GROUP 3

EFFECTIVE MEASURES IN THE COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT OFJUVENILE OFFENDERS AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE JUVENILE’SABILITY TO REINTEGRATE INTO SOCIETY
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteurs

Ms. Loupua Kuli
Mr. Braam Paul Korff
Mr. Henry Asaah Ngu Ndama
Ms. Iacy Monteiro Braga Caracelli
Ms. Suwa Imai
Mr. Abdelkhoder Mahdi Al-Taher
Mr. Cesar Alexis Luiz Rodriguez
Mr. Satoshi Imamura(Tonga)(South Africa)(Cameroon)(Brazil)(Japan)(Iraq)(Honduras)(Japan)Visiting Experts

Dr. Ann Skelton
Dr. Robert Hoge

(South Africa)(Canada)Advisers

Prof. Tae Sugiyama
Prof. Haruhiko Higuchi
Prof. Ryuji Tatsuya(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Members

I. INTRODUCTION
Group 3 elected by consensus Ms Loupua Kuli as its chairperson, Mr. Braam Paul Korff as its cochairperson, Mr. Henry Asaah Ngu Ndama as its rapporteur, and Ms. Suwa Imai and Ms. Iacy Monteiro
Braga Caracelli as its co-rapporteurs. The group, which was assigned to discuss “Effective Measures in theCommunity-Based Treatment of Juvenile Offenders and Enhancement of the Juvenile’s Ability to
Reintegrate into Society”, agreed to conduct its discussion according to the following agenda:
1) The current situation and problems faced by organizations that treat juveniles.
2) Measures of assessing the individual characteristics, degree of risk and individual needs of juveniles
and classification accordingly.
3) Development of an effective programme in accordance with risk and needs assessment.
4) Development of an effective treatment programme considering victims and/or restitution of theharm caused to victims.
5) Continuous collaboration and maintaining links with institutional treatment services and/or relatedorganizations for the effective treatment of juveniles and their rehabilitation (through-care).
6) The creation of an aftercare system which helps maintain the effect of correctional treatment,
reduces the risk of reoffending and enhances the juvenile’s ability to reintegrate into the community.

II. THE CURRENT SITUATION AND PROBLEMS FACED BY ORGANIZATIONSTHAT TREAT JUVENILES
The group first reviewed the current situation and problems faced by organizations treating juveniles inparticipants’ countries. The participant from Honduras, Mr. Rodriguez, said that in his country juvenile gang
activity is a problem, as is their stigmatization by society. He added that some Christian groups and NGOs
support juveniles but there are only eight such groups and they work with few juveniles. Also, one of theseNGOs has conflict with the police making it difficult to have complete trust in NGOs because of the difficulty
in reaching an agreement. He concluded that cultural and educational change, plus a sense of value, isneeded. Reacting to this, the visiting expert from South Africa, Dr. Skelton, said some NGOs have an
adversarial position to the government while others do not and actually assist the government in providing
services. She said all these roles were important but the government will find it easier to make agreementswith the second group of NGOs.
Ms. Caracelli, from Brazil, said that in her country, institutions are overcrowded and the aftercare system
is not good, leading to a high rate of recidivism. Dr. Skelton responded that community-based treatment isless costly than institutional treatment and it is therefore easier to convince the government to establish andutilize such treatment.

147

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.75

Mr. Al-Taher said that in his country there is the problem of war orphans and civil organizations which do
not do their work properly. These orphans are at great risk of turning to juvenile crime because they have noone to take care of them. The present government is making efforts to take care of juvenile offenders andrehabilitate them.
The participant from South Africa, Mr. Korff, said that in his country police officers are not well trained todeal with juvenile offenders. He also raised the problem of prison overcrowding and the need for more
facilities in urban areas for juveniles. Reacting to this statement, Dr. Skelton noted that there is at present a
good relationship between NGOs and the government for community-based treatment in South Africa. The
only problem, she said, is that accessibility varies greatly between rural and urban areas. She emphasizedthat NGO activities should be financed by the government since they provide public services. She finallyrevealed that South Africa is preparing a detailed standard for restorative justice and NGO activities.
The participant from Cameroon said that in his country there is too much emphasis on institutional
treatment and there are no policy guidelines or rules for community-based treatment. Probation officers
have no legal power to conduct aftercare programmes and they work on a voluntary basis for a few
community-based programmes, which are in turn initiated by NGOs and religious organizations.
The participant from Tonga, Ms. Kuli, said her country relied mainly on community-based treatment withgood support from seven NGOs. According to her the only problem is accessibility since all NGOs arelocated on the mainland. The participant from Iraq also raised the issue of reliance on religion. To this Ms.
Kuli said home training is more important than religion. The participant from Cameroon added that, religion
being a sensitive issue, separation of religion from politics (secularism) is important.
Ms. Imai said about 80% of juvenile offenders’ cases are dismissed after Family Court probation officers’
investigations (which function as protective measures) so diversion is accomplished and Family Court
probation officers, professional probation officers and volunteer probation officers are all well trained. She
added that the future need is additional professional assistance for probation officers because cases havebecome, with regard to juveniles and victims, increasingly difficult to handle.
Mr. Imamura said that there has been a recent discussion of the increasing level of family problems andschool problems which have necessitated the revision of the educational system, including the amendmentof the Fundamental Law of Education. According to him, the problem lies with probation officers. Also,
inquiry by Family Court probation officers is not fully utilized in aftercare and training also requires
improvement.
The group afterwards discussed the countermeasures taken by governments to solve the problems
raised above. Ms. Caracelli said in her country, age and type of offence are being considered but correction
measures are not enough to take care of juvenile offenders and the educational level of offenders is very low.
Mr. Rodriguez said that his government has not established any concrete correction measures. Treatment
measures are not adapted to the needs of offenders and personnel in juvenile centres lack training.
Mr. Al-Taher mentioned that young people constitute 60% of the population of Middle Eastern countries.
Education, religion, tribe and rehabilitation are therefore important in the treatment of juveniles. He said
there are childhood, employment, education and rehabilitation problems.
Mr. Ndama said that in his country a family code has been elaborated and will be sent to Parliament, and a
Department of Child Protection has been created in the Ministry of Social Affairs to help pre-delinquent andstreet children and child protection has become an important aspect of the National Human Rights
Commission’s job. All of these he said will give probation officers a wider sphere of influence in thetreatment of juveniles.
Ms. Kuli said that in her country, there are rehabilitation programmes such as training seminars andworkshops, an alcohol and drugs treatment programme and unofficial practice of restorative justice at thefono, which is a village meeting where nobles and elders of the village gather to solve community problems.

148

136TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE COURSE

The participant from South Africa said that in his country, there is need for improvement or creation of
more facilities for the custody of juveniles, especially in urban areas, and lectures by the Department of
Education to increase children’s level of education. There are two One-Stop Child Justice Centres andnineteen other facilities for juveniles. Donors finance learning programmes for the police on domestic
violence and child protection and people from the community provide police services on a voluntary basis.
Dr. Skelton said that training on diversion has been provided by the government for judges andprosecutors. The number of people in custody has been decreasing through inter-sectoral collaboration andlegal representation. The problem of the budget required for enforcement has been solved by donors
convincing the government to continue funding NGO activities and assistant probation officers earn a
relatively low salary. Mr. Imamura said the Japanese government is reviewing the professional probation
officers’ training system and is working on increasing their numbers and criteria of employment. There isalso the development of expert, clear, unified and specified services to be provided to clients.
Prof. Sugiyama added that in Japan professional probation officers have three years’ training, consisting of
lectures and on the job training, and another one month’s training after ten years of service to become
senior probation officers. Training is also provided six times a year for volunteer probation officers on
matters such as the treatment of offenders and juveniles who have difficult problems. She also mentionedthat social requests for effective community-based treatment are increasing.
The participant from Brazil said volunteers for several projects, such as the Midnight Programme, comefrom the Public Safety Secretariat, the police and the community.

III. MEASURES OF ASSESSING INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS, RISK AND NEEDS,AND CLASSIFICATION ACCORDINGLY
Under this topic the group permitted each participant to mention what elements are assessed in his or
her country, the methods of assessment, and how this assessment is used.
Mr. Korff said age, type of offence, family background and personal history constitute elements ofassessment in his country. To this, Dr. Skelton said emphasis should be placed on the juvenile’s abilities andinterests. Professor Sugiyama added that considering the juvenile’s abilities and interests is very important
for reintegration. Ms. Caracelli, from Brazil, said that in her country the type of offence and age are theprimary factors for consideration. The mental and physical development of the juvenile and his or her family
situation are also taken into account. For the participant from Honduras, family background is a very
important factor. The participant from Cameroon said assessment by probation officers is based on the
traditional elements of age, type of offence, criminal history etc. The medical approach is used in age
determination and type of offence is important in determining diversion.
Ms. Kuli said that in Tonga there are two kinds of assessments; one for pretrial diversion programmes
and the other for court. Six elements are used: family background, health status, criminal history, social
circumstances, educational status and economic status. Marks are allocated as follows; 0-9 is low risk; 10-17
is moderate risk; 18-25 is high risk. Drug abuse is a subtitle under the social circumstance category.
The participant from Iraq said the political situation is an important element in assessment in his country.
Mr. Imamura said the social and economic situation should be also considered.
Concerning methods of assessment, the participant from South Africa said that in his country theassessment is conducted via interviews with the juvenile. The interviewers are probation officers,
schoolteachers and parents. This is the same for Brazil.
In the case of Iraq, interview is carried out after identifying the juvenile suspect. The Honduras
participant said police officers in his country carry out such investigations. In Cameroon and Tonga
assessment is carried out through interviewing of juvenile offenders, family members, teachers, friends,
church leaders, employers or any person who can provide useful information.

149

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.75

In Japan, as revealed by Mr. Imamura, interviews and questionnaires are used. Professor Sugiyama addedthat psychological tests are used by the juvenile classification home officer. To this, Professor Higuchi said
psychological tests are not always effective because they do not guarantee that juveniles will speak thetruth; therefore, professional judgment is very important. Still on assessment methods, the visiting expert
from Canada, Dr. Hoge, said assessments should be standardized, the people who administer them should bewell trained, and assessment of juveniles should be different from that of adults. He gave the example of theCase Management Index method which gathers and mixes information. In addition there should always beroom for professional judgments and flexibility, and he emphasized that school officers should be taught basic
risk/needs assessments because there is a danger that they may overestimate risk, especially risk ofviolence.
On the use of assessment, the participant from South Africa said the scoring sheets are used todetermine level of delinquency, peer influence and other characteristics. In Cameroon probation officers
have discretion to decide on the use of assessment results. This decision influences future determinations
on diversion and premature release. In the case of Tonga, assessment results are used to evaluate thejuvenile’s characteristics and from this make an individualized treatment plan. They also enlighten on thecomposition of the panel members who will attend the juvenile hearing, the appropriate disposition and theelaboration of an appropriate rehabilitation programme. In Japan assessment results are used to determine
the appropriate disposition and elaboration of treatment programmes.

IV. DEVELOPMENT OF AN EFFECTIVE TREATMENT PROGRAMMEIN ACCORDANCE WITH RISK AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Under this topic the participants discussed the characteristics and circumstances of each juvenile which
ought to be considered in order to develop a treatment programme, the kind of treatment programmes that
could be introduced, and the kinds of resources that could be used.
Concerning the characteristics of the juvenile, the participant from Honduras said the juvenile’s abilities
and interests should be a primary factor for consideration, to which all participants agreed. Mr. Ndama addedthat in complement to the juvenile’s skill and ability, community opinion should be considered since thecommunity’s acceptance of the juvenile favours his or her reintegration. Therefore, in determining risk
there is a need to strike a balance between juvenile risk and social risk.
In Japan, as expressed by Mr. Imamura, evaluation of a juvenile’s characteristics are based on thefollowing classification elements: drug dependency, relationship with gangs, sex offences, psychologicaldisorders (including mental disability), unemployment, level of education, school violence, and domestic
violence. Professor Sugiyama mentioned that emotional maturity was also an important characteristic toassess.
Ms. Kuli explained that in addition to needs, skills, and the disposition of the community, the juvenile’s
health, physical condition and possible changes in his or her circumstances if he or she moves from one
community to another, should be considered. All participants concurred.
Regarding treatment programmes to be introduced, participants agreed that they should be individualized
as much as possible. This is the case in Japan where there are different treatment programmes according todifferent behavioural patterns and characteristics, such as sex offender treatment programmes, drug
treatment programmes, vocational training, etc.
In addition, many participants admitted the insufficiency or poor enforcement of treatment programmes
in their countries. In the case of Honduras there are 12 programmes for at-risk juveniles and a passiveminors’ programme. These programmes face problems such as lack of finances and inadequately trained
personnel. They therefore need to be improved. In Cameroon, there is a need for a treatment programme forgirls and drug offenders as the numbers of such offenders are increasing.
Finally, participants agreed that in addition to taking into account juveniles’ abilities and interests, such as
sports or music, treatment programmes should incorporate, as much as possible, elements of juveniles’
former environments. For example, for juveniles who have links with gangs, the rites and role types that150

136TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE COURSE

feature in gang life can be used in the elaboration of a treatment programme for them.
Referring to possible resources the group unanimously agreed that institutional and community
resources are necessary. In Japan, this involves professional probation officers and VPOs; in South Africa, itmeans assistant probation officers and probation officers; and in other countries it refers to probation
officers.
Mr. Imamura asked what material is to be used by these officials and proposed the establishment of
unified manuals to provide the same quality of treatment across all institutions. Mr. Ndama thought such amanual could minimize differences in knowledge and experience of probation workers, while Professor
Higuchi thought that since crimes are varied, an excessively detailed manual would discourage independent
thinking and initiative, thereby promoting incompetence. Professor Sugiyama expressed the view that a
guideline rather than a manual was necessary and this should be associated with experience and discussion
between professionals. This was agreed upon by participants.
The use of community resources was considered very important in community-based treatment, forexample, in Iraq community treatment involves religious and tribal leaders with strong influence in thecommunity. This may require political and financial aid. The fono in Tonga, where nobles and elders in thevillage meet to solve the juvenile’s problems, is a further example.
It was noted that in many countries NGOs and religious organizations are the major providers ofcommunity-based assistance to juveniles. Workers in these bodies usually assist offenders on a voluntarybasis and the organizations themselves usually face financial problems and lack of access to information.
Given the above situation group members were unanimous on the fact that it’s important for governments toprovide necessary information and financial aid to these bodies. The role of the government in providing
incentives to companies who employ juveniles and that of the mass media in sensitization of communities on
the need, importance and advantage of community-based treatment as against prejudice and rejection ofjuveniles was highlighted. To this end, the Japanese example regarding incentives for employers wasconsidered an example to emulate.
In relation to this topic certain difficulties were raised. Dr. Hoge mentioned that although community
opinion is important, it is difficult to consider it in a large community where there are few or no relationships
between community members.
Another problem raised by Professor Sugiyama was sectionalism, which makes it difficult for PPOs,
VPOs and police to co-operate with schools. Nonetheless, she said this is changing due to co-operation fromthe community. In reaction to these difficulties presented, the group unanimously agreed that the use ofopinion leaders within the community is crucial, coupled with media sensitization of the community.
Nevertheless, the difficulty of how to sensitize the media to advance this aim remains.

V. DEVELOPMENT OF AN EFFECTIVE TREATMENT PROGRAMME CONSIDERING
VICTIMS AND/OR RESTITUTION OF HARM CAUSED TO VICTIMS
Under this topic, the group discussed the victim’s feelings, expectations and needs; how, where and when
offenders and victims should relate; and the third parties that should be involved in victim-offender contact.
On the aspect of victim’s feelings, Dr. Hoge said anger and sorrow were common emotions experienced
by victims. Also, victims may blame themselves, lose interest in their lives and isolate themselves fromsociety, as mentioned by the participant from South Africa. Other concerns are cases where victims don’t
want to talk at all, even after a minor offence. This has happened in many cases in Brazil. With the victims
having these feelings it is important to know what they want. The participant from Cameroon in relation tothis said some victims may want justice to be done while others may not bother much about the offence. Stillon this, Professor Higuchi said victims want severe punishment and they expect the government to provide
such punishment. In order to take the victim’s interest into consideration, compensation is important.
Dr. Hoge said this could be monetary compensation or community work. Also, Mr. Ndama mentioned thatvictims may require only symbolic compensation, such as an apology. Professor Sugiyama added that victims
want some information about the offender, the circumstances and facts constituting the offence. It is

151

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.75

noteworthy, as Ms. Imai mentioned, that in cases where the victim is seriously injured as a result of theoffence and needs continuous medical assistance, or is permanently handicapped, the issue of receiving
compensation becomes very serious.
Referring to how offenders and victims should relate, Dr. Hoge said that face-to-face meeting is the mostuseful but it is very difficult and needs to be applied carefully. In some cases, victims do not want to see theoffender. Ms. Caracelli said that in Brazil, communities are shown a video on how juveniles are serving thecommunity through voluntary work. Some victims feel more satisfied and less afraid after watching thevideo. Dr. Hoge added that although compensation is very important, restorative justice has to continue after
restitution because there are needs of juveniles which need to be addressed.
The discussion that followed was on the matter of where victims and offenders should meet. Mr. Al-Taher
said that in his country, they meet in a tribe guesthouse, a countryside place called the “Senate”, or tribe
police affairs where meetings are organized in conformity with the desires of the victim. Other participants
proposed that the meetings should be held at the victim’s house and or an administrator’s office. Participants
finally agreed on Ms. Kuli’s proposal that a neutral place where both parties could relax, chosen throughconsensus and accepted by them both, was preferable.
Ms. Kuli also asked whether offenders could write letters to victims. Participants agreed that this was
possible where victims were ready to read the letters. Participants discussed the inability of many offenders
to write comprehensive letters due to their low level of education. It was unanimously agreed that face-toface meeting between victims and offenders in a convenient place accepted by both parties is most desirable.
Speaking on when victims and offenders should meet, Mr. Imamura said that victims’ feelings usually show
the following progression: firstly confusion; secondly anger and revenge when he or she finds out the facts
constituting the offence; and thirdly wanting to act to achieve solutions. As such, the best time for the
meeting between the victim and the offender is after the second stage. This opinion was unanimously
accepted by all group members. Talking about third parties who should be included in victim-offender
meetings, Mr. Rodriguez said the victim should be accompanied by a friend or somebody he or she trusts.
The participant from Cameroon continued that in cases of sexual offence victims are often in a very sensitive
situation and in the case of murder the bereaved family’s feelings are very severe and this should beconsidered when deciding on the presence of third parties. Dr. Hoge highlighted the fact that the healing of
the victim is a process and should be considered as such. Ms. Kuli was of the opinion that the victim’s andoffender’s choices should be considered when deciding on the presence of third parties.
The group finally agreed that third parties were necessary for the successful conduct of victim-offender
meetings but stipulated that they needed to be chosen carefully, taking into account the desires of both
victims and offenders.

VI. CONTINUOUS COLLABORATION AND MAINTAINING LINKS WITH
INSTITUTIONAL TREATMENT SERVICES (THROUGH-CARE)
Under this topic the group discussed three issues: how to strengthen the relationship between related
treatment agencies to create an integrated system; the efforts communities can make before they receive
the juvenile, and the institutional change that can be introduced to enhance inter-agency co-operation.
Relating to the first issue, participants agreed that communication and exchange of information between
treatment agencies and the community was crucial in increasing collaboration and co-operation between
them. This nonetheless requires due regard for the juvenile’s right to privacy and should be done in thejuvenile’s best interests. In this regard, information should not be given to just anybody and should be given
for a good reason. Ideally information will be provided only to persons or bodies who have a positive stake inthe juvenile’s rehabilitation. In the case of Japan, there is a juvenile support team in which VPOs, police
officers, child welfare centre officers and school teachers discuss juvenile aftercare treatment.
In Honduras, officials and bodies involved in treatment have access to only part of the information on thecase of the juvenile; full access is the exclusive preserve of the judge. Ms. Kuli proposed in this regard thatthe probation officer should be responsible for information on the juvenile.

152

136TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE COURSE

Mr. Korff said depending on the country situation, the courts of the Social Welfare Department could bein charge of information on the juvenile. No matter what the facts of the case, it is desirable and in the bestinterests of the juvenile that the probation office has a perfect mastery of this information. Professor
Sugiyama, from her Kenyan experience, posited a situation in which different agencies may use differently
formatted documents, thereby creating misunderstanding. In this case the challenge of ensuring the use ofidentically formatted documents by all agencies is very important, because this enhances co-operation andcollaboration. The participant from Honduras said this situation exists in his country, where NGOs use
differently formatted documents, but agencies exchange information with them and everything works well.
Exchange of personnel between agencies as a means of enhancing collaboration was also mentioned byProfessor Sugiyama.
Concerning the efforts communities should undertake before they receive the juvenile, participants
focused on community sensitization in order to ensure preparedness. The participant from South Africa said
that in his country there is a “police forum” involving police officers, community members and invited
experts, where juvenile offenders’ issues are discussed and common solutions are sought. This makes thecommunity more prepared to receive and accept the juvenile, and prevents stigmatization. Social events arealso organized in the community for sensitization.
The participant from Brazil revealed that the above-mentioned approach is also used in her country andthis raises community awareness of and co-operation with the reintegration of juveniles. To this, theparticipant from Tonga said that police officers and probation workers have connections with people who are
influential in the community, to whom they can turn for help in sensitizing the community. She also
underscored the important role of the mass media in community sensitization. Enhancing community
preparedness also requires that the community has some information about the juvenile that they will
receive. In this connection, Professor Sugiyama said the community needs to know what the juvenile wants
to do after release, and it needs to understand what training the juvenile has received by visiting theinstitution or exchanging letters with staff.
Mr. Ndama proposed that the community be involved in activities of vocational training and living
guidance within the institution. This will ready the community to receive and accept the juvenile because it
can already identify with the juvenile when he or she is released.
With reference to what institutional change should be introduced to enhance inter-agency co-operation,
the group had a heated discussion.
Mr. Ndama highlighted the fact that the link between the institution and the community is difficult toestablish, but it is nonetheless desirable to continue treatment after the juvenile’s release. It is therefore
necessary to establish a formal public institution for aftercare. He continued that in Japan there is a formallink between institutional treatment and community-based treatment, but this is not the case in many othercountries, like his, where commissions have been proposed in each province to act as a link between theinstitution and the community. Professor Sugiyama said in that in Japan, the parole board decides whether or
not the juvenile will be paroled. Also, in some systems, such as that of Hong Kong, correctional institutions
have a section in charge of aftercare activities such as job searching. Ms. Kuli said that in Tonga, theprobation office is the link between institutional treatment and community-based treatment. Mr. Imamura
mentioned the fact that establishing a good system of information was most important given that providing
information to the community is more necessary than setting up a new government institution. Regarding
the juvenile’s right to privacy, he said information can be provided on an anonymous basis, on request. For
example, when a company requests information for recruitment, the juvenile’s name is not disclosed.
Mr. Ndama next proposed the establishment of a government agency which co-ordinates several
community resources regarding the juvenile because he believes that an overly complicated system would
be unclear and vague. He also said that the Japanese system is too dependent on volunteers. The participantfrom South Africa said to change institutions you must have good benchmarks and communication between
agencies and everyone has to assume responsibility. In relation to the proposal to establish anotherinstitution which is mainly in charge of aftercare, the participant from Cameroon said it was an excellent
idea, but mentioned one difficulty. According to him, most of the time corrections tend to be regarded as aconsuming department and to convince the government to provide a budget for institutional change, it is153

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.75

important to use cost-benefit analysis. This opinion was also shared by Mr. Imamura. To this, the participantfrom South Africa said that before carrying out institutional change it is necessary to carry out an impact
study to show how corrections can decrease recidivism and save money.

VII. AN AFTERCARE SYSTEM WHICH HELPS MAINTAIN THE EFFECT OF
CORRECTIONAL TREATMENT AND PROMOTES REINTEGRATION
Under this topic, the group dwelt firstly on how aftercare should maintain the effect of correctional
treatment; secondly on how it reduces the risk of reoffending; and finally how it enhances the juvenile’s
ability to reintegrate into the community.
Relating to the first subtopic, Ms. Caracelli said that in her country finding a job for juveniles is very
difficult, and there is no aftercare treatment. She continued that there is an agricultural training school but it
is not for juveniles. This school, she said, may be useful for juveniles and does not require a large
government budget.
Ms. Kuli said continuous communication with the juvenile’s family, school authorities and community isnecessary. To this end, in her country, probation officers continue to keep in touch with family members andschool members for at least six months. Ms. Caracelli mentioned that it is possible to work on continuous
aftercare where the community can collaborate with the police and schools to help juveniles.
Mr. Korff said an impact study is very important to see whether the treatment was effective and if
juveniles have re-offended. The participant from Cameroon was of the opinion that there is a big gap
between community-based treatment and institutional treatment, and it is necessary to make efforts to
reduce this gap since treatment has to be a continuous process.
Ms. Caracelli next highlighted the fact that it is important for juveniles to attend community-based
activities, while for Tonga’s participant it is also important to solve family problems before release and it isdesirable for juveniles to attend counselling once or twice a week.
Professor Sugiyama said that in Japan it is necessary to provide many medical follow-up programmessuch as hospital or clinic visits to treat the juvenile’s mental disorder or psychological problem. Additionally,
there is need for professional support to supervise the juveniles after release because supervising them isdifficult for their family members. According to Professor Sugiyama, family support is very necessary and
VPOs work in liaison with families, medical doctors, counsellors and other experts. The problem here is thatvery few of these professionals provide these services and the insufficiency of medical follow-up
programmes makes it difficult to release the juvenile. Some people are thus of the opinion that a juvenile
should remain in the institution for a longer period so as to get full treatment before he or she is released.
To this the participant from Cameroon said that a longer stay in the institution defeats the very purposeof juvenile justice which demands that juveniles be in institutions for the shortest possible time. This,according to him, is a controversial issue and should be a matter of public policy.
For the participant from Iraq, whether or not the juvenile has the support of family members after his or
her release is very important. If he or she has no family member there is a need to provide a particular
programme. This in his opinion is because when the juvenile is released, he or she may be taken care of by
the probation officer for a few months but if there is no family member to take over he or she will go back tothe streets and resume a criminal or delinquent lifestyle. The government therefore has to take care of suchjuvenile offenders and oversee their rehabilitation. He added that in his country the government provides
counselling to increase the self-esteem of juveniles and the community has to accept him or her. Also, thegovernment provides money to juveniles without jobs to get married and to start a small business.
Professor Sugiyama was of the opinion that establishing facilities requires a large budget. She said that inJapan the government gives compensation or financial aid to companies which employ juveniles. This was
proposed as a good approach by the participant from Tonga.

154

136TH INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARREPORTS OF THE COURSE

The participant from South Africa revealed that his government gives subsidies to certain organizations
which provide free accommodation and food to released juveniles and the juveniles in turn do community
work. Also, most churches carry out weekend activities where social workers and other professionals
provide counselling, communication and social skills to juveniles.
The participant from Cameroon said that public opinion is sometimes very critical of government
provision of facilities for offenders which are much better than those available to the law-abiding community.
It is therefore necessary according to him to provide minimum service; this is the responsibility of thegovernment because over-reliance on volunteer systems does not set a solid basis for aftercare.
He added that private individuals or companies can provide aftercare services and manage them under
the supervision of the government, like the privatization system underway in Hong Kong and Japan. To this,Professor Sugiyama said halfway houses in Japan were established by private persons, but now thegovernment provides about 70% to 80% of their budgets. She added that Japan is now planning to establish
national halfway houses for offenders who are difficult to deal with and this may be useful to other countries.
For Mr. Imamura, the important thing is improving the juvenile’s ability or awareness rather than giving
any particular kind of aid. Also, Ms. Kuli said a post-release legal system is needed because most aftercare
activities are carried out through personal or group initiatives.
On how aftercare can reduce the risk of reoffending the participant from South Africa asserted that theprobation officer’s role is very important. He continued that his country has a programme for adult andjuvenile sex offenders called “Say Stop’’. This is an NGO programme, which aims at preventing offenders
from committing further sex offences. He also emphasized the importance of stopping juveniles fromengaging in relationships with peers, especially adults, who influence them negatively. The above-mentioned
programme provides advice and counselling to them in this regard.
Mr. Rodriguez said that in Honduras there is no aftercare system. Co-ordination between NGOs and thegovernment is therefore necessary. In his opinion, police officers could call such meetings. Ms. Imai said it isalso important for NGOs to receive budgets from the government. This is because without such budgets, it
is difficult for the government to supervise NGOs and they can’t work effectively.
According to Ms. Kuli, an aftercare system has to accommodate the problems of the juvenile. This needs
continuous assessment after release and the information has to be shared with family members. She addedthat aftercare has to continue until the juvenile is completely corrected or becomes an adult.
To this Mr. Korff reaffirmed the importance of continuous assessment to see if the juvenile is progressing
and the crucial role of the probation officer.
Mr. Imamura said when we assess the risk and needs of the juvenile both before and after release, notonly family problems but relationships with supportive persons are important. In addition, whether or not
the juvenile has a job is important, not only because of money but also because it is important for him or her
to contribute to society.
Mr. Al-Taher agreed with Mr. Imamura’s opinion and added that the juvenile should also feel forgiven andnot have a sense of guilt anymore in order to consider himself or herself accepted and admitted into thecommunity.
Mr. Ndama was of the opinion that bad peer influence and recidivism can be reduced by changing the way
the juvenile uses his or her free time. In this connection, treatment programmes should involve juveniles
using their free time for healthy distractions and hobbies, such as the Midnight Programmes in Brazil. In
this regard it is important to take the juvenile’s interest into consideration and not impose on him on her
activities which will not work.
Professor Higuchi said that in his experience, the juvenile is relatively psychologically, mentally and evenphysically weak. This makes him or her want to belong to a group and he or she tends to return todetrimental peer groups after release. It is therefore necessary to provide the juvenile with another group,155

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.75

such as legal motorcycle riders or an agricultural activities group, which is involved in constructive
activities.
Following this the participant from Brazil said that in her country, juveniles always talk about groups andthey say the group is waiting for them. She agrees therefore, that it is very important to provide them withanother group.
On aftercare enhancing the juvenile’s ability to reintegrate into the community, Professor Sugiyama said
the juvenile’s parents always need continuous support because they tend to conceal the juvenile’s case fromtheir wider social circle. They are also afraid to ask for help because they are always criticized by othercommunity members. She mentioned that in the case of Japan each prefectural police office has a support
centre which the juvenile’s parents can consult at no cost. Ms. Caracelli also added that the juvenile’s familyneeds support in looking for a job and counselling by probation officers is very important for them. For Ms.
Kuli, to make aftercare treatment effective, connecting with family and community members is very
important and there is need for a legal system of aftercare treatment.
The participant from South Africa said that in his country, there is a “Skill Development Programme’’
which provides juveniles with skills so that they can find employment.
Referring to the family, the participant from Cameroon said it is one of the most important elements inensuring that the juvenile is reintegrated into the community. According to him, counselling parents
increases their ability to help the juveniles after release, making it a vital element of aftercare treatment. He
went ahead to underscore the role of the victim in aftercare treatment. He said when the victim and offender
are in the same community, the victim will be an important element in facilitating the juvenile’s reintegrationin cases where he or she has forgiven the juvenile. The victim can convince the community members toaccept the juvenile as he or she has done.
Mr. Al-Taher said the volunteer system is very important because it has a direct influence on thecommunity. He added that Iraq has a child adoption system which works very well.

VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS
1.

2.
3.
4.

5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

156

Community-based treatment measures must be in line with the needs of offenders. A board or
governmental institution may screen these programmes before allowing implementation by NGOs
and other community organizations. By doing this, the government may also need to set guidelines
or regulations;
A treatment programme for the type of risk and need assessment should be developed by specialists
and role players in co-operation with the police and departments of justice, social welfare,correctional services and prisons;Considering the protection of the human rights of juveniles, governments must prioritize financial
support of treatment programmes and concerned organizations;
Aftercare agencies should co-operate and collaborate with all institutional organizations.
Communication and exchange of information and community resources between treatment agencies
and the community is crucial in increasing collaboration and co-operation between them. This shouldtake into consideration the juvenile’s right to privacy, and should be in the juvenile’s best interests.
Identically formatted documents should be used by all agencies to enhance co-operation andcollaboration among stakeholders;
The use of community resources such as religious groups, community leaders and police community
forums should be highly considered for community-based treatment;
Third parties are necessary for successful victim-offender meetings but they need to be chosencarefully, taking into account the desires and situations of both victims and offenders;Aftercare residences (halfway houses, etc.) should be established or increased to continue effective
treatment of the juvenile within the community;
Continuous supervision, assessment and treatment of juveniles, and supports to their parents andfamilies, should be maintained;
Treatment programmes should provide juveniles with healthy distractions and hobbies in which they
have interest so as to reduce negative peer influence and recidivism.