GROUP 2
EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO IMPROVE THE TREATMENT OF OFFENDERSTHROUGH THE ENHANCEMENT OF COMMUNITY-BASED ALTERNATIVESTO INCARCERATION AT THE POST SENTENCING STAGE
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members

Advisers

Ms. Boitumelo Makunga
Mr. Akihiro Nosaka
Ms. Janet Davey
Mr. Yasuhiro Date
Mr. Antonio Carlos Welter
Mr. Sutrisno
Mr. Jihad H. Majali
Mr. Victor Manuel Esteche Mendez
Mr. Carlos Vargas Merida
Mr. Leo Sarte Carrillo
Mr. Jose Enrique Colman
Mr. Manabu Nakajima
Mr. Shigeru Takenaka
Prof. Naoyuki HaradaProf. Jun Oshino
Prof. Tetsuya SuganoProf. Koji Yamada(Botswana)(Japan)(Jamaica)(Japan)(Brazil)(Indonesia)(Jordan)(Paraguay)(Peru)(Philippines)(Uruguay)(Japan)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCTION
The group convened on 26 January 2009 and concluded discussions on 3 February 2009. The group
was chaired by Ms. Makunga, with Mr. Nosaka as the co-chairperson, Ms. Davey as the rapporteur andMr. Date as the co-rapporteur. The group consisted of 13 participants from ten countries; who had diverse
professional experience ranging from legal expertise to policing as well as probation work to working withconvicted inmates. The group was assisted by four UNAFEI professors.
The members of Group 2 were required to examine: “Effective measures to improve the treatment ofoffenders through the enhancement of community-based alternatives to incarceration at the post sentence stage.”Sub- topics included:a)

The mechanism of community-based alternative measures to incarceration undertaken by each country;b)Current situations and problems facing existing legal systems and/or practice of the above
mentioned mechanisms;c)Countermeasures under current legal systems and/or practice of the above mentioned mechanisms;d)

Identification of other effective intervention models;e)

Measures to monitor and evaluate all mechanisms discussed.

II. SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSIONS
A. Mechanism of Community-Based Alternatives to Incarceration in Each Country
The group first reviewed the current systems of community-based alternatives to incarceration
employed in each participant’s country. These are listed in Table 1 below. There were slight variations inthe administration of some of the alternatives, the general agreement was: even if the term is the same;
there is a difference in the use for each country. With this in mind there were differences in some of the noncustodial options - included in the differences were: parole, probation and suspension of execution.

312Corporal
Punishment

Presidential
PardonCombination
OrdersAdmonished andDischarged

Electronicmonitoring(currently piloting)Redemption/(for person who
study or work inprison)

Reprieve

Bound over tokeep the peace

Amnesty
Pardon

Domiciliary
ArrestRightsRestricted

Halfway house

Domiciliary
ArrestRemissionDismissal
with warning

Conditional release

Suspended
Sentences

Suspensionof Execution

Suspended
Sentence

Fines
Community
Services Order

Fines

Suspended
Sentence
Supervision Order

Probation

ParoleJamaica

Extramurallabour

Fines

Fines

Probation

ParoleParoleProbation

Indonesia

BrazilProbation

Botswana

Amnesty
PardonHalfway
house

Suspensionof Execution

Fines

Probation

ParoleJapan

Amnesty
PardonSuspended
SentencesFines

JordanPardonHouse
Sentences for people overseventy andpregnant womenCommunity
work

Charity HelpParoleParaguay

Amnesty
Pardon

Domiciliary
ArrestRemissionCommunity
LabourProbation

ParolePeruGood
conduct timeallowance

Amnesty
PardonHalfwayhouse

Commutationof SentenceCommunity
ServiceFines

Probation

ParolePhilippines

Redemption for
prisoners whowork or study inor out of prison.

Family leave

Extra wall leave

Patronage

Indictment
without prison

Amnesty

Halfway house

Domiciliary
ArrestReducedSentences

Community
LabourFines

ParoleUruguay

TABLE 1: A SUMMARY OF NON-CUSTODIAL ALTERNATIVE MEASURES TO INCARCERATION UNDERTAKEN BY EACH COUNTRY

THE 141ST INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

These variations are outlined below.

313

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.79

B. Current Situations and Problems
Participants deliberated on the major problems impacting on the administration of the various alternatives
to incarceration processes. The main problems were lack of financial resources to maintain community-based
programmes as well as lack of adequate human resources to monitor and guide offenders. Also stated werenumerous problems which were unique to each system in each country. These were itemized as follows:1.

Lack of community understanding and societal support: communities deem offenders to be
dangerous and do not appreciate them being released into their environment; believing that this typeof practice can endanger the populace as a whole;2.

Lack of collaboration between agencies: results in the fragmentation or duplication of services byagencies that work with offenders in the community; causing the agencies services to be overstretched. Furthermore, this in turn could result in lack of support systems for some candidates;

3.

Slow legal procedures: this was believed to be related to the lack of adequate risk assessment
procedures. For example, what criterion was to be used to select offenders suitable for parole?

4.

A highly centralized processing system: the end result of a centralized system is a backlog of cases
resulting in the impediment of carrying out the prescribed sentence;5.

Too many high-risk offenders: making the option of community-based alternatives to incarceration
risky for the community;

6.

Inadequate monitoring due to lack of human resources.

The problems outlined by participants from countries using parole as an alternative to incarceration
are as stated above. However, some of the participants listed a short parole period (resulting in a highrecidivism rates) and a highly centralized processing system (resulting in a backlog of cases and the ensuing
impediment of carrying out the prescribed sentence) as major problems.
Of the ten legal systems, six had probation as an alternative to incarceration. In the case of Jamaica this isa separate order and not pinned to any other order as is evident in the systems that have it pinned to paroleor suspension of execution. The major problems affecting probation are similar to the ones stated above.
Regarding the alternative of monetary penalties/economic sanctions, most of the participants stated that
there are no major problems with this option; however, the participant from Botswana stated that offenders
may have a tendency to believe they can buy the criminal justice system because they have the means to do
so. Another participant indicated by that the major problem with the administration of this option was the nonpayment of fines. The participant from Indonesia pointed out that fines are only granted for special cases i.e.
traffic accident offences and limited corruption cases.
Most of the participating countries utilized some form of suspended sentence. Concerning the option ofsuspended sentence without supervision, participants indicated that the major problems encountered with theadministration of this alternative are a high recidivism rate and lack of recognizance on the part of the offender.
On the subject of a suspended sentence with supervision order, most participants indicated that the majorproblems encountered in the administration of this alternative are similar to the former. In addition, theparticipant from Jamaica pointed out that lack of human and financial resources hampered the implementationof programmes and projects for offenders who are subjects of this option.
Participants from Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Uruguay, Peru, and the Philippines stated that amnesty wasused in their countries as an alternative to incarceration. However, they pointed out that the problems withthis option include increased recidivism rates due to poor evaluation of recipients, limited use of the option
by the judiciary and the lack of clear procedures in some jurisdictions.
One legal system is piloting electronic monitoring and this will be used as a measure to enhance otheroptions. Problems include a high cost, a lack of clear legislation and lack public sensitization.

314

THE 141ST INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

Community Service Orders, Combination Orders, Charity, and Extramural Labour all punish offenders inthe community. These forms of alternatives to incarceration were defined in a similar manner - unpaid public
work or service conducted outside the prison. However, participants agreed that the major problem with thisoption is a high risk factor for penal institutions, where offenders could/would bring in contraband into theprison, as well as a high recidivism rate.
Brazil was the only country which has Rights Restricted as an alternative to incarceration and theproblems encountered in relation to that option are similar to the problems mentioned in the introduction ofthis section above.
Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay are the only represented countries which have house sentence/domiciliaryarrest as an alternative to incarceration. This option requires an offender to remain in his/her own abodewith certain restrictions. The problem encountered in relation to this option is a lack of human resources.
Similarly Uruguay’s patronage for released people and extra-mural leave had problems with lack of financial
resources and carried a risk factor of the importation of contraband for penal institutions. Extra-mural leavealso encountered the same problems in Brazil. Family visits existed as an alternative in some countries andthe problems cited were similar in nature to those encountered in the use of patronage for released peopleand extra-mural leave as alternatives to incarceration.
Reduced Sentences/remission were outlined as alternatives to incarceration in some countries andthe major problems with were cited as a lack of comprehensible legislation: inadequacies in the selection
process of suitable offenders, a lack of adequate human resource and slow legal processes.
Corporal punishment was used as an alternative in one jurisdiction. One of the participants stated that it
was an inhumane and degrading punishment; another stated that it was a violation of human rights; however,corporal punishment should be viewed in its cultural context.
Verbal sanctions i.e. admonition and discharge or dismissal with warning are used in Jamaica andBotswana respectively. The main disadvantage of these options were identified as a lack of human resources.
Redemption is used in Brazil and Uruguay as an alternative to incarceration and as a measure ofrehabilitation and social reintegration. However the major problem is inadequate support services i.e. lack ofemployment opportunities and educational facilities.

315

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.79

C. Countermeasures and/or Practice of the Above Mentioned Mechanisms
The participants went on to deliberate upon the problems that were encountered by, and possible
solutions for, the relevant agencies responsible for offenders.
Table 2-A. Collaboration among related agencies- e.g. Parole, Probation, Suspension of Execution

PROBLEMSSOLUTIONS• Lack of financial resources• Inadequacies regarding information sharing• Lack of capacity building• Lack of human resources• Lack of support systems for victims of crime• Fragmentation of the availability of services;e.g. health services for drug users andoffenders with mental illness• Limited employment opportunities• Police confidentiality of criminal records
tends to be lax• Enhancement of NGOs & CBOs by:- Information Sharing- Capacity Building- Sensitization• Secondment of officers to other related agencies• Sensitization and regular consultation meetings among
related agencies• Creation of a multi-sectoral board to assist in the searchfor solutions• Victim compensation and assistance programmes• Offender education regarding recognizance and restitution• Skills-development for parolees and probationers• Keep criminal records valid for a set period of time
• Enhancement of the PPP (Public-Private Partnerships)• Tax incentives for companies/agencies that employ
ex-offenders• Change of legislation to prevent access of passed criminalrecords that will disadvantage the parolee or probationers
regarding their reintegration into society• Developing a policy of anonymity for certain categoriesof parolees and probationers; i.e. keeping their IDs
anonymous in order to enable them to reintegrate into
society with minimal stigma and discrimination, but thisshould not be afforded to sex offenders and those whohave committed violent crimes

Table 2-B. Improvement of Staff Skills

PROBLEMSSOLUTIONS• Lack of capacity building• Lack of financial resources• Lack of screening of potential personnel• Poor motivation and incentive work packages• Closed/guarded incarceration systems• L ack of periodic evaluation of prisonpersonnel• Lack of specialized training• Holistic training done by qualified persons and experts• Work in collaboration with skilled professionals fromother sectors in order to gain much needed knowledge
and skills• Regular refresher courses especially for senior personnel
in order to keep them informed of current trends• Work–study programmes to further staff development• Development of efficient VPO systems• Encouraging school-leavers and university graduates
to take up employment in the sectors that work withoffenders• Develop in-country/national networks whose sole focus
would be developing community-based alternatives toincarceration• Develop biannual international collaboration forums.
• Develop skills banks nationally and internationally toexchange best practices• Develop efficient selection procedures for personnel• Develop attractive career development processes

316THE 141ST INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

Table 2-C. Improvement of Treatment Programmes offered while the Offender serves his/her Sentence(in an institution and/or the community, etc.)

PROBLEMSSOLUTIONS• Problems with prison officer/offender ratio• Lack of financial resources• Lack of Capacity Building• Lack of human resources to monitor andassist offenders• Lack of support systems; i.e. drug rehab;sex offender rehab and health care for theoffenders• L ack of facilities; i.e. with regard toemployment and education opportunities forthe offenders• “Proper” sentencing of offenders e.g. somedrug traffickers are given probation which is
not practical• HIV/AIDS and related problems as a criticalhealth problem• Lack of sustainability of VPO programme• Lack of committed staff• Poor training of prison officers• Increased aged & disabled prison populations• Provision of funding for prison systems and prison
programmes• Capacity building of prison personnel• Robust community programme to help communities
understand community-based alternatives toincarceration• Post-release control of offenders• Improve infrastructure to afford employment andeducation opportunities for offenders• Availability of for mal educational facilities andvocational training opportunities within prisons thatafford inmates qualifications to use in the community• Have newly qualified professionals in psychology,sociology, criminology, medicine etc offer a year’s service
on completion of programme (mandatory national service)• Decentralization of mental healthcare for those in needof relevant care
• Affordable; accessible healthcare for offenders• Collaboration with health sector and drug rehab sector
to conduct drug-testing• Intensive HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment
programmes; including TB treatment in order toprevent or reduce the possibility MDR TB or XDR TB• Sex offender-treatment that is evidence-based• Small group therapeutic communities where offenders
support each other: this is cost effective• Therapeutic community modality with a restorative
justice as a conceptual framework and utilization ofvolunteers as a strategy• Creation of field training labs to enhance recruitment ofVPOs• NGOs train offenders in various skills• Supervision and support of NGOs that work withoffenders• NGOs that assist offenders families until children are 18• Collaboration with private sector; including private
sector administration of prisons• Collaboration of universities’ health faculties (or relevantinstitutions) with agencies that assist offenders• Review of treatment programmes in order to makethem all evidence-based• Employment of professional experts from outside theoffender rehabilitation sector• Establishment of national prison hospitals to care forinmates with health problems• Provide psychological treatment for all inmates/offenders

317

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.79

D. Identification of Other Effective Intervention Models
The group participants went on to identify a number of practical intervention models, as follows:•The relevant ministries should work in collaboration to provide additional community support
services and halfway houses that meet the needs of aged and disabled offenders;•Domiciliary (house) arrest should only be considered for aged, chronically ill and disabled people;•

Establishment of a workable probation officer/offender ratio;•Establishment of an effective risk assessment system to determine suitable candidates for housearrest and other community-based alternatives to incarceration;•Electronic monitoring;•

Identify and adopt specific and effective drug treatment programmes for offenders with drug abuseproblems; e.g. the Therapeutic Community Model;•

Establishment of comprehensive community crime prevention forums.

E. Measures to Monitor and Evaluate all Mechanisms Discussed
The importance of monitoring and evaluation were considered; and critical areas were highlighted asfollows:•

Monitor recidivism rates in order to evaluate the success of the prescribed programmes;•

Monitor effectiveness of treatment models used to rehabilitate offenders;•Employ qualified staff to monitor effectively;•

Establish an effective offender management system;•Develop short-term and long-term monitoring systems;•Monitor the mortality and morbidity of offenders to evaluate the level of healthcare provided for them;•

Establish a national crime statistics register that includes community crime statistics;•

Conduct a cost/benefit analysis of treatment programmes;•Develop risk assessment tools to assist with analyses;•Involve offenders in the choice of alternative sentencing;•

Establish neighbourhood commissions/committees that can help with the monitoring of offenders;•Establish effective VPO systems;•

Conduct public surveys to establish public opinion of alternative sentencing methods and involve thepublic in the planning of releasing offenders into their respective communities;•Establish international networks that focus on monitoring and evaluation of alternatives to incarceration.

III. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
Using incarceration as the only method of punishment will only lead to high recidivism rates, andfurthermore it will be a violation of human rights. Although we need to reduce the number of inmates in ourprisons, the most important of our goals should be the rehabilitation of inmates. Therefore, to be effective

318

THE 141ST INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE SEMINAR

and to improve the treatment of offenders, the alternatives to incarceration that we propose should:
1.
2.
3.

reduce stigmatization;
promote the social reintegration of offenders;prevent recidivism.

In order to succeed in this objective we believe that by matching the right offenders with the rightsentencing options and ensuring that community-based programmes are adequately resourced andadministered with integrity, community-based alternatives to incarceration can become a reality for
productive and prosperous societies that aspire to reduced rates of crime.
The following are the recommendations proposed by the group members:
1.

Non-custodial options be considered as effective rehabilitation strategy;

2.

Sentencing officers who utilize alternative sentencing options should be cognizant of the humanrights of offenders;3.

Recidivism rates be continuously monitored;

4.

Risk assessments be used as an efficient supervision/monitoring system for community-based noncustodial options;5.

Inmates be evaluated during incarceration and as follow-up post release;

6.

Effective measures for evaluation of social measures be established;

7.

Effective public education programmes be implemented in order to sensitize and inform the public
about community-based alternatives to incarceration;

8.

Human and financial resources be increased to enhance the administration of community-basedalternatives to incarceration;

9.

Continuous research in these areas through public education forums, conferences, seminars andnetworking, at national, regional and international levels.

Finally, as societies we must understand that inmates are human beings who belong to our respective
societies and communities. We have discussed many community-based alternatives to incarceration and wehave arrived at the conclusion that the only way to reinstate offenders into society and into communities isby developing rehabilitation programmes in order to avoid recidivism - especially in this era where violenceis emerging due to deterioration in moral values, the current economic recession, influence on culturalvalues and other related factors.

GLOSSARY
**
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

AIDS –Acquired Immuno-deficiency Syndrome
CBO – Community Based Organizations
HIV – Human Immune Virus
M & E – Monitoring and Evaluation
MDR – TB - Multi-drug resistant tuberculosis
NGO – Non-governmental Organization
TB – Tuberculosis
VPO – Volunteer Probation Officers
XDR – TB – Extreme multi-drug resistant tuberculosis

319