REPORTS
OF THECOURSERESOURCE MATERIALSERIES
No. 56
GROUP 3
THE PARTICIPATION OF THE PUBLIC AND VICTIMS FOR
MORE EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATION IN THE TREATMENTOF OFFENDERS
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members

Advisers

Mr. John Isaac Odongo
Mr. Takehiko Mukaigawa
Ms. Pornpit Norapoompipat
Ms. Chikako Nakajima
Mr. Mansa Ram
Mr. Tai Kin Han
Ms. Noriko Komori
Mr. Mattew Peter Himsa
Mr. Young-Hoon Ha
Professor Akihiro Nosaka
Professor Hiroshi Tutomi
Professor Shinya Watanabe

I. INTRODUCTION
We know that the effective treatment ofoffenders cannot be achieved through theefforts of governmental agencies alone, we
require public participation and cooperation in order to effectively rehabilitate
offenders and re-integrate them into
society. At the same time, the treatment
of offenders can be enhanced by theparticipation of victims, so that it cansatisfy the needs of victims as well as thoseof offenders.
This group was assigned the topic:“participation of the public and victims formore effective administration in thetreatment of offenders.” Since there are
two forms of offenders’ treatment i.e,
institutional treatment and communitybased treatment, this topic was divided into
three issues:(1) Participation of the public ininstitutional treatment:(a) prison labor(b) rehabilitation programs

300(Kenya)(Japan)(Thailand)(Japan)(Fiji)(Hong Kong)(Japan)(Papua New Guinea)(Republic of Korea)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(2) Participation of the public incommunity-based treatment(3) Involvement of victims in thetreatment system of offenders
II. PARTICIPATION OF THE
PUBLIC IN THE INSTITUTIONAL
TREATMENT OF OFFENDERS
A. Prison Labor
It is noted that many countries havebeen facing the problem of overcrowding
and the supply of inadequate amounts ofprison labor for prisoners. Consequently,
it is often seen that many prisoners do
nothing in prison, which brings undesirable
results in the administration of thetreatment of prisoners. The main point
which we have discussed is how prison
labor can be stabilized and promoted bymeans of public participation.
1. Actual Situation
Some countries have been successful inincreasing public participation in runningprison industries, as a form of thestabilization of idle prison labor. In doing

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
so, it is believed that public participationin running prison industries, insideprisons, can contribute to a decrease in therecidivism rates of both adults andjuveniles delinquents.
It is very interesting to take particularnote of how religious organizations play animportant part in the stabilization of prison
labor in some countries like Fiji, Hong
Kong, India, Kenya, Malaysia, Pakistan,
Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, theRepublic of Korea and Thailand. Anotherinteresting situation, which will soon comeinto reality, is the establishment ofprivately managed prisons in both
Malaysia and Korea in the near future.
Hereunder, we will observe the actual
situation of public participation in prison
labor in Japan, Korea and Thailand.
Making an effort is essential to preparing
satisfing prison labor, to make prisoners
constructive human beings.
In Japan, a style of public participationin prison labor is the CAPIC (Correctional
Association Prison Industry Cooperation).
As a result of the stringent fiscal situationof the State, the raw materials budget forthe operation of prison work was forced tobe substantially curtailed. Consequently,
the Corrections Bureau of the Ministry ofJustice adopted the “third sector system’’as a countermeasure. Specifically, thePrison Industry Cooperation Division,
which provides raw materials for prison
work and markets for these products, wasset up within the Japanese Correctional
Association (JCA) in 1983, with the State
providing subsidies for five years. Since
the discontinuance of the subsidies, it isself-funding and manages its own accounts.
In Korea, the State Use Law for Products
by Prison Industry was enacted in 1962.
Under the Law, industrial plants have been
established at correctional institutions

across the country, with the participationof private contractors. Industrial work
consists of 27 different kinds of work, suchas carpentry and printing. An average of
21,600 prisoners are working at thesefactories per day.
In Thailand, the Department ofCorrections has promoted offender ’streatment through mass media byencouraging the private sector to set up
workshops in prison. Now, most prisonsin Thailand have made contracts withprivate contractors for producing goods orusing prison labor.
2. Obstacles
The following points are recognized asproblems in public participation in thestabilization of prison labor, and these are;(a) L a c k o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a n d
appropriate information getting
across to the general public orbusiness sector, to help or assist
prison administrators in the
rehabilitation process by way ofsetting up small-scale industries
within prisons to stabilize prison
labor.
(b) Security risk is a contributing factor
as prison administrators cannot
guarantee the safety of the public in
the prison. Lack of tight security
allows easy access for prisoners to
attack or take civilian participants as
hostages, or to escape from prison.
(c)I n a d e q u a t e l a n d o r s p a c e f o r
expansion of the prison impedes
businesses who are interested insetting up small-scale industries inprison.
(d) Quality of productions cannot becompetitive in open markets on the
grounds that goods and items
produced in prisons are considered to
be of poor quality and of no open301

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
market value, as compared to thesame kinds of products produced bywell recognised manufacturing
companies.
(e) Difficulty in securing qualified andwell-trained prisoners constantly
exists, because offenders may bereleased: early; on their normal due
date of release after serving out theirfull imprisonment term; released onamnesty; extra-mural release or onparole.
(f) Lack of official certificates for
attainment of certain levels of work
skills, issued by authorized labor
institutes, to help discharged
offenders in securing employment
with private business firms/
institutions after their release.
(g) No legal provisions in place for theuse of prison labor or liberalizationof the market in a number ofcountries. Therefore, it is difficult for
those countries with no legal basis toimprove their prison labor
engagement by the public.
3. Countermeasures
The following points are thought to be
the countermeasures for the obstacles topublic participation in the stabilization ofprison labor:(a) Strengthen the activities of public
relations through media and public
seminars on the various activities
undertaken inside the prison, so thatthey (the public) can meaningfully
contribute, in whatever possible form,
to the stabilization of prison labor.
(b) Improve security capability or
measures in prison in order toaccommodate and protect the wellbeing of public participants working
inside the prison and its
surroundings.
(c) Establish intensive and functional
workshop units (put together) in302

prison by making use of limited landas much as possible, to accommodate
more public participation in prisons
for the stabilization of prison labor.
(d) Upgrade the quality productivity ofprison products through more
modernized instruments, with thehelp of private sectors.
(e) Te a c h p r i s o n e r s , a f f i r m a t i v e
guidance, or instruction for work
skills (with the help of the private
sector), and utilize the evaluations ofa classification system more
effectively.
(f) Skills gained through prison labor
should be geared towards the issuingof trade test certificates.
(g) Active movement for appropriate
legislation by appealing to thenecessity of public participation inprison labor.
B. Rehabilitation Program
The main point of our discussion is how
rehabilitation can be more fruitful andeffective by means of public participation.
Rehabilitation programs should be treatedas the most important factor because they
are regarded as one of the most effective
programs for offenders.
1. Actual Situation
The search for effective measures for the
rehabilitation of prisoners has led thecriminal justice system to look beyond thewalls of the prisons for programs in thecommunity that effectively complement therehabilitative efforts in prisons. It is notedthat prison authorities run rehabilitation
programs in two ways, either by the prison
management themselves or withassistance (by introducing public
participation in helping with theimplementation of programs conducive tothe suitability of a particular prison
environment). Some countries havedeveloped many effective rehabilitation
programs throughout their correctional

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
history, and are trying to develop more
effective rehabilitation programs
nowadays.
(a) Vocational Training
Vocational training programs areorganized so as to serve a constructive
purpose in the treatment of offenders. The
objective is not only to provide offenders
with vocational knowledge, but also tostrengthen their individual will to workand learn new skills. On the other hand,
vocational training can be seen as part ofprison work. Nevertheless, these should
be more skill orientated in the sense thattraining helps very much in enhancing thecomplement of prison and public joint
venture projects situated in prisons.
In Hong Kong, the public participates bysupplying the prison with raw materials
and vocational training examination
documents for the offenders to makefinished products, and to sit for vocational
training examinations endorsed andcertified by the Vocational Training Council
for Offenders, respectively.
In Japan, many vocational training
programs are conducted with theparticipation of the public who havequalifications in teaching those programs.
In Kenya, qualified skilled personnel fromthe public participate actively with theoffenders in finishing products.
In the Philippines, the Correctional
Bureau, in cooperation with nongovernment organizations, has intensified
the conduct of livelihood training programsfor offenders through the effective agroindustrial livestock productivity program.
The continuous conduct of religious
activities, recreational programs, as wellas educational (both formal and nonformal), and training programs are given
by concerned non-governmentalorganizations.

In Korea, since 1969, public vocational
training centers have been establishedwith authorization from the Ministry ofLabor Affairs throughout the 30
correctional institutions amongst thenation. At each training center, six month
to two year training courses are provided
for 54 different types of jobs, such asarchitecture, mechanics, electrical fields,
etc. For the training, many volunteers
teach their skills to prisoners with theassistance of professional vocational
training teachers. Some religious members
or rehabilitation members financially
support the expenses needed for vocational
training. Amongst the trainees, those whohave exceptional skills are selected toparticipate in national and local skills
contests, with other students or civil
participants. If they win prizes from thecontest, occupational guidance is provided
by the prison or public, and they are given
priority for such privileges as release onparole.
In Thailand, the public supply raw
materials, together with training
equipment, for offender rehabilitation
programs. Qualified skilled personnel arealso sent into the prison to assist in
finishing production of the goods/items
supplied to the prison.
(b) Educational Training
In countries like Hong Kong, Japan andthe Republic of Korea, services receive goodfinancial support from their respective
governments, as seen in the form ofgovernment-funded basic education/
literacy, English and mathematics
programs. As far as higher education isconcerned, a large number of theparticipating countries facilitate
correspondence courses for offenders, withthe assistance of the public. In most cases,
the government meets the cost for longterm sentenced offenders who undertakesuch correspondence courses. Likewise, in

303

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
some cases, public assistance also comesfrom NGOs and church organizations.
(c) Life Guidance
Volunteer visitors, psychologists, andrespectable religious instructors
participate in life guidance programs toprovide counseling, role playing andspiritual guidance to offenders. In this way,
offenders will know that they are not left
alone in prisons without public care.
Offenders are human beings and therefore
they are to be cared for and treatedhumanely as another fellow human being.
(d) Work Release
In order to facilitate offenders’ smooth
re-integration into society upon discharge,
many countries adopt work releaseprograms with public participation,
especially with the help of the private
sector, by employing offenders at theirworkplace outside of the prison.
Work release programs contribute to the
reduction of institutional operation costs,
or allows assistance for victims, when someamount of offenders wage is paid for prison
food or bed expenses, or remitted to a victim
or his/her family.
In Japan, offenders are selected to go on
work release programs in factories
producing building materials and shipbuilding. The offenders commute to theirwork place either by foot or institutionaltransportation, with supervision provided
by prison officers. In fact, work release
offenders are selected under strict
conditions, and work is accorded only tooffenders having six months of an
imprisonment term left to serve.
In Korea, the work release program has
been in force since 1984. Under thisprogram, selected model prisoners
commute to their workplace in thecommunity’s (private industry) and receive

304

a salary according to their work. In
February 1992, the number of prisoners
participating in work release programs was
400 offenders, and this number has
gradually increased, so nowadays thenumber of prisoners participating in work
release programs are 1064, from 25 prisonsin 54 private industries.
In Sri Lanka, according to theadministrative regulation concerned, thework release program is defined as “ascheme under which selected offenders areallowed to get themselves employed in the
open community, unescorted during day,and return to prison for the night”. The
work release program may be applied tothose offenders who have successfullycompleted part of their prison term (twoyears or more) and who have a remainderof two years or less imprisonment. Amongthese offenders, some are selected for the
program when resources for
implementation are available. This
program was inaugurated in May 1974.
Under this program, offenders for whomsuitable employment can be found in thecommunity are sent to work, either from aprison or from a work release center, where
they return in the evening. Therefore they
are technically still a custody. The
prisoners receive normal wages, which they
can send to their families or which they cancollect on their discharge. In the process,the offender gets accustomed to conditions
and regulations prevailing in theworkplace. Prison welfare officers
occasionally visit the workplace to meet
employers and to monitor the progress ofinmates. Offenders who perform poorly canbe withdrawn from the program. Workrelease is applied to about one hundred
offenders each year.
2. Obstacles
The following points are regarded as
obstacles:

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE(a) Negative public perception ofparticipating in rehabilitation
programs. The public want theoffender to do hard labor for thepunishment of the crime committed,
rather than be assisted by way ofeducation and vocational training
programs given by both the prison
and the public.
(b) Shortage of specialists or qualified
staff suitable for implementing therequired rehabilitation programs run
in prisons.
(c) Shortage of effective or practical
vocational training programs such asdata processing, motor mechanics,
welding, electrical work, boiler
making and tailoring.
(d) Security risks in prison whereby
there is less manpower to carry out
the supervisory role of offenders
undergoing rehabilitation programs.
(e) Protection of privacy of offenders.
Offenders privacy needs be protected
at all times whenever public
participants are participating inside
the prison.
(f) Less employment opportunities inwork release programs. When an exoffender approaches businesses
seeking employment, he/she is outrightly rejected from employment due
to their criminal background.
(g) R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i n j u r i e s t oprisoners in work release programs
makes employers hesitate to accept
offenders. When an offender sustains
any serious or minor injuries while
undertaking a work release program,
there is still difficulty in solving who
is supposed to meet the medical
expenses or workers compensation
for the offender.
3. Countermeasures
Based on examining the actual situationand problems, the following
countermeasures are recommended:(a) Strengthen the activities of public
relations through print and electronic
media, and public seminars
educating the public on theimportance of their role inparticipating and involving
themselves in rehabilitation
programs.
(b) Encourage the participation ofexperts from private fields, such as
institutes or universities, to make useof retired staff or reformed exoffenders who have become good
citizens of society. This kind of effort
can make rehabilitation programs
more fruitful.
(c) Introduce more modernized andpractical vocational training
programs which meet the needs ofsociety, with the assistance of public
participation.
(d) Improve security capability or
measures in prison by improving thecurrent prison manpower strength, inorder to encourage the public that
their security is guaranteed if andwhen assisting the offenders inrehabilitation programs.
(e) Set up effective regulation for privacy
protection, describing that violators
leaking privacy information to the
public shall be disqualified and given
sanctions.
(f) Find and encourage cooperative
employers in cooperation with job
placement offices, where government
needs to take the initiative in making
an effort to give private contractors
benefits such as reducing corporate
or income tax.
(g) Give cooperative employers theopportunity to make use of the
medical insurance system applied tothe case of injury in order to reduce
their responsibility.

305

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
III. PARTICIPATION OF THE
PUBLIC IN COMMUNITY-BASEDTREATMENTThe main task of the group was toexhaustively explore how participation of
the public in the community-based
treatment of offenders could be enhanced
to achieve good results. In this regard, thegroup was to evaluate the performance ofexisting, conventional community-based
methods of treatment of offenders like
probation, parole, halfway houses,
probation hostels, community work
programs, mediation and fines, and also togive an insight into other community-based
treatment programs which may be used as
supplementary methods of the restorative
justice system. The group also looked into
the obstacles affecting these methods andthe countermeasures which may be used
to secure more public participation in thecommunity-based treatment of offenders.
In so doing, we opened the discussion by
expressing the importance of participationof the public in the community-based
treatment of offenders as a crime
prevention method. The forms of public
participation may vary from country tocountry, depending on the diverse sociocultural and economic practices inherent
in specific countries. Some countries may
have less crime, while others have a greaternumber and more serious crime. However
since the commission of crime is as dynamic
as technology, the growth of urbanization,
moral decadence, and economic difficulties
take centre stage. Even countries who are
currently enjoying a situation of public
safety might find themselves entangled in
an environment where they have to grapple
with complicated crimes.
We further said that in approaching the
subject of participation of the public in thecommunity-based treatment of offenders,
we need to focus our attention on non-306

custodial measures. The advantage of noncustodial measures are many and varied,
as they range from benefits to the offenders
in particular, and to government and thecommunity in general. The following wereconsidered as some of the most important
benefits derived from non-custodial
measures in the treatment of offenders.
A. Advantages
1. The liberty of the individual is
maximized to prevent the possible
violation of human rights.
2. It is less disruptive on family life. The
offender is still allowed to continue
contributing towards his/her family
in particular, and society in general,
by working instead of being confinedin prison.
3. The rehabilitation of the offender isenhanced by continuing normal
community life.
4. The criminogenic effects of custodial
measures are avoided, thus removing
a factor that often complicates thereintegration of the offender into thecommunity and avoids offender
stigmatization.
5. Non-custodial measures are costeffective. They cost much less thancustodial measures.
6. The number of prisoners entering theprison is reduced, thus facilitating
the administration of prisons and theproper correctional treatment of
those who remain in prison.
7. It is more conducive to social
integration, thereby reducing
recidivism and increasing the crime
control effects of the criminal justicesystem.
The kinds of non-custodial measures inthe treatment of offenders, as well as the
obstacles and countermeasures ofparticipation of the public in thesemeasures, are considered as outlined below.

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
B. Probation and Parole
1. Probation
Probation is a community-based method
in which a juvenile delinquent or an adultcriminal offender, who has been foundguilty by the process of judicial criminal
hearing or on their own plea of guilt, isreleased into the community (particularly
the family or halfway house) by asentencing court, without being sent toprison or a juvenile institution. Such an
offender will be subjected to specificconditions imposed by the court and shallbe under the supervision of a probation
officer. In countries like Fiji, Hong Kong,Japan, Kenya, Papua New Guinea, theRepublic of Korea and Thailand, probation
services have almost similar arrangements
and are used as an alternative to
imprisonment. The application of actual
supervision by a probationer seems to be
the same in the above mentioned countries,
including the Seychelles and India.
In Hong Kong, Japan, Papua New
Guinea, the Philippines, the Republic ofKorea and Thailand, the services ofgovernment probation officers aresupported by Volunteer Probation Officers(VPO). However the VPO systems varyfrom country to country.
In Hong Kong, the role of VPOs is minor.
They may assist the probation officers in
the overall supervision of the probationers.
They accompany the probation officer
during the time of actual visits to ap r o b a t i o n e r. I n H o n g K o n g , t h eprobationer directly reports to theprobation officer and not to the VPO. The
VPO may only assist the probationers inorganizing some social activities in thehome area of the probationer. VPOs areusually members of NGOs under the Social
Welfare Department. The VPO may also
be an ex-offender with a proven record ofgood conduct, or university students
studying behavioural sciences who are on

vacation and have an interest in assisting
probationers.
In Japan, the probation officer assigns
a VPO as the day-to-day supervisor of theprobationer. The assignment is based upon
the probation officer’s judgement, matching
the VPO’s personality with that of theoffender, so that the most effective
supervision of him/her will be materialized.
Most VPOs are familiar and keep close
relations with community residents,groups and organizations. They utilize
these relationships in helping offenders
rehabilitate. Also there are two forms of
public participation in the treatment ofprobationers in Japan. First, Big Brothers
and Sisters (BBS) is an organization ofyouths who befriend juvenile probationers,
and encourage their desistance fromdelinquency. Their activities include
organizing sporting events and outdoor
activities, accompanying juveniles involunteer work in homes of the aged anddiscussing probationers’ views of their lifeand future. Second, the Cooperative
Employers Scheme helps probationers byoffering stable employment.
In Papua New Guinea, there are about
500 active VPOs who assist probation
officers. In urban areas, they are retired
public servants, missionaries, NGOs,
Young Men’s Christian Association(YMCA), Young Women’s Christian
Association (YMCA). In rural areas, they
are village elders, councillors, literate
middle-aged men/women.
In the Philippines, probation is adisposition of the court that allows aconvicted offender to serve their sentencein the community/outside prison, but under
the supervision of a parole and probation
officer and subject to certain conditions
contained in the Parole and Probation
Order. Dedicated members of thecommunity are tapped as volunteers to307

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
ensure the success of the parole andprobation system. These volunteers arescreened and trained. Each volunteer
supervises a maximum of five clients andkeeps all information about the parolee,
probationer or pardonee in strict
confidence. S/he works in close
coordination with the Chief Probation and
Parole Officer in providing counselling andin placement assistance.
In the Republic of Korea, previously
there were three types of VPO groups:
rehabilitation members, who were in
charge of halfway houses; protection
members who assist juvenile offenders; andcrime prevention members, who weregenerally acting as crime prevention
agents. The coordination of the activitiesof the above groups became fairly
cumbersome. Therefore in 1996, the threegroups were integrated into one body called
Crime Protection Members. To make theiractivities become more effective, and toachieve efficient communication andunderstanding amongst the members.
In Thailand, there are two types of
VPOs. One works for the Department of
Probation. Another works for the
Department of Corrections. The main
responsibilities of VPOs in the two
departments are similar, i.e to examine thebackground of offenders and supervise
them. However, their target groups aredifferent. The probationers are those whohave never been imprisoned before andhave committed minor crimes, but theparolees and the sentence remissioners are
prisoners who are conditionally released.
So the work of VPOs in the Department ofCorrections is tougher and requires moreskill. Moreover, the way they are trained
is different.
In general, it is not easy to decide
whether integration of the system of VPOs
is better than a separate service, because308

the decision to integrate or not will be
determined by the local conditions
prevailing in each country.
2. Parole
Parole is a system which has been usedover the years in many countries as acommunity-based method of treatment foroffenders. In this system, a prisoner isgiven a certificate of discharge from prison
to detention in the community under thesupervision of a probation officer. While
the actual application may vary fromcountry to country, the principle behindparole remains the same. The parole
system is granted to a prisoner who has aremaining sentence to serve, subject togood conduct, previous criminal record andlength of the sentence. The parole system
is used in Hong Kong, India, Japan, Kenya,
Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, the Republicof Korea and Thailand.
In Japan, a parolee who has been
conditionally released from a prison or ajuvenile training school shall be placed
under the supervision of the VPO for theremaining term of the sentence, as is thecase of a probationer. Parolees get
assistance from BBS and Cooperative
Employers.
In Kenya, parole or after-care service isextended to long-term offenders. Longterm offenders are those offenders who arecommitted to life imprisonment or long
confinement, but on serving part of theirsentences, usually ten years or above, they
may be considered for early release. For
this category of prisoners, the officer incharge is expected to submit periodical
reports on the conduct and behaviour ofsuch a prisoner to be placed before adischarge board. The discharge board iscomposed of the Attorney General as thechairperson, Commissioner of Prisons as
the secretary, the Director of Probation
Services, Director of Medical Services,

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
Permanent Secretary to the Minister
Responsible for Prisons, and two otherprominent members of the public who areappointed by the Minister Responsible for
Prisons. The discharge boards’ main
responsibility is to review the prisoners
records with a view to making
recommendations for early release under
the supervision of probation officers.
For ex-Borstal inmates, the law provides
that a youthful offender between the ageof 15 and 18 years who has committed an
offence punishable by imprisonment, who
may not be rehabilitated by the probation
services, is ordered to undergo three years
Borstal training. During their residence
in the Borstal Institution, the offenders aretaught some useful vocational training in
addition to academic education. On
completion of one year, the inmates are
released on license to their communities
under the care of a responsible person, who
is usually a community leader, village elder,businessmen, retired public servant orfrom organizations like religious groups orNGOs offering welfare services to needy
cases and charitable organizations. Whileon license out of institutional treatment,
they remain under the supervision of aprobation officer. So the number ofopportunities available for such youthful
offenders to be released on license will
depend on the number of people willing tolive with and take care of such offenders
in the community. During this period, they
may continue with formal education or
technical training in local polytechnics.
While they are out in the community, they
are required to be of good conduct and avoid
associating with bad characters.
The Papua New Guinea members areappointed from the public by the Minister
for Justice. Appointment is based on thefollowing conditions:(b) Active involvement in community
affairs.
(c) Maturity and integrity.
(d) Good standing in the community.
(e) Appreciation and understanding ofsocial issues and problems: interestor background in working with people
in need of rehabilitation.
The Minister may therefore nominate
the Chairman, who must be a lawyer bytraining, another person is nominated by
the Commissioner of Prisons and anotherperson nominated by the Departmental
Head.
3. Obstacles(a) Negative public attitude towards
offenders.
(b) Limitation of activities like lessemployment opportunities.
(c) Inadequate trained staff and VPOs.
(d) Some parole board members areincompetent in making usefuldecisions.
(e) Insufficient budget to meet the needs
of VPOs.
(f) VPOs supervise by means of their
humane interests and their strong
sense of responsibility, but sometimes
it is difficult for them to supervise
offenders like sex offenders and drug
offenders.
4. Countermeasures(a) Encourage the public to cooperate in
the community-based treatment ofoffenders.
(b) Introduction and improvement of
VPO training in supervisory duties.
(c) Governments to provide more funds
to improve the services of VPOs.
(d) D i v e r s i f y c o m m u n i t y - b a s e dtreatment methods by involving
various community groups likeNGOs, Drug Addiction Rehabilitation
Centers, Alcoholic Anonymous.

(a) Experience in social welfare.

309

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
C. Halfway Houses and Probation
Hostels
1. Halfway Houses
Halfway Houses can be defined ascommunity-based centers to which
offenders are sent with the view tomaintaining or facilitating social
integration. Halfway houses serve thoseplaced under supervision following
institutional treatment and those who havecompleted serving their sentences. They
are provided with the basic necessities likefood, shelter and clothing and, where
possible, help seek employment
opportunities for ex-offenders preparing
themselves for re-integration into thecommunity. In Hong Kong, Japan, thePhilippines, the Republic of Korea andThailand, halfway houses are privately
managed. On the other hand, Hong Kong
halfway houses managed by its
government.
In Japan, all halfway houses are run bya non-profit organization called theJuridical Persons for Offenders
Rehabilitation Services (JPORS). The Law
for Offender Rehabilitation Services was
enforced in 1996 to legally improve thefinancial status of the JPORS byintroducing a tax-reduction specificallyapplied to it.
2. Probation Hostels
In Kenya, probation hostels areresidential institutions providing
temporary residence for some special
categories of probationers. Some
probationers commit crimes which
necessitate their removal from society forfear of reprisal or revenge as a result of
hostility displayed by the victims of theircrimes. Other crimes like infanticide orabortion, incest or manslaughter may
create family hostility among close family
relatives. It is therefore necessary to
remove them, through a court order, into a
probation hostel for a period not exceeding310

12 months. During their stay in theprobation hostel, they are involved invarious occupational training courses
under the supervision of probation officers.
The charitable organizations and NGOs
voluntarily donate items like bedding to be
used by inmates and also tools to be usedin vocational training courses.
3. Obstacles(a) Inadequate accommodation space in
halfway houses and probation hostels
in developing countries due toinsufficient funds.
(b) Lack of community support andnegative public perception.
(c) Lack of public awareness due to lackof education.
(d) Vulnerable groups like the aged,
disabled, and the sick, who may needassistance, cannot be accommodated
in halfway houses.
(e) Inmates with poor records like gangmembers, and drug or sex offenders
may not be accepted in halfway
houses.
4. Countermeasures(a) Seek alternative accommodation likefrom the church and non-government
agencies.
(b) Developing countries which are notcapable of expanding halfway houseprograms should seek donor funds tofacilitate the administration of these
programs.
(c) Community education programs
should be provided so that thecommunity gains a better
understanding of community
corrections issues to accept andsupport halfway houses/probation
hostels within their localities.
(d) T h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r s h o u l d b e
encouraged to make contributions tothese programs by way of incentives.
(e) The programs for the treatment ofresidents of halfway houses should

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
involve various community resources
such as medical officers, teachers,
psychologists, sociologists,
psychiatrists, community leaders andbusiness executives.
(f) Halfway houses should be morevigorous in reciprocating services tothe public like cleaning in thecommunity, actively assisting theevents held by neighbourhood
associations, renting parking lots toneighbors at a lower price, andallowing cultural groups to havemeetings in their premises.
(g) H a l f w a y h o u s e s s h o u l d b e
encouraged to make positive
contributions to the community by
availing their programs. They should
avoid operating as closed institutions.
(h) The government should support
halfway house in recognition of theimportant role they play in theintensive treatment of offenders in
the community.
(i) Pre-release programs to makeintegration easier.
D. Community Work Programs
The community work program is asystem in which prisoners andprobationers perform public work within
their community. It is the type of work
which benefits the whole community. In
this program, offenders perform such work
like the up-keep of the streets, cutting
grass, clearing bushes, putting-out fires,
maintenance of school buildings, assisting
the aged or disabled people in social welfare
institutions. The rationale underlying
Community Work Programs is for offenders
involvement in community work and forsuch performance to be acknowledged by
the community.
Community work programs include
community service orders by courts, prerelease by correctional institutions,community participation programs by

probation offices or by prisons. Including
countries, community work programs arealso an alternative to imprisonment and ameans to alleviate prison overcrowding. It
is a reparation method for offenders to pay
back the community for the offences they
have committed. It is a program thatenables a prisoner to become accustomed
to social life within their community, build
self-worth, achievement and eradicate guilt
or stigmatization.
In Japan, many volunteers like VPOs,WARA and BBS participate in thisprogram. The effects of the program are:(a) t o d e v e l o p a c l i e n t ’s s e n s e o f
responsibility as a member of society
and enhance their sense of self-worth;(b) to know different types of people intheir living space and learn their wayof life and values as identifiable rolemodels;(c) to learn about sound relationships
with others;(d) to learn sound ways of spending
leisure time.
Community work programs are found inFiji, Hong Kong, Japan, Kenya, Papua New
Guinea, the Republic of Korea andThailand (prisoners only).
1. Obstacles(a) Insufficient trained staff to perform
supervisory duties.
(b) Lack of equipment like vehicles totransport probation officers tosupervise work.
(c) Lack of placement like social welfare
institutions and cooperative
employers.
(d) N e g a t i v e p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s i n
accepting offenders to work in theircommunities.
(e) Unwillingness by the offenders towork in the community where they
reside.

311

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56(f) Danger of offenders getting injuredin the course of performing publicwork.
2. Countermeasures(a) Improve public perception througheducation programs. The publicshould come to understand andappreciate offenders as fellow humanbeings who need care and love. A
person does not cease to be a humanbeing by becoming an offender.
(b) Encourage more public involvementin the community work programs
through the media, public educationand public meetings.
(c) Use the services of part-timesupervisors like retired police, prison
officers, army officers, probation
officers, churches, non-government
agencies, and civil servants including
university students (studying social
sciences) during their vacation as
Volunteer Probation Officers.
(d) Publicity of the work or services
provided by the offenders like tree
planting, building of temporary
wooden bridges, digging of water
canals, cleaning parks.
(e) Motivate offenders to perform
community work and gain
community responsibility.
E. Aftercare Services
The definition may vary from country tocountry, for example with the existance ofsupervision, application or obligation, but
this form of system was found in Hong
Kong, Japan, Papua New Guinea, theRepublic of Korea, and Thailand. In
countries like Japan, after-care services areprovided only to those who specifically
apply for them in person at the probation
office. The probation officer will thenconduct a background investigation andscreen each individual in light of theurgency and priority, and the offenders’willingness to rehabilitate themselves. The

312

offenders who take after-care services aremainly as follows: termination of executionof sentence, granted suspended executionof sentence, granted suspended
prosecution. Such ex-offenders areprovided meals, clothing or fares for travel.
Some of these services are aided by the
Juridical Person for Offenders
Rehabilitation. When lodging is necessary,
ex-offenders can live in halfway houses run
by the Juridical Person for Offenders
Rehabilitation.
1. Obstacles(a) Unreceptive community not wanting
prisoners.
(b) Slim employment opportunities for
ex-offenders.
(c) Inadequate supervisory staff - use ofvolunteers.
(d) Difficulty in coordinating the servicesof other government departments
and organizations like NGOs andsocial welfare institutions.
2. Countermeasures(a) Encourage educational activities
through public meetings, seminars tocreate public awareness on the valueof human life.
(b) E n c o u r a g e p r i v a t e s e c t o r
participation by incorporatingprominent businessmen andmembers of the community andvolunteers.
(c) Set up community agency networks
through education and a better
understanding of roles andresponsibilities.
F. Mediation
Mediation is a method that has beenused as a means of solving disputes andpersonal damages in many countries in theworld. Mediation has been used in solving
minor conflicts in which basically bothparties, the offender and the victim, cometo some form of compromise through a

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
neutral group comprising of village elders
or respectable persons in the community
acting as mediators in the restorative
justice system, without necessarily seeking
the intervention of the judiciary.
Mediation programs bring the offenderand the victim together in face-to-facemeetings to negotiate a restitution
settlement. The objective is to appease thesocial situation which has been disturbed
by the offender. Mediation procedures aredifferent from criminal judicial
proceedings. A mediation session is only
arranged with the consent of both thevictim and the offender. During areconciliation session, the two parties canbring up the social conflict which might
have been the cause of the delinquent act.
This approach attempts to address the
economic, as well as the psychological,
injuries in such way that the offender isable to comprehend the full impact that thecrime has had on the victim. The
advantages of mediation are:(a) The victim is not treated as a mere
witness but has the opportunity todigest what has happened to them byexpressing their shock andbewilderment.
(b) The offender is made to reflect upon
the injuries done to the victim and toaccept responsibility by engaging inconstructive actions. This is deemed
to have a high value of rehabilitation.
(c) The offender gets less stigmatized.
(d) The victim obtains financial andemotional restitution quickly and in
an informal way.
(e) There is higher involvement of thecommunity in the solution of
conflicts, which is supposed to havea positive impact on deterrence.
However, due to modernization, thesesystems have been disregarded as
outmoded methods of solving disputes

between parties like land cases, damage
caused to crops by cattle, and minor
disputes within the community. It isabsurd that the present generation does
not appreciate traditional laws, which they
presume to be orthodox and authoritative.
In our view, these methods should be
revived and activated to settle minor cases
in society and avoid offenders being taken
to court, and eventually entering prison.
Mediation may take place in threestages, at pre-trial, during trial and at posttrial. For the purpose of our discussion,
we focused on mediation at post trial. In
our view, we would like to recommend thepossibility of mediation as a form ofcommunity-based treatment of offenders.
In the community-based treatment ofoffenders in Japan, it is taken into
consideration whether the offender makes
restitution to their victim or not, andwhether he or she has the willingness tomake amends or not. It is important foroffenders to apologize with sincerity andto make restitution after trial for theirsuccessful entry into the community. When
probation officers conclude that it isnecessary for parolees and probationers tomake restitution or to apologize to their
victims, they supervise through thefollowing means:(a) Including victim measures in thetreatment plans made by probation
officers.
(b) Including victim measures in any
special conditions to be observed.
(c) Asking about the progress conditionsof victim measures or discussing theirnecessity.
Victim measures by offenders reduce thehostility of the public, allowing the offender
to re-integrate more easily. Furthermore,this helps the offender to develop thewillingness to rehabilitate and, in doing so,

313

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
continues to prevent crime. That is why
the development of mediation after trial
has an important role in the treatment ofoffenders.
In many instances, mediation after trial
is not enough. However, from the viewpointof the re-integration of offenders and crime
prevention, many countries felt it moredesirable that we expand public
participation and promote mediation at the
post-trial stage.
1. Obstacles(a) No guidelines defining the use of
mediation in penal matters. There
are no guidelines to address theconditions for the referral of cases tothe mediation service, nor proceduresto handle cases following mediation.
(b) Mediators lack training, resulting in
unfair and biased decisions.
(c) Offenders/victims are sometimes
unwilling to appear and uphold theruling by the mediator.
(d) N o s e l e c t i o n a n d a s s e s s m e n t
procedures for mediators.
(e) Mediation services do not haveautonomy in performing their duties,
making it difficult to issue certified
documents. In India and Pakistan,
mediation is legislated and required
as a lawful method of settling adispute.
(f) No public awareness as to theusefulness of medition.
2. Countermeasures(a) Legislation facilitates mediation inpenal matters. There exists clear
guidelines explaining the use of
mediation in penal matters.
(b) M e d i a t o r s m u s t h a v e b a s i cqualifications and receive training inmediation skills. Training programs
should be made available for the
betterment of the mediation system,
for the smooth and effective disposal

314

of disputes. Before assuming office,mediators receive initial training inmediation duties, as well as inservice
training. Their training aims at
providing for a high level ofcompetence, taking into accountconflict resolution skills, the specificrequirements of working with victims
and offenders, and basic knowledgeof the criminal justice system.
(c) Recruitment and appointment ofmediators should be done from all
sections of society, and such people
should generally possess a goodunderstanding of local culture andthe norms of the communities.
(d) The public be educated to appreciate
mediation as a means to resolve
disputes. Before agreeing tomediation, the parties should be fully
informed of their rights, the natureof the mediation process, and thepossible consequences of theirdecision.
G. Fine Payment
In many countries, monetary penalties
are usually awarded, and in default of
payment, the offender suffers
imprisonment. Fines are mostly awarded
for petty and traffic offences. That is, if
the offender can pay the fine s/he secures
their liberty, but if s/he fails to pay the finethey suffer imprisonment. Fines are acommon form of non-custodial sentence.
Fines are economical because their
management involves less money and lessmanpower. They are regarded as humane,since they cause minimum social damage
to the offenders. Fines therefore aim toachieve the objectives of punishment interms of retribution, deterrence andrehabilitation.
In a number of cases where fines are
imposed, the court may consider thefollowing basic pre-requisites:

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE(a) The gravity of the offence and thecircumstances under which theoffence was committed.
(b) The financial ability of the offender.
(c) The offender’s family background.
(d) Offender’s occupation.
(e) The health condition of the offender.
(f) The previous criminal history of theoffender.
In determining the amount of fine, thecourt may also consider the offender’sfinancial position, whether s/he can pay on
demand, be allowed more time for payment
or order the payment by installment. In
Fiji, when the offender is given monetary
penalty and the offender does not havesufficient money to meet the amountrequired, s/he may be given more time,
usually thirty days, to go and look for themoney, or the offender may be allowed to
pay by installment until s/he completes thefine.
In quite a number of situations, theoffender may not be able to pay the finedue to poverty or other adverse economic
factors surrounding the offender. In sucha case, we may ask the public to offer theoffender opportunities to pay the fine due.
For example, the community can provide
work to the offender so that he/she canfulfill the responsibility of paying the fine.
Also the work to be performed by such an
offender can benefit the whole community.
The community, which is aware that noncustodial sentences are better thanimprisonment for the re-integration of theoffender into the community, can help withthe rehabilitation of the offender.
1. Obstacles(a) Poor status of the offender in theimmediate community.
(b) Unwillingness by the public tocontribute towards the payment of
the fine.
(c) Award of fine sentences is at thediscretion of the sentencing courts.
2. Countermeasures(a) Educate the public to learn to assist
disadvantaged members of thecommunity by pulling their resources
together.
(b) Educate and counsel members of thecommunity to be law abiding.
H. Summary
In the past, not much attention has been
focused on the community-based treatment
of offenders as a mean to achieve therehabilitation and reformation of offenders.
However, considering that governments
are now experiencing huge budget deficits,
to the extent that not many governments
can now afford to be over-burdened withthe provision of other than basic services,public participation in the communitybased treatment of offenders is vital. Thereis, therefore, the need to strengthen
cooperation between government agencies
like local government, law enforcement
agencies and correctional agencies, social
welfare departments, non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs), donors and theprivate sector.
IV. INVOLVEMENT OF VICTIMS IN
THE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR
OFFENDERS
Involvement of victims in the treatment
system for offenders is very important for
both victims and offenders. By involving
victims in the treatment of offenders,
offenders can be sensitized to the victims’
feelings and agony. Also, offenders’ genuine
feelings of guilt are promoted. Programs
previously described in this paper promote
understanding between offenders andvictims, and prompt reconciliation. Victims
are encouraged to be more forgiving.
A criminal justice system that is
intended to restore social relationships is315

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
called ‘Restorative Justice’. The aims of
the restorative justice are:(i) To repair the harm that has been
done to the victims and thecommunity;(ii) To involve the victims and othermembers of the community as active
participants in the process;(iii) To help communities to reintegrate
victims and offenders;(iv) To rebuild communities that havebeen weakened by crime and othersocial ills;(v) To deal with the needs of the victims,
offenders and community.
So, restorative justice systems require
the involvement of victims in the treatment
of offenders.
A. Restorative Justice Programs
We classified restorative justiceprograms into the following five categories
and organized our discussion according tothese categories.
1. Mediation (direct/indirect)
There are two types of mediation
programs; one which requires face-to-facecontact between the victim and the offender(direct mediation), and one which does not
involve face-to-face contact between thevictim and the offender (indirect
mediation).
(a) Victim-Offender Mediation
Victim-Offender Mediation Programs(VOMP), also known as Victim-Offender
Reconciliation Programs (VORP), bring
offenders face-to-face with the victims of
their crimes, with the assistance of a
trained mediator (usually a community
volunteer). The value of these programsin restoring all those affected has been
proven in communities throughout theworld. Through the process, crime victims
are given an opportunity to have their316

questions answered, and restitution andemotional needs are met. The person
responsible for the crime is held
accountable for his/her actions and given
an opportunity to make things right. The
community becomes involved in the processof restorative justice.
A basic case management process inNorth America and in Europe typicallyinvolves four phases:(i) Case referral and intake;(ii) Preparation for mediation;(iii) The mediation itself; and(iv) A n y f o l l o w u p n e c e s s a r y e . g ,enforcement of restitutionagreements.
Often, a case is referred to VORP after aconviction or formal admission of guilt incourt; but some cases are diverted prior tosuch a disposition in an attempt to avoid
prosecution. Studies have concluded thatthese programs have high client
satisfaction rates, victim participation
rates, restitution completion rates, andresult in reduced fear among victims, andreduced criminal behavior by offenders.
(b) Serious Offence Mediation
Program for serious offenders werecarried out in Anchorage, Alaska.
Mediations were conducted with juvenile
offenders and their victims for offences as
serious as manslaughter and attempted
murder. While mediation for minor
property offences has the goal of obtaining
restitution, the primary goal of serious
offences mediation is to help in the healing
process. Participation in mediation did not
result in more lenient dispositions for theoffenders, most of whom were alreadyserving their penalties at the time of themediation. Most participants reported thatmediation was successful in meeting thegoals of reconciliation, accountability, andclosure.

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
Several projects involving prison-based
mediation have been done with adultoffenders. As with the young offender
program, the goals are somewhat different
from those of community-based programs,
in that they emphasize sharing informationand healing rather than restitution. They
involve voluntary meetings held between
victims and offenders in an institutionalsetting. Typically, they explicitly exclude
offender benefits such as parole release.
Immarigeon’s (1996) assessment of several
prison-based programs found that
hundreds of victim-offender reconciliation
meetings have been held with a great dealof success, and with no negative
consequences.
Such violent offenses are usually
mediated upon the initiation of the victim,
and only after many months (sometimes
even years) of work with a specially trainedand qualified mediator, collaborating withthe victim’s therapist and/or other helping
professionals. Participation must becompletely voluntary, for both the victim
and the offender.
(c) Assessment of Mediation
Programs
Victim-Offender Mediation Programs
have been mediating meaningful justicebetween crime victims and offenders forover twenty years. There are now over 300
such programs in the US and Canada, anda b o u t 5 0 0 i n E n g l a n d , G e r m a n y,
Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, Australia
and New Zealand. Remarkably, consistentstatistics from a cross-section of the North
American programs shows that about twothirds of the cases referred resulted in faceto-face mediation meetings; over 95% of thecases mediated resulted in a written
restitution agreement; over 90% of thoserestitution agreements are completed
within one year.

In France in 1993 and in Germany in
1994, after the assessment of theseexperimental programs, victim-offender
mediation has been fully recognized incriminal procedure. In France, theprosecutor is entitled to arrange formediation before the decision of whether
or not to prosecute. The mediation is
directed to the compensation of the victim
and the rehabilitation of the offender.
2. Disclosure of Offender’s Information
Recently, a victims’ need to be notifiedof their offenders’ information is increasing.
Since criminal procedures, criminal justicesystems, and cultures differ among
countries, there is no definite answer to thequestion “Who/which agency (e.g, police,
public prosecutors office, the courts,
correctional institutions, probation office,etc) should disclose the offender ’s
information?”. In principle, victims should
be notified of their right of access to theoffender’s information, and the agency
which is most convenient to victims should
be available to them, so that they will havethe least trouble in requesting theoffender’s information. However, suchdisclosure may endanger the rehabilitationof the offenders, and therefore, the criminal
justice agencies should be allowed toexercise discretionary power, in case they
foresee such a danger.
3. Involvement of Victims’ Opinion in
Decision-making Concerning
Offender’s Status
In some countries, victims provide input
about the impact of the crime (andsometimes parole violation) at the parole
hearings, in person, via audiotape orvideotape, by teleconferencing, or inwriting. Their statements give the parole
authority crucial information about thecrime’s financial, physical and emotional
impact on the victim. To make thismeaningful however, parole authorities
must notify victims and their families of

317

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
the hearings (in advance), and schedule
time during the hearing to allow them todescribe the crime’s impact on their lives.

opportunity for offenders to
express the impact that drunk
driving has had on their lives.

4. Education(a) Victim-Offender Confrontation
Programs and Similar Programs(i) Victim-Offender Confrontation
Programs: Programs in which
offenders and victims of otheroffenders, usually groups ofvictims or their families, meet in
the correctional setting to discuss
the impact of crime from both
perspectives. This program’s goal
is to sensitize offenders to the pain
and suffering of victims and cangive offenders the opportunity todeal with remorse and guilt (forexample, Alberta Seven Step
“Surrogate Perpetrators
Program”, a program for sex
offenders in Fort Saskatchewan).

A VOP is comprised of unrelated
victims and offenders, linked only
by a common kind of crime, not theparticular crimes that involved
others. It thus provides anopportunity for indirect encounter
when either the victim or offenderis unwilling or unable to meet theother.

(ii) Victim-Offender Panels: VictimOffender Panels (VOP) can be
attributed to the rise of thevictims’ rights movement in thelast decade, and in particular tothe campaign against drunk
driving. They were developed asa means of giving convicted drunk
drivers an appreciation of thehuman cost of drunk driving on
victims and survivors, with theintention of decreasing the
likelihood of repeat offences. It
also offers victims and survivors
a forum in which to express theirexperience and thereby restore
some sense of power to the victims
of crime.

(b) Victim-Awareness ProgramThis type of program sensitizes offenders
to the needs of victims, without directcontact with them. This type of programis important because we may not be able
to find victims who are willing toparticipate in programs involving contact
with their offenders. The following are thelist of programs which are currently
utilized in Japan:

One noteable example of a VOP
in application is the Victim Impact
Panel (VIP) organized by Mothers
Against Drunk Driving (MADD).
This panel provides an

318

With the VIP operated by MADD,
for example, judges or probation
officers will often requireconvicted drunk driving offenders
to attend a panel as an element of
their sentence or probation.
Attendance is monitored, withsanctions applied for failure toattend.

(i) Essay writing.
(ii) Imaginary letter.
(iii) Role playing.
(iv) “Naikan” meditation therapy.

5. Community Service
Community service requires offenders to
perform some beneficial community
service. These services are beneficial tovictims in several ways. First, somevictims may want to humiliate offenders
by having them engage in community

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
work. Second, some victims may want
offenders to engage in community work
believing that experience such as working
in an elderly person’s home may help
offenders be aware of the plight of victims.
Third, since crimes offend the feelings ofthe public, including the victims,
community service works as “symbolic
restitution”.
B. Actual Situation
Table 1 shows the actual situation of thecountries of this group. Mediation
programs (including programs which aresimilar to mediation) are implemented inFiji, Japan, Kenya and Papua New Guinea.
Who takes the role of mediator is different
amongst these countries. In Japan,
probation officers and VPOs take the roleof mediator. In other countries, mediators
are voluntary chaplains and elderly
persons who are trusted by the community.
The disclosure of offenders’ information
to victims is implemented in Hong Kong,
Kenya and the Republic of Korea. In Hong
Kong, upon the victim’s request, theCommissioner of the Correctional Service
is required to provide information asneeded in respect of the offender. In Kenya
and the Republic of Korea, the offender’sinformation is disclosed to victims by thepolice and welfare officers.
The consideration of the victim’s opinion
in decision-making concerning theoffender’s status is implemented in Fiji,
Japan, Kenya, the Republic of Korea andPapua New Guinea. In these countries, thevictim usually does not attend the parole
hearing. Only a document describing thevictim’s opinion is submitted to the paroleboard (e.g, the report of probation officers
to the board).
Victim-offender confrontation programs
and similar programs are not implemented
in all countries of the group . Victim

awareness programs are implemented inJapan, Papua New Guinea, and Thailand.
In Papua New Guinea, voluntary chaplainscome to prisons or juvenile training schools
and talk about the feelings and agony ofthe victims. In Thailand, meditation is
implemented as one victim awarenessprogram. Thus, the involvement of victims
in the treatment of offenders in many of
the group’s countries seems to have beensuccessful.
C. Obstacles and Countermeasures
1. Mediation(a) Obstacles(i) In some participating countries,
programs are being conductedwithout any legal backup. In thatno monitoring system is in place,the neutrality/quality of themediator is not guaranteed.
Hence, the rights of the victim andthe offender can hardly beprotected.
(ii) In general, the public do not havea full understanding of theobjectives and the value of these
programs.
(iii) Public opinion is accustomed to
the retributive model of justice, i.e,
geared to the punishment ofoffenders. As such, public support
and participation in mediation
programs difficult.
(iv) Usually, the victims do not wantto meet offenders as they are
either afraid of being re-victimized
or choose to forget the harm/trauma that the offender has doneto them.
(v) The role of the mediators is sodemanding that it is quite difficult
to recruit sufficiently competentmediators.
(vi) Face-to-face contact of offenders
with victims can be quite
dangerous, i.e, not easy to control(security administration

319

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
problems).
(b) Countermeasures(i) Relevant laws have to be enacted
in the implementation ofmediation programs, in order toprotect the rights of the victims
and offenders.
(ii) The public has to be made awareof the objectives and values of suchprograms by providing them withall the necessary information (e.g,using the mass media).
(iii) Offenders and victims need to be
encouraged to participate inprograms by educating them on
their objectives and values.
(iv) Government and NGOs shouldtake the lead in organizing thetraining of mediators, and invite
suitable citizens to become
mediators.
(v) Appropriate programs, such as
psychological counselling, should
be set up to assist victims andoffenders to be prepared for
mediation.
2. Disclosure of Offender’s Information(a) Obstacles(i) In many participating countries,
there is no leglistaion to govern
whether it is lawful to provide
offender’s information to their
victims.
(ii) Offenders may object to having
their information being disclosed
to their victims, as it would
infringe on their privacy.
(iii) Offenders get disadvantaged as
their victims may plan retalitation
against them after theirdischarge, by knowing their dateof discharge and other informationsuch as place of residence.
(b) Countermeasures(i) Relevant laws have to be enacted

320

to specify suitable types of
information disclosable to thevictim, and the proper procedure
in disclosing this information to
victims.
(ii) The public has to be made awareof the objectives of providing
offender information to theirrespective victims.
(iii) Protection of offenders’ privacy
and human rights has to beobserved. In that, laws should beenacted to prevent the victims
from misusing the information
provided to them.
(iv) Cooperation among the police,
public prosecutor ’s office, thecourts, and correctional
institutions has to be secured inorder to ensure that all
information provided to thevictims is updated and given ingood time.
3. Consideration of the Victim’s Opinion
in Decision-making Concerning the
Offender’s Status(a) Obstacles(i) Victims do not have adequate
information about parole
hearings, and thus they are
unwilling to participate in the
hearings either in person or inwriting.
(ii) Most participating countries lackhuman resources (e.g, probation
officers, etc) to approach thevictims and explain to them theobjectives of the parole hearing, or
to give them counseling insecuring their participation in the
hearing.
(iii) Most of the victims do not wish tohave any further direct or indirect
involvement/contact with theiroffenders. Some of them evenrefuse to hear anything about
their offenders.

112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE(b) Countermeasures(i) Government should recruit moreprobation officers and invite
suitable citizens to be volunteer
probation officers.
(ii) There is a need to explain theobjectives and values of the paroleboard hearings to the victims andthe public.
(iii) Education and counselling should
be given to victims, informing
them that they, their offender andsociety would benefit from their
participation in the parole
hearing.
(iv) Victims have the right to attend
parole hearings so that they canfully realize how the parole
hearing is being conducted.
(v) If the offenders are to be granted
release by the parole board,
victims should be protected by
imposing certain conditions forthe offenders to observe, such as
keeping a certain distance awayfrom the victim’s residence. In
such a way, victims may feel safein participating in the parole
hearing.
4. Education(a) Victim-Offender Confrontation
Programs and Similar Programs(1) Obstacles(a) The general public do notrecognize the objectives andvalue of these programs.
(b) P u b l i c o p i n i o n i s d e e p l yentrenched in executing
punishment against offenders(retributive sentiment).
(c) Victim’s unwillingness.
(d) Offender’s unwillingness.
(e) Serving officers are not trained
to implement and organize
these programs.
(f) Offenders can be dangerous tovictims(security

administration problems).
(2) Countermeasures(a) E d u c a t i n g t h e p u b l i c b yproviding them with all theinformation (e.g, using mass
media) regarding the objectives
and value of the programs.
(b) E d u c a t i n g o f f e n d e r s a n d
victims about the benefits of the
programs, and encouraging
them to participate.
(c) Providing appropriate training
for serving officers in
implementing and organizing
the programs, and seeking
cooperation from private
experts in providing theirprofessional advice to enhance/
improve the qualities of these
programs.
(d) Assisting victims and offenders
to be prepared for participation.
(b) Victim-Awareness Program(1) Obstacles(a) Serving officers are not trained
to conduct/organize theprograms.
(b) Through participation in the
programs, some offenders may
have their guilty feelings
aggravated, i.e, depression.
(2) Countermeasures(a) Serving officers should beequipped with adequate
knowledge in organizing andconducting programs throughin-service training.
(b) Cooperation with private
experts should be sought inorder to obtain their expertisein enhancing the effectivenessof programs.
(c) Future-orientation of programs
should be emphasized toprevent offenders from321

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56
becoming depressed.

D. Problems/Challenges in Using
Restorative Justice Programs
Through the above processes, crime
victims are given an opportunity to havetheir questions answered and theirrestitution and emotional needs met. The
person responsible for the crime is held
accountable for his/her actions and given
an opportunity to make things right. The
community becomes involved in the processof restorative justice.
However, some research indicates thatvictim participation in restorative justiceprograms places an unwanted burden on
the victim himself or herself, beyond what
would result from serving only as a witness
for the prosecution. In particular, placing
the victim in a decision-making role maylead to even more harassment andintimidation by the offender. In somejurisdictions that have introduced
mechanisms designed to give victims amore active role in the process, aconsiderable number of victims havechosen not to exercise such a right.
One of the keys to successful restorative
justice projects is the participation andsupport of the community. In some cases,
victims have been unwilling to participate
in victim-offender mediation programs, andsome surveys have shown a relatively low
level of public support for alternative
programs. There are several reasons why
public support for these programs is by nomeans automatic :(i)People accustomed to the retributive
model of justice may be reluctant tosupport restorative justice programs.
However, successful restorative
initiatives can lead to a change inpublic attitudes.
(ii) Empowering the community to take322

control of justice issues can be a major
step in community healing. However,it can be a difficult step because thecommunity institutions that must do
this - including the family, schools,
and religious and economic
institutions - may not themselves behealthy. In other words, communities
may have too many other problems
to deal with.
(iii) There is also the possibility that
community justice may divide rather
than unite people. This may happen
in small isolated communities where
punishment, even when it is intended
to reintegrate offenders, may alienate
individuals and their friends andrelatives from one and other. To
prevent this, everyone must
understand that restorative justice isin the best interest of the entire
community.
(iv) For programs conducted inside theprison setting, such as VictimOffender Reconciliation and VictimOffender Confrontation Programs,
they are operated less often than
expected. This may be largely due tothe lack of additional resources.
Under a limited budget, suchprograms are not given priority.
(v) A l s o , o f f e n d e r s m u s t w a n t t oparticipate in these programs forthem to be successful. Offenders
should not be given rewards (such as
reduced punishment) for
participating, because the offendermust be sincere.
(vi) Restorative justice programs may beinappropriate in cases of unequal
power positions between the victim
and offender (e.g, child abuse).
Victims might be revictimized bysuch participation.
(vii) In mediation programs, the mediatorneeds to be well trained so that he/she can prepare both the victim andthe offender. Victims cannot use the112TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE
session to only express grief or anger(i.e, just yell at the offender). Also,
mediation needs to make sure thatthe expectations of both sides are
realistic.
V. CONCLUSION
Participation of the public and victims
is imperative in the overall treatment,
rehabilitation and re-integration of
offenders into society. In order to achieve
the desired results, public involvement in
the effective utilization of prison labor,enhancing and resuscitating rehabilitation
programs available to prisoners, is indeed
vital.
Similarly, for the re-socialization of
offenders to be effective and pragmatic,emphasis should be given to communitybased treatment methods which can beenormously enhanced by active public
involvement. The participation of the
public in community-based treatment
provides an enabling environment
conducive to the speedy re-socialization of
the offender.
Lastly, no comprehensive treatment
program for offenders will ever be complete
without the involvement of the victims in
the restorative justice system. The actual
re-settlement of the offender into thecommunity will be determined by theability and readiness of the victim to livein harmony with and restore the hope ofthe offender.

323

324

Indirect

Direct

●

●

●

●

●

○

●

●

○

●

○

●

○

●

○

●

○

○

Hong Kong Japan●… program which can/should be implemented

Involvement of Victim’s Opinion in
Decision-making Concerning
Offender’s Status
Education
Victim-Offender
Confrontation Programs
and Similar Programs
Victim Awareness
Programs

Disclosure of Offender’s Information
to Victims

Mediation(post trial)

Fiji

○

●

○

●

○

○

●

●

○

○

●

●

○

●

●

●

●

●

Papua.
Republic of Thailand
New Guinea Korea○… program is implemented

●

●

○

○

○

○

Kenya

Table 1
Involvement of Victims in the Treatmet System of Offenders (actual situation of group members)

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 56