GROUP 3
FOSTERING PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING AND MULTISTAKEHOLDER PARTNERSHIPS FOR ACCEPTANCE OF
OFFENDERS

Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Members

Advisers

Rapporteur: Ms. Aminath Rasheed (Maldives)
Co-Rapporteur: Ms. MIYAGAWA Tsubura (Japan)
Mr. Vanahnakone Chanthapanya(Lao PDR)
Mr. MATSUMURA Tadanori(Japan)Mr. Oka Parama Budita Anak Agung(Indonesia)
Ms. Lilian Akinyi Otieno(Kenya)
Mr. Soe Naing(Myanmar)
Ms. HAYASHI Kyoko(Japan)Prof. MORIKAWA Takeshi(UNAFEI)
Prof. WATANABE Hiroyuki(UNAFEI)
I. INTRODUCTION

Recent research reveals that support by stakeholders is required to tackle crime
prevention and facilitate rehabilitation. At the same time, creating awareness about themagnitude of the matter is not easy. Although statistics show that Japan has a low crimerate, the country faces different challenges in rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders.
The topic allocated to group three was “Forming multi-stakeholder partnerships andengaging the community in the social reintegration of offenders.” At the initial stage ofthe group discussion, all the members highlighted the situation of their own countries.
The member countries in this group include: Japan, Laos, Myanmar, Kenya, Indonesia
and Maldives. The specific discussions include the public/private stakeholders and theirinvolvement in the pretrial, post-trial and trial phases. It was identified that the member
countries who have a well-established relationship with stakeholders in this matter are
Japan and Kenya. The main discussions of the group focused the challenges faced
regarding stakeholder involvement, solutions and best practices that can be suggested.
Accordingly, based on the lectures provided and field visits, recommendations areprovided to the pressing issues in all member countries of the group.
Hence, it was agreed that the most prevalent issue in all the countries is the concern
on eliminating public stigmatization and enhancing offender acceptance. In order toovercome the mentioned issues, it is important to foster public understanding and multistakeholder partnerships for acceptance of offenders.
Based on the group discussion, several stages regarding the stigma and discriminationof offenders were identified. Therefore, the group came up with three steps according to
the level of acceptance by the community and proposed the best practices based on thediscussion.

154

174TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARGROUP WORKSHOP REPORTS

II. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
In the group discussion, the following three steps were identified to eliminate
prejudice against offenders:A. Public Awareness
The first step is to make the public aware of the need to support offenders and prevent
recidivism.
In Japan, challenges must be overcome in order to demolish stigma anddiscrimination against offenders. Many intervention programmes have been conducted
throughout the country. One of the main programmes is the Brighter Society Movement,
which is a nationwide movement launched by the Ministry of Justice in 1949. The aim ofthe movement is to make society brighter and inclusive through the deeper understandingof offenders, their rehabilitation and their need for support from all the people in Japan.
Every year the Ministry of Justice holds festivals that include the distribution of flyers
and booklets. In addition, social media is used to create awareness among the public.
In addition to the movement, the public prosecutors’ offices in Japan launched reentry support in 2009. The support aims to provide social welfare services to suspects, incooperation with social welfare agencies. The public prosecutors’ offices take every
opportunity to promote the importance of support because it is critical to prevent crime.
In Kenya, the involvement of community members in supervision throughCommunity Probation Volunteers promotes the sense that the community is rehabilitating
their own offender for community safety. Also, the Community Service Order (CSO)
supervisor is from the community, and the work done is for the benefit of the community.
Open days are held where successfully rehabilitated offenders tell their stories andencourage community members to help in social reintegration of offenders.
However, despite these challenges explained above, it is assumed that stigma anddiscrimination against offenders are still prevalent. It should be noted that thesechallenges have only involved people who are interested in offender rehabilitation. As aresult, people who are not interested in the issue have not been sufficiently influenced.
B. Acceptance of Offenders into the Community
The second step is to eliminate prejudice against offenders without imprisonment.
There is no doubt that offenders face discrimination in the community. It is
understandable that people seek safer communities; therefore, offenders might beregarded as threats to the community. However, what should be emphasized from theviewpoint of building a safer community is as follows.
First, in many countries, most offenders who return to the community without
imprisonment have committed minor crimes. It is doubtful that these offenders will
become a threat to the community. Second, based on research, offenders often have abroad range of problems including lack of education, diseases, disadvantaged family
backgrounds and so forth. Therefore, exclusion from the community will worsen theproblems and cause reoffending.

155

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES NO. 111

C. Acceptance of Ex-inmates into the Community
The third step is to eliminate prejudice against ex-inmates: offenders who served timein a correctional facility. The ex-inmates released both before and after completion of theterms of their sentences face harsher stigma and discrimination than offenders without
imprisonment. People fear ex-inmates because they are usually regarded as vicious
criminals who are likely to commit crimes again. Thus, ex-inmates have difficulty finding
housing, employment, healthcare services and getting married.
The general public understands that people who have been released from prison needto live without discrimination in society in order to reintegrate and prevent recidivism, butthey refuse to accept offenders as their neighbours, which prevents the offenders fromliving normal lives.
In some countries, the ex-inmates released from prison receive various forms ofsupport, such as admission to a halfway house, employment support and welfare support.
In addition, some countries provide support through volunteer probation officers.
However, not all of these interventions have been successful.
In response to this problem, for example, in Laos, where Buddhism is widespread,some ex-inmates released from correctional institutions are likely to become monks.
However, it is not practical to adopt ex-inmates released from prisons or correctional
institutions in countries with relatively low interest in religion. It is also possible to makea fresh start by living in a different area, where no one knows about the offender’scriminal record. Even in this case, the Internet is so advanced that, even if offenders move,their criminal records may be revealed, and this does not lead to a fundamental solution.
On the other hand, in some countries, ex-inmates are still facing the difficulties in finding
housing, employment and health care services due to lack of links to the community.
III. BEST PRACTICESIn the discussions, it was proposed that the following best practices can be used inorder to build more inclusive communities which discriminate less against offenders. It is
critical to change the perception of people in the community. Based on the lessons andexperiences obtained from both seminars and group work sessions, it should be noted that
inclusive communities would effectively reduce recidivism. Especially, ex-inmates needtailored bridges linking them between the prison or correctional institutions and society interms of rehabilitation and reintegration after they are released. At the same time, the stateand society should organize programmes or projects with public participation in order toraise awareness for people in society on understanding and providing more chances forthe ex-inmates in terms of reintegration into society and living together.
A. Awareness RaisingFirst, as discussed above, raising the community’s awareness about offender
rehabilitation is critical. For this purpose, public awareness campaigns by criminal justiceagencies and other related agencies would be helpful. The more attractive and catchy
tools will bring more effective results. For example, to publicize how offenders’community work or activities contribute to the community would be persuasive, as in156

174TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARGROUP WORKSHOP REPORTS

some countries, offenders are obliged to do something for a community as diversion or acondition of probation.
Singapore is a country that has a lower crime rate in comparison to other countries. Avisiting expert from Singapore shared success stories related to the Yellow Ribbon
Project in Singapore. The purpose of the Yellow Ribbon Project is to create awareness ofthe need to give second chances to offenders, secondly, to generate acceptance ofoffenders and their families by the community and, thirdly, to inspire community action
to support the rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-inmates. The success of the Yellow
Ribbon Project can be attributed to the media campaign and outreach strategies andstrong community ownership of the Yellow Ribbon brand.
In order to make such projects more attractive, a symbol can be used to create andvisualize the efforts to support reintegration. In general, in order to attract young people
who are not interested in such activities, the government works to raise awareness of theYellow Ribbon Project through public relations activities that make full use of SNS,
marathons and concerts that seem to be largely successful. The point of this plan is tocreate a symbol of the activity, involve young people and clarify the goals, and it can beadopted in each country. In addition, Japan's Movement for a Brighter Society has createda mascot character called "Hogo-Chan", which can be taken up as a best practice.
B. Providing Support Services for Offenders
Second, in the discussion, the group members highlighted information delivered byvisiting lectures who provided information about best practices in their respectivecountries. One of the best practices was the success of the Probation Service in Croatia,
which aims to effectively resocialize and reintegrate offenders into the community. The
positive effect brought to the country within a short timeframe is a key factor toacknowledge. Due to the positive outcome of the service, it has been acknowledged at thenational and the international levels. Substitution of prison sentences with community
work orders has had a significant role on public acceptance of offenders into thecommunity. Those participating countries, such as Maldives and Myanmar, that do nothave established mechanisms can adopt the best practices of the Croatia Probation
Service.
In Japan, various public and private partners engage in supporting offenders. Some ofthe examples are volunteer probation officers (VPOs), who are volunteers working under
the close supervision of the probation office and who play crucial roles in offender
rehabilitation in the community. Big Brothers and Sisters (BBS) works with youth andjuvenile offenders. Hello Work works for the promotion of employment support projects
for ex-offenders. The establishment of halfway houses in Japan has played an importantrole in the accommodation and support of offenders who are released back to thecommunity.
In Kenya, some of the following practices help with the acceptance of offenders
within the community. Offenders perform community service orders (CSOs), which is
unpaid public work to pay back to the community for the offences committed, forexample, by doing afforestation for environmental conservation, rehabilitating
community access roads and the like. Offenders with technical skills, like carpentry,
make classroom desks for pupils and repair broken ones including school doors andwindows. Empowering offenders is done, for example, with school fees for education and157

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES NO. 111

technical skills including capital to start a business to be productive members of thecommunity. This gives hope to the community that offenders will change positively andpromotes acceptance.
C. Appreciation and Persuasion of the Community
Third, rewarding the community in various ways is also effective. In Japan,employers are paid money by a public agency when they hire an ex-inmate. Thisapproach can also be applied to an offender. For example, instead of building facilities
such as prisons or correctional institutions, it may be effective to improve roads in thesurrounding area. Giving incentives to companies that let offenders work may also beeffective. In order to resolve the high costs, we believe that the costs of prison should be
reduced by community work whenever possible. Although the reward does not help tochange the community’s perception itself, it could enhance the acceptance of offenders.
It is also important to demonstrate the effectiveness of support for offenders to reduce
crimes. It should be noted that most people in a community do not know that excluding
offenders from the community possibly causes reoffending. Therefore, the criminal
justice agencies are obliged to demonstrate that support for offenders will prevent crimes
and contribute to building a safer community. At the same time, how to deliver theinformation to people in the community should be considered. Merely publishing a white
paper or distributing a booklet to related agencies is not the best way to reach to people
who are not interested in rehabilitation of offenders. Finding ways to involve those people
is a key which we identified through discussions.
IV. CONCLUSIONAcceptance of an offender back into society by the public is a topic of global interest.
Most developed countries face several stages of offender stigmatization anddiscrimination which tend to result in reoffending. However, it was agreed that in the past
few years, few interventions have been done in their respective countries towards
eliminating offender stigmatization and discrimination within the community. Effective
measures are needed to overcome these issues. Implementation of the best practices
mentioned in this report would minimize stigmatization of offenders and increase public
acceptance in accordance with integrated approaches of all multi-stakeholder partnerships,
including both public and private partners.

158