REPORT OF THE FOLLOW-UP SEMINAR FOR THE SECOND PHASE
OF THE THIRD COUNTRY TRAINING PROGRAMME (TCTP)
FOCUSING ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY-BASEDTREATMENT OF OFFENDERS IN THE CLMV COUNTRIESFrom 26 to 28 June 2018, the United Nations Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime andthe Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI) hosted the Follow-up Seminar for the Second Phase of the Third
Country Training Programme (TCTP) Focusing on the Development of Community-Based Treatment of
Offenders in the CLMV Countries (hereinafter, the “Follow-up Seminar”). This report summarizes theproceedings, country presentations and general discussions held throughout the Follow-up Seminar.
Proceedings
1. MS. KAYO ISHIHARA, Deputy Director of UNAFEI, welcomed the participants and announced theopening of the Follow-up Seminar. Further, she recognized the efforts of the Japan International
Cooperation Agency, the Department of Probation of Thailand (DOP), and the Thailand International
Cooperation Agency (TICA) in organizing and implementing the TCTP with the cooperation of
UNAFEI. Noting that the establishment of effective community-based treatment (CBT) in the CLMV
countries faces numerous challenges, it is very important to share periodically what each country has
achieved and to evaluate progress. To achieve the goal of the TCTP, Deputy Director Ishihara
stressed that it is important for all participants, as experts and practitioners, to take the initiative to
introduce and develop CBT in their respective countries, making use of the knowledge and insights
obtained during the TCTP.
2. MR. PAYONT SINTHUNAVA, Deputy Director-General of the Department of Probation (DOP) of the
Ministry of Justice of Thailand, emphasized the importance of implementing the Tokyo Rules incriminal justice systems in order to rehabilitate offenders in the community with their families and toallow them to become productive members of society. Noting that the first two phases of the TCTP
have demonstrated the importance of implementing probation practices in the context of each country
with an understanding of the “big picture” in terms of legislative, executive and judicial powers of thestate, this Follow-up Seminar presents an opportunity to discuss the progress and challenges of
implementing community-based treatment in the CLMV countries, with the goal of full implementation of the Tokyo Rules in the near future.
3. The Visiting Expert, DR. MANUEL G. Co, Ex Officio Member of the Board of Pardons and Parole andAdministrator of the Parole and Probation Administration (PPA) of the Republic of the Philippines,delivered a presentation on “Countermeasures to Supervisees who Commit Bad Conduct”.
4. Country presentations detailing progress made since the first phase of the TCTP were made by thedelegations from Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Viet Nam.
5. Lectures were delivered by: (1) MR. HITOSHI MIYAKE, Principal Examiner of the Kanto Regional Parole
Board, on an “Outline and details of punishment and sanctions imposed on persons released on paroleand persons under probation with suspension of execution of the sentence” and (2) Deputy Director
Ishihara, on the “Legislative Steps for Introduction of Community-based Treatment of Offenders”.
Visiting Expertʼs Lecture
6. Dr. Co presented on the topic of dealing with supervisees who violate conditions of probation or parole,considering the question of whether revocation of probation or parole should be considered a failure of
the system. In the Philippines, community corrections is implemented through individualized
treatment. The PPA supervises and rehabilitates parolees, pardonees, probationers and first timeminor drug offenders in the community, and its three vital responsibilities are investigation,
supervision and rehabilitation. Post-sentence investigation into the background of each offender199

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 105

identifies which offenders are suitable for community-based treatment, and those who are suitable aresupervised in the community with the support of Volunteer Probation Assistants. Rehabilitation
programmes are applied according to a three-pronged approach, including (i) restorative justice, (ii) the
Therapeutic Community (TC) Ladderized Program, and (iii) volunteer resource mobilization.
Community-based treatment is a conditional release subject to conditions. While the conditions serve
as a substitute to iron bars and prison laws, it is important that conditions are realistic and imposed forthe purpose of helping each individual offender conform conduct to a law-abiding lifestyle. In addition
to probation and parole, conditional pardons are used as a means to release offenders while
maintaining control over their conduct in the community. Control over supervisees in the community
is maintained through mandatory and special conditions. Mandatory conditions include the duty toreport to probation offices, to reside at the offenderʼs approved residence, and to refrain fromcommitting further offences. Special conditions are designed to encourage offenders to develop as
responsible, productive and socially redeemed individuals by requiring them to engage in productive
behaviours, e.g., employment, or to refrain from destructive behaviours, e.g., drug use, possession of
firearms, or relationships with criminal associates.
If mandatory or special conditions are breached, the PPA may take various actions depending on thenature of the violation. Minor violations of conditions may be addressed by administrative disciplinary
protocols, which may include corrective measures imposed at the discretion of Probation and Parole
Officers. If a parolee commits another offence while on conditional release, he or she must serve theremaining portion of the original sentence in addition to the term required for the new offence;probationers who reoffend must serve the time for the original and the new offence. Violations ofconditions of parole or pardon are evaluated by the Board of Pardons and Parole based on fact-finding
and the recommendations of probation officers, and the Board may issue an Order of Arrest andRecommitment to place the offender in custody. At any time during probation, the Court may issue awarrant for the re-arrest of a probationer for violation of any condition. In all cases, it is important toremember that offenders are entitled to the presumption of innocence and other constitutional rights.
In answering the question of whether revocation is a failure of the system, Dr. Co stressed that failure
cannot be attributed to the probation officer alone, as each offender is ultimately responsible for his or
her own behaviour and faces his or her own family and other problems in the community. The role ofprobation officers is to serve as gatekeepers of the justice system and to help offenders comply with
their conditions. Recalling that the purposes of supervision are to implement conditions, rehabilitate
the offender and prevent the commission of further crime, Dr. Co recommended that the participating
countries consider the adoption of volunteer probation officer/assistant programmes to enhance
offender supervision and rehabilitation through the use of community volunteers and community
resources.
Country Presentations
7. CAMBODIA. Like a number of other countries, Cambodia has adopted legislation that addresses
community-based treatment but has faced challenges in implementation. The reported challenges
include public resistance to the concept and financial constraints that prevented the commencement ofa pilot project. These challenges were raised at the Cambodian MOJʼs annual congress, and the MOJ
committed to further promotion of community-based treatment by disseminating relevant statues on
non-custodial measures to judges, police, prosecutors and judicial police officers of various provinces.
The Ministry of Interior has established a committee to address these issues, agreeing that the best
way to initiate a trial programme would be to focus on the community-based treatment of juvenile
delinquents. In 2019, responsibility for juvenile delinquents will be transferred from the Ministry ofInterior to the Ministry of Social Affairs. Under existing law, prosecutors execute the decisions of thecourt with the assistance of judicial police officers. The delegation plans to raise public awareness of
CBT and non-custodial measures though all means possible.
8. LAOS. The delegation from Laos reported having gained useful knowledge during the Second Phase of
the TCTP, which was reported to the Minister of Justice. The Criminal Procedure Law contains
provisions on re-education without deprivation of liberty, stay of execution of penalty, conditional
release, and other CBT-related measures. Currently, however, no ministry has been assigned as the200168TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

responsible agency for CBT, so offenders are entrusted to local administration authorities (such as
village, district, and community police), mass organizations and other state organizations forrehabilitation, reintegration and recidivism prevention. The village administration system, including
village mediation committees, are responsible for handling normal cases and non-violent cases, such as
stealing property, traffic violations, battery and other cases resulting in minor damage or those that do
not affect society. Applicable laws, regulations and policies will be disseminated to local
administrations and the other organizations mentioned above to raise public awareness.
9. MYANMAR. The delegation reported that there is no specific legal framework for CBT, but a CBTframework is applied in drug cases in which police officers take drug users to medical centres for
medical treatment. Drug users who refuse treatment are sent to a rehabilitation centre for six months.
This process involves the police, the courts, the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Health andSport, and the Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement (MOSWRR). The MOSWRR
implements rehabilitation services by Centre Based Rehabilitation, Semi-Community Based
Rehabilitation, and Community-Based Rehabilitation Reports on Activities of Rehabilitation. These
processes involve interviewing and recording of the biological data of trainees and making
assessments based on the use of drugs. The social work practices being carried out include mental andphysical rehabilitation, providing vocational training, preparing for reintegration into society and theprovision of after-care services. Myanmar is undertaking efforts to raise public awareness in order toeducate the public, change the public mindset, promote the use of community corrections overimprisonment, and prevent recidivism.
10. VIET NAM. The delegation from Viet Nam reported learning about organizational structure, qualified
staff, facilities, and professional volunteers during the second phase of the TCTP. In January 2018, Viet
Nam issued guidance on conditional early release and the application of suspended sentence. In Viet
Nam, CBT basically includes conditional early release, non-custodial sentences, and suspended
sentences. Vietnamese law emphasizes the participation of the community in offender treatment
through many measures such as education and job training, sport and cultural activities, yearlymeetings for families of inmates, agreements with the private sector to support offender rehabilitation,and legal support and psychological counselling. Inmates are eligible for conditional early release basedon good behaviour. Conditional release decisions are made by provincial peopleʼs courts where theinmates are serving the sentence. Offenders serving sentences in the community are subject tosupervision and reporting, but they receive vocational training and job-hunting and financial support.
To raise awareness of CBT in the community, the delegation recommended measures such as (i)issuing instruction documents, (ii) dissemination of information through the media, especially national
television, (iii) conducting national surveys on CBT, (iv) developing mechanisms to reward active
participation of people in the community and extending models of funds and clubs for rehabilitation.
Plenary Discussion
11. PROFESSOR HIROYUKI WATANABE (UNAFEI) chaired a plenary discussion, during which the participants
shared comments and asked questions regarding their respective systems. Noting that Thailand took
22 years to adopt a fully functional CBT system, MR. SINTHUNAVA (DOP) stressed the importance ofsetting timelines for the adoption of such systems. PROF. WATANABE raised the issue of dealing withdrug crimes in the CLMV countries, whereupon MR. NOUTH (CAMBODIA) pointed out that there is adifference in the way that drug use and possession is viewed in many countries. While drug use isconsidered a medical problem, drug possession is viewed as a crime. In jurisdictions where drug
possession is aggressively enforced, the result is that even minor possession cases can result inprosecution, and, thus, prison overcrowding. Additionally, while the public may be more accepting ofdrug users in medical treatment, the public will be much less sympathetic to those who are labelled as
criminals. DR. CO (PHILIPPINES) raised the importance of performing drug dependency examinations
prior to making probation decisions in drug cases because drug-dependent offenders cannot beeffectively treated in the community (without first completing a drug addiction treatment programme
at a rehabilitation centre). PROFESSOR TAKUYA FURUHASHI (UNAFEI) enquired into the use of risk
assessment in CBT programmes, and it was report that Thailand conducts assessment based on
Andrews and Bontaʼs well-known Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Model, which assesses each offenderʼs (i) risk of reoffending and (ii) dynamic criminogenic needs that can be supported in various ways bygovernment and community resources. Finally, all participants recognized the need to develop
201

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 105

effective strategies to promote public awareness of CBT.
Lectures12. MR. MIYAKEʼs presentation addressed the topics of probation supervision in Japan and sanctions forbad conduct. Pursuant to the Offenders Rehabilitation Act, the purpose of rehabilitation is to prevent
reoffending and juvenile delinquency and to assist offenders as in becoming self-reliant as soundmembers of society. The primary measures for offender rehabilitation include (i) instruction andsupervision, which guide offenders toward pro-social thinking and living, and (ii) guidance andassistance, which connects offenders with social services to facilitate their rehabilitation andreintegration. In Japan, probation supervision can be applied to juvenile and adult probationers andparolees. Supervision is conducted on an individualized basis, taking account of each offenderʼs age,family situation, etc., and efforts are made to apply the most “appropriate” measures to facilitate theoffenderʼs rehabilitation and reintegration into society. For example, if a probationer exhibits selfreliance and other pro-social qualities, probation is no longer necessary or “appropriate”. On the other
hand, if probation is not effective in a particular case and the probationerʼs attitude or conduct
deteriorates, the continuation of probation may not be appropriate. Probationers and parolees are
subject to general and special conditions, and when these conditions are violated, action must be taken
in response. For example, probationers are required to reside at a specific address that has beenreported to the probation office. If the probationer cannot be found or has changed residences without
permission, measures may need to be taken to address the probationerʼs violation of his conditions ofprobation (i.e., bad conduct). In such cases, the probation officer will submit a report to the regional
parole board, which will determine what action should be taken. If a probationer cannot be found, it
may be necessary to suspended probation, which means that the probationer will not be given credit
for serving probation for the period during which he or she cannot be found. This effectively extends
the probationary period by the number of days the probationer was absent without leave. However, incases where probation is no longer appropriate due to bad conduct, e.g. reoffending or violation of
special conditions, probation will be revoked unless the regional parole board finds that special
circumstances exist that make it reasonable to continue probation. Probation is revoked by theissuance of a warrant of appearance, and a probation officer may serve the warrant on and arrest theprobationer. The probationer is then taken to the probation office, where he or she is interviewed anddetained pending the final revocation decision of the regional parole board. If a probationer receives
suspended execution of sentence and violates the conditions of probation, the public prosecutor must
be informed to process the revocation through the courts.
13. DEPUTY DIRECTOR ISHIHARA presented on legislative and practical strategies for the creation of effective
CBT systems. Legislation is necessary because CBT is a constituent element of a criminal penalty
which restricts the liberty of offenders. Thus, due process protections must be afforded to provide acheck on the exercise of state power. Appropriate laws must address, among others, (i) the conditions
upon which CBT can be applied, (ii) who may impose CBT, and (iii) which agency is responsible for
conducting CBT. At the same time, the application of CBT must remain flexible, diverse anddiscretionary because the sanction is imposed in the community where offenders are faced with reallife challenges. Accordingly, input from practitioners on developing workable practices is extremely
important. Of course, the enactment of legislation alone is insufficient. To carry out the purpose of thelaw, the following factors must be present when the law enters into force: an implementing agency,
adequate resources, detailed procedures, and the support of relevant stakeholders and the generalpublic. This makes it critically important to conduct adequate “market research” to determine anappropriate timeframe for implementation. In this context, market research is a process to gather
information to estimate the number of offenders that will be subject to CBT once the system becomes
operational. This requires policymakers to frame the scope of CBT by clarifying the major conditions
as defined by law, such as the types of crime and penalties eligible for CBT, the degree to which
criminal records and family relations are considered and so on. Each country will need to determine
whether judges or administrative bodies will be responsible for deciding which offenders are eligible
for CBT. If judges, make such decisions, the law should refer to the factors to be considered; ifadministrative bodies make such decisions, guidelines should be developed and training should be
provided. Additionally, reliable statistics are necessary to plan for the implementation of CBT
programmes. Such planning should take “market size” into consideration, for example, by recognizingthat CBT in an urban setting is likely to face different challenges and require different resources than202

168TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

in suburban or rural areas. After gathering the information necessary to create a roadmap toimplementation, stricter conditions for eligibility and limiting the initial scope of CBT are options foraccelerating implementation with the expectation of expanding the programme in the future.
Introduction of the Third Phase of the TCTP
14. MS. TARUATA KLAEWKLA (DOP) introduced the General Information for the Third Phase of the TCTP,
reviewing the application procedures, participant qualifications, and the programme schedule. The
programme will take place in Thailand from 10-22 December 2018. The primary objective of the Third
Phase is to gain practical experience by working with Thai probation officers in the field.
Presentation on Halfway Houses in Japan
15. PROFESSOR HIDENORI OHINATA (UNAFEI) delivered a final presentation on halfway houses. Japan
currently has 103 halfway houses, which accommodate discharged offenders and provide aid andguidance necessary for offendersʼ reintegration. Halfway houses are run by persons approved by the
Minister of Justice, and the government provides financial support for their operations. These
operations include housing, feeding, and the provision of training and other guidance programmes forresidents. Probationers, parolees, offenders released from prison after serving their full terms ofimprisonment, and persons released from pre-trial detention are eligible to reside in halfway houses.
Upon release, roughly 30% of parolees reside in halfway houses, and the average length of a residentʼs
stay is 79.8 days.
Study Visit
16. At the conclusion of the Follow-up Seminar, the participants visited the Saishukai Halfway House inTokyoʼs Shinjuku Ward
28 JUNE 2018
AKISHIMA CITY, TOKYO, JAPAN203