WORKSHOP 2 OF THE FOURTEENTH UNITED NATIONS CONGRESSON CRIME PREVENTION AND CRIMINAL JUSTICEIntroduction
1. Workshop 2 of the Fourteenth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice
was held from 8-9 March 2021 in the Committee Room at theKyoto International Conference Center in Kyoto, Japan. Dr.
Matti Joutsen, the chair of Committee II, introduced theworkshop theme of reducing reoffending and desistance. The
chair introduced Director SETO Takeshi of UNAFEI as thescientific moderator of the workshop and its three panels. The
chair explained that he would summarize the outcome of theworkshop and would then report it to the committee.
2. Dr. Kittipong Kittayarak, former Executive Director of the Thailand Institute of Justice (TIJ),
observed that the Mandela Rules established the importance ofprison-based rehabilitation programmes, yet overcrowding has
undermined the ability of prisons to rehabilitate offenders,
underscoring the importance of community-based treatment andmulti-stakeholder partnership. As Covid-19 has limited the abilityof justice systems to engage in offender rehabilitation,practitioners should exchange best practices to ensure theeffectiveness of rehabilitation and reintegration programmes.
Keynote Speech
3. Dr. Fergus McNeill, Professor of Criminology and Social Work at the University of Glasgow,
reported that as many as half of all people incarcerated return to prison. The costs of reoffending
are economic and human, and the Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated the failure of the state torehabilitate offenders through punishment. Punitive responses have enhanced social disintegration,
leading to more reoffending. The destabilization of societies due to these policies is in directconflict with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). There is a growing evidence base tosuggest that stigmatization and criminal punishment slow the rehabilitative process. Thus,
rehabilitative interventions must be guided by three principles: parsimony (no more intervention
than necessary), proportionality, and productiveness (personal, judicial, moral and social
rehabilitation). Dr. McNeill introduced the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Model as a specificform of “personal rehabilitation” and stated that pro-social modelling by correctional staff plays
an important role in offender rehabilitation. The Good Lives Model was also introduced as arehabilitation model that promotes “primary human goods”, byfocusing on offenders’ personal strengths. Desistance is linked tophysical and psychological maturation, the development of newsocial connections, and a shift in personal identity, requiring
respect for diversity, enhancing social relations, enabling selfdetermination, providing practical support (housing, employmentetc.), and recognizing and celebrating change. Public participationand social reintegration programmes are critical to helping
1

offenders along their paths to lasting change. As reconviction data is a limited measure of thesuccess of desistance, research should focus on efforts to reduce barriers to reintegration imposedby the state with the goal of keeping penal systems small and judging criminal justice by its ability
to enable reintegration and promote desistance.
Panel I: Creating rehabilitative prison environments
4. Ms. Vera Tkachenko, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Officer of the United Nations Officeon Drugs and Crime (UNODC), introduced the UNODC’s technical assistance programmes, whichshifted policies toward crime prevention and social reintegration. Enhanced investment inpersonnel is crucial to ensure rehabilitation, and rehabilitative prisons actually increase prison
security. Rehabilitative prisons can also improve public health by addressing addiction and otherissues, while social reintegration of offenders requires active participation of the public andrelevant community stakeholders to reinforce progress made during prison-based programmes.
5. Ms. Mariana Martin, Commissioner of Rehabilitation of the Namibian Correctional Service
introduced offender treatment practices in Namibia, which implemented its offender risk
management correctional strategy, focusing on individualized treatment as a means for reducing
reoffending. Since implementing the RNR model, the correctional service has improved its ability
to understand which programmes will be most effective for each offender and for allocating
resources effectively. Namibia’s experience has demonstrated that offenders need to have theircriminogenic needs addressed, but they also require support for desistance.
6. Dr. Emiliano Blanco, former National Director, Federal Prison Service of Argentina, presented onefforts to address corruption in Argentina’s prisons, noting the links between anti-corruption,reducing reoffending and creating rehabilitative prison environments. He shared Argentina’s
experience in promoting a culture of integrity in prison, which led to prisoners’ reports that they
were treated with more respect and enjoyed a greater quality of life in prison. Dr. Blanco
recommended prisoner surveys to measure corruption perception, and continual monitoring andmeasurement is fundamental to detecting and responding to corruption trends.
7. Ms. Heidi Bottolfs, Deputy Director General of the Directorate of Correctional Service of Norway,
addressed the “principle of normality” and its application in Norwegian prisons. The principle ofnormality implies that every prisoner should enjoy the same rights as all other persons living inNorway. These rights include placement in the least-restrictive security regime with a prison
environment that resembles life outside prison. To create rehabilitative prison environments,principles and values matter. Instilling principles and values requires the hiring of officers with apositive attitude toward rehabilitation and training them to improve their treatment skills.
Panel II: Community-based approaches that support desistance
8. Dr. Matti Joutsen, Special Advisor, TIJ, delivered the keynote address for Panel II, noting that
non-custodial approaches are more effective at reducing reoffending (at lower cost) than custodial
alternatives. Custodial treatment is under-resourced and overburdened, resulting in harmful prison
environments and more reoffending. Both research and practical experience demonstrate thatshort-term imprisonment tends to increase reoffending. As most offenders will be released into thecommunity, treatment in the community works in connection with high-quality, well-targeted,well-resourced and well-supported interventions. Most low- and medium-risk offenders need no2

support; however, members of vulnerable populations – the poor, migrants, and other marginalizedgroups – are in great need of support, along with higher-risk offenders. Good practices found in
the UN standards and norms, such as the Tokyo Rules and the Bangkok Rules, can be replicatedand adapted, but policymakers and practitioners should be aware of and avoid net widening –expanding the overall offender population through the application of non-custodial measures. Dr.
Joutsen identified six keys to the wider use of community-based sanctions: (i) an adequate range
of non-custodial sentences must be available to judges, (ii) substantive and procedural criminal
laws should be reviewed, (iii) stakeholders should be provided with necessary information andtraining, (iv) partnerships between criminal justice decision makers and community-based services
should be improved, (v) a steady resource base should be ensured and (vi) a continuous researchcomponent should be ensured. Dr. Joutsen stated that non-custodial sanctions are in line with theSDGs, and the issues are cross-cutting, meaning that we must consider the impact of criminal
justice decisions on the victim, the offender and the community. Ultimately, greater use of noncustodial measures should lead toward a “development-led criminal justice system”.
9. Ms. Jennifer Oades, Chairperson of the Parole Board of Canada, addressed how community-based
approaches facilitate rehabilitation and reintegration and the importance of community
partnerships to the provision of services. Ms. Oades identified the keys to success as gradual andstructured release, quality case information, evidence-based risk assessment, highly qualified
board members and specialized training. Parole hearings are now more gender and trauma
informed. She also stressed the importance of public awareness, citing the “Judges to Jail”
programme in which judges gain an understanding of the effects of sentencing.
10. Ms. Jana Špero, Assistant Minister of Justice of Croatia, presented on the step-by-step introductionof probation in Croatia. Although prisons are necessary, short-term custodial sentences areextraordinarily damaging to offenders’ lives through the disruption of employment, family andsocial connections, etc. Ms. Špero emphasized that building public trust is a key aspect ofdeveloping new probation systems. Probation enhances public safety by providing counselling andsupport in the community. Providing these services requires extensive cooperation with courts, thepolice, prosecutors, the prison service, social services, health care institutions, NGOs, etc. She
encouraged new probation systems, and those in formation, to work with other countries andorganizations to develop ideas and tailor them to the local context.
11. Justice Theresa Matheka of the High Court of Kenya spoke on community approaches to juvenile
desistance in Kenya. To overcome the punitive approach engrained in Kenya’s juvenile justicesystem, Justice Matheka created multi-agency Child Protection Teams (now called Children Court
Users Committees) to address challenges and identify solutions. Due to a capacity-building
programme using an integrated approach (judges, police, probation officers, prison officers andchildren officers), bureaucratic barriers were removed, and as a result, service delivery improved,
there was greater use of social inquiry reports, and the best interests of the child were addressed.
12. Dr. Manuel Co, former Administrator of the Parole and Probation Administration (PPA) of thePhilippines, spoke on barangay (village) justice and the probation system. As in the barangay
system, restorative principles are applied to probation and parole. Mediation, conferencing andcircles of support involve community members, volunteer probation assistants, offenders, etc. The

3

barangay system and the work of the PPA apply restorative justice principles in similar ways,
providing forums for people to solve their problems without resorting to the criminal justice system.
Panel III: Taking a multifaceted approach to ensure continuous support and services forrehabilitation and reintegration of offenders
13. Mr. IMAFUKU Shoji of the Rehabilitation Bureau of the Ministryof Justice of Japan presented on government-led multi-stakeholder
partnership. He introduced Japan’s practice of reintegration
coordination among correctional officers and probation officers,
noting that this approach begins as early as possible upon
incarceration and continues after release. He also stressed that it isimportant for probation officers to work with local partners, such aswelfare and medical institutes, self-help groups, local government and the private sector, including
halfway houses and volunteer probation officers (VPOs), to connect offenders with support
services. VPOs also help to promote public understanding of the need for reintegration support.
14. Ms. Sodiqua Williams of the Safer Foundation presented on building safe pathways to successful
re-entry for returning residents in Chicago, Illinois. Many people with arrest and conviction
records are either stigmatized or stripped of rights, threatening their ability to obtain housing,
employment and other basic services. Re-entry must be viewed through a holistic lens that
addresses a litany of underlying social issues. To achieve racial justice and equity, vulnerable
populations need support, and governments need to invest in re-entry services and support.
15. Ms. Olivia Rope, Executive Director of Penal Reform International, presented on genderresponsive rehabilitation, introducing PRI’s work in Georgia and in Thailand. PRI’s researchshows that women face common barriers to rehabilitation, such as poverty, violence,stigmatization, mental health needs, and status as sole caretakers. In Georgia, health andcounselling, employment and childcare were identified as the top needs of women re-enteringsociety. Shelters provide safe spaces for women as they re-enter society, and they enable theprovision of legal and psychological counselling. Economic empowerment to tackle poverty isimportant to help returning women earn livelihoods, as is coordinating multi-stakeholder re-entry
support.
16. Mr. Ali Reunanen of Criminals Return Into Society (KRIS), a Sweden-based peer-support group,
introduced himself as an addict and offender, explaining his own
history of trauma and victimization and how it led him toward crimeand addiction. He underscored that change comes from within,requiring the offender to ask for help. Thus, peer support groups areimportant to the development of self-esteem and efficacy. The path
toward recovery often requires treatment in prison, drawing
inspiration from hope and faith, self-help groups, housing support etc.
17. Ms. Cristina Mattei of Hedayah, presented on MASAR, Hedayah’s online monitoring,measurement and evaluation tool and its applicability to all forms of offender rehabilitation andreintegration programmes. MASAR helps frame the “theory of change” to project long-term
impact, track progress towards goals and activities, generate indicators to measure impact and4performance, identify data collection methods, etc. By enhancing evaluation capability, MASAR
helps practitioners design and identify smarter goals for treatment programmes, select appropriate
indicators and analyse the results.
Summary18. The moderator briefly summarized the workshop presentations and interventions as havinggenerated consensus on the importance of the following approaches to reducing reoffending: (i)individualized treatment drawing on the principles of the RNR Model, the Good Lives Model andDesistance Theory; (ii) less restrictive sanctions while avoiding mass supervision and netwidening; (iii) continuity of support throughout the process of rehabilitation and reintegration
through a multi-stakeholder approach. He also noted that, during the discussion, there was arecommendation to create model strategies on reducing recidivism.

5