REPORTS OF THE COURSEGROUP 1

SPECIFIC MEASURES:DISENGAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS IN PRISONS
Rapporteur: Ms. Folole Lemisio (Samoa)
Co-Rapporteur: Ms. Remona Visser (Namibia)

Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Members

Advisers

Mr. Ahmad Altaharwah
Mr. Nanding Bayle
Mr. Yuta Abe
Mr. Galih Rakasiwi
Ms. Chantima Uiyyasathian
Mr. JongWoong Youn
Mr. Kei Takayama
Mr. Yukio Kono
Prof. Mana Yamamoto
Prof. Fumiko Akashi(Jordan)(Philippines)(Japan)(Indonesia)(Thailand)(Korea)(Japan)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCTION
Group 1 started its discussion on the 4th of September 2017. The group elected by consensus thechairperson, co-chairperson, rapporteur and co-rapporteur. Five topics were decided by the group as themost important to address:
A. How do we manage prison staff and other people who work with organized crime members andviolent extremists?
B. How do we classify, allocate and accommodate violent extremists in prison?
C. How can we assess violent extremistsʼ risk and needs?
D. What are methods and approaches to delivering interventions, especially psychological and cognitive
interventions?
E. How can we involve community and governmental organizations in the process of reintegration ofrehabilitated violent extremist offenders into the community?

II. SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSIONS
Brief summary of the problem (definitions) the group discussed:
1. The logic behind disengagement programmes: Radical Islamism has been an enduring problem formany nations, but it became a prominent international priority only after the 9/11 attacks. Counterterrorism
campaigns in many theatres around the world have produced a mounting number of incarcerated Islamist
extremists. These detainees present a dual problem for the nations holding them. Firstly, most states do notwant to hold the growing numbers of extremists in their prisons indefinitely, and, in many cases, they lack theresources to do so. They have, therefore, searched for a way to rehabilitate these prisoners so that they canbe released without posing a threat to society. Secondly, many states have recognized that prisons are often
incubators of radicalization, and, in an effort to stymie this process, they have sought to tackle radicalizationin their penitentiaries by reforming violent extremist detainees.
2. Radicalization: Most of the definitions currently in circulation describe radicalization as the process (orprocesses) whereby individuals or groups come to approve of and (ultimately) participate in the use ofviolence for political aims. (Ms. Chiara Bologna, UNICRI, Preventing and Countering terrorism and violent
61

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 104

extremism, 167th UNAFEI International Training Course (5 September 2017)
3. Disengagement entails a change in behaviour (i.e., refraining from violence and withdrawing from aradical organization) but not necessarily a change in beliefs. A person could exit a radical organization andrefrain from violence but nevertheless retain a radical worldview. (Dr. Andrea Moser, Correctional Service
Canada Management of Radicalized Offenders and Security Threat Groups in a Correctional Context, 167th
UNAFEI International Training Course (30 August 2017)
A. How Do We Manage Prison Staff and Other People Who Work with Organized Crime Members andViolent Extremists?
Individuals play an integral role in any workforce. Prison systems cannot function well if there are no staff
members to implement its core responsibilities. Hence prison administrations should recognize this anddevote significant time and resources to the recruitment, selection and training of personnel who work inprison. Ensuring that prisons holding violent extremist prisoners have a sufficient number of good quality andwell-trained staff should be a priority for all prison systems.
1. Quality of Prison Staff
Staff working with violent extremist prisoners requires a good combination of personal qualities andtechnical skills, and high standards of personal and professional conduct. They need personal qualities thatenable them to deal with all prisoners, including the difficult, dangerous and manipulative, in an even-handed,
humane and just manner. It should be remembered that people joining the prison administration do so with arange of existing skills, knowledge and abilities.
2. Recruitment and Selection of Staff
Safeguards should be put in place to ensure that staff selected to work with violent extremist prisoners
are not members of violent extremist groups, criminal gangs or associated with organized crime, and are notbeing used to infiltrate the prison.
Every effort should be made to recruit staff from ethnic, religious and racial minorities and indigenous
peoples represented among the violent extremist prisoner population. This will help to ensure a better
understanding among staff about different cultures and establish a nondiscriminatory attitude towards
prisoners from minority groups and indigenous peoples.
Particular attention needs to be paid to the recruitment of specialist staff. These are likely to be
individuals who are already trained in a specific profession. They will include faith leaders, teachers,
instructors and health-care staff. Adequate numbers of specialist staff, such as psychiatrists, psychologists
and social workers, should also be appointed to prisons holding violent extremist prisoners, given therequirement to address the complex needs of this group of prisoners.
3. Training and Development of Staff
Training, which is crucial to any environment, is especially important for people working with violent
extremist prisoners. International standards indicate that prison staff should receive training before
beginning work in prison (pre-service “orientation” training) and throughout their careers in the prison
administration (in-service “refresher” training).
Introductory-level modules such as on “Managing violent extremists in prison” or on “Identifying
radicalization to violence within prison” can be delivered to new staff as part of their primary orientation
training. In addition, it is important to offer courses that educate and sensitize staff to linguistic, cultural andreligious diversity.
More advanced training should be provided for staff working with violent extremist prisoners on a daily
basis and should include topics such as: understanding violent extremism; recognizing signs of radicalization
to violence; assessment of violent extremist prisoners; implementing a positive regime for violent extremist
prisoners; assessment of intelligence and other information about violent extremist prisoners; and anticonditioning and manipulation training. It is particularly important that frontline prison staff understand andare carefully attuned to the disengagement and reintegration process, even if they are not directly
responsible for its delivery. Staff should avoid actions that undermine disengagement and reintegration.
62

167TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE(Handbook on the Management of Violent Extremist Prisoners and the Prevention of Radicalization toViolence in Prisons 2016 )4. Conditions of Service
As the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela
Rules) make clear, prison staff should be given appropriate status, levels of pay and conditions of employment.
The conditions of service for staff working with violent extremist prisoners should reflect the challenges andimportance of their role. The issue of pay requires careful consideration. If staff does not receive salary levels
appropriate to the economic situation in their country, they may be open to corruption of a direct or indirect
nature.
5. Contributions of Specialist Staff and Other People
Faith professionals: Integrating appropriate faith professionals into the disengagement process should beconsidered, as they can play an important role in the process.
6. Psychologists
Psychologists can play a key role in the disengagement process and should be fully integrated into thosedisengagement interventions. They can help identify factors in the social context and psychological make-up
that made the individual vulnerable to violent extremism and the motivational factors that contributed to his
or her decision to engage in violent extremist activity.
B. How Do We Classify, Allocate and Accommodate Violent Extremists in Prison?
Governments everywhere have to ask themselves how violent extremists are different from “ordinary”
prisoners and what this means for how they should be treated in prison.
1. Prison regimes for violent extremists need to be informed by a sophisticated understanding of the
motivations and behaviours of politically motivated offenders, who ‒ unlike “ordinary prisoners” ‒ may
want to mobilize outside support.
2. Radicalize other prisoners, and (in the case of violent extremists) re-create operational command
structures.
3. Most practice a policy of dispersal and (partial) concentration, which distributes violent extremists
among a small number of high security prisons. The overall approach can be characterized as“security first”,
4. In the prison context, most difficulties in dealing with violent extremists are caused precisely by thefact that these offenders do not see themselves as criminals. Rather than quietly serving theirsentences, many regard their time in prison as an opportunity to continue the “struggle”,
5. Challenges in dealing with violent extremist inmates include:
6 Preventing the radicalization of (non-violent-extremist) inmates;
6 Preventing the maintenance and/or re-creation of operational command structures;
6 Preventing the exploitation of the prison environment for the purpose of mobilizing outside
support. In addition, prison regimes for violent extremists should also aspire to:✓ Providing opportunities for deradicalization and disengagement; and✓ Making a positive contribution to reducing terrorism and radicalization on the outside.
6. Concentration, Separation and Isolation
All prison services that deal with violent extremists need to decide how to distribute this prisoner
population around their systems. In most cases, this boils down to three related questions, namely
whether they should all be held in one place (concentration); whether they should they be separated
from the general prison population (separation); and if they should be isolated from each other(isolation). There is no one right answer, and prison administrations will need to determine the best
approach to accommodation, based on specific factors within the country, such as:
6 The size of the violent extremist population
6 The state of the prison infrastructure
63

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 104

6
6

The financial resources available
The cultural, political and social context (Dr. Andrea Moser, Management of radicalized offenders
and security threat groups in a correctional context, 167th UNAFEI International Training
Course, 30 August 2017 )The group explored different accommodation strategies used by countries such as France, Spain,
England/Wales, Morocco, Canada, Algeria and Indonesia. Some Member States adopt a mixed approachbased on the influence of the violent extremist prisoner. For example, violent extremist ideologues andcharismatic leaders are assessed as more likely to radicalize others than those who are criminal opportunists.
Therefore, the ideologues and leaders are separated from the general population, while criminal opportunists
are integrated with the general population. (Rome Memorandum on Good Practices for Rehabilitation andReintegration of Violent Extremist Offenders)
The group agreed:6

To adopt a hybrid strategy that merges the ideas of separation (separate housing units) and isolation(single cells) depending on the level of influence and modus operandi based on assessment, in orderto deny violent extremists the opportunity to influence vulnerable prisoners in the general
population.

6

That those who are successfully rehabilitated can be moved back into the general population.

C. How Can We Assess Violent Extremistsʼ Risk and Needs?
Assessment may be conducted during an offenderʼs stay in prison, and an assessment is also
recommended: (a) at the time of determining the appropriate sanctions or measure or when diversion fromformal criminal proceedings is being considered; (b) at the beginning of a period of supervision; (c) whenever
there are significant changes in the offenderʼs life; (d) when consideration is being given to a change in thenature or the level of supervision; or (e) at the end of the supervision measure.
There are methods and instruments to evaluate the key factors that may have an impact on the likelihoodthat an offender will reoffend. These risk factors are defined as prior factors that increase the probability(risk) of reoffending and the potential danger an offender may thus represent to the victim and thecommunity.
Knowledge about risk factors associated with recidivism can be used to develop profiles of high-risk
offenders (forensic profiles) to help practitioners and decision makers identify candidates for various forms ofintervention. Evidence suggests that an accumulation of risk factors in an individualʼs life is associated with ahigher likelihood of involvement in criminal behaviour.
A lot of work has been done to try to identify an empirical framework capable of supporting decisions
concerning the treatment of offenders and their successful reintegration into the community.
The risk-needs-responsivity (RNR) framework is one of those frameworks, initially based on research toidentify the risk factors associated with recidivism (as outlined in the UNODC Introductory Handbook on theprevention of recidivism and the social reintegration of offenders p 38).
1. Risk
6 What do we know about offender characteristics that are associated with reoffending
6 Risk factors are not necessarily causal factors (behavioural and cognitive markers)
6 Risk factors can be static or dynamic
6 High-risk offenders can be identified
2. Needs
6 Needs that are criminogenic (associated with reoffending)
6 Needs that can be addressed by treatment or other interventions
6 Needs may vary by types of offender (e.g. violent offenders)
6 Needs may vary by age (young offenders)64

167TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE

3. Responsivity
6 General responsivity (emphasis on cognitive social learning interventions within a supportive
structure)
6 Specific responsivity (motivation, special characteristics of offenders, special circumstances, culture)
These risk factors are not necessarily causal, but their identification led to the formulation of the notion of“criminogenic needs” associated with the factors and are therefore related in a more “causal way” toreoffending. These criminogenic needs can be understood as issues that must be addressed by treatment,
including various cognitive-behavioural intervention techniques.
Furthermore, a risk/needs assessment is not complete without a corollary assessment of protective (orresiliency) factors. These are factors that reduce the risks for the onset and repeat offending behaviour
associated with the risk factors.
A number of tools have been developed and validated for different types of offenders in order to proceed
as systematically as possible with the identification of risk factors in individual offenders. However, there arequite few specific tools for violent extremists at the moment, for example, VERA-II (Pressman, D. andFlockton, J. (2014) “Violent extremist risk assessment: issues and applications of the VERA II in a highsecurity setting”, chapter 9 in Silke, A. (ed.) Prisons, Terrorism and Extremist – Critical Issues inManagement, Radicalization and Reform.) and ERG22 (Lloyd, M and Dean, C. (2015) “The Development ofStructured Guidelines for Assessing Risk in Extremist Offenders”, Journal of Threat Assessment andManagement, 2015, Vol.2, No. 1,40-52.)
Summary of scored areas for VERA II
Beliefs and attitudes

Risk Factors (Not changeable)

Need Factor (Changeable)

Victim of personal or group injusticeand grievances

Feelings of hate, frustration, persecution and / or alienation
Dehumanization of identified targets
of injusticeRejection of democratic, pluralistic
society and values
Attachment to ideology justifying
violence
Hostility to national collective identity/identity conflict
Lack of understanding or empathy for
those outside own groupContext and intent

Seeker, consumer, developer of violent
extremist materials

Anger and expressed intent to act
violently

Identification of target (person, place,group) in response to perceived injusticeExpressed desire to die for cause or
martyrdom

Active personal contact with violent
extremists

Expressed intent to plan, prepare
violent action
Susceptible to influence, authority,
indoctrination

History and capability

Early exposure to pro-violence militant ideology
Network of family, friends involved inviolent action
Prior criminal history of violence
Tactical, paramilitary, explosive train65

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 104

ing
Extremist ideological training
Access to funds, resources, organizational skills
Commitment andmotivation

Driven by perceived noble cause/
glorification of violent action/religious
obligation
Driven by opportunism, excitement,
adventure
Driven by comradery, group belonging, status in group, social needs
Driven by moral imperative, moral
superiority, identity
Driven by excitement, adventure

Protective items

Re-interpretation of ideology less rigid, absolute; rejection of violence to obtaingoals, change of vision of enemy; involvement with offence-related programmes; community support for non-violence, family support for non-violence.

D. What Are the Methods and Approaches to Delivering Interventions, Especially Psychological andCognitive Interventions?
Key Components of Successful Disengagement Programmes:
1. To effectively challenge radical Islamism, a programme must employ an interlocutor whom themilitants view as credible. In addition, after the programme has been completed, graduates must be
carefully monitored and offered continued support to reduce the likelihood of recidivism.
2. Disengagement programme is not likely to succeed unless the ties with the organization can be broken
and alternative means to meet the militantʼs psychological and material needs are provided. (RomeMemorandum on Good Practices for Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Violent Extremist Offenders)
3. Many radical organizations not only provide for all their membersʼ basic needs, but they also offer
assistance to their membersʼ families. Thus, disengagement programmes need to help ex-militants andtheir families find alternative sources of income, housing, health care, and education.
4. Disengagement programmes need to continue to monitor and support rehabilitated violent extremists
after they have completed the programme to facilitate their reintegration into mainstream society.
5. It appears that it is important that efforts be made to facilitate the process of disengagement during
the crucial early stages.
6. A government can take actions that make disengagement more attractive and continued extremist
behaviour less appealing by implementing counterterrorism measures that increase the costs ofremaining in an extremist organization while strategically offering incentives that increase thebenefits of exiting.
7. It is important that these programmes continue to assist freed, rehabilitated individuals. In particular,
the programme should assist the ex-militant in finding a job and locating a supportive environment(Ms. Chiara Bologna UNICRI, Prison-based rehabilitation and reintegration approaches andcommunity-led initiatives, 167th UNAFEI International Training Course (7 Sepember 2017)
8. Rehabilitated violent extremists engage extremists in discussions of Islamic theology in an effort toconvince the militants that their interpretation of Islam is wrong.
9. Prison Imams:
66

167TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE

Little attention had been paid to the provision of religious services for this segment of the prison
population. Only recently have prison services begun to embrace the institution of the prison imam asa counter-radicalization tool.
E. How Can We Involve Community and Governmental Organizations in the Process of Reintegrationof Rehabilitated Violent Extremists into the Community?
In order to ensure public reassurance and understanding, regular work with the media (newspapers,
television) should take place to explain the positive disengagement activity taking place in prison, The
growing popularity of social media offers many opportunities for publicizing disengagement activity andsuccess stories to the members of the community, including celebrities and other influential personalities, canalso help inspire change among violent extremist prisoners, and could be included in disengagement
interventions. The motivational themes and public service messages they deliver can be quite captivatingand effective. Enhancing relationships with the private sector to support the released extremist with
employment opportunities or financial support after release is also important. (Dr. Rohan Gunaratna, Global
Terrorist rehabilitation and community engagement programs: The state-of-the-Art, 167th UNAFEIInternational Training Course (8 September 2017).
Good governance can deter the involvement of people from terrorist activities, and consideration should
also be given to involving non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community-sector organizations and theprivate sector. These bodies are often not seen as being part of the system or State and, therefore, may find it
easier to establish relationships with violent extremist prisoners. Engaging these groups brings the added
benefit of continuity of care for the reintegration of violent extremist prisoners upon release. The prison
authorities should carefully assess external bodies before they are permitted to engage with violent
extremist prisoners.

III. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Recommendations
At the end of the discussion, the Group reached a consensus on the following recommendations:
1. Prison staff working on this challenging category of prisoners should be carefully selected for theirintegrity, humanity, professional capacity, personal suitability and ability.
2. Prison administrators should implement measures to prevent prisons from becoming locations inwhich violent extremism can thrive and where prisoners can be radicalized to violence. All violent
extremist prisoners should be (a) separated according to gender, legal status, and age; (b) classified
according to the information gained through the risk and needs assessment; and (c) categorizedaccording to the appropriate level of security they will need to be held in.
3. Upon admission of a violent extremist prisoner, a thorough, evidence-based risk and needs assessment
should be undertaken by specialized trained staff and based on structured professional judgement.
4. Disengagement interventions may consist of a variety of activities including:
Psychological counselling and support; cognitive-behavioural programmes; social work interventions;faith-based debate and dialogue;
5. In order to ensure public reassurance and understanding, regular work with the media should takeplace to explain the positive disengagement activity taking place in prison. Consideration should also
be given to involving non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community sector organizations and theprivate sector.
B. Conclusion
1. The first and most crucial recommendation is to enhance security, staff training, and evidence-based
assessment that contributes to classification and allocation. Furthermore, it is necessary to provide
meaningful programmes and work collaboratively with the wider community, allowing violent
extremists to develop stable inmate identities.

67

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 104

2. The good practices outlined in this document are intended to inform and guide countries as they
develop programmes designed to rehabilitate and disengage incarcerated violent extremists or toaddress more general issues relating to prison radicalization.
3. The document also can be used to shape any bilateral or multilateral technical or other capacitybuilding assistance that is provided in this area.

68