importance of intelligence gathering in the preassessment process.
2. Examples(a) Community service
During the discussion, most members of the group agreed that community-service can be a reparative
sanction, in the sense that it defines responsibility of the offender for their crime and can reduce prison
overcrowding. By contrast, some participants stated that judges can sentence defendants to perform unpaid
community service under enhanced supervision, mainly on behalf of civic or non-profit organizations. Somegroup members, however, argued that serious crimes such as first-degree murder, firearms trafficking,conspiracy and terrorist-related cases should not be subject to community corrections. Most participants also
pointed out that if the offender violates the terms set by the court, probation should be revoked, after which
the offender is liable to a term of imprisonment. The group also suggested that the offender be given theopportunity to repair the damage caused by their crime.
(b) Electronic Monitoring
In parallel, most participants agreed that electronic monitoring can be a relevant community-basedalternative measure to incarceration, mainly for low-risk offenders. Hence, upon discussion, it was asserted
that proximity monitoring can identify offendersʼ locations using electronic ankle or wrist bracelets. However,from various viewpoints that have been expressed during the discussion, some participants were reluctant as
to the use of that alternative. They argued that no such alternative is stipulated by their respective countriesʼ
constitutional texts, considering it a violation of privacy, mainly without the offenderʼs prior consent.
Nevertheless, all members of the group shared the view that if the offender violates conditions set by thecourt regarding that alternative measure (ex: taking off the bracelet), the offender should be denied the rightto undergo electronic monitoring.

The GCTFʼs “Recommendations on the Effective of Appropriate Alternative Measures for Terrorism-Related Offenses(Recommendation 6)”.
2Article 9 of the Japanese Juvenile Law.
170

167TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE

B. Reintegration into Society: Rehabilitation after Release
1. The Role of the Community and Civil Society
The group agreed that reintegration is of the utmost importance for organized crime group members or
terrorists. Hence, with the exception of convicts sentenced to death, all offenders have to receive necessary
support to go back to the community. All participants underscored that the reintegration process shall begin
before an offenderʼs release, by promoting interaction between reintegration partners and offenders beforerelease.
In addition, the group called attention to the fact that reintegration is a fundamental approach inaddressing recidivism, on account of the fact that offenders may well undergo rehabilitation programmes andyet unscrupulously reoffend all over again. Therefore, there was general agreement that community
acceptance is the backbone of social reintegration. Accordingly, the group unanimously agreed on thefollowing measures as being advantageous, mainly to organized crime members and terrorists:(a) Religious partners
Group members discussed the situation in some countries, such as Morocco, Maldives and Singapore,
where official bodies are in charge of religious education, notably the Ministry of Religious Endowment whichworks in collaboration with the correctional department in implementing peer education programmes andnational religious contests (Quran memorization and recitation, prophetic Hadith memorization, etc.). In Braziland Japan, however, official religious bodies or agencies are not permitted to undertake such activities.
Despite all those differences, the group members highlighted the importance of religious guidance inreintegration.
(b) Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
It was stated by visiting experts that in order to make good use of community resources, NGOs should
provide support, counselling, recreational activities and visits to organized-crime members (OCMs) andterrorists. In this regard, most participants agreed that halfway houses are essential for supporting released
offenders and an opportunity for them to learn the necessary skills to reintegrate into society. In addition,
the group believes that halfway houses can bridge the gap between prison and community, thus enablingOCMs and terrorists to start afresh with the aid of community support networks.
(c) Companies/Employers
The group reached a consensus that providing OCM/terrorist offenders with an adequate income isfundamental to bringing them back into society. Hence, government policies are no less necessary inadvocating and encouraging the public to employ OCMs/terrorists. Consequently, the overwhelming
majority of the group stressed the significance of the governmentsʼ input in supporting companies oremployers in hiring former OCMs and terrorists. Throughout the discussion, focus was placed on the“Incentive Payment” and “Guarantor” systems in Japan. Most participants called for encouraging the private
sector to offer more job opportunities to offenders. Moreover, public campaigns in recognizing thecontribution of such cooperative employers as well as promoting corporate social responsibility may also
increase the number of cooperative employers.
(d) Individuals
The group discussed and expressed their interest in volunteer probation officers as being preponderant
players in supporting rehabilitation of former offenders in the community and connecting them with welfare
services. All agreed that volunteer probation officers (VPOs) play the most important role in the Japaneseoffendersʼ rehabilitation system. Furthermore, volunteersʼ active participation would assist former
OCMs/terrorists and regular offenders in reintegration. The implementation of the VPO system wasunanimously highly regarded by group members for giving support and advice as well as serving as a model
to OCMs/terrorists.
(e) Mass Media
Most participants concurred that mass media is a public channel that not only helps with the transmissionof positive messages, but also enhances the publicʼs acceptance of offendersʼ rehabilitation. Self-reflection offormer organized crime members and terrorists and interviews may be adopted for such objectives.
Nevertheless, victimsʼ feelings and consent should be taken into consideration when using the mass media.

71

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 104

2. Restorative Justice
Most participants agreed that restorative justice can repair harm and restore justice to the victims. They
stated that the justice system can resort to victim-offender mediation and conferencing through joint
meetings with the offender and the victimʼs family, with a view to reaching an agreement as to which option
may best suit the victimʼs family and the community.

III. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations outlined in this report are intended to demonstrate that organized crime members
and terrorists should not be considered as an obstacle to the implementation of alternative measures,
especially in the case of juvenile offenders, first-time offenders, etc. Nevertheless, balance needs be struck
regarding the rights of individual offenders and those of the victims, as well as the concern for public safety.
Therefore, at the end of the discussion, the group reached a consensus that the following should berecommended as possible measures. Key components in implementing alternative measures for OCMs andterrorists would be:) Creating a pre-assessment procedure at the request of the court or authority in charge of thedecision, by public officers involved in the supervision process or experts, with the objective ofproviding information regarding the proper assignment of alternative measures.
) In addition to the punitive scope, the judicial and criminal justice systems should consider thereintegration of organized crime or violent extremist offenders as one of the main objectives ofincarceration.
) Providing close assistance to offenders in the community and connecting them with the community:(halfway houses, probation officers, etc.).
) Offering job opportunities to offenders and financial support to reintegration programmes, according
to their corporate social responsibility, by providing government support to private companies.
) Providing religious assistance and guidance on behalf of ideologically driven violent extremists byofficial agencies or private religious organizations, according to each countryʼs legal system.
) Particular attention should be given to reconciliation with victims and the community, to enable theoffender to express regret and repentance through direct communication, written communication orvideos, as well as mass and social media.
References:- The GCTFʼs “Recommendations on the Effective of Appropriate Alternative Measures for TerrorismRelated Offenses (Recommendation 6)”.
-72

Article 9 of the Japanese Juvenile Law.