Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 2:55 am
Time: 2:55 am
Results for criminal justice systems
92 results foundAuthor: Great Britain. HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, HM Inspectorate of Court Administration, and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary Title: Report of a Joint Thematic Review of Victim and Witness Experiences in the Criminal Justice System Summary: This joint inspectorate report examined the effectiveness of services provided to victims and witnesses of crime, and whether they maximized the likelihood of witnesses attending court and improved the confidence of victims and witnesses in the criminal justice system. Details: London: Criminal Justice Joint Inspection, 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 116247 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsVictimsWitnesses |
Author: New Zealand. Department of Corrections. Policy, Strategy and Research Group Title: Over-Representation of Maori in the Criminal Justice System: An Exploratory Report Summary: This report examines the over-representation of Maori in various points of the criminal justice system in order to answer the question of why the numbers of Maori are so high. It also seeks to provide a basis upon which options to address the problem can best be formulated. Details: Wellington: 2007 Source: Year: 2007 Country: New Zealand URL: Shelf Number: 116512 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsIndigenous Peoples |
Author: Dane County Task Force on Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System Title: Final Report Summary: The Task Force was directed to review the February 2008 report of the Governor's Commission and outline an action plan of specific recommendations and best practices to address and reduce disparities at various decicion points in Dane County's criminal justice system. Details: Madison, WI: Dane County Office of Equal Opportunity, 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117372 Keywords: BiasCriminal Justice SystemsRace/Ethnicity |
Author: Matibini, Patrick Title: The Criminal Justice System in Zambia: Enhancing the Delivery of Security in Africa Summary: From the executive summary: "The African Human Security Initiative (AHSI) is a consortium of organisations that has taken the initiative to emphasise human security in Africa. AHSI has used the opportunity created by the peer review concept to complement the formal African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) process of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) to undertake a focused review of the criminal justice system in selected countries identified for the APRM. Under the programme, five countries - Zambia, Tanzania, Benin, Mali and Sierra Leone - were selected for review in 2007 and 2008." Details: Pretoria, South Africa: Institute for Security Studies, 2009 Source: African Human Security Initiative, Monograph 159 Year: 2009 Country: South Africa URL: Shelf Number: 115673 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsZambia |
Author: Amnesty International Title: Case closed: rape and human rights in the nordic countries Summary: This report shows that women who report rape to the police in the Nordic countries have only a small chance of having their cases tried by a court of law. The result is that many perpetrators are never held to account for their crimes. Amnesty International examines the gaps in laws, procedures and practices and calls on the governments of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden to take steps to ensure justice for all victims and survivors of sexual crimes. Details: London: Amnesty International, 2008, 27p. Source: Internet Source Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 118149 Keywords: CourtsCriminal Justice SystemsCriminal ProcedureEuropeRape |
Author: Howe, Martin, Chair Title: Order in the Courts: Restoring Trust Through Local Justice. A Policy Report from the Courts and Sentencing Working Group. Summary: This report draws on interviews with the public, experts, the judiciary, probation and others involved in the criminal justice system. It makes 40 recommendations which will shift the focus of magistrates' courts, the probation service and prisons onto the communities they serve and will make sentences more productive. Details: London: Centre for Social Justice, 2009. 192p. Source: Breakthrough Britain Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 118166 Keywords: CourtsCriminal Justice SystemsSentencing |
Author: Wortley, Scot Title: The Jamaican National Crime Victimization Survey: Final Report Summary: The 2006 Jamaican National Victimization Survey (JNVS) is the first victimization survey conducted in Jamaica that is based on a representative sample of the general Jamaican population. The final victimization survey was completed by a random sample of 3,112 Jamaican residents, 16 years of age or over. The survey focused on the following issues: 1) Patterns of criminal victimization; 2) Community crime problems; 3) Indirect exposure to crime; 4) Fear of Crime; and 5) Public attitudes towards the Jamaican police and other aspects of the Jamaican criminal justice system. Details: Toronto: Centre for Criminology, University of Toronto, 2006. 272p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2010 at: http://www.oas.org/ATIP/documents/victimization_surveys/jamaica/JNCVSfinal_2006%5B1%5D.pdf Year: 2006 Country: Jamaica URL: http://www.oas.org/ATIP/documents/victimization_surveys/jamaica/JNCVSfinal_2006%5B1%5D.pdf Shelf Number: 119988 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsFear of CrimePolice-Community RelationsPublic OpinionVictimization Surveys |
Author: Leonardi, Cherry Title: Local Justice in Southern Sudan Summary: Since its establishment five years ago under the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) has struggled to create a justice system that reflects the values and requirements for justice among the people of Southern Sudan. For both political and practical reasons, chiefs’ courts and customary law are central to this endeavor. A key question facing the GoSS is how to define the relationship between chiefs’ courts (and the ideas about law that they embody) and the courts of Southern Sudan’s judiciary, while ensuring equal access to justice and the protection of human rights. Policy discussions and recent interventions have focused on ascertainment, whereby the customary laws of communities (usually defined as ethnic groups) would be identified and recorded in written form, to become the basis for the direct application, harmonization, and modification of customary law. This report empirically analyzes the current dynamics of justice at the local level, identifying priorities for reform according to the expressed needs and perceptions of local litigants. Our findings are based on field research conducted from November 2009 to January 2010 in three locations in Southern Sudan: Aweil East, Wau, and Kajokeji. Details: Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 2010. 94p. Source: Internet Resource: Peaceworks No. 66: Accessed October 20, 2010 at: http://www.swisspeace.ch/typo3/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/KOFF/country_resources/Sudan_Platform/Local_Justice_in_Southern_Sudan.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Sudan URL: http://www.swisspeace.ch/typo3/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/KOFF/country_resources/Sudan_Platform/Local_Justice_in_Southern_Sudan.pdf Shelf Number: 119973 Keywords: CourtsCriminal Justice SystemsHuman Rights |
Author: Fox, Aubrey Title: Daring to Fail: First-person Stories of Criminal Justice Reform Summary: Talk of “best practices” and “evidence-based programs” has dominated the field of criminal justice in recent years. By and large this has been a positive development – and a natural corrective to policymaking based on anecdote and emotion. But simply spreading evidence-based practices is not enough to solve the pressing public safety problems that continue to plague our country. For one thing, there simply aren’t enough evidence-based programs: the vast majority of the initiatives undertaken by police, courts, probation, pre-trial services and other criminal justice agencies in recent years have not been subjected to rigorous evaluation. That doesn’t mean that they don’t work, of course, just that we don’t have enough data to declare them “evidence-based.” The other problem with spreading evidence-based programs is that they are by definition today’s solutions to yesterday’s problems. New challenges are emerging all of the time within criminal justice. The context is constantly changing. If we hope to keep up, if we hope to respond quickly and effectively to tomorrow’s problems, we must continue to innovate. Recognizing this, the Center for Court Innovation and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance have launched a multi-faceted initiative designed to promote innovation at the grassroots level by encouraging criminal justice agencies to engage in a process of trial and error – much the way a scientist would. A large part of this effort has been devoted to studying criminal justice reform efforts – both successes and failures – in an effort to identify lessons for the innovators of tomorrow. By fostering a more open and honest public discussion of failures in particular, the project seeks to encourage self-reflection, transparency and thoughtful risk-taking among criminal justice agencies. One of the hallmarks of the Trial and Error initiative has been first-person interviews with leading criminal justice scholars, practitioners and policymakers. Over the past three years, staff from the Center for Court Innovation have conducted nearly 100 such interviews with leaders in a variety of fields – prosecution, policing, community corrections, indigent defense and others. This book includes a representative sample of these interviews. While each interview is unique – questions were tailored to each individual’s expertise – in general the interviewees were asked to reflect candidly on challenges from their own professional career and lessons they have learned along the way. Taken together, the interviews offer vivid testimony that even the most successful and well-regarded leaders in the field of criminal justice have experienced their share of setbacks. Almost everyone who appears in this volume has been involved in a program that failed to achieve its stated goals or fell short of expectations in some way. While disappointing, in no case were these failures professionally fatal, in large part because the individuals involved took pains to learn from their mistakes before moving on. In addition to underlining the importance of self-reflection, the interviews that follow also make it clear just how difficult it is to achieve change within the criminal justice system. The obstacles, after all, are enormous. In many places, the volume of work is crushing. Technology is often outmoded. Facilities are often antiquated. Pertinent data is often missing. And this litany doesn’t even include the problems that arrestees, probationers, inmates and parolees bring with them to the criminal justice system, including addiction, mental illness, homelessness and histories of abuse and dysfunction. In this context, it is difficult for many judges, probation officers and prosecutors to simply get through each work day, let alone find time and space to be analytical and creative. This volume also offers clear and compelling evidence that despite long odds, frontline criminal justice practitioners over the past generation have fashioned a number of remarkable innovations that have made a significant difference on the ground and in the streets. Drug courts, CompStat, Ceasefire, problem-oriented policing… the list goes on and on. But this book is not meant to be an exhaustive review of the criminal justice reforms of the past few decades. Rather, it is an effort to tell the stories of dozens of remarkable leaders who have successfully navigated difficult challenges to make change happen within the criminal justice system. The interviews have been lightly edited for clarity and length, but otherwise are verbatim transcripts. Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2010. 177p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2011 at: http://www.courtinnovation.org/_uploads/documents/Daring_2_Fail.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.courtinnovation.org/_uploads/documents/Daring_2_Fail.pdf Shelf Number: 120699 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Kasambala, Tiseke Title: Perpetual Fear: Impunity and Cycles of Violence in Zimbabwe Summary: Two years since the formation of a power-sharing government that was expected to end human rights violations and restore the rule of law, politically motivated violence and the lack of accountability for abuses remains a serious problem in Zimbabwe. Perpetual Fear: Impunity and Cycles of Violence in Zimbabwe, examines the impunity that prevails in Zimbabwe by updating illustrative cases of political killings, torture, and abductions by alleged government security forces and their allies that took place during and after the presidential election run-off in 2008. There has been little or no accountability for these crimes. Cases of political violence that have been filed by victims or their relatives have largely been ignored by the police or have stalled in the courts. And the government has failed to respond to calls by local nongovernmental organizations for investigations into abuses. With a referendum and elections planned for 2011, the lack of accountability and justice for past abuses raises the specter of further violence, and poses a significant obstacle to the holding of free, fair, and credible elections. Human Rights Watch calls on the power-sharing government to immediately embark on credible, impartial and transparent investigations into serious human rights abuses and discipline or prosecute those responsible, regardless of their position or rank. The government should put transitional justice mechanisms in place while reforming the criminal justice system to ensure that it meets international legal standards. Ending impunity for past and ongoing abuses is essential if Zimbabwe is to end violence and firmly establish the rule of law. Details: New York: Human Rights Watch, 2011. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2011 at: http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2011/03/08/perpetual-fear Year: 2011 Country: Zimbabwe URL: http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2011/03/08/perpetual-fear Shelf Number: 120960 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsHuman RightsTortureViolence (Zimbabwe) |
Author: Vera Institute of Justice Title: Proposals for New Orleans' Criminal Justice System: Best Practices to Advance Public Safety and Justice Summary: Hurricane Katrina ravaged New Orleans, destroying not only the city’s infrastructure and the lives of many of its residents, but also its justice system. To identify practical steps New Orleans can take to make its criminal justice system more reliable, effective, and just, the Vera Institute of Justice interviewed key stakeholders—including justice system leaders, representatives of nonprofit research and advocacy groups, and several members of the city council—and reviewed data on how the system has been operating after flooding devastated the city. Specifically, Vera's investigation indicates that New Orleans can improve public safety by pursuing the following new policies or programs: early triage of cases and routine communication between police and prosecutors; a wider range of pretrial release options, community-service sentencing, and greater use of alternatives to prison; and more appropriate and cost-effective sanctions for municipal offenses. For each of these policy areas, this report identifies specific areas of need and proposes solutions that are based on effective practices used in other jurisdictions. Moreover, it focuses on practical steps that over the next six to 12 months promise the “biggest bang for the buck.” Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2007. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 14, 2011 at: http://www.vera.org/download?file=2849/no_proposals.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/download?file=2849/no_proposals.pdf Shelf Number: 120922 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsDisasters (New Orleans)Hurricane Katrina |
Author: The Smart on Crime Coalition Title: Smart on Crime: Recommendations for the Administration and Congress Summary: Smart on Crime: Recommendations for the Administration and Congress provides the 112th Congress and the Administration with analysis of the problems plaguing our state and federal criminal justice systems and a series of recommendations to address these failures. It provides a comprehensive examination of the criminal justice system, from the creation of new criminal laws to ex-offenders’ reentry into communities after serving their sentences. The broad recommendations range from helping to restore and empower victims to identifying ways to protect the rights of the accused. Smart on Crime is organized into 16 chapters, each of which discusses a particular area of criminal justice policy. This report is premised on the idea that to successfully confront the crises in the criminal justice system, we must fully understand the nature of the problems, the context in which the problems arose and in which they continue to exist, and the manner in which recommendations will best address the problem. Thus, each chapter: Identifies the issue; Provides a history and summary of the problems; Proposes specific recommendations; Identifies the role of Congress, the Administration and the judiciary in implementing recommendations; Identifies experts who can provide further analysis; and Refers readers to further resources that provide additional depth and research Provides primary policy contacts available for further inquiries. Chapters include the following: Overcriminalization of Conduct, Overfederalization of Criminal Law, and Exercise of Enforcement Discretion; Asset Forfeiture; Federal Investigations; Federal Grand Juries; Forensic Science; Innocence Issues; Indigent Defense; Juvenile Justice; Federal Sentencing; Improving the Prison System; Death Penalty; Fixing Medellin: Ensuring Consular Access Through Compliance with International Law; Pardon Power and Executive Clemency; Reentry: Ensuring Successful Reintegration After Incarceration; Victims Issues & Restorative Justice; and System Change. Details: Washington, DC: The Constitution Project, 2011. 318p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2011 at: http://www.besmartoncrime.org/pdf/Complete.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.besmartoncrime.org/pdf/Complete.pdf Shelf Number: 121078 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Atabay, Tomris Title: Afghanistan: Implementing Alternatives to Imprisonment, in Line with International Standards and National Legislation Summary: The current assessment forms part of UNODC’s programme to extend penitentiary reform to the provinces of Afghanistan (AFG/R87), building on the UNODC penitentiary reform project ongoing in Afghanistan since 2003 (AFG/R41). The project includes the introduction of initiatives to increase the use of alternatives to prison, in line with the recommendations of international standards, to complement a range of other activities focusing on the infrastructural, normative and operational priorities in the penitentiary system. The assessment provides a review of existing legislation, in terms of their provisions for non-custodial measures and sanctions, with particular focus on the provisions for offenders with mental healthcare needs, drug users, women, juveniles and first time non-violent offenders. It analyses information gathered in Kabul, as regards offences committed by some of these groups and sentences received, with a view to assessing the application of existing provisions for alternatives and potential for expanding the use of non-custodial sanctions and measures. It reviews the capacity of criminal justice institutions and services in the community, provided by the State and NGOs, to implement and support non-custodial measures and sanctions. It comments on the current discussion on forming links with the informal justice structures for diversion from the criminal justice system. Finally, it puts forward a series of recommendations to increase the implementation in practice of existing alternatives to prison, to expand non-custodial measures and sanctions in legislation, and to initiate practical steps to ensure that legislation is applied, and applied to enhance the social reintegration prospects of offenders. The assessment and recommendations are guided by international instruments, including: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; United Nations Standards Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners; United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (Tokyo Rules); United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules); United Nations Principles for the protection of persons with mental illness and the improvement of mental healthcare (Mental Illness Principles) and United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. The assessment has been prepared in the context of priorities and goals set by the Afghanistan Compact, within the overall framework of the Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS), and decisions taken at the Justice and Rule of Law Conference held in Rome in July 2007. Details: New York, United Nations, 2008. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2011 at: http://ar.unrol.org/files/Afghanistan_Implementing_Alternatives_Imprisonment[1].pdf Year: 2008 Country: Afghanistan URL: http://ar.unrol.org/files/Afghanistan_Implementing_Alternatives_Imprisonment[1].pdf Shelf Number: 121453 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration (Afghanistan)CorrectionsCriminal Justice SystemsPrisons |
Author: Petteruti, Amanda Title: Finding Direction: Expanding Criminal Justice Options by Considering Policies of Other Nations Summary: When it comes to criminal justice, there is much to be gleaned from the policies and practices in other democratic nations. Other nations protect public safety without imprisoning as large a percentage of their population, handle law-breaking behavior in ways less reliant on incarceration, and have different approaches to addressing complex social issues. A country’s criminal justice policies and practices do not exist within a vacuum: they are a product of the larger social systems and political realities to which they are inextricably tied. For this reason, some policymakers may think other countries are too fundamentally different than the U.S. for these policies to be adopted. This report compares and contrasts the criminal justice policies and social, economic, and governmental structures of five countries – Australia, Canada, England and Wales, Finland and Germany – to the United States. While each nation has a unique set of circumstances and realities, each has enough fundamental similarities to the U.S. that cross-national policy adoption could be considered. An evaluation of the various similarities and differences can broaden the existing dialogue and create more momentum for the types of systemic reforms that will reduce the burden of over-incarceration on communities, states, and the country as a whole. Details: Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2011. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2011 at: http://www.justicepolicy.org/research/2322 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.justicepolicy.org/research/2322 Shelf Number: 121458 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Title: Reform Cannot Wait: A Comprehensive Examination of the Cost of Incarceration in Ohio from 1991-2010 Summary: Over the last twenty years, numerous experts have studied Ohio’s criminal justice system and made recommendations for reform. Unfortunately, many of those recommendations have been ignored. The result is that our criminal justice system is riddled with inefficient policies that increase cost, reduce safety, and contribute to racial disparities. Our criminal justice system is functioning well over capacity and over budget. • We are funneling a significant number of low-level, low-risk offenders into the most costly placements and away from alternatives that cost less and are more effective. • We waste resources on those who are least likely to pose some future risk to society, rather than focusing scarce resources on ensuring the most dangerous are adequately supervised. • We are sacrificing safety to continue funding costly, inefficient policies with failed results. • Communities of color around the state carry the burden of an unbalanced criminal justice system. • We fail to document how various programs function, rendering them impossible to audit for cost efficiency or success. What follows is a survey of the many studies that have analyzed Ohio’s criminal justice system, identified inefficiencies across program areas, and made recommendations to improve efficiency and fairness. For the last twenty years, these inefficiencies have been allowed to continue and grow. Recommendations were not acted upon, with officials often claiming that more study is needed and putting the problem off for another day. That day is here. In light of the current budget crisis, these inefficiencies can no longer be ignored. Details: Cleveland, OH: American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, 2011. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 21, 2011 at: http://www.acluohio.org/issues/CriminalJustice/ReformCannotWait2010_08.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.acluohio.org/issues/CriminalJustice/ReformCannotWait2010_08.pdf Shelf Number: 121467 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice SystemsImprisonmentPrisons (Ohio) |
Author: United Nations. Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Title: United Nations Rule of Law Indicators - Implementation Guide and Project Tools Summary: Building and strengthening the “rule of law” in developing nations, particularly countries in transition or emerging from a period of armed conflict, has become a central focus of the work of the United Nations. As a result, there is growing demand throughout the United Nations system to better understand the delivery of justice in conflict and post-conflict situations and the impact of developments in this area. The United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), in cooperation with other United Nations departments, agencies, funds and programmes, have developed an instrument to monitor changes in the performance and fundamental characteristics of criminal justice institutions in conflict and post-conflict situations. The instrument consists of a set of indicators, the United Nations Rule of Law Indicators. This Guide describes how to implement this instrument and measure these indicators. The United Nations Rule of Law Indicators and this Guide are part of an emerging body of empirically based approaches to measuring the strengths and effectiveness of law enforcement, judicial and correctional institutions. The instrument, in contrast to some other measurement tools, is designed to highlight apparent successes and shortcomings within institutions and to monitor changes over time within countries. It is not meant to support direct comparisons between countries or rank them. The instrument refers, as it should, to all relevant international human rights and criminal justice norms and standards, but is not designed to assess compliance with such norms and standards. Nor is the instrument a substitute for a detailed assessment of the capacity or performance of criminal justice institutions, including for programmatic purposes. The instrument is to be implemented in collaboration with national Governments and potentially adopted by them as an ongoing monitoring mechanism. Participating countries will find this instrument very useful for monitoring their own progress in developing their criminal justice institutions and strengthening the rule of law. The instrument will also provide and summarize accurate information which the United Nations, donors and development partners will be able to use to plan and monitor the impact of their efforts to build the capacity of criminal justice institutions and, more generally, strengthen the rule of law. Additionally, the process of implementing the indicators will strengthen relationships between the United Nations and participating national Governments, relationships that are crucial to the Organization’s objectives of promoting peace and security in conflict and post-conflict situations and building sustainable criminal justice institutions that provide equal access to justice for all individuals. The Guide provides step-by-step instructions on how to implement the instrument, with United Nations support, in a conflict or post-conflict setting. It is meant for first-time users of the instrument who have a general knowledge of the United Nations system, previous experience working in such situations, a good knowledge of criminal justice institutions and a familiarity with social sciences research methods. Details: New York: United Nations, 2011. 137p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 7, 2011 at: http://www.unrol.org/files/United%20Nations%20Rule%20of%20Law%20Indicators%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.unrol.org/files/United%20Nations%20Rule%20of%20Law%20Indicators%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 121995 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice SystemsRule of Law |
Author: Amnesty International Title: The Time for Justice is Now: New Strategy Needed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Summary: The people of the Democratic Republic of the Congo have been beset by violence and human rights abuses for two decades. Crimes under international law – including mass rape, torture and murder – have been committed in almost every corner of the country and are still being committed with alarming frequency. Impunity remains pervasive: while millions of men, women and children have suffered as a result of the violence, only a handful of perpetrators have ever been brought to justice. After decades of neglect, mismanagement and poor governance, the Congolese justice system is largely unable to deliver accountability, address impunity and secure reparation. Its credibility is low because of political and military interference, endemic corruption, lack of personnel, training and resources and its failure to protect victims and witnesses, provide legal aid, enforce its own rulings or even keep convicted prisoners behind bars. Despite some efforts at reform, the government has not shown the clear political and financial commitment necessary to respond to the Congolese population’s need for justice. This report identifies fundamental flaws within the criminal justice system that are more often than not overlooked by current policy and programmes. It examines the complementary role that some proposed transitional justice mechanisms could play. Amnesty International calls for the development of a comprehensive justice strategy that can deliver long-term and sustainable reform of the Congolese justice system in order to overcome impunity. Details: London: Amnesty International, 2011. 88p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 11, 2011 at: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR62/006/2011/en/6cd862df-be60-418e-b70d-7d2d53a0a2d4/afr620062011en.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Congo, Democratic Republic URL: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR62/006/2011/en/6cd862df-be60-418e-b70d-7d2d53a0a2d4/afr620062011en.pdf Shelf Number: 122373 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsCriminal Justice, Administration of (Democratic ReCriminal ViolenceHomicidesRape |
Author: Council of State Governments, Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Ohio: Summary Report of Analyses Summary: In late 2008, Governor Ted Strickland, Senate President Bill Harris (R-Ashland), then House Speaker Jon Husted (R-Kettering), and former Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Moyer requested technical assistance from the Council of State Governments Justice Center to help develop a statewide policy framework to reduce spending on corrections and reinvest in strategies to increase public safety. In January 2010, to guide the CSG Justice Center’s analysis of the state’s criminal justice system and development of policy options, Governor Strickland, Senate President Harris, current House Speaker Armond Budish (D-Beachwood), Senate Minority Leader Capri Cafaro (D-Hubbard), and House Minority Leader William Batchelder (R-Medina) announced the “Justice Reinvestment Working Group,” which Senator Bill Seitz (R-Green Township) and Representative Mike Moran (D-Hudson) co-chair and which includes a bipartisan, inter-branch group of state lawmakers, state agency directors, and Ohio Supreme Court officials. The CSG Justice Center collected and analyzed vast amounts of state criminal justice, mental health, and substance abuse data, drawing on information systems maintained by the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Alcohol and Drug Addiction Services, the Supreme Court, and county probation departments—as well as the FBI Uniform Crime Reports. In addition to these quantitative analyses, the CSG Justice Center convened dozens of focus groups, interviewing hundreds of people from across the criminal justice system, including judges, prosecuting attorneys, defense attorneys, law enforcement, probation and parole/post-release control, community corrections administrators, and others. Additional stakeholders consulted included victim advocates, county officials, behavioral health treatment providers, and many others. This report provides a brief summary of the preliminary findings. The working group will review these findings to begin developing a policy framework for the General Assembly’s consideration. Details: New York: Justice Center, Council of State Governments, 2010. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 26, 2011 at: http://www.opd.ohio.gov/RC_Reports/ohio_conference_report.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.opd.ohio.gov/RC_Reports/ohio_conference_report.pdf Shelf Number: 122551 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice SystemsCriminal Justice, Administration of (Ohio) |
Author: The World Bank. Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit, Europe and Central Asia Region Title: Kyrgyz Republic Judicial System Diagnostic: Measuring Progress and Identifying Needs Summary: The Joint Country Support Strategy for the Kyrgyz Republic (2007-2010) (JCSS), extended in 2008 to cover the period 2009-2011, identified the weak and inefficient Kyrgyz legal and judicial system as contributing to a poor business environment and weak governance. As a result, JCSS partners identified comprehensive judicial reform as a program focus and a goal of the JCSS (Goal 2.5: Legal Reform) which was enlarged to include independence for the judicial budget. As part of the JCSS, the World Bank program included the preparation of a judicial reform study. In order to implement this program, the World Bank and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) agreed to fund this Judicial System Diagnostic conducted by a World Bank Diagnostic Team complemented by international experts in specific sectors. The Diagnostic’s objective is to provide an analysis of the institutional and operational issues and obstacles that constrain the functioning of Kyrgyzstan’s legal and judicial system. The Diagnostic provides recommendations for overcoming key constraints both at the policy and the implementation levels. The Kyrgyz Government’s Country Development Strategy 2007 -2010 (CDS), updated in 2008 for the period 2009-2011, describes the judicial system as one of the weakest constituents of public administration and aims to reform the system in order to improve its effectiveness and independence. The CDS also attaches a prominent role to improving the judicial system in order to combat corruption and the operation of the shadow economy. Where laws are not working, where entrepreneurs and investors do not trust the courts to enforce contract rights or judicial protection of property rights, it is more profitable for them to work in the shadow economy with its established traditions and mechanisms or to avoid investing in Kyrgyzstan at all. As recently as August 2009, the World Bank and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development found that 42 percent of firms operating in Kyrgyzstan, across a broad spectrum of sectors and sizes, felt that the Kyrgyz court system was a problem for doing business in Kyrgyzstan. This was an increase of 4 percent over the results in 2005 and was greater than the regional average for Europe and Central Asia and for the Southern CIS countries. According to the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report 2009- 2010 the Kyrgyz Republic fares poorly when international business executives were asked to rate the efficiency of the Kyrgyz judicial system in resolving private business disputes; the Kyrgyz system rated 125 out of 133 countries, reflecting a score of 2.6 on a seven point scale. ES3. In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, the focus on the competitiveness of the Kyrgyz Republic’s investment climate has only heightened. As countries look for ways to attract trade and investment, the ability of their judicial system to resolve commercial disputes in a fair, quick and cost-effective manner and offer secure protection of property rights can be a key attraction or a harmful obstacle in the eyes of newly-risk adverse domestic and foreign businesses and investors. A focus on the impact of the Kyrgyz Republic’s judicial system and the rule of law on the investment climate should have been the responsibility of the Central Agency for Development, Investment and Innovation created in 2009 within the Institute of the President (CADII), as it was charged with formulating policies to improve Kyrgyzstan’s business and investment environment and the formulation of national economic development strategies and programs. The CADII was eliminated when state authority passed to the Temporary Government on April 7, 2010 as a result of public unrest. Fulfilling this function will now require the Supreme Court and Judicial Council, in conjunction with the Government, to identify weaknesses in the Kyrgyz judicial system and develop strategies to overcome and address them. The World Bank and SDC believe that this Judicial System Diagnostic will be a useful input as the judicial leadership and the Government undertake to develop the programs and projects necessary to improve the Kyrgyz judicial system. Details: Bishkek: Kyrgyz Republic Country Office, The World Bank, 2011. 98p. Source: Internet Resource: Report No. 61906-KG: Accessed September 20, 2011 at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTECA/Resources/KGJudicialDiagnosticENG2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Kyrgyzstan URL: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTECA/Resources/KGJudicialDiagnosticENG2011.pdf Shelf Number: 122790 Keywords: CourtsCriminal Justice SystemsJudicial System (Kyrgyz Republic) |
Author: Great Britain. National Audit Office Title: Comparing International Criminal Justice Systems Summary: This briefing was prepared for the House of Commons Justice Committee to provide an international dimension to its inquiry into the budget and structure of the Ministry of Justice in England and Wales. The briefing compares crime and criminal justice data from a number of different countries and sets out some of the challenges of making such comparisons. It also identifies a number of areas where it may be beneficial for the Ministry or others to do additional comparative work. Details: London: National Audit Office, 2012. 56p. Source: Briefing for the House of Commons Justice Committee: Internet Resource: Accessed March 13, 2012 at http://www.nao.org.uk//idoc.ashx?docId=558e0abc-7429-47cb-a1d9-51affadc6556&version=-1 Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.nao.org.uk//idoc.ashx?docId=558e0abc-7429-47cb-a1d9-51affadc6556&version=-1 Shelf Number: 124473 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCrime TrendsCriminal Justice SystemsReoffending |
Author: Mauer, Marc Title: To Build a Better Criminal Justice System: 25 Experts Envision the Next 25 Years of Reform Summary: In a new publication of The Sentencing Project 25 leading scholars and practitioners have contributed essays on their strategic vision for the next 25 years of criminal justice reform. Issues addressed in the collection include racial justice strategies, linking public health and criminal justice reform, challenging the war on drugs, and the viability of fiscal pressures as a focus for reform. Details: Washington, D.C.: The Sentencing Project, 2012. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 21, 2012 at http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/sen_25_eassys.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/sen_25_eassys.pdf Shelf Number: 124637 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsDrug PolicyIncarcerationJuvenile JusticeRacial DisparitySentencing ReformVoting Rights |
Author: Fernando, Basil Title: Sri Lanka: Impunity, Criminal Justice and Human Rights Summary: Despite the success achieved by the international community regarding the promotion of international human rights norms and standards in countries other than developed democracies, it would be an illusion to believe that these principles are actually applied in daily life. In their pursuit of justice, Sri Lankans will learn the difficulties they face come from their dysfunctional criminal justice system. Building a narrative on these difficulties is therefore an essential component of seeking redress for rights violations. These narratives describe not only the difficulties and suffering faced by individuals, but also the nature of various public institutions and the problems within them. This book makes an attempt to understand the obstacles to the realization of human rights norms in Sri Lanka, relating to the constitution, criminal justice system or local traditions. The ideas discussed in the book are the result of practical interventions by way of litigation, providing assistance to victims, and through debates conducted on these issues over a considerable time. Details: Hong Kong: Asian Human Rights Commission, 2010. 172p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 9, 2012 at: http://www.humanrights.asia/resources/books/AHRC-PUB-001-2010/AHRC-PUB-001-2010-SLImpunity.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Sri Lanka URL: http://www.humanrights.asia/resources/books/AHRC-PUB-001-2010/AHRC-PUB-001-2010-SLImpunity.pdf Shelf Number: 118785 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsHuman Rights (Sri Lanka) |
Author: Durch, William J. Title: Understanding Impact of Police, Justice and Corrections Components in UN Peace Operations Summary: Over the last decade or so, the UN Security Council gave complex UN peace operations broader mandates in police development, followed by mandates to help restore criminal justice systems and eventually for advisory support to national prison systems. The UN's rule of law community recognizes that an emphasis on quality of people and plans, what the UN calls a "capability-based approach," has to replace a quantity-based approach to meeting the requirements of such mandates. The Stimson Center's Future of Peace Operations Program responded to a request from the Office of Rule of Law and Security Institutions (OROLSI) in DPKO, coordinating with its Police Division and Criminal Law and Judicial Advisory Service (CLJAS), to study the effects, or more specifically, the impact that police, justice and corrections components in UN peace operations have on the areas in which they work. The study was set up to search for "minimum essential tasks" - those that 1) always seem needed in comparable ways across missions; and 2) seem to consistently have the desired effects on the host country's approach to police, justice and corrections. It found that while certain tasks may always be needed, their implementation is often dependent on characteristics of a mission's operational environment over which the mission cannot exert direct control. Missions face perhaps irresolvable dilemmas in being asked to deploy quickly into places where politics can prevent the quick actions that peacebuilding precepts dictate, or with resources inadequate to substitute for capacities that government lacks. That is, they often have resources sufficient to offer some security and stability but not sufficient for very much else. The study identifies areas where the imprints left by the police, justice and corrections components of UN missions are larger than those of other players and offers recommendations for those components. Details: Washington, DC: Future of Peace Operations Program, The Stimson Center, 2012. 137p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 11, 2012 at: http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/research-pdfs/Stimson_Police_Justice_and_Corrections_Impact_Report_FW_small.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/research-pdfs/Stimson_Police_Justice_and_Corrections_Impact_Report_FW_small.pdf Shelf Number: 125536 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsPeace OperationsRule of LawUnited Nations |
Author: Wilson, Carole Title: The Public and the Justice System: Attitudes, Drivers and Behaviour - A Literature Review Summary: This literature review examines evidence on what public attitudes to the justice system are, what drives these attitudes, what effect these attitudes have on behaviour, and what works to improve such attitudes. People’s attitudes to the justice system are complex, and vary depending on whether the focus is confidence, satisfaction, trust or legitimacy, and what part of the system or aspect of performance is in question. The most important drivers of people’s attitudes to the justice system are personal experience. This includes direct contact with justice system professionals, seeing or hearing from local police, experience and perceptions of the local neighbourhood, and stories about the experiences of other people. It is crucial that people feel that the justice system, as represented by people such as the police, demonstrates ‘procedural justice’ - that is that they value and care about individuals and the community, and behave fairly, respectfully, neutrally and take seriously the things that matter to people. Research shows that experiencing such procedural justice leads to higher satisfaction, confidence and perceived legitimacy of justice system professionals, which in turn is associated with people being more compliant and cooperative when they interact with the justice system. For parts of the justice system that fewer people have direct or vicarious personal experience of, such as sentencing, people make judgements from other information available to them, which may include media sources. The impact on people’s attitudes depends on which media sources they use, and the degree to which information from the media aligns with their existing attitudes and experiences. Four broad types of activity have been found to improve public attitudes: procedurally fair treatment of system users, visibility of police and engagement with the public, improving neighbourhood conditions, and written communication. The key message from the evidence is that people’s personal experiences of the justice system and of their local area is the most important influence on their attitudes to the justice system. Factors such as knowledge about the system, and the media, do not have the large direct influence that some might expect. The evidence shows that building responsive relationships between justice system professionals and individuals and communities can improve attitudes to the justice system, and by doing so may also improve people’s engagement with the justice system and their wider behaviour. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research, 2012. 87p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 13, 2012 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0039/00396342.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0039/00396342.pdf Shelf Number: 125606 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsPublic Attitudes (Scotland)Public ConfidencePublic Opinion |
Author: Kralstein, Dana Title: A Comprehensive Community Justice Model: An Evaluation of the Baltimore Community Justice Initiative Summary: This report evaluates an ambitious and comprehensive new community justice initiative implemented in two communities of Baltimore, Maryland beginning in late 2004. The initiative, funded by the Crane Family Foundation, aims to reach adults and youth alike, and seeks to incorporate a broad array of justice system agencies and community-based organizations. An important question is whether such a comprehensive model can produce a large and sustainable impact, both within its target communities and in the Baltimore City justice system as a whole. There were three principal components of the Baltimore Community Justice Initiative: focus on the justice system; school conflict resolution; and youth advocacy. Community Justice – Prosecution, Capacity-Building, and Collaboration This component encompassed three goals. The first goal was to develop a community prosecution project in the Hargrove District Court servicing the communities of Cherry Hill and Pigtown – and perhaps to lay the groundwork for a community court at some point in the future. The second goal was to strengthen the capacity of community organizations to become significant contributors to the ongoing discussion about justice in Baltimore. Lastly, the initiative intended to create a network of justice system and community stakeholders. During the evaluation period, from January of 2006 through August of 2007, the initiative team established a citywide network of almost 200 contacts throughout the criminal justice system as well as in the communities of Pigtown and Cherry Hill. This network met on a quarterly basis as a Task Force to discuss common issues. The team made inroads in the criminal justice community in Baltimore regarding support for the idea of a community court and gained the commitment of a State Senator to sponsor any legislation that might be required. Perhaps most significantly, the initiative helped to foster an environment that enabled other community justice projects to emerge throughout the city, including a prostitution task force, a community prosecution project, a community defense program, and the creation of the Office of Problem-Solving Courts within the Maryland judiciary. Lastly, a national symposium was held in March of 2007 at the University of Maryland School of Law to discuss community justice, engaging both local and national participants. The School of Law established itself as an effective convener. School Conflict Resolution As part of the community justice initiative, the Center for Dispute Resolution at the University of Maryland School of Law (C-DRUM) proposed to implement a demonstration project in conflict resolution at one specific school, the Southside Academy of Cherry Hill. The program was to consist of a peer mediation program, coupled with efforts to spread the philosophy and practice of alternative conflict resolution throughout the school. Beginning in the fall of 2005, C-DRUM staff began to implement the peer mediation model in Southside. The first mediation session took place in February of 2006, and a small number of other sessions were held in the course of the spring semester. Despite the efforts of C-DRUM staff, however, the peer mediation program never received the level of institutional support that was necessary from Southside Academy. In the spring of 2007, C-DRUM broke away from the Southside Academy and turned its attention to the Baltimore Freedom Academy (BFA), a high school that seemed more receptive to conflict resolution efforts. In March 2007, C-DRUM staff held a training for 13 students at the Baltimore Freedom Academy to become peer mediators. The mediation sessions began almost immediately, and 18 mediation sessions took place the first month of implementation. The students who participated in mediation sessions were surveyed at the end of the school year, and the results were mostly encouraging. In addition, a teacher survey was distributed in the spring of 2007, and teacher feedback was positive about the use of conflict management techniques within their classrooms. C-DRUM currently has plans to continue the peer mediation program as well as implement a more comprehensive conflict resolution program in the Baltimore Freedom Academy during the 2007-08 school year that would incorporate teacher training in classroom management techniques. Youth Advocacy The final component of the Baltimore Community Justice Initiative involved the piloting of a youth advocacy program within a school environment. The Community Law in Action Center (CLIA) at the University of Maryland School of Law planned to recruit a small number of teenagers to be trained in advocacy. This group of teenagers would then accompany CLIA into the Cherry Hill community to identify a specific youth safety concern on which to focus their advocacy project. Concurrent with the youth advocacy piece, CLIA would help the Southside Academy set up a youth court and a student government. However, late in the spring of 2006, the entire youth advocacy plan was rebuffed by the administration at the Southside Academy. In January of 2007, CLIA staff put together a new plan with three components: • The Youth Media Showcase was hosted by CLIA at the National Symposium on community justice at the University of Maryland School of Law. Youth from around the country were invited to send in video tapes of their vision of violence and self in the community. The youth media showcase was the opening event for Beginning in the fall of 2005, C-DRUM staff began to implement the peer mediation model in Southside. The first mediation session took place in February of 2006, and a small number of other sessions were held in the course of the spring semester. Despite the efforts of C-DRUM staff, however, the peer mediation program never received the level of institutional support that was necessary from Southside Academy. In the spring of 2007, C-DRUM broke away from the Southside Academy and turned its attention to the Baltimore Freedom Academy (BFA), a high school that seemed more receptive to conflict resolution efforts. In March 2007, C-DRUM staff held a training for 13 students at the Baltimore Freedom Academy to become peer mediators. The mediation sessions began almost immediately, and 18 mediation sessions took place the first month of implementation. The students who participated in mediation sessions were surveyed at the end of the school year, and the results were mostly encouraging. In addition, a teacher survey was distributed in the spring of 2007, and teacher feedback was positive about the use of conflict management techniques within their classrooms. C-DRUM currently has plans to continue the peer mediation program as well as implement a more comprehensive conflict resolution program in the Baltimore Freedom Academy during the 2007-08 school year that would incorporate teacher training in classroom management techniques. Youth Advocacy The final component of the Baltimore Community Justice Initiative involved the piloting of a youth advocacy program within a school environment. The Community Law in Action Center (CLIA) at the University of Maryland School of Law planned to recruit a small number of teenagers to be trained in advocacy. This group of teenagers would then accompany CLIA into the Cherry Hill community to identify a specific youth safety concern on which to focus their advocacy project. Concurrent with the youth advocacy piece, CLIA would help the Southside Academy set up a youth court and a student government. However, late in the spring of 2006, the entire youth advocacy plan was rebuffed by the administration at the Southside Academy. In January of 2007, CLIA staff put together a new plan with three components: • The Youth Media Showcase was hosted by CLIA at the National Symposium on community justice at the University of Maryland School of Law. Youth from around the country were invited to send in video tapes of their vision of violence and self in the community. The youth media showcase was the opening event for Beginning in the fall of 2005, C-DRUM staff began to implement the peer mediation model in Southside. The first mediation session took place in February of 2006, and a small number of other sessions were held in the course of the spring semester. Despite the efforts of C-DRUM staff, however, the peer mediation program never received the level of institutional support that was necessary from Southside Academy. In the spring of 2007, C-DRUM broke away from the Southside Academy and turned its attention to the Baltimore Freedom Academy (BFA), a high school that seemed more receptive to conflict resolution efforts. In March 2007, C-DRUM staff held a training for 13 students at the Baltimore Freedom Academy to become peer mediators. The mediation sessions began almost immediately, and 18 mediation sessions took place the first month of implementation. The students who participated in mediation sessions were surveyed at the end of the school year, and the results were mostly encouraging. In addition, a teacher survey was distributed in the spring of 2007, and teacher feedback was positive about the use of conflict management techniques within their classrooms. C-DRUM currently has plans to continue the peer mediation program as well as implement a more comprehensive conflict resolution program in the Baltimore Freedom Academy during the 2007-08 school year that would incorporate teacher training in classroom management techniques. Youth Advocacy The final component of the Baltimore Community Justice Initiative involved the piloting of a youth advocacy program within a school environment. The Community Law in Action Center (CLIA) at the University of Maryland School of Law planned to recruit a small number of teenagers to be trained in advocacy. This group of teenagers would then accompany CLIA into the Cherry Hill community to identify a specific youth safety concern on which to focus their advocacy project. Concurrent with the youth advocacy piece, CLIA would help the Southside Academy set up a youth court and a student government. However, late in the spring of 2006, the entire youth advocacy plan was rebuffed by the administration at the Southside Academy. In January of 2007, CLIA staff put together a new plan with three components: • The Youth Media Showcase was hosted by CLIA at the National Symposium on community justice at the University of Maryland School of Law. Youth from around the country were invited to send in video tapes of their vision of violence and self in the community. The youth media showcase was the opening event for the Symposium and was attended by more than 100 people. • Teen Leaders for Change was created in Cherry Hill by recruiting five to ten high school seniors from a different school, the New Era Academy, training them in advocacy, and then paying them to work in the community. CLIA taught the teens mapping skills and sent them out to survey the Cherry Hill neighborhood. They also linked the youth to a community-based mentoring program for kids at risk for gang involvement. • CLIA also recruited a group of youth for Pigtown advocacy. The youth were charged with walking the community streets to identify code violations, writing up their work into a report and giving a public presentation of their findings. Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2007. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2012 at: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/Baltimore_Eval.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/Baltimore_Eval.pdf Shelf Number: 125670 Keywords: Community Justice (Baltimore)Community ParticipationCommunity ProsecutionCommunity-Based ProgramsCriminal Justice SystemsDispute SettlementYouth Advocacy Programs |
Author: Berk, Seda Kalem Title: “Access to Justice” in Turkey: Indicators and Recommendations Summary: The concept of “access to justice” started to become popular in the literature of law in Turkey during the 2000s. One can argue that this might be due to different legal and political reasons and coincides with the acceptance of Turkey’s candidacy for full membership to the European Union. In this context, the justice policies that could be developed from the perspective of “access to justice” will carry importance in the purpose of ensuring that everyone in the society is able to effectively benefit from the justice services. The other front of the matter concerns more directly the legal field. The main themes in this field are defined by the constitutions under headings, such as the protection of fundamental rights and freedom and the right to legal remedy, etc. Traditionally, these headings are included under the study area of the discipline of “procedural law” in modern law systems. However, from a traditional viewpoint of law, even if the abovementioned concepts are included in constitutions, it is also possible to assert that the viewpoint focusing on the technique, style and procedure of the procedural law is always more in the foreground in applications concerning this matter. In human rights law, particularly with the developments taking place in the second half of the 20th century, it can be said that the traditional definition and implementation framework of procedural law has broken with the acknowledgement of the right to fair trial and other related rights, and the efforts for the protection of these rights. Within the context of human rights law, it is essential that a right is granted, protected and exercised, and its development is monitored. This axis, which expresses different functional phases, can be explained with one concept: empowerment. Of course, this is a concept that expresses the empowerment of the subject of the right. In other words, this situation expresses the logic in protecting the rights of a legal person (be it a real or juridical entity) through the law. Establishing the concept of “access to justice” based on the “empowerment” approach will also be one of the important legal, political and social instruments of transition from the traditional to a redefined procedural law that is under the effect of the human rights law. This study by Seda Kalem Berk, titled “Access to Justice” in Turkey: Indicators and Recommendations, can be regarded as the analysis of an impact assessment that is capable of covering all the phases of the abovementioned development and re-definition axis. With this outlook, I can even say that it is an analysis from a social sciences lens, scrutinizing the domain of exercising “the right to legal remedy” and other factors affecting it in Turkey. On the other hand, this study is also an exemplary contribution in terms of the academic change demonstrating itself with social scientists starting to work alongside jurists in areas concerning the law. The author examines the situation of access to justice in Turkey through the cross-sections opened by the headings “Legal Aid”, “Access to Information”, “Interpretation in Courts”, and “Electronic Case Filing.” In a sense, this represents an analysis of the “right to legal remedy” in present-day Turkey and in view of the current social, economic and technological development. In other words, these four headings specify the mechanisms and instruments which should be discussed within the context of the “right to legal remedy” in Turkey and the determination and empowerment of the positions of those who will be accepted as the subjects of these and other connected rights. With this aspect, the study should be read as an analysis into one of the major structural elements of the policy area called “justice reform” or “judicial reform”, that calles for a human-focused approach. Details: Istanbul: Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV), 2011. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 24, 2012 at: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?ots591=0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e-2c24-a6a8c7060233&lng=en&id=135218 Year: 2011 Country: Turkey URL: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?ots591=0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e-2c24-a6a8c7060233&lng=en&id=135218 Shelf Number: 125758 Keywords: CourtsCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsJudicial Reform (Turkey) |
Author: Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice Title: Strategies to Enhance and Coordinate Cook County Diversion Programs Summary: This document proposes strategies for Cook County to employ a smarter, more effective, cost efficient system of administering justice for the people. These are neither radical ideas nor unrealistic aspirations. Every recommendation is based on the documented successes of other jurisdictions in grappling with the issues that we address: how do we make our criminal justice system more efficient, decrease government costs, and improve the quality of life for the citizens of Cook County? Improving the criminal justice system in Cook County is not as difficult as it may appear. Making the system more efficient need not come at the cost of decreasing services or reducing public safety. To the contrary, the strategies proposed will decrease crime rates while increasing cost savings. There is plenty of opportunity for diversion. This is because Cook County expends tremendous resources sending people to jail on charges that are later dismissed. Other offenders are put on probation and released after spending time in jail. The County does not benefit from paying the jail costs in these cases, and jailing these people does not make the County safer. Nonviolent cases and cases with a low likelihood of successful prosecution present ideal opportunities for diversion. In 2010, the Cook County Jail admitted 78,534 individuals, seventy percent of whom – 55,000 people – were held on the basis of nonviolent charges. Also in 2010, 12,446 Cook County prisoners were released because the charges against them were dismissed entirely. On average, these detainees spent 25 days in jail before release. The County estimates the total cost of operating the jail to be $229,449,000 per year. This breaks down to a cost of about $142.60 per inmate per day. Even if we just improve the system so that we jail 10% fewer of the defendants whose cases are ultimately dismissed, we save the County over $4,000,000 a year. And we think that Cook County can do better than a 10% improvement. Not diverting is no longer an option. Our institutions and justice personnel are stretched beyond their limits. In order to allow them to address the most serious and strongest cases, we must divert nonviolent and weak cases. To reduce reliance upon incarceration safely and cost-effectively, we offer the following strategies, divided into three categories: 1. Centralize & Coordinate Diversion Court Efforts We suggest that the existing diversion courts, also known as specialty courts, remain in place. The County should convene a blue ribbon task force, a coalition, to help create a diversion system and centralize these diversion efforts in two dedicated courtrooms in the Criminal Division. Judges and staff would focus on the issues that overburden the criminal justice system: people suffering from addiction and mental health problems. These courts would also handle cases of many first time offenders who are suitable to be diverted from the traditional court system. 2. Improve Access Points We recommend three key stages after arrest where defendants may be identified for formal diversion programs and recommended for release from jail: Stationhouse Felony Drug Review, Enhanced Pretrial Services, and Bond Court. These stages are opportunities to improve the administration of justice and create savings. We propose strategies for limiting involvement in the criminal justice system through optimizing efficiency at each stage. 3. Collect Data on Performance and Use It Perhaps the most common sense strategy is that the County should be collecting data on program performance and using that data to monitor and evaluate progress. Currently, data is collected piecemeal, and often only by the people responsible for program management: not surprisingly, each program reports excellent performance. We suggest that the County create an independent data collection group to ensure that the County is using methods that objectively analyze performance. The real question is: if we are not using objectively collected data to gauge performance now, do we even know how we are doing? Details: Chicago: Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice, 2012. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2012 at: http://chicagoappleseed.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/chicago-appleseed-diversion-strategies-for-cook-county1.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://chicagoappleseed.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/chicago-appleseed-diversion-strategies-for-cook-county1.pdf Shelf Number: 125906 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration (Chicago)Costs of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsDiversion |
Author: Blandford, Alex M. Title: A Checklist for Implementing Evidence-Based Practices and Programs for Justice-Involved Adults with Behavioral Health Disorders Summary: The prevalence of serious mental illness (SMI) among persons in the criminal justice system is between three and six times the rate for individuals with SMI in the general U.S. population. A recent study of over 20,000 adults in five local jails found that 14.5 percent of male inmates and 31 percent of female inmates met criteria for a SMI. If these same estimates are applied to the almost 13 million jail admissions reported in 2010, the study findings suggest that more than two million bookings of a person with SMI occur annually. Studies suggest that the co-occurrence of mental health and substance use disorders (COD) is common. In jails, of the approximately 17 percent with SMI, an estimated 72 percent had a co-occurring substance use disorder. Approximately 59 percent of state prisoners with mental illnesses had a co-occurring drug and/or alcohol problem. The overrepresentation of people with SMI or COD in the criminal justice system has a significant impact on the recovery path of these individuals, creates stress for their families, and has an effect on public safety and government spending. A significant number of individuals who receive services through the publicly funded mental health and substance abuse systems are involved, or are at risk for involvement, in the criminal justice system. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the criminal justice system is the single largest source of referral to the public substance abuse treatment system, with probation and parole treatment admissions representing the largest proportion of these referrals. There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to advance the recovery of individuals under criminal justice supervision with substance abuse and/or mental health disorders—or to reduce their likelihood of reoffending. Treatment, support, and supervision must be tailored to individuals’ needs and risk levels. Research supports the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of some behavioral interventions for people with behavioral health issues under the supervision of the criminal justice system. Yet not all treatment is equally effective, and it’s important to ensure that individuals with behavioral health disorders have access to evidence-based practices and programs (EBPs). EBPs, when implemented as designed (i.e., with high fidelity), are critical to improve outcomes, maximize investments, and build support for further expansion of services. Details: Delmar, NY: SAMHSA's GAINS Center for Behavioral Health and Justice Transformation, 2012. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 5, 2012 at http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov/cms-assets/documents/73659-994452.ebpchecklistfinal.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov/cms-assets/documents/73659-994452.ebpchecklistfinal.pdf Shelf Number: 126272 Keywords: Adult CorrectionsCriminal Justice SystemsMental HealthMental Health Services Evidence-Based PracticesSubstance Abuse |
Author: Southern Center for Human Rights Title: Roadblocks to Reform: Perils for Georgia's Criminal Justice System Summary: Georgia has the highest rate of adults under correctional control of any state in the country, and its corrections budget reflects this fact. This report evaluates current practices of Georgia's Special Council on Criminal Justice Reform, including the contracting out of government responsibilities of running correctional facilities to private companies. It details the risks posed by contracting out and proposes common-sense reforms to cabin the perverse incentives of private companies: increasing transparency, enforcing accountability, and evaluating costs and performance, while also ensuring respect for the constitutional rights of those facing criminal charges or serving prison terms. Details: Atlanta, GA: Southern Center for Human Rights, 2012. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: http://www.inthepublicinterest.org/sites/default/files/SCHR%20Roadblocks%20to%20Reform%20-%20Georgia%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.inthepublicinterest.org/sites/default/files/SCHR%20Roadblocks%20to%20Reform%20-%20Georgia%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 127438 Keywords: Correctional InstitutionsCriminal Justice SystemsPrison ReformPrisoners (Georgia, U.S.) |
Author: Ingram, Matthew C. Title: Criminal Procedure Reform in Mexico: Where Things Stand Now Summary: On June 18, 2008, a federal reform in Mexico mandated a package of changes to the criminal justice system throughout the country, covering 33 jurisdictions: the federal justice system and all 32 states (including the Federal District of Mexico City). Although portions of the reform dealt with changes to the criminal justice system in general, the emphasis on investigatory and adjudicatory practices - and on improving due process in general - justifies referring to the reform as principally one of criminal procedure. This paper assesses progress in the implementation of the 2008 reform across the 33 jurisdictions mentioned above. The content and significance of the changes have been covered widely by both policy analysts and legal scholars (e.g., Shirk 2010; Ingram, Rodriguez-Ferreira, and Shirk 2011; Zwier and Barney 2012; Ingram and Shirk 2012), especially since it is part of a broader global and regional transformation in criminal procedure that dates back at least to Italy's prominent 1988 reform (Grande 2000; Amodio 2004) and started spreading through Latin America in the early 1990s (Langer 2007). Given existing attention to these aspects of the reform, I only briefly summarize the reform's content within this paper. The main focus in policy and academic circles is quickly shifting to the implementation of the reform and to questions about whether the reform, even when completely implemented, is achieving its anticipated results, why it is doing so, or why not. The attention here to the progress of implementation is part of this new focus. Details: Washington, DC: Wilcon Center, Mexico Institute, 2013. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 26, 2013 at: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Ingram_CrimProReformMexico_Jan_2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Mexico URL: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Ingram_CrimProReformMexico_Jan_2013.pdf Shelf Number: 127719 Keywords: Criminal Justice Reform (Mexico)Criminal Justice SystemsCriminal Procedure |
Author: Forman, Benjamin Title: Crime, Cost, and Consequences: Is it Time to Get Smart on Crime? Summary: As the title suggests, the report calls into question Massachusetts's current approach to corrections, which favors long prison stays at the expense of treatment, reentry programming, and post-release supervision. Without a change in course, the report concludes that Massachusetts will spend more than $2 billion over the next decade on corrections policies and practices that provide limited public safety benefit for the taxpayer. The report shows that models developed elsewhere, including in many “red states” that have halted prison construction, reformed sentencing practices, and invested in evidence-based programs, provide Massachusetts with sound alternatives. Instead of spending more on what doesn’t work, states like Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas have cut corrections budgets and increased public safety for their residents. Crime, Cost, and Consequences lays the groundwork for a multi-year campaign to make the Commonwealth a leader in the field of corrections. This effort is spearheaded by the Massachusetts Criminal Justice Coalition, committed prosecutors and corrections practitioners, defense lawyers and community organizers, and businessmen and women, working together to reform the Massachusetts criminal justice system. MassINC will support the work of the Coalition with additional research, polling, and civic events. Details: Boston: Massachusetts Institute for a New Commonwealth, 2013. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2013 at: http://www.massinc.org/~/media/Files/Mass%20Inc/Research/Full%20Report%20PDF%20files/Crime_Cost_Consequences_MassINC_Final.ashx Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.massinc.org/~/media/Files/Mass%20Inc/Research/Full%20Report%20PDF%20files/Crime_Cost_Consequences_MassINC_Final.ashx Shelf Number: 128142 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCosts of Criminal Justice (Massachusetts, U.S.)Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: A Corporate Governance Inspection of the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland Summary: One of the most radical reforms advocated by the ‘Review of the Criminal Justice System Northern Ireland’ in March 2000 arose from their recommendations to create the PPS. The Review Team made proposals to transfer all prosecutions from the police to the prosecution service with consequences for the resources, independence, structure and accountability of the new PPS. In many ways the Review set the strategic direction for the service for a number of years, dependent upon how long it would take to implement structural change, complete recruitment and training, as well as the impact of the future devolution of justice. Now that most of the major changes have occurred, the PPS management team should be less cautious in implementing change and strive to be more influential within the wider criminal justice system and specifically in developing more effective joint working with other agencies. Inevitably the early challenges facing the PPS shaped its assessment of success towards capacity and process in the shape of regional offices opened, numbers of files received, decisions made and prosecutions actioned. In many respects the PPS made good headway and recent Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJI) inspections and follow-up reviews charted substantial progress in a number of areas. Throughout this period the PPS delivered a very high quality of legal decision making - a testimony to the professionalism and commitment of its staff. On paper the governance structures meet the accepted models of good governance, including risk management, procurement policies and a management board with overall responsibility for setting the direction of the organisation. An independent audit report gave the governance arrangements of the PPS a satisfactory level of assurance and this was complemented by the annual PPS Audit Committee report that provided additional assurance to the Director covering governance and risk management. Whilst acknowledging the adequacy of the structural and procedural aspects of governance, CJI adopted the ‘Treasury’s Code of Good Practice’ with its wider emphasis on ‘the way in which organisations are directed and controlled... the distribution of rights and responsibilities among the different stakeholders and participants in the organisation... the rules and procedures for making decisions on corporate affairs, including the process through which the organisation’s objectives are set, and... the means of attaining those objectives and monitoring performance.’ Thus, the overall assessment of the inspection team was that the governance structures and associated processes within the PPS provided a sound governance framework to introduce further improvements and deliver their ultimate aim of providing a first class prosecution service. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2013. 75p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 1, 2013 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/1b/1b8e142e-9f17-41b5-8674-fec5c0521706.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/1b/1b8e142e-9f17-41b5-8674-fec5c0521706.pdf Shelf Number: 128507 Keywords: Criminal CourtsCriminal Justice SystemsCriminal Prosecution (U.K.) |
Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. European Union Committee Title: Eu Police and Criminal Justice Measures: The UK's 2014 Opt-out Decision Summary: Under Protocol 36 to the EU Treaties, the Government must decide whether or not the UK should continue to be bound by around 130 EU police and criminal justice (PCJ) measures which were adopted before the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force in 2009, or whether it should exercise its right to opt out of them all. That decision must be made at the latest by 31 May 2014. If the Government do not opt out, on 1 December 2014 these measures will become subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the enforcement powers of the European Commission. If the Government do exercise the opt-out, the PCJ measures will cease to apply to the UK on 1 December 2014. The CJEU’s jurisdiction and the Commission’s enforcement powers will then apply in relation to the measures for all the Member States except the UK. The UK may later rejoin any of the measures subject to conditions set out in the Protocol. On 15 October 2012, the Home Secretary said the Government’s “current thinking” was that the UK should opt out of all the pre-Lisbon measures and negotiate to rejoin individual measures where that is in the national interest. Shortly after this announcement we commenced our inquiry into the decision that needs to be taken by the Government. The Government have undertaken to consult both Houses of Parliament before it reaches a final decision, and this report is intended to support that process. The decision on the opt-out is one of great significance, with far-reaching implications not only for the UK but also for the other Member States and the EU as a whole. Cross-border cooperation on policing and criminal justice matters is an essential element in tackling security threats such as terrorism and organised crime in the twenty-first century. In the course of taking evidence from a wide range of witnesses, we found that supporters of the opt-out have several areas of concern, including: The risks associated with extending the jurisdiction of the CJEU in relation to the pre-Lisbon PCJ measures to include the UK, including the risk of “judicial activism” and the potential for undermining the UK’s common law systems; The loss of national control over areas of police and criminal justice policy; Many of the PCJ measures are of little use or are defunct; Many of the areas of cooperation could be achieved by non-legislative means or through alternative arrangements; They also wish the UK to use the opt-out to promote the reform of certain measures, in particular the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). Opponents of the opt-out, on the other hand, considered that: The pre-Lisbon measures are in the UK’s national interest and some are vital to our internal security; The measures are beneficial to UK citizens who may become the victims of crime or are suspected of committing a crime in another Member State and also in permitting the rapid extradition of criminals from other Member States who have come to the UK; The CJEU’s jurisdiction would provide the benefits of legal clarity and the stronger and more consistent application of EU measures across the EU; There is no risk to the UK’s common law systems and there has been no evidence of any harm caused to those systems from any PCJ measures or judgments; Withdrawing from some of those PCJ measures would result in the UK having to rely upon less effective means of cooperation; The UK would lose influence over existing and future EU police and criminal justice policies and agencies. We conclude that the concerns of proponents of opting out, in particular as regards the role of the CJEU, were not supported by the evidence we received and did not provide a convincing reason for exercising the opt-out. We have failed to identify any significant, objective, justification for avoiding the jurisdiction of the CJEU over the pre-Lisbon PCJ measures in the UK and note that the Government appeared to share that view in respect of the number of post-Lisbon PCJ measures to which they have opted in. Indeed, we believe that the CJEU has an important role to play, alongside Member States’ domestic courts, in safeguarding the rights of citizens and upholding the rule of law. It would be theoretically possible for the UK to continue cooperating with other Member States through alternative arrangements, but we found that these would raise legal complications, and result in more cumbersome, expensive and less effective procedures, thus weakening the hand of the UK’s police and law enforcement authorities. The negotiation of any new arrangements would also be a time-consuming and uncertain process. The most effective way for the UK to cooperate with other Member States is to remain engaged in the existing EU measures in this area. The European Arrest Warrant is the single most important of the measures which are subject to the opt-out decision. In some cases, the operation of the EAW has resulted in serious injustices, but these arose from the consequences of extradition, including long periods of pre-trial detention in poor prison conditions, which could occur under any alternative system of extradition. Relying upon alternative extradition arrangements is highly unlikely to address the criticisms directed at the EAW and would inevitably render the extradition process more protracted and cumbersome, potentially undermining public safety. The best way to achieve improvements in the operation of the EAW is through negotiations with the other Member States, the use of existing provisions in national law, informal judicial cooperation, the development of EU jurisprudence and the immediate implementation of flanking EU measures such as the European Supervision Order. If the opt-out is exercised, the UK may seek to rejoin individual PCJ measures but this process would not necessarily be automatic or straightforward. Witnesses who opposed exercising the opt-out were concerned that the procedures for rejoining measures are uncertain and depend on the decisions of the Commission and the other Member States; about timing (whether it would be practicable to rejoin measures without any hiatus in their application); and about cost (the potential to incur financial consequences assessed by the Commission, and sunk costs, for example, substantial multi-million pound contributions to the development of second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) if the UK did not rejoin that system). Watertight transitional arrangements would have to be agreed, and there is a clear risk that gaps and legal uncertainties would arise. We are unable to form a firm view on the merits and adequacy of any list of measures that the Government might seek to rejoin, were the opt-out to be exercised, since they have not provided us with any list of measures they might seek to rejoin, nor even a summary of the reactions of the other Member States to the Government’s intention to exercise the opt-out, which may be critical in assessing the potential success or otherwise of the UK’s negotiations to rejoin particular measures. A proper assessment by Parliament of whether or not the optout should be exercised is necessarily linked with the measures which the Government wish (or are able) to rejoin. In light of the evidence we have received, including a preponderant view among our witnesses from the legal, law enforcement and prosecutorial professions, we conclude that the Government have not made a convincing case for exercising the opt-out and that opting out would have significant adverse negative repercussions for the internal security of the UK and the administration of criminal justice in the UK, as well as reducing its influence over this area of EU policy. Details: London: The Stationery Office Limited, 2013. 151p. Source: Internet Resource: HP Paper 159: accessed May 1, 2013 at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldeucom/159/159.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldeucom/159/159.pdf Shelf Number: 128591 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy (U.K.)Criminal Justice SystemsPolicing (Europe) |
Author: Jarjoura, Roger Title: Review of IDOC Admission Cohort of D Felony and Select C Felony Offenders Summary: In 2011, the Indiana State Legislature's Criminal Code Evaluation Commission formed a committee, since called the Data Analysis Work Group (DAWG). One goal of this group was to examine why certain low-level and nonviolent felony offenders spend very short periods of incarceration (often less than 365 days) in IDOC. In September 2011, representatives of the Indiana University Public Policy Institute's Center for Criminal Justice Research (CCJR) met with DAWG committee members to discuss the possibility of collecting data to understand the issues that lead to short periods of incarceration in IDOC for low-level and nonviolent felony offenders. CCJR was contracted to conduct a study to better understand the processes that ultimately result in offenders sentenced to IDOC where the most serious conviction offense is a D felony or selected nonviolent C felonies. CCJR's goal for the study was to provide rich case-level data on all D felony cases and the eligible nonviolent C felonies that were admitted to the IDOC for a three-month period in 2011 to inform policy discussions surrounding efforts to change incarceration practices in the state of Indiana. This report summarizes findings of this study. Details: Indianapolis: Indiana University, Center for Criminal Justice Research, 2012. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: https://archives.iupui.edu/handle/2450/6766 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: https://archives.iupui.edu/handle/2450/6766 Shelf Number: 129539 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice SystemsFelony OffendersSentencing |
Author: Indian Law and Order Commission Title: A Roadmap For Making Native America Safer. Report To The President And Congress Of The United States Summary: These recommendations are intended to make Native American and Alaska Native nations safer and more just for all U.S. citizens and to reduce the unacceptably high rates of violent crime that have plagued Indian country for decades. This report reflects one of the most comprehensive assessments ever undertaken of criminal justice systems servicing Native American and Alaska Native communities. The Indian Law and Order Commission is an independent national advisory commission created in July 2010 when the Tribal Law and Order Act was passed and extended earlier in 2013 by the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization (VAWA Amendments). The President and the majority and minority leadership of the Congress appointed the nine Commissioners, all of whom have served as volunteers. Importantly, the findings and recommendations contained in this Roadmap represent the unanimous conclusions of all nine Commissioners - Democratic and Republican appointees alike - of what needs to be done now to make Native America safer. As provided by TLOA, the Commission received limited funding from the U.S. Departments of Justice and the Interior to carry out its statutory responsibilities. To save taxpayers' money, the Commission has operated entirely in the field - often on the road in federally recognized Indian country - and conducted its business primarily by phone and Internet email. The Commission had no offices. Its superb professional staff consists entirely of career Federal public officials who have been loaned to the Commission as provided by TLOA, and we are grateful to them and the Departments of Justice and the Interior. TLOA has three basic purposes. First, the Act was intended to make Federal departments and agencies more accountable for serving Native people and lands. Second, TLOA was designed to provide greater freedom for Indian Tribes and nations to design and run their own justice systems. This includes Tribal court systems generally, along with those communities that are subject to full or partial State criminal jurisdiction under P.L. 83-280. Third, the Act sought to enhance cooperation among Tribal, Federal, and State officials in key areas such as law enforcement training, interoperability, and access to criminal justice information. In addition to assessing the Act's effectiveness, this Roadmap recommends long-term improvements to the structure of the justice system in Indian country. This includes changes to the basic division of responsibility among Federal, Tribal, and State officials and institutions. The theme here is to provide for greater local control and accountability while respecting the Federal constitutional rights of all U.S. citizens. Some of the Commission's recommendations require Federal legislative action. Others are matters of internal executive branch policy and practice. Still others must be addressed by the Federal judiciary. Finally, much of what the Commission has proposed will require enlightened and energetic leadership from the State governments and, ultimately, Native Americans and Alaska Native citizens and their elected leaders. The Commission finds that the public safety crisis in Native America is emphatically not an intractable problem. More lives and property can and will be saved once Tribes have greater freedom to build and maintain their own criminal justice systems. The Commission sees breathtaking possibilities for safer, strong Native communities achieved through home-grown, tribally based systems that respect the civil rights of all U.S. citizens, and reject outmoded Federal command-and-control policies in favor of increased local control, accountability, and transparency. Details: Washington, DC: Indian Law & Order Commission, 2013. 326p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 23, 2013 at: https://www.indianlawandordercommission.com/report/files/A_Roadmap_For_Making_Native_America_Safer-Full.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.indianlawandordercommission.com/report/files/A_Roadmap_For_Making_Native_America_Safer-Full.pdf Shelf Number: 131687 Keywords: American IndiansCriminal Justice SystemsIndians of North AmericaIndigenous PeoplesNative Americans |
Author: Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights Title: Pre-Trial Detention in Zimbabwe: Analysis of the Criminal Justice System and Conditions of Pre-Trial Detention Summary: This analysis of the criminal justice system and conditions of pre-trial detention in Zimbabwe was conducted to better understand the variance between the policy and legislative frameworks that govern pre-trial detention and the conditions in detention facilities in Zimbabwe, and to provide concrete recommendations to improve the situation. It was undertaken in the context of a country emerging from over a decade of socio-economic collapse, aspects of which had negatively affected the justice delivery system. Researched and produced by the Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights and the Law Society of Zimbabwe, the study found that the number of pre-trial detainees was found to be high - approximately 30 percent of the total prison population - due to inefficiencies in the country's justice delivery system. Direct and indirect political control of the criminal justice system has also meant that the independence and neutrality of key institutions - such as the police, Attorney-General's office and the judiciary - has often been hindered. Severe underfunding, capacity constraints and poor conditions of service among institutions within the justice delivery system have also contributed to increasing inefficiency in caseflow management, which has resulted in unnecessarily prolonged stays for many PTDs. This excessive detention undoubtedly violates inmates' rights to freedom, dignity and a fair and speedy trial as enshrined in the constitution as well as in other national, regional and international statutes. The situation of human rights defenders and detainees held for political reasons was found to be worse, with political vendettas seemingly taking pre-eminence over the execution of justice. The conditions in pre-trial detention were found to be despicable and inhumane, and amounted to violations of the detainees' rights. The report also highlights the plight of female inmates, children incarcerated alongside their mothers and juvenile offenders, as well as other concerns, such as overcrowding in prisons, run-down infrastructure and the shortage of basic services, nutritious food and adequate clothing. The study concludes that, while the country has an apparently adequate legislative framework to enable the realisation of the rights of pre-trial detainees, the implementation of these legislative provisions remains the major obstacle - due primarily to funding shortages, institutional capacity constraints, and the slow recovery in the country's socio-political and economic fortunes. The report concludes with a number of key recommendations, including the establishment of an integrated caseflow management system to enable more rapid processing of cases; more effective implementation of the parole system; an increase in government funding to upgrade the infrastructure at detention facilities, and provide adequate nutrition and clothing; and an improvement in social amenities so as to meet humane standards of treatment for detainees. The report also argues that improved conditions of service for employees within various institutions in the criminal justice system - such as the police, prison services, Attorney-General's office and judiciary - would complement efforts to improve professionalism and efficiency in the country's justice delivery system. However, there is also an overarching need for socio-economic and political stability in Zimbabwe to pave the way for the creation of an environment that allows for the optimal functioning of the criminal justice system. Conclusions and Recommendations The study found that despite a strong legislative framework - ranging from the constitution to various acts of parliament and also regional and international statues mandating rights for pre- and post-trial detainees - there were a number of challenges at the implementation level. Among the key challenges was the poor administration of criminal procedure by law enforcement institutions and agents and the judiciary, which in many cases resulted in prejudice against pre-trial detainees and the violation of their rights. Many pre-trial detainees had faced prolonged pre-trial incarceration due to the failure by the police to fully investigate their cases, so that their cases were tossed back and forth between the police and the Attorney General's Office, and they were tossed back and forth between the courts and remand prison. Meanwhile, the lack of adequate resources within the judiciary and prison services resulted in inefficiency in dealing with trials and ensuring the pre-trial detainees spent the least amount of time possible awaiting trial. There are also serious concerns about the condition of detention centres, including overcrowding, dilapidated infrastructure, and inadequate food and clothing for inmates. Unfortunately, owing to many years of neglect and underfunding, there seemed to no sustainable solutions to these problems, despite the fact that non-state actors, such as NGOs, were working hard to try and improve conditions. Recommendations: Rights of pre-trial detainees To better safeguard the rights of pre-trial detainees, there is a need for: Increased awareness and implementation of the Constitutional provisions guaranteeing pre-trial detainees their rights while they are incarcerated by all key state institutions; - Increased use of non-custodial measures such as diversion, particularly for young offenders; - Increased cooperation between criminal justice institutions to ensure the efficient flow of cases from the moment of arrest until finalisation of a trial; and - Firm judicial control over every stage of criminal proceedings. Improving conditions of service for government employees - The government must improve conditions of services for all state institutions in the justice delivery system, which would help to minimise institutional lethargy, motivate employees, promote greater effectiveness and efficiency, and reduce corruption. Improving coordination between 'sentencing' and 'custodian' authorities - A liaison committee should be established to improve coordination between the ZPS and the judiciary to help alleviate overcrowding in prisons since there is reportedly no consultation or coordination at all between the 'sentencing authority' and the 'custodian authority', which cannot refuse to accept new inmates. Strengthening caseflow management - The government and its partners should develop and implement an integrated caseflow management system, enabled by effective ICT, which will result in an automated and quicker flow of cases using an electronic filing system. - A Caseflow Management Committee should also be established to ensure that cases in the Magistrates, High and Supreme Courts are dealt with expeditiously and that in future no-one spends months or years in remand prison. - The operation of the parole system, which allows prisoners serving long sentences to be eligible for release with specific conditions before the expiry of their sentences, needs to be enhanced. - Judges and magistrates should consider travelling to prisons to hold court hearings since this would reduce congestion in the courts and consequentially the number of remand prisoners. Improving prisoners' welfare - The government should immediately fund the repair of prison infrastructure across the country, and should engage other partners, such as donor organisations and the private sector, to assist. - The involvement of volunteers, community groups and NGOs should be increased to provide meaningful programmes for prisoners since these improve morale and reduce inmate idleness. - The government - through the Department of Social welfare and with support from non-state partners - should boost funding of the Zimbabwe Prison Services so that it can adequately care for pregnant women as well as infants and children who are incarcerated with their mothers and who need play areas, bedding, clothing and food for their growth, health and developmental needs. - Prison officers need to be trained to assist pregnant prisoners by learning how to assess risk and about their extra requirements in terms of diet, nutrition, and general prenatal care. - The rehabilitation aspect within the country's prisons - particularly the thrust towards providing inmates with sustainable social, technical and economic skills so that they can reintegrate more effectively into communities upon release - needs to be strengthened. The government should also enhance collaboration with NGOs to promote better community reintegration of offenders. - Inmates should be trained on preventative health care, including basic sanitation, food preparation and personal hygiene. - Prison officers should be trained to communicate with prisoners with hearing and speech impairments. Details: Harare: ZLHR, Law Society of Zimbabwe, 2013. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 13, 2014 at: http://www.osisa.org/sites/default/files/pre-trial_detention_in_zimbabwe.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Zimbabwe URL: http://www.osisa.org/sites/default/files/pre-trial_detention_in_zimbabwe.pdf Shelf Number: 131893 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsInmatesPre-Trial DetentionPrisons |
Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Reducing Recidivism: States Deliver Results Summary: In Reducing Recidivism: States Deliver Results, the National Reentry Resource Center (NRRC) highlights eight states that have achieved reductions in statewide recidivism in recent years: Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Wisconsin. The report focuses on statewide recidivism data for adults released in 2007 and 2010 with a three-year follow-up period, offering a current snapshot of criminal justice outcomes in these states. The report also features examples of recidivism-reduction strategies and programs that the states have undertaken in this timeframe, as well as additional data on the state's criminal justice populations through 2013. This report follows a 2012 National Reentry Resource Center report featuring seven additional states that had lowered recidivism since 2005. Highlighting an interesting cross-section of states representing different regions of the nation, sizes in prison populations, and correctional systems, the two reports demonstrate it is possible for states to achieve significant reductions in statewide recidivism through system-level change. Details: New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2014. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 17, 2014 at: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ReducingRecidivism_StatesDeliverResults.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ReducingRecidivism_StatesDeliverResults.pdf Shelf Number: 132482 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsPrisoner ReentryRecidivism |
Author: Bradford, Spike Title: Virginia's Justice System: Expensive, Ineffective and Unfair Summary: With the 8th highest jail incarceration rate in the U.S., 1 of every 214 adult Virginians is behind bars in county jails across the state; African-American youth over-represented in the juvenile justice system; and the Commonwealth's overreliance on incarceration largely as a result of arresting Virginians for drug offenses - Virginia has an over-burdened correctional system unable to consistently provide services or safety. Virginia's Justice System: Expensive, Ineffective and Unfair points to reforms that, if implemented, would result in relief for Virginians directly impacted by the justice system and taxpayers alike. The policy brief -- the first in a series of publications being released by JPI as a group of justice advocates and concerned stakeholders have been meeting in the Commonwealth to discuss pushing for reforms -- is an overview of the Commonwealth's adult and youth justice system, which identifies areas of progress - like the recent effort to re-enfranchise formerly incarcerated residents with voting rights and other civil rights - and also identifies solutions to revise ineffective policies and practices of the past that remain in place. Details: Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2013. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 16, 2014 at: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/va_justice_system_expensive_ineffective_and_unfair_final.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/va_justice_system_expensive_ineffective_and_unfair_final.pdf Shelf Number: 132686 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsDrug Law PolicyDrug OffendersJuvenile JusticeMinority GroupsPrisonersRacial Disparities |
Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Nebraska: Analysis and Policy Framework Summary: This report summarizes comprehensive analyses of sentencing, corrections, probation, and parole data presented to Nebraska's Justice Reinvestment Working Group. It outlines strategies and policy options to avert prison population growth and reduce recidivism in the state by holding people convicted of the lowest-level felonies accountable with probation and treatment, reducing the number of people leaving prison unsupervised, and strengthening parole supervision. The report also offers strategies for supporting victims of crime through improved restitution collection. If implemented, the report's suggested policies would reinvest $32.8 million in recidivism reduction strategies and avert $306.4 million in prison costs Details: New York: Council of State Government, Justice Center, 2015. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 28, 2015 at: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/JusticeReinvestmentinNebraska.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 134445 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsJustice Reinvestment (Nebraska)ParoleProbationRecidivismSentencing |
Author: Guidry, Sarah R. Title: A Blueprint for Criminal Justice Policy Solutions in Harris County Summary: On any given day, Texas county jails house approximately 65,000 people. More than half of these individuals are typically awaiting trial, not yet having been convicted. Many others are misdemeanants or serving terms for nonviolent offenses. And sadly, some individuals have repeatedly returned to jail, trapped in a continuous cycle of recidivism, unprepared for a life outside of the criminal justice system without access to post-release treatment and programming. As more and more individuals are incarcerated or otherwise involved in the criminal justice system, the fiscal and human costs increase: Individuals with criminal records have difficulty finding stable employment and housing, leading to re-offending; the expenses associated with managing bloated jail populations can be extensive; and public safety and health are likewise compromised when crowded jails fail to meet the needs of incoming and exiting individuals. Despite being home to the largest jail in Texas (and third largest in the United States), Harris County has nonetheless struggled with jail overcrowding for the past four decades. In 1974, a group of inmates filed a lawsuit against the Sheriff and County Commissioners that challenged the conditions of their confinement; it culminated in a federal court order condemning the overcrowded conditions in the Harris County jail, and it provided jurisdiction to the federal court to ensure steps were taken to bring the conditions of the jail within constitutionally protected standards. For nearly two decades, that court wielded its oversight power heavily, frequently intervening to prevent conditions at the Harris County jail from deteriorating further. And yet, following the termination of the court's oversight in the mid-1990's, the Harris County jail population once again swelled. By the late 2000's, Harris County's jail population was exceeding the design capacity of the jail facilities by almost 2,000 inmates and exceeding the target figure for safe operation of the jail by more than 2,400 inmates. The large number of inmates forced the County to outsource approximately 1,000 inmates each month to jail facilities in Louisiana; additionally, the County housed approximately 2,100 inmates in jail facilities in other Texas counties. Unsafe and unsanitary crowding conditions prompted new federal oversight in the form of a 2008 investigation by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). Facing a county budget burdened by the fiscal costs associated with such a large number of jail inmates, the Harris County Commissioners Court contracted with the Justice Management Institute (JMI) to conduct a study on improving the County's criminal justice system and addressing the County's jail crowding problem. The release of the JMI report in 2009 and the ongoing DOJ investigation inspired the formation of the Harris County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (HCCJCC), a panel of county officials and stakeholders, as the first step in a concerted effort to solve the County's jail population issues. Since then, various strategies have been implemented to address specialized populations, including those with substance abuse and mental health problems who too frequently end up behind bars. The County has implemented emergency response teams that provide assistance to those in mental health crisis, and District Attorney Devon Anderson has implemented a policy in regard to nonviolent individuals charged with a low-level drug offense who have a history of drug or alcohol dependency; rather than sentencing the person under 12.44(a), the defendant is offered intensive rehabilitation with community supervision to address the addiction issue. Additionally, in October 2014, District Attorney Anderson's office initiated the First Chance Intervention Program, a pilot diversion program offered to first-time offenders who would otherwise be charged with Class B possession of marijuana (2 ounces or less). Harris County Probation Director Teresa May has worked ardently with judges to drastically reduce technical violations among those being supervised, and Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia has expanded the use of legally permitted "good time" credit for eligible jail inmates who exhibit positive behavior. We are now seeing a reduction in Harris County's jail population, which has been below its operating capacity since October 2011. Sustaining that initial success would prove difficult, however, and an influx of inmates in the fall of 2013 nearly drove the jail population over its operating capacity. Similar influxes have, at times, necessitated Harris County to make requests to the Texas Commission on Jail Standards for additional jail beds through temporary variances (See Appendix 1). Absent further jail population reduction strategies, more variances may become necessary in the future, and further county resources may be expended on confinement. Those costs are not insubstantial. In fiscal year 2013, following a rise in the County's jail population, taxpayers spent nearly a half-million dollars per day operating the jail. Harris County stakeholders - including law enforcement, judges, prosecutors, jailers, County Commissioners, county budget staff, and treatment providers - must collaborate to deliver cost-savings to county taxpayers through jail population management strategies and through a more public health response to drug use and mental illness. Ultimately, where possible, low-risk, nonviolent individuals should be diverted and handled outside of already overburdened court and jail systems, rather than forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for their pretrial detention and later confinement; meanwhile, those who are exiting jail should have access to post-release assistance to stay on the right path. Smart-on-crime strategies can ensure that funds needed for social services and programs are not unnecessarily diverted to criminal justice oversight. Details: Austin, TX: Texas Criminal Justice Coalition, 2015. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 14, 2015 at: http://www.texascjc.org/sites/default/files/publications/Blueprint%20for%20Criminal%20Justice%20Policy%20Solutions%202015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.texascjc.org/sites/default/files/publications/Blueprint%20for%20Criminal%20Justice%20Policy%20Solutions%202015.pdf Shelf Number: 135637 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice SystemsDrug Abuse TreatmentDrug OffendersGood Time CreditsInmatesJail OvercrowdingJailsPretrial Detention |
Author: Chettiar, Inimai M. Title: Solutions: American Leaders Speak Out on Criminal Justice Summary: In this time of increased political polarization, there is one area where we have a genuine chance at bipartisan cooperation: the over-imprisonment of people who did not commit serious crimes. The drop in violence and crime in America has been an extraordinary national achievement. But plainly, our nation has too many people in prison and for too long - we have overshot the mark. With just 5 percent of the world's population, we now have 25 percent of its prison population, and an emerging bipartisan consensus now understands the need to do better. It has been two decades since there was sustained national attention to criminal justice. By 1994, violent crime had tripled in 30 years. Our communities were under assault. We acted to address a genuine national crisis. But much has changed since then. It's time to take a clear-eyed look at what worked, what didn't, and what produced unintended, long-lasting consequences. So many of these laws worked well, especially those that put more police on the streets. But too many laws were overly broad instead of appropriately tailored. A very small number of people commit a large percentage of serious crimes - and society gains when that relatively small group is behind bars. But some are in prison who shouldn't be, others are in for too long, and without a plan to educate, train, and reintegrate them into our communities, we all suffer. The new approach has many roots and just as many advantages: a desire to save taxpayers money; the resolve to promote rehabilitation not recidivism; an obligation to honor religious values; the necessity to alleviate crushing racial imbalances. All of them strengthen this powerful new movement. Details: New York: Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, 2015. 164p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 21, 2015 at: https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Solutions_American_Leaders_Speak_Out_On_Criminal_Justice.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Solutions_American_Leaders_Speak_Out_On_Criminal_Justice.pdf Shelf Number: 135751 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsRacial Disparities |
Author: Council of State Governments. Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Washington: Analysis and Policy Framework Summary: Washington has the highest reported property crime rate in the nation. People convicted of property offenses have a high likelihood of committing a new crime, yet Washington is the only state in the country where supervision is not available as a sentence for most people convicted of property offenses, despite the significant impact supervision can have on reducing the likelihood of reoffending. In addition, the state's prison population is projected to grow by 6 percent over the next 10 years, from 17,502 in FY2014 to 18,542 by FY2024, in part, due to an increasing number of repeat property offenders being sentenced to prison for long lengths of stay. In 2014, the CSG Justice Center was asked to analyze Washington's criminal justice data, interview stakeholders from across the criminal justice system, and work with state leaders to develop data-driven policy options designed to reduce spending on corrections and increase public safety. Among other things, Washington's Justice Reinvestment Policy Framework would: - Adopt a new sentencing grid for felony property offenses that mandates a period of supervision and, if needed, treatment for people convicted of less serious property offenses; - Fund local law enforcement efforts to deter property crime; - Create a fund to provide financial assistance to victims of property crime; and - Incentivize counties to improve pretrial practices. The Justice Reinvestment Policy Framework would help the state avoid up to $291 million in prison construction and operating costs that would otherwise be needed to accommodate the growth that was forecast to occur by FY2024. To achieve these outcomes, the state would need to reinvest $90 million by FY2021 in law enforcement grants, supervision and treatment, support for counties, and financial assistance for victims of property crime. Through improvements to the criminal justice system, this policy framework establishes a goal of reducing the property crime rate by 15 percent by FY2021, deterring crime, and reducing recidivism. The Justice Reinvestment Policy Framework will be considered by the legislature during the 2015 session. Details: New York: Council of State Governments, 2015. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 5, 2015 at: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/JusticeReinvestmentinWashington.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/JusticeReinvestmentinWashington.pdf Shelf Number: 135914 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice systemsJustice ReinvestmentProperty CrimesSentencing Reform |
Author: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority Title: Public Safety, Crime and Justice Report Summary: Every day, thousands of dedicated men and women in blue risk their lives to keep the residents of the sprawling Chicago metropolitan region safe. Their service and sacrifice are deeply appreciated. Unfortunately, the criminal justice system in the Chicago metropolitan region and across the United States has been heavily criticized for not always meeting the "Big Three Es" Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Equity. The system is slow in administering justice and expensive to maintain. Too often the system that is supposed to rehabilitate offenders is unable to prevent them from returning to crime. And too often the system that is supposed to dispense justice is accused of enforcing laws in a manner that discriminates against persons of color and the poor. Indeed, research has documented racial bias in decisions regarding arrests, searches, prosecutions, and sentencing, thus yielding today's problem of disproportionate minority contact. Furthermore, research has documented some abusive encounters between the police and the public. This has resulted in reduced public confidence in the legitimacy of the criminal justice system. In an attempt to enhance safety in our communities, American society has become heavily reliant on punitive, zero tolerance strategies. This has resulted in the rapid growth of prison populations over the past two decades, mostly affecting persons of color with limited means, and often involving non-violent offenders. The result is that United States now has the highest rate of imprisonment per capita in the world. In addition to enhancing the existing system, this report suggests a need to seriously consider alternative models of justice, such as the Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ) approach - which gives balanced attention to public safety, individual accountability to victims and the community, and development of skills to help offenders live law abiding and productive lives. The report also suggests the need to create an independent system of measurement to monitor the fairness of the criminal justice system and measure public safety outcomes that are important to the community, but are not captured in current indicators. Besides crime rates, the public cares about the quality of life in their neighborhoods as measured by levels of physical and social disorder, fear of crime, and their freedom to use the local environment without concern for safety. The community also cares deeply about equity and fairness during encounters with the police and other agents of the criminal justice system. Details: Chicago: Chicago Community Trust; Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority; University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) Center for Research in Law and Justice, 2009. 127p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 15, 2015 at: http://www.issuelab.org/resource/public_safety_crime_and_justice_report Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.issuelab.org/resource/public_safety_crime_and_justice_report Shelf Number: 136057 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsPublic SafetyRacial BiasRacial Discrimination |
Author: Johnson, Calvin Title: Criminal Justice: Changing Course on Incarceration Summary: Much has changed in New Orleans' criminal justice arena in the past 10 years: two consent decrees forcing reform in the police department and at the jail, a public defender office built on national models as part of a statewide system, an Inspector General's office with a focus on holding criminal justice officials accountable, the city's first Independent Police Monitor, and an active Criminal Justice Committee of the City Council exploring policy reforms. The most ambitious set of changes has addressed the city's dramatic overuse of incarceration in the local jail. Prior to Katrina, and for most of the last 10 years, New Orleans incarcerated residents in the jail at a much higher rate than any other city in the country. In a hopeful sign going forward, the city has reduced the number of people it incarcerates on any given day by more than two-thirds. New Orleans is now at a pivotal moment. Incarceration is being challenged as the reflexive response to crime. As then-City Council President Arnie Fielkow summed up in 2011, "You cannot incarcerate yourselves into a safer city, and we have learned that over recent years." But putting that lesson into practice in a fractured criminal justice system has been, and remains, an enormous challenge. Speaking earlier this year and looking to the future, First Deputy Mayor Andy Kopplin noted, "One of the biggest challenges going forward is maintaining the philosophical shift we have achieved-to reserve the jail principally for those who are arrested for violent felonies." This essay explores these dynamics, how the profound failings of the system were laid bare as the floodwaters receded, what city officials and community groups did to reverse course, and the culture change that remains to be fully embraced. Details: s.l.: Data Center, 2015. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: New Orleans Index at Ten: Accessed July 20, 2015 at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/gnocdc/reports/The+Data+Center_NOI10_Changing+Course+on+Incarceration.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://s3.amazonaws.com/gnocdc/reports/The+Data+Center_NOI10_Changing+Course+on+Incarceration.pdf Shelf Number: 136105 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsPrison PopulationPrisoners |
Author: Breger, Daniel Title: Keeping Youth Away from Crime: Searching for Best European Practices. Volume 1: Findings from a comparative study on youth crime and early prevention strategies Summary: The main objective of this report is to pool together European wide experiences of juvenile crime prevention, particularly in relation early prevention strategies. In this context, "early prevention" refers to a series of actions which aim to create an environment that deters children from persistent disruptive behaviour and early-onset delinquency. This report sets out and compares the various systems and strategies that exist in respect of children who have entered, or are at risk of entering, the criminal justice system. This is achieved through the analysis of reports from Latvia, Netherlands, Scotland, Lithuania, Estonia, England and Wales, Belgium, Austria, Italy, Sweden; all of which have been prepared by domestic experts in youth justice. Each national report has been considered and, in so far as possible, compared with European counterparts. Obviously direct comparison in many cases is simply not possible (because of the nuanced systems that are in place in each country), however, there are a number of trends and themes that can and have been identified, such as an overall decline in young people entering the youth justice system; a prevalence of young men committing crimes; an appetite for recent legislative reforms; and the development of innovative diversion and early prevention strategies. Details: Brussels: International Juvenile Justice Observatory; Riva, Latvia: PROVIDUS, 2015. 145p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 20, 2015 at: http://providus.lv/article_files/2912/original/Volume_1_-_Findings_from_a_comparative_study.pdf?1428501057 Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: http://providus.lv/article_files/2912/original/Volume_1_-_Findings_from_a_comparative_study.pdf?1428501057 Shelf Number: 137034 Keywords: At-Risk Youth Criminal Justice SystemsDelinquency Prevention Juvenile Delinquency |
Author: Lawrence, Sarah Title: What's Next? Priority Issues for the Next Phase of Public Safety Realignment: A Report by the Stanford Executive Session on Public Safety Realignment Summary: Since Public Safety Realignment implementation began in October 0211, California's criminal justice system has experienced remarkable change along a variety of dimensions. And it will be some time before we understand the entirety of the consequences of Realignment, both intended and unintended. We are lonely two and a half years into reforms of a criminal justice system that was decades in the making. We are only just beginning to understand the ripple effects Realignment is having on the day-to-day functioning of California's criminal justice system. We should view these early stages of major criminal justice reform as key opportunities to make continued improvements. We need to continue to learn from our mistakes and strive for a criminal justice system that is balanced, equitable, cost-effective, and just. Details: Stanford, CA: Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Stanford Law School, 2014. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 26, 2015 at: https://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/ES-Consensus-Report-final-report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/ES-Consensus-Report-final-report.pdf Shelf Number: 137059 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsPublic Safety Realignment |
Author: Borakove, M. Elaine Title: From Silo to System: What Makes a Criminal Justice System Operate Like a System? Summary: For years, criminal justice systems have been described as being broken into silos - an analogy that reflects how insular each part of the criminal justice system has become, which has resulted in heightened attention on the intake and output of people and less attention paid to the fundamental principles of the justice system. This report is the result of an exploratory case study approach that used in-depth interviews, as well as quantitative and qualitative data, from eight county-based criminal justice systems that have been cited over the years as being "highly effective." The goal of this study was to create a framework for change that focuses on improving criminal justice system processes and outcomes by identifying the factors that create local systems that make improving the administration of justice a priority. Details: Arlington, VA: Justice Management Institute, 2015. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 11, 2016 at: http://www.safetyandjusticechallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/From-Silo-to-System-30-APR-2015_FINAL.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.safetyandjusticechallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/From-Silo-to-System-30-APR-2015_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 137455 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Alaska Criminal Justice Commission Title: Justice Reinvestment Report Summary: Alaska's prison population has grown by 27 percent in the last decade, almost three times faster than the resident population. This rapid growth spurred the opening of the state's newest correctional facility - Goose Creek Correctional Center - in 2012, costing the state $240 million in construction funds. On July 1, 2014, Alaska's correctional facilities housed 5,267 inmates, and the Department of Corrections ("DOC") had a fiscal year operating budget of $327 million. Absent reform, these trends are projected to continue: Alaska will need to house an additional 1,416 inmates by 2024, surpassing the state's current prison bed capacity by 2017. This growth is estimated to cost the state at least $169 million in new corrections spending over the next 10 years. The rising cost of Alaska's prison population coupled with the state's high recidivism rate - almost two-thirds of inmates released from the state's facilities return within three years - have led policymakers to consider whether the state is achieving the best public safety return on its corrections spending. Seeking a comprehensive review of the state's corrections and criminal justice systems, the 2014 Alaska Legislature established the bi-partisan, interbranch Alaska Criminal Justice Commission ("Commission"). In April of the following year, state leaders from all three branches of government joined together to request technical assistance from the Public Safety Performance Project of The Pew Charitable Trusts and the U.S. Department of Justice as part of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative. Governor Bill Walker, former Chief Justice Dana Fabe, Senate President Kevin Meyer, House Speaker Mike Chenault, Attorney General Craig Richards, former Commissioner of the Alaska DOC Ron Taylor, and former Chair of the Commission Alexander O. Bryner tasked the Commission with "develop[ing] recommendations aimed at safely controlling prison and jail growth and recalibrating our correctional investments to ensure that we are achieving the best possible public safety return on our state dollars." In addition, Senate President Meyer and Speaker Chenault requested that, because the state's difficult budget situation rendered reinvestment in evidence-based programs and treatment possible only with significant reforms, the Commission forward policy options that would not only avert future prison growth, but would also reduce the prison population between 15 and 25 percent below current levels. Over a seven-month period, the Commission analyzed the state's criminal justice system, including a comprehensive review of sentencing, corrections, and community supervision data. Key findings include: - Alaska's pretrial population has grown by 81 percent over the past decade, driven primarily by longer lengths of stay for both felony and misdemeanor defendants. - Three-quarters of offenders entering prison post-conviction in 2014 were convicted of a nonviolent offense. - Length of stay for sentenced felony offenders is up 31 percent over the past decade. - In 2014, 47 percent of post-revocation supervision violators - who are incarcerated primarily for non-criminal violations of probation and parole conditions - stayed more than 30 days, and 28 percent stayed longer than 3 months behind bars. Based on this analysis, and the directive from legislative leadership, the Commission developed a comprehensive, evidence-based package of 21 consensus policy recommendations that would protect public safety, hold offenders accountable, and reduce the state's average daily prison population by 21 percent, netting estimated savings of $424 million over the next decade. Details: Juneau: Alaska Criminal Justice Commission, 2015. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2016 at: http://www.ajc.state.ak.us/sites/default/files/imported/acjc/AJRI/ak_jri_report_final12-15.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.ajc.state.ak.us/sites/default/files/imported/acjc/AJRI/ak_jri_report_final12-15.pdf Shelf Number: 137792 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsJustice ReinvestmentPrison PopulationPrisons |
Author: Phillippi, Stephen Title: A Legislated Study of Raising the Age of Juvenile Jurisdiction in Louisiana: The future of 17-year-olds in the Louisiana Justice Systems Summary: This study, authorized by the Louisiana State Legislature in House Concurrent Resolution No. 73 of the 2015 Regular session, was completed at an expedited pace over a six-month period to meet the deadlines established in the resolution. With the involvement of key stakeholders in the justice system from across Louisiana and input from national partners who have worked to study raising the age of juvenile jurisdiction in other states, three key findings of this study are summarized below. - There is a growing consensus, based on a large body of scientific evidence, that 17-year-olds are developmentally different than adults and should be treated as such. They have a far greater potential for rehabilitation and are particularly influenced - for good or ill - by the environments in which they are placed. - The last several years of reform in the Louisiana juvenile justice system have created a capacity to accept, manage, and rehabilitate these youth in a manner that will predictably generate better outcomes than the adult system. - The initial impact projections are generally lower than states that have recently gone before Louisiana in raising the age of juvenile jurisdiction, and those states found that the impact on the system was substantially less than first predicted. In fact, states have reported substantial fiscal savings. We have reason to suspect this will be the same for Louisiana. Details: New Orleans: Louisiana State University, Institute for Public Health and Justice, 2016. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2016 at: http://sph.lsuhsc.edu/Websites/lsupublichealth/images/pdf/iphj/RAISE_THE_AGE_DRAFT_20160128Final.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://sph.lsuhsc.edu/Websites/lsupublichealth/images/pdf/iphj/RAISE_THE_AGE_DRAFT_20160128Final.pdf Shelf Number: 137848 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsJurisdictionJuvenile Court TransfersJuvenile JurisdictionJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Reimer, J.K. Title: A System Just for Children: Voices of child victims and witnesses about their experiences Summary: Over the past two decades, Cambodia's justice system has improved markedly. More people are being processed through the system, with greater fairness and speed than ever before. More complaints are being investigated and perpetrators are more likely to be convicted and serve at least part of their sentence. Solid protocols and procedural documents governing the rights of children are firmly in place and frequently cited by high-ranking officials. However, implementation of "child-friendly justice" remains limited. This research is one of the first conducted in Cambodia to look in detail at the experience of child witnesses and victims who go through the Cambodian criminal justice system. It particularly aims to give voice to children's views in order to contribute to the development of criminal court procedures that more fully reflect the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), especially Article 12. Details: Hagar, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, UNICEF, 2015. 164p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2016 at: http://www.unicef.org/cambodia/A-System-Just-for-Children_FINAL_Jan-2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Cambodia URL: http://www.unicef.org/cambodia/A-System-Just-for-Children_FINAL_Jan-2015.pdf Shelf Number: 137839 Keywords: Child ProtectionChild VictimsChild WitnessesCriminal Justice SystemsJuvenile CourtJuvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Title: Situation of Human Rights in Honduras Summary: The report "Situation of Human Rights in Honduras", addresses the situation of human rights violations which result of high rates of violence, citizen insecurity and impunity. The report also provides recommendations in order to assist the State in strengthening its efforts to protect and guarantee human rights. The report indicates that the homicide rate in Honduras remains one of the highest in the region and the world, although the State reported numbers that indicate a decline in 2014. These levels of violence are a result of several factors, including the increased presence of organized crime and drug traffickers, an inadequate judicial response that fuels impunity, corruption, and high levels of poverty and inequality. "Violence and insecurity are serious problems that Honduran society faces with a major impact on the enjoyment and effective exercise of human rights in the country," said Commissioner Francisco Eguiguren, IACHR Rapporteur for Honduras. The report indicates that the high levels of violence faced by Honduran society have a particular impact on human rights defenders, indigenous peoples, women, children, adolescents and youth, LGBT persons, migrants, campesinos from the Bajo Aguan, journalists and media workers, and justice operators. The report also analyzes those still considered to be among the most serious problems that the Honduran prison system is facing. Official figures released in 2013 indicate that 80% of murders committed in Honduras go unpunished due to a lack of capacity of investigative bodies. During the visit, civil society organizations claimed that the prevailing levels of impunity in Honduras are even higher. Details: Washington, DC: IACHR, 2015. 230p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2016 at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Honduras-en-2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Honduras URL: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Honduras-en-2015.pdf Shelf Number: 138417 Keywords: Crime RatesCriminal Justice SystemsHomicideHuman Rights AbusesMurdersViolenceViolent Crime |
Author: Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Title: Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala: Siversity, Inequality and Exclusion Summary: The report "Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala: Diversity, Inequality and Exclusion," addresses structural challenges on public safety, access to justice and impunity, marginalization and discrimination that seriously affect the human rights of its inhabitants. The report particularly analyzes the system of administration of justice in Guatemala and the need for appropriate, efficient, independent and impartial, in order to respond to structural impunity for several past and present human rights violations. Also, the report especially addresses the situation of the indigenous peoples of Guatemala, whose rights to their ancestral lands and territories have been affected, and suffer exclusion, inequality and malnutrition as a result of racism and structural discrimination. The report analyzes the situation of human rights of human rights defenders, journalists, women, children and adolescents, persons with disabilities, lesbian, gay, transgender, bisexual and intersex persons and migrants. "We have noticed changes in Guatemala in favor of a society that is more respectful of human rights," said the IACHR Rapporteur for Guatemala, Commissioner Enrique Gil Botero. "These advances have been promoted and triggered by the efforts of public officials committed to justice, as well as human rights defenders and social leaders. Their work, which often endangers their life and integrity, has been and continues to be essential. " Among the improvements, the IACHR highlights the reduction in the homicide rate and the September 2015 Constitutional Court's decision, which for the first time ordered the implementation of a prior and informed consultation with the indigenous communities affected by an investment project. Furthermore, also regarding administration of justice, the Commission highlights the efforts of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) and the Public Ministry in their work dismantling criminal networks and fighting against corruption. The IACHR also appreciates the efforts taken by the State in order to create a program to protect journalists, prevent and combat human trafficking, as well as to register differentiated statistics on violence against women to feed the design of public policies, among others. The IACHR also applauds the decision taken by the government to extend the mandate of the CICIG in 2015, whose work has been crucial. Details: Washington, DC: IACHR, 2015. 221p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2016 at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Guatemala2016-en.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Guatemala URL: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Guatemala2016-en.pdf Shelf Number: 138418 Keywords: Crime RatesCriminal Justice SystemsDiscriminationHomicidesHuman Rights AbusesIndigenous PeoplesPublic SafetyViolenceViolent Crime |
Author: Council of State Governments, Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Pennsylvania Summary: From 2011 to 2012, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania employed a "justice reinvestment" approach to reduce corrections spending and reinvest savings in strategies to reduce recidivism and improve public safety. In 2012, the state enacted legislation based on a justice reinvestment policy framework (Act 122 and Act 196). These policies have helped Pennsylvania reduce inefficiencies in the parole and corrections systems, develop responses to major parole violations that include short periods of incarceration followed by supervision and treatment, as necessary, and transform state-funded community corrections programs to better reduce recidivism. As a result of these and other policies, the state has experienced a decrease in the prison population, averting significant corrections costs. Despite the declining prison population and averted corrections costs, however, Pennsylvania has the highest rate of incarcerated adults in the Northeast and spends more than $2 billion annually on corrections. Pennsylvania now seeks to make further improvements to its criminal justice system that will help generate greater savings for reinvestment in public safety strategies. Details: New York: Council of State Government Justice Center, 2016. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2016 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/JusticeReinvestmentinPennsylvaniaOverview.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/JusticeReinvestmentinPennsylvaniaOverview.pdf Shelf Number: 138429 Keywords: Costs of Corrections Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice SystemsJustice Reinvestment |
Author: Goff, Diana Title: A Crisis of Confidence, Competence and Capacity: Programming Advice for Strengthening Mali's Penal Chain Summary: This report analyses the organisation and performance of the penal process in Mali. Its aim is to provide advice on how this process could be strengthened in ways that would enable it to act as a unifying element in Mali's development by holding state and citizens accountable to the same standards of conduct. Despite the shortcomings of a number of top-down reform efforts in the past, there seems to have been little variation or innovation in how the many challenges that plague the penal chain in Mali have been addressed programmatically. It is for this reason that the report examines a number of recent innovations in development programming such as 'Thinking and Working Politically', the 'Theory of Change' concept and 'Systems Complexity', in addition to an in-depth analysis of the state of justice in Mali. It uses the resulting insights to develop elements of an innovative program to strengthen Mali's penal chain. This offers a basis for further discussions between Malian and international stakeholders. Key elements are to work on the basis of bottom-up, pilot-type programmes that enable learning and scaling, to focus on local improvements in the accessibility and quality of criminal justice, to also work collaboratively with 'customary justice' actors and civil society representatives - beyond the usual local state representatives of the penal process and to monitor programme implementation jointly on the basis of behavioural change on the part of Malian stakeholders. Details: New York: International Development Law Organization (IDLO); The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations (Clingendael), 2015. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2016 at: http://www.clingendael.nl/sites/default/files/IDLO%20CRU%20report%20A%20crisis%20of%20confidence%2C%20competence%20and%20capacity_0.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Mali URL: http://www.clingendael.nl/sites/default/files/IDLO%20CRU%20report%20A%20crisis%20of%20confidence%2C%20competence%20and%20capacity_0.pdf Shelf Number: 138431 Keywords: Correctional InstitutionsCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsPrisons |
Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Montana: Overview Summary: June 2015, Montana Governor Steve Bullock, Chief Justice Mike McGrath, Attorney General Tim Fox, Senate President Debby Barrett, Speaker of the House Austin Knudsen, House Minority Leader and Legislative Council President Chuck Hunter, Senate Minority Leader Jon Sesso, and Montana Department of Corrections (DOC) Director Mike Batista requested support from The Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew) and the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) to explore a 'justice reinvestment' approach to reduce corrections spending and reinvest savings in strategies that can reduce recidivism and improve public safety. Despite declining crime in recent years, court cases involving felony offenses in Montana have increased significantly, and Montana's prison population is on the rise. The prison population currently exceeds capacity and is projected to continue to grow to 119 percent of capacity by FY2025. In partnership with Pew and BJA, The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center will provide intensive technical assistance to help collect and analyze data and develop appropriate policy options for the state. The Montana legislature had enacted Senate Bill 224 in April 2015 to establish the state's bipartisan, inter-branch Commission on Sentencing, which calls upon designees from all three branches of government, as well as state and local criminal justice system stakeholders, to study the state's criminal justice system, including the impact of existing sentencing policies and practices on the state's system. Senator Cynthia Wolken (D) chairs the commission, and Senator Kristen Hansen (R) serves as vice-chair of the commission. Under the direction of the 15-member commission, CSG Justice Center staff will conduct a comprehensive analysis of extensive data collected from various state agencies. To help build a broad picture of statewide criminal justice trends, additional data from local governments on county jails and county probation will be collected and analyzed where possible. CSG Justice Center staff also will convene focus groups and lead interviews with people working on the front lines of Montana's criminal justice system. Based on these exhaustive quantitative and qualitative analyses, the commission will develop policy options for the 2017 legislature's consideration. This overview highlights some recent criminal justice trends in Montana that the commission and CSG Justice Center staff will explore in the coming months. Details: New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2016. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 28, 2016 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Justice_Reinvestment_in_Montana_Overview.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Justice_Reinvestment_in_Montana_Overview.pdf Shelf Number: 138436 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsJustice Reinvestment |
Author: American Bar Association. Center for Human Rights Title: Tilted Scales: Social Conflict and Criminal Justice in Guatemala Summary: Guatemala has made progress in the last decade addressing the legacy of thirty-six years of internal armed conflict, including by holding key actors responsible for atrocities. However, the level of social conflict in Guatemala remains high in part because many of the issues that contributed to past discord remain unresolved. These issues include disputes over land titles and the exploitation of resources in historically indigenous territories. Social conflict has at times manifested in violence against both indigenous communities and individuals associated with business interests. In this setting, a wide variety of organizations - local and international, governmental and non-governmental - have reported a pattern of attacks, threats, and frivolous criminal charges against human rights defenders, specifically in the context of disputes over mega projects in indigenous lands. These reports prompted the American Bar Association's Center for Human Rights, Georgetown University Law Center's Human Rights Institute and the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights to conduct a fact-finding mission in Guatemala to determine whether allegations of the misuse of the judicial system against human rights advocates were well founded. We interviewed government officials, civil society leaders, defense attorneys and community activists in Guatemala City from November 26-30, 2012. In addition, we reviewed court documents, official reports and press accounts concerning emblematic cases to evaluate the sufficiency of the evidence against defendants, the government's response to credible threats against activists and the conduct of business personnel. Details: Washington, DC: American Bar Association Center for Human Rights, 2013. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 4, 2016 at: http://www.law.georgetown.edu/academics/centers-institutes/human-rights-institute/opportunities/upload/Tilted-Scales-Social-Conflict-and-Criminal-Justice-in-Guatemala.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Guatemala URL: http://www.law.georgetown.edu/academics/centers-institutes/human-rights-institute/opportunities/upload/Tilted-Scales-Social-Conflict-and-Criminal-Justice-in-Guatemala.pdf Shelf Number: 138558 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsHuman Rights AbusesJudicial SystemNatural Resources |
Author: Bennett, Will Title: Summary: Osh, Kyrgyzstan is still working through some of the structural drivers of the 2010 conflict that destroyed 2,677 buildings, displaced 80,000 people, and left approximately 500 people dead. The majority were ethnic Uzbeks, victims of the longstanding anger between themselves and the majority ethnic Kyrgyz. It is an event not yet consigned to history. Ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbeks live in largely segregated areas, mixing infrequently and increasing the potential for mistrust and violence. Justice is difficult to access and of questionable quality in Osh, and this is likely to have ongoing repercussions for peace and security. Much rests upon the ability of recently elected parliamentarians to understand and address people's underlying social, economic and political grievances. This report is based on research carried out in Osh, looking at the links between injustice and violence. One group of interviewees' conclusion that "there is no fairness in Osh" matches the overall findings of this research. Women and minorities suffer most. Inequality is becoming more noticeable. Land shortages cause domestic overcrowding, contributing to poverty and poor health. Kyrgyzstanis are 'tolerant' but not limitlessly so, and the fear is that with each experience of injustice the potential for even further social division, withdrawal, and violence increases. As such, reducing people's daily experiences of injustice is vital for peace in Osh. The report recommends that efforts should be made to address: - social injustices at the heart of youth disaffection and rejection of the state - bureaucratic opacity and people's unawareness of how to access services, including welfare and birth registration - the full social and political inclusion of marginalised groups, including women, ethnic minorities and people living with disabilities - corruption and transparency among security and justice providers to strengthen public access and confidence - land provision for overcrowded families who risk slipping further into poverty - peace and rights education at schools to ensure young people understand their entitlements and responsibilities Details: London: Saferworld, 2016. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2016 at: http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/1050-ldquoeverything-can-be-tolerated-ndash-except-injusticerdquo Year: 2016 Country: Kyrgyzstan URL: http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/1050-ldquoeverything-can-be-tolerated-ndash-except-injusticerdquo Shelf Number: 138574 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsSocioeconomic ConditionsViolence |
Author: Porteux, Jonson Nathaniel Title: Police, Paramilitaries, Nationalists and Gangsters: The Processes of State Building in Korea Summary: This dissertation seeks to understand why developed democracies with high state capacity tolerate, and in some cases cooperate with criminal organizations such as paramilitaries, mafia organizations, and vigilantes. The symbiotic relationship between these groups is surprisingly common, but it blurs the lines between legitimate and illegitimate use of violence and allows political actors to circumvent democratic checks on state authority. While previous research has linked illicit violence to weak or failing states, my study is unique in its empirical and theoretical focus on both economically and politically developed governments. It is argued that state monopoly over the use of violence purposefully varies. Political actors must continually exercise their authority in the face of both resource and politically driven constraints in the complex processes of state building, and state maintaining. In the face of resource constraints, political actors sub-contract violence in order to extend their reach and expand their forces. Sub-contracting as a result of principally politically driven constraints however, serves two goals beyond an expansion of forces. First, it allows political actors to distance themselves from police actions deemed illiberal-and hence unpopular-by society. Second, because criminal groups are extra-legal organizations, subcontracting allows the state to avoid transparency and accountability constraints. The choice to subcontract is thus conditioned not only by the end goal, but also by social pressures regarding appropriate means to bring about preferred outcomes. Importantly, the political payoffs from subcontracting are high in states with high levels of operational capacity, as they can best manage the potential risk that criminal groups metastasize and challenge state authority directly. Unbiased, quantifiable data on the linkage between state actors and illicit organizations are-largely by design-impossible to obtain. My primary analysis is based on a year of fieldwork in South Korea, utilizing evidence gleaned from interviews with the police, prosecutors, journalists, mafia members, and victims. Details: Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2013. 218p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed April 6, 2016 at: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/102333/jporteux_1.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2013 Country: Korea, South URL: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/102333/jporteux_1.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 138588 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsCriminal ViolenceOrganized CrimeParamilitary Groups |
Author: Institute for Economics and Peace Title: Mexico Peace Index 2016. Mapping the Evolution of Peace and Its Drivers Summary: In 2015, Mexico's peace improved by 0.3 percent, which is the smallest improvement in peace in the last five years. The improvement is largely attributed to a 10 percent decline in the violent crime rate and an eight percent decline in the rate of organized crime related offenses. However, this was offset by deteriorations in detention without sentencing, weapons crime and the homicide rate. The latter increased by six percent. Furthermore, the gap between the most and least peaceful states widened slightly in 2015, reversing the trend observed in six of the seven prior years. An area of concern is the trend towards increased impunity, which deteriorated dramatically from 2007 onwards. In 2007, there were four convictions for every five cases of homicide, but by 2013 there was only one conviction for every five cases. This, combined with the increases in detention without sentencing, points to an overstretched judicial system, as is further supported by statistics on the over-crowding of prisons. It also highlights the challenges facing the justice system, whose 2015 federal expenditure was 78 billion pesos, below the 2012 level of expenditure. The longer term trends indicate a marked improvement in peacefulness since 2011, the year in which violence peaked in Mexico. The country has improved its peacefulness by 13 percent since that time. Violent crime, homicides and organized crime have all fallen by nearly 30 percent. These improvements mean that twenty-five out of the 32 states in Mexico have become more peaceful since 2011, including four of the five states that ranked at the bottom in that year. These improvements in peace have resulted in roughly 85 percent of The Mexico Peace Index (MPI), produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace, provides a comprehensive measure of peacefulness in Mexico from 2003 to 2015, with new results for 2015. This report aims to deepen the understanding of the trends, patterns and drivers of peace in Mexico, while highlighting the important economic benefits that will flow from a more peaceful society. Details: Sydney, AUS: Institute for Economics and Peace, 2016. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 13, 2016 at: http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Mexico-Peace-Index-2016_English.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Mexico URL: http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Mexico-Peace-Index-2016_English.pdf Shelf Number: 138663 Keywords: Crime RatesCriminal Justice SystemsHomicidesViolenceViolent Crime |
Author: National Governor's Association Title: A Governor's Guide to Criminal Justice Summary: Governors play a critical role in ensuring public safety. As the state's chief executive, they are responsible for setting public safety priorities for their administration and identifying policies and programs to achieve them. Further, they oversee the state agencies responsible for implementing those policies and programs, such as corrections, state police, and juvenile justice. To help them define and achieve their priorities, governors rely on expertise and support from a core team of advisors including policy staff, legal counsel, and cabinet secretaries. Those criminal justice policy advisors serve as a primary source of information and play an integral role in the development of state policy. They provide guidance on best practices, help develop effective strategies for achieving policy objectives, coordinate agency actions, engage communities and stakeholders, allocate resources, and evaluate effectiveness. For nearly 15 years, the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) has supported a network of governors' criminal justice policy advisors with the goal of improving how justice and public safety policy decisions are made within states. The NGA Center provides them a trusted forum where they can learn best practices, receive technical assistance, and connect with and learn from their peers across the country. As part of its ongoing effort to support that network, the NGA Center has developed A Governor's Guide to Criminal Justice. This guide: 1. Provides an overview of governors' roles and responsibilities as they relate to public safety; 2. Examines the key components that make up a state's criminal justice system and explains the interplay between state, local, and federal functions; 3. Explores budgetary aspects of criminal justice systems; 4. Defines evidence-based practices and examines their role in achieving policy objectives; and 5. Identifies ways that data can be used to drive policy, ensure accountability, and improve public safety. Details: National Governor's Association, 2016. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 11, 2016 at: http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/2016/1601GovernorsGuideCriminalJustice.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/2016/1601GovernorsGuideCriminalJustice.pdf Shelf Number: 139592 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Louisiana Legislative Auditor Title: Evaluation of Strategies to Reduce Louisiana's Incarceration Rate and Costs for Nonviolent Offenders Summary: According to Department of Corrections (DOC) data, of the 128,612 individuals incarcerated or on supervision during fiscal years 2009 to 2015, 75,370 (58.6%) had nonviolent offenses only, meaning they had no violent convictions in their past, and 22,851 (17.8%) had drug offenses only, as shown in Exhibit 1. We identified strategies to reduce incarceration rates for these nonviolent offenders at each key decision point in the criminal justice system. These decision points and strategies include the following: - Pre-incarceration: Providing alternatives to incarceration that include services to help prevent or divert low-risk or nonviolent offenders from incarceration. - Expanding pretrial diversion and specialty courts could reduce the incarceration rate by diverting nonviolent offenders from prison. However, while Louisiana's drug courts have demonstrated cost savings, better data collection is needed for pretrial diversion and other specialty courts to evaluate whether these programs are effective. According to our survey, at least 37 (88.1%) of the 42 district attorney offices operate a pretrial intervention program, and at least 28 (66.7%) of the 42 judicial districts have a specialty court. - Sentencing: Ensuring that sentences are fair and proportionate to the crime committed. - Sentencing reforms, such as reducing the use of mandatory minimum sentences and the habitual offender law for nonviolent offenders, and sentencing certain nonviolent offenders to probation instead of prison could reduce the incarceration rate. Of the approximately 164 mandatory minimum sentences in state law, 91 (55%) are for nonviolent crimes. In addition, of the 15,235 habitual offender cases for offenders in our scope, 11,801 (77.5%) were for nonviolent offenses. - During Incarceration: Providing effective rehabilitation programs to offenders while they are incarcerated to help reduce recidivism and facilitate their successful re-entry into society. - Expanding rehabilitation programs in local facilities that are effective at decreasing recidivism would help reduce the incarceration rate. Although local jails house more nonviolent offenders, they have fewer rehabilitation programs and higher recidivism rates than state facilities. According to DOC, of the 105 local facilities that house state offenders, 46% offer no treatment programs. - Further expanding re-entry services at the local level to help offenders transition back into society would help reduce Louisiana's incarceration rate. Re-entry programs can reduce recidivism by 32% and save approximately $14 million per year. - Release: Providing effective and appropriate levels of supervision to offenders after they are released. - Because reform efforts have resulted in more offenders on parole, the caseloads of probation and parole officers have increased by 12.9%. Additional strategies to reduce the amount of supervision required for low-risk, nonviolent offenders could reduce the incarceration rate by focusing probation and parole resources on offenders most likely to re-offend. Details: Baton Rouge, LA: Performance Audit Services, 2016. 87p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 17, 2016 at: https://app.lla.state.la.us/PublicReports.nsf/DB26F2309F9783F2862580200077A2CD/$FILE/00010B73.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://app.lla.state.la.us/PublicReports.nsf/DB26F2309F9783F2862580200077A2CD/$FILE/00010B73.pdf Shelf Number: 140322 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCosts of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Perrin, Benjamin Title: Report Card on the Criminal Justice System: Evaluating Canada's Justice Deficit Summary: Canada is suffering from a "justice deficit" - a large and growing gap between the aspirations of the justice system and its actual performance. With few exceptions, our justice system is slow, inefficient, and costly. The Supreme Court sent this message loudly and clearly in its July 8, 2016 decision when it threw out drug trafficking charges from British Columbia; more than four years had elapsed from when the accused was charged to the conclusion of the trial. But until now, the extent of inefficiency and under-performance in the Canadian criminal justice system has never been fully assessed. The Macdonald-Laurier Institute Report Card on the Criminal Justice System aims to enhance accountability and transparency with a view towards its reform and ongoing improvement for the benefit of all Canadians. Using Statistics Canada data and quantitative statistical methods, we assess each province and territory's criminal justice system based on five major objectives: public safety, support for victims, costs and resources, fairness and access to justice, and efficiency. A few of the highlights from the report cards for each province and territory are: 1. The cost of public safety per person is lowest in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia, while it is highest in the territories, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. 2. The territories have disproportionately high per-capita crime rates - far exceeding any of the provinces. Among the provinces, violent crime rates per capita are highest in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Newfoundland & Labrador, while they are lowest in Ontario, Quebec, and Prince Edward Island. 3. Public perceptions of the police are generally higher in the Atlantic Provinces than in the Western Provinces. 4. There are serious issues with efficiency in Ontario's justice system. It has the worst record in Canada for the proportion of charges stayed or withdrawn (43.1 percent on average), compared with a mere 8.6 percent in neighbouring Quebec. At just 55.3 percent on average, Ontario is also a significant outlier for the percentage of accused persons found guilty. 5. British Columbia received a failing grade for its weighted clearance rate for violent crime (on average slightly over half of violent crimes were solved by police). 6. In terms of support for victims, restitution orders (where offenders are required to compensate their victims) are infrequent in Canada and ordered in less than 1.0 percent of cases in Quebec, Manitoba, and Nunavut. 7. Referrals to victim services per 1,000 crimes are highest in Ontario, Manitoba, and Alberta, while they are lowest in the territories, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. 8. The number of accused persons on remand (in jail awaiting trial) per 1,000 crimes is highest in Manitoba and Ontario, while it is lowest in Newfoundland & Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and Northwest Territories. Keeping large numbers of accused on remand is costly and suggests undue delays in case processing. 9. In terms of access to justice, legal aid expenditures on criminal matters per crime are highest in Ontario, Newfoundland & Labrador, and Nova Scotia, and lowest in New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and the Northwest Territories. 10. Disproportionate levels of Aboriginal incarceration relative to the population are a problem in every jurisdiction in Canada, but are particularly acute in Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and British Columbia. Details: Ottawa: Macdonald-Laurier Institute, 2016. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2016 at: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/3111332/MLI-Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/3111332/MLI-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 145613 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: van Loon, A.J. Title: Law and Order in Ancient Egypt: The Development of Criminal Justice from the Pharaonic New Kingdom until the Roman Dominate Summary: In one way or another, the civilizations who ruled over Egypt in antiquity could all boast a close connection to the concepts of 'law' and 'justice'. Balance, justice, and order - all personified by the goddess Ma'at - were the cornerstones of Ancient Egyptian religion and society. The Greek Ptolemies, who ruled over Egypt between 323 and 30 BC, would become famous for their advanced and intricate bureaucracy, which also featured a highly effective law enforcement system. The Romans, more than any, prided themselves on their laws, which remain influential in modern societies to this day. This thesis sets out to discover the manner in which criminal justice in Egypt developed from the times of the New Kingdom, through the Ptolemaic era, and under Roman rule. Not only for the above-mentioned anecdotal reasons, but also because the capability to deal with crime and to maintain order can serve as an indicator for a successful administration in general. Because criminal law forms an integral part of a legal system as a whole, which, in turn, is inseparable from the general administrative system of a country, all of these will be taken into account. The following questions will be answered in this thesis: how were the various legal and administrative systems organized?; which actions were considered to be crimes by the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans?; who possessed the legal authority to deal with these matters?; and in what manner were criminal transgressions dealt with in practice? In the end, the aim is to not only find out how criminal justice developed in the course of nearly two millennia, but also to offer an explanation as to why these developments took their specific course. Details: Leiden, NETH: Leiden University, 2014. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed September 27, 2016 at: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/30196/Law%20and%20Order%20in%20Ancient%20Egypt.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2014 Country: Egypt URL: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/30196/Law%20and%20Order%20in%20Ancient%20Egypt.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 146152 Keywords: CrimeCriminal Justice SystemsCriminal LawHistorical StudyLaw EnforcementPunishment |
Author: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, Statistical Analysis Center Title: Arizona Crime Trends: A System Review, 2004-2013 Summary: On a biennial basis, the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission is tasked with preparing for the governor a criminal justice system trends report. Available resources, the size and complexity of the criminal justice system and the availability of relevant data influence the scope of the issues addressed in the report. In support of data-driven decision making, this report uses publicly available data to describe the activity of Arizona's criminal justice system from law enforcement agencies description of the offenses reported to their agencies to the population of the Arizona Department of Corrections. More specifically, in this edition of Arizona Crime Trends: A System Review, up to 10 years of data from law enforcement, the courts, corrections, and the juvenile justice system are compiled to give readers a decade overview of crime and criminal and juvenile justice system activity from 2004 to 2013 in Arizona. An analysis of the data included in this report reveals the following: Crime In 2013, the number of violent index offenses reported to the police in Arizona was 19.5 percent lower than in 2004 and 20.9 percent lower than the decade high in 2005. Arizona remains higher than the national rate. Although the rate of violent index offenses reported to the police decreased over the decade, the rate of forcible rape in Arizona increased 24.0 percent. Arizona remains higher than the national rate. The rate of property index offenses reported to the police in Arizona was 36.4 percent lower in 2013 than in 2004 and 4.4 percent lower than the decade high in 2009. Arizona remains higher than the national rate. Arizona has had a reduction in the percentage of violent crimes committed with a firearm over the decade. Cumulative decreases for murder, robbery and aggravated assault declined 16.1 percent, 23.3 percent and 12.1 percent, respectively. Arizona has consistently had a lower percentage of murders committed with a firearm compared to the national percentage since 2009. Courts Statewide, the number of felony case filings decreased by 13.7 percent over the decade. From state fiscal year 2004 to 2013, the number of individuals on standard probation remained similar; however, the number of individuals on intensive probation decreased 24.4 percent. From 2004 to 2013, the courts collected $116 million in restitution from offenders on standard probation. In 2013, the amount of restitution collected from standard probationers was 6.0 percent higher than the amount of restitution collected in 2004. From 2004 to 2013, the number of community service hours completed by standard probationers decreased by 50.7 percent from 813,823 hours in 2004 to 401,613 hours in 2013. At the 2013 minimum wage in Arizona ($7.80/hour), standard probationers performed community service work worth approximately $3.1 million in 2013. The number of community service hours performed by intensive probationers declined by 47.9 percent over the decade from 615,182 hours in 2004 to 320,357 hours in 2013. At the 2013 minimum wage in Arizona ($7.80/hour), intensive probationers performed community service work worth approximately $2.5 million in 2013. Corrections From 2004 to 2013, the number of individuals incarcerated in the Arizona Department of Corrections increased by 26.0 percent. The rate of increase was close to five times higher than the national increase. At the end of calendar year 2013, 32.1 percent of inmates in the Arizona Department of Corrections were in prison for the violent offenses1 , 16.0 percent for property offenses,2 24.8 percent for drug and driving under the influence offenses, and 27.0 percent for other types of offenses. Juvenile Justice System From 2004 to 2007, the number of juveniles referred to juvenile court remained relatively stable at approximately 49,000 youth. From 2007 to 2010, the number of juveniles referred to juvenile court decreased by 15.7 percent and continued to decline between 2010 and 2013, representing an overall cumulative decline of 40.8 percent across the decade. From 2004 to 2013, the number of juveniles held in detention in Arizona decreased by 47.9 percent, from 12,688 to 6,610. The number of juveniles transferred to criminal court decreased 45.4 percent across the decade. The number of new commitments to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections decreased 42.7 percent between 2004 and 2013. There was a 36.3 percent increase across the decade in the percentage of new commitments to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections for youth with three to five prior adjudications of delinquency and a 49.4 percent decrease for youth with six or more prior adjudications of delinquency. Details: Phoenix: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, 2015. 115p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 29, 2016 at: http://www.azcjc.gov/ACJC.Web/Pubs/Home/Arizona_Crime_Trends_Report_2004-2013.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.azcjc.gov/ACJC.Web/Pubs/Home/Arizona_Crime_Trends_Report_2004-2013.pdf Shelf Number: 147761 Keywords: Crime StatisticsCrime TrendsCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Newark, Scott Title: Justice on Trial: Inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in the Canadian criminal justice system Summary: Canada's criminal justice system is a vast and complex machine with numerous players whose actions or inactions impact each other: the courts, the police, corrections, and legal professionals. For those Canadians who are exposed to it, whether as victims or accused, delay and inefficiency can cause real hardship. For taxpayers and those who care about effective public policy and public safety, inefficient and ineffective courts create excessive costs and stand in the way of the proper administration of justice. Good justice policy can only be informed by gathering and analysing the right data, but this has rarely been undertaken in Canada. This paper examines the data on crime rates, length of trials, administration of justice offences, and other measures to get a clear picture of a system that is too often beset with delay and inefficiency. The issues could not be timelier, with the Supreme Court of Canada's July 2016 ruling in the case of R. v. Jordan establishing time frames for reasonable lengths of trial. The accused in the case waited more than 49 months from the time of his arrest to his conviction on a drug offence, which the court found was reflective of a "culture of complacency towards delay". The data show that the police-reported adult crime rate is down 25 percent and youth crime is down 47 percent between 2004 and 2014 (although there was a marked increase in violent crime in 2015). Even so, in 2013/14, the median amount of time from an individual's first court appearance to the completion of their case was 123 days (around 4 months), a slight increase from the years prior. So the system overall has been facing fewer cases but taking longer to complete them. Also of note, offences against the "administration of justice" (violating court orders or bail conditions for example) decreased by 7 percent between 2004 and 2014, much less than the 34 percent decline in the overall crime rate, suggesting that the system is dealing with a smaller core of repeat offenders. Additionally, rates of those in jail awaiting trial (or on "remand") have been exacerbated by the practice of the Courts using judicial discretion to award extra credit due to the perceived less pleasant conditions for offenders. Ironically, a result of this approach is to actually reward repeat offenders at sentencing who are properly and lawfully denied bail, and it also creates an incentive for the accused to stay in jail, adding costs to the system. This paper recommends a Criminal Code amendment that permits pre-trial credit at sentencing but expressly precludes it where bail has been denied because of the past criminal conduct of the person charged. In 1990 the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in the R. v. Askov case, ruling that unjustified delay could constitute a breach of Charter rights. Since then, some defence counsel insist on strict procedural compliance to delay proceedings in an effort to get charges dismissed. What was intended as a shield against abuse has now become a sword to avoid responsibility, and systemic delay is but one of the results. Exacerbating matters, the 1991 Stinchcombe case now mandates disclosure before a preliminary inquiry, which has led to significant delays and calls for its abolition, although this is not feasible because a preliminary inquiry is required by the Charter if the potential punishment is five years or more. But this applies to a wide range of less serious offenses, which have long maximum sentences that are never imposed, including residential break and entry, which has a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. This paper recommends that the Criminal Code should be amended to create select hybrid offences with an option for a sentence of five years less one day, to reduce significantly the number of cases requiring preliminary inquiry. In addition, part XVIII.1 of the Criminal Code regarding mandatory case resolution procedures should be reviewed by the provinces to ensure it is practically achieving the intended result of expediting case processing and resolution. Other promising measures for increasing justice system efficiency include: increasing the jurisdiction of Provincial Courts, simplifying judicial authorizations for evidence gathering and admissibility, changing Legal Aid service delivery models to increase full time salaried counsel and reduce private counsel who bill based on time spent, and more. There is no shortage of reforms to consider. Finally, this paper makes a series of recommendations intended to deal with repeat offenders and administration of justice offences: - Creation of the Criminal Code offence (s. 145) of breach of a condition of conditional release under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA); - authorize the Parole Board of Canada to order electronic monitoring of offenders on conditional release; - amend the CCRA to restrict statutory release eligibility to first time federal offenders and require earned parole for repeat federal custody offenders; and - amend the CCRA to expressly restrict parole for convicted non-citizens serving a federal sentence for the purpose of immediate removal from Canada. While the data collected for this report reveal a great deal, there is a wide range of potentially extremely useful data points that should be collected by Statcan or the relevant institutions. Because of the multiple players and processes in the Canadian criminal justice system it is extremely important to identify and track information. The Jordan ruling has articulated the importance of improving justice system efficiency and this paper offers some specific suggestions to achieve that goal. While there will no doubt be institutional resistance to this kind of analysis, the best way to design and implement effective public safety reforms is to gather the relevant information, ask the right questions, and make the appropriate choices. Canadians deserve nothing less. Details: Ottawa, ONT: Macdonald-Laurier Institute, 2016. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2016 at: http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_NewarkJusticegood.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_NewarkJusticegood.pdf Shelf Number: 144879 Keywords: Crime RatesCriminal CourtsCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsCriminal Trials |
Author: Kane-Berman, John Title: Going Off the Rails: The Slide Towards the Lawless South African State Summary: South Africa is widely recognised as a lawless country. It is also a country run by a government which has itself become increasingly lawless. This is so despite all the commitments to legality set out in the Constitution. Not only is the post-apartheid South Africa founded upon the principle of legality, but courts whose independence is guaranteed are vested with the power to ensure that these principles are upheld. Prosecuting authorities are enjoined to exercise their functions "without fear, favour, or prejudice". The same duty is laid upon other institutions established by the Constitution, among them the public protector and the auditor general. Everyone is endowed with the right to "equal protection and benefit of the law". We are all also entitled to "administrative action that is lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair". Unlike the old South Africa – no doubt because of it – the new Rechtsstaat was one where the rule of law would be supreme, power would be limited, and the courts would have the final say. This edifice, and these ideals, are under threat. Lawlessness on the part of the state and those who run it is on the increase. The culprits run from the president down to clerks of the court, from directors general to immigration officials, from municipal managers to prison warders, from police generals to police constables, from cabinet ministers to petty bureaucrats. Lawlessness ranges from protecting the criminal, to hounding the innocent, to crushing the poor. It runs from the unconstitutional to the outright criminal, from the brazen and defiant to the negligent or ignorant. It embraces slamming down the telephone on judges as well as victimising traffic policemen who flag down celebrities. It ranges from violations of parliamentary procedure, to breaches of the Public Finance Management Act, to outright skulduggery and corruption. Its victims include taxpayers who get fleeced, mining companies whose licence applications are unlawfully denied, suppliers who do not get paid for their services, and motorists who are forced off the road by reckless government drivers. The victims also include prisoners denied medical treatment, refugees forced to pay bribes, hawkers whose goods are unlawfully confiscated, and poor people unlawfully evicted from shacks which are then unlawfully demolished. Some people are unlawfully appointed, some unlawfully dismissed, some both. Others are unlawfully denied appointment or promotion. A criminal record is no bar to appointment or promotion, even in agencies designed to combat crime. Physical torture seems to be pervasive. Perpetrators of crime often get away with it. Some victims are able to seek redress in the courts, others suffer in silence. Many cases of lawlessness are reported in the newspapers, but they are probably the tip of quite a large iceberg. The courts are the ultimate guarantors of our rights and of legality but they are insulted, their orders are sometimes ignored, and their decisions are frequently taken on endless appeals. Sometimes instead of bowing to the courts and the law, the government seeks – unlawfully – to change the law. Statutory organisations designed to apply the law are deliberately undermined, while watchdogs and whistle-blowers seeking to uphold the law are subjected to intimidation. Lawlessness predates President Jacob Zuma's assumption of power in 2009, but it has intensified during his rule as more and more people and institutions follow his example and the examples of those who condone his behaviour. Details: Johannesburg: IRR (South African Institute of Race Relations), 2016. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Internet Resource: Accessed November 3, 2016 at: http://us-cdn.creamermedia.co.za/assets/articles/attachments/65454_going_off_the_rails_02.11.2016_.pdf Year: 2016 Country: South Africa URL: http://us-cdn.creamermedia.co.za/assets/articles/attachments/65454_going_off_the_rails_02.11.2016_.pdf Shelf Number: 144997 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCorruptionCrimeCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice SystemsLawlessness |
Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Salt Lake County, Utah: A County Justice and Behavioral Health Systems Improvement Project Summary: An extensive data analysis coupled with over 50 in-person interviews with stakeholders in Salt Lake County's justice and behavioral health systems led to the identification of key recommendations improve outcomes for people involved with the county's criminal justice system, particular those with behavioral health disorders. Since the start of this project in January 2014, county leaders have taken steps to strengthen policies, programs, and practices, demonstrating their commitment to continued systems improvement and data-driven outcomes. These efforts include: n Pretrial screening process enhancements to ensure that everyone receives a Salt Lake Pretrial Risk Instrument (SLPRI) assessment once booked into jail n Funding to hire staff to implement a risk and need screen for everyone booked into jail n Information-sharing agreements are being developed to increase data sharing between county stakeholders, particularly the Sheriff's Office, Behavioral Health Services, and Criminal Justice Services n Commitment to the use of evidence-based interventions with the county probation population to address criminogenic risk and needs The county has also created three new programs that complement many of the recommendations in this report: - Community-based Intensive Supervision Program pilot (currently being implemented) - Pre-Prosecutorial Diversion pilot (currently being designed) - Co-Occurring Reentry and Empowerment (CORE) II Program for women with co-occurring disorders (scheduled to launch in September 2015) Details: Washington, DC: The Justice Center, 2015. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 12, 2016 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/SaltLakeCountyReport.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/SaltLakeCountyReport.pdf Shelf Number: 146669 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsEvidence-Based ProgramsMental Health ReformTreatment Programs |
Author: Uhrig, Noah Title: Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic disproportionality in the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales Summary: The landscape of disproportionality for black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) individuals in the criminal justice system (CJS) is complex. Policing and specific policies, such as stop and search, are well evidenced and the subject of considerable debate in this arena. 1 There is less published evidence on disproportionality from the point of Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) involvement onwards in the CJS. Therefore, this analysis aims to identify key pinchpoints in the CJS from this point onward, focusing on identifying where disproportionality becomes more pronounced and may therefore warrant further explanatory investigation. This paper contributes to an independent review led by the Rt Hon David Lammy (MP) considering the treatment of, and outcomes for, BAME adults and young people within the CJS in England and Wales. This paper addresses the following research questions: • Where is disproportionate BAME contact with the CJS more pronounced? • To what extent is disproportionate BAME contact with the CJS paralleled in the youth system compared to the adult system? • To what extent is disproportionate BAME contact with the CJS paralleled for males and females? Analysis of management information data showed large BAME disproportionate contact occurring at the point of arrest with small contributions to BAME disproportionate contact emerging at subsequent stages in the CJS. Some areas – such as CPS charging and convictions – found white ethnic groups experienced small levels of disproportionate outcomes. Nevertheless, areas within the CJS post-arrest where BAME disproportionality was found to be particularly pronounced included: • being tried at Crown Court rather than magistrates' court; • custodial remand and plea at Crown Court; • custodial sentencing; and • adjudications of prison discipline. The analysis also found that the pattern of disproportionality across the CJS for BAME adult males and females was broadly similar. However, BAME young males2 experienced noticeably different disproportionality, particularly in the magistrates’ courts, compared to both BAME young females and adults. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2016. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Services : Accessed November 16, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/568680/bame-disproportionality-in-the-cjs.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/568680/bame-disproportionality-in-the-cjs.pdf Shelf Number: 141171 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsEthnic Groups Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice |
Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice Title: Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System 2015. Summary: This publication compiles statistics from data sources across the Criminal Justice System (CJS), to provide a combined perspective on the typical experiences of women who come into contact with it. It considers how these experiences have changed over time and how they contrast to the typical experiences of men. No causative links can be drawn from these summary statistics, and no controls have been applied to account for differences in circumstances between the males and females coming into contact with the CJS (e.g. average income or age); differences observed may indicate areas worth further investigation, but should not be taken as evidence of unequal treatment or as direct effects of sex. In general, females appear to have been substantially under-represented as offenders throughout the CJS compared with males. This is particularly true in relation to the most serious offence types and sentences, though patterns by sex vary between individual offences. Females were also typically underrepresented among practitioners in the CJS and among victims of violent crime, although they were more likely than males to have been a victim of intimate violence or child abuse. Trends over time for each sex often mirror overall trends, though this is not always the case. Victimisation According to the Crime Survey of England and Wales, there was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of women and men that were victims of crime in 2015/16. Women were less likely than men to think that the CJS is fair and more likely to believe that crime is rising. Women were more likely to have been subject to abuse as children, particularly sexual assault. They were less likely to be victims of violent crime in general, but much more likely to be victims of sexual assault or domestic violence – and female homicide victims were far more likely than their male equivalents to have a current or former partner be the principal suspect for their death. Police Activity Less than a quarter of those given a penalty notice for disorder (22%) or caution (24%) were female. Women were underrepresented to an even greater extent among those arrested (16%), who are typically being dealt with for more serious offences than those dealt with out of court. For both out of court disposals and arrests, females were particularly likely to have been dealt with for theft offences. Defendants Over the last decade, the number of females prosecuted has risen by 6%, driven by increases in prosecutions for TV license evasion, while the number of males prosecuted has fallen by a third. Nevertheless, in line with police activity, females were still substantially underrepresented among those prosecuted, at just over a quarter of the total (27%). This is broadly mirrored in convictions, remands and sentencing, although women have a slightly higher conviction ratio. Women were more likely to be sentenced to fines and conditional discharges and less likely to be sentenced to custody, compared with men. They also received shorter immediate custodial sentences on average, with the gap increasing over the last decade, driven by increases in the number of prosecutions and average custodial sentence length of male sexual offenders. Offender Characteristics Females made up a quarter of first time offenders, but only one in seven of those dealt with who had a previous caution or conviction. Males were more likely to be sentenced to immediate custody and to receive custodial sentences of 6 months or longer than females with a similar criminal history. Three-fifths of offences committed by women with 15 or more previous cautions or convictions related to theft, compared with only two-fifths for men. Although males were more likely to reoffend, females had a higher number of proven reoffences on average per reoffender. Females were slightly more likely than males to reoffend following a short custodial sentence, but considerably less likely to reoffend following longer ones. Offenders under supervision or in custody Women represented only 5% of the prison population, a proportion that has fallen over the last decade. However, in line with sentencing patterns, women were typically serving shorter sentences and represented almost 9% of those admitted to custody. Female prisoners reported feeling better supported in prison, but less safe, and they were more likely to self-harm and self-harm more frequently than men. There were lower rates of assault in female prisons, but a slightly higher proportion of disciplinary incidents relative to the population. Women typically had shorter periods of probation and fewer requirements. They were also more likely than men to participate in education in prison, to be granted home detention curfew if eligible, to make a success of release on temporary license and to have their probation orders terminated early for good progress. Offence analysis A range of differences between the sexes could be seen when individual offences are examined; typical behaviours and outcomes vary between men and women at an offence level. For example, while women were more likely than men to have been prosecuted for TV license evasion, typical sentencing behaviour was the same for both sexes, whereas prosecutions for benefit fraud were close to evenly split between men and women, but males typically received more serious sentences. Trends also vary over time at an offence level: for example, women were becoming less likely to receive an immediate custodial sentence for indictable drug offence, while males were not. In line with overall trends, however, the differences that exist at offence level usually represent either less involvement or less serious involvement in the CJS for women than men. Practitioners Women were substantially underrepresented among the police and judiciary, at just over a quarter of practitioners, but represented more than half of those working in the Ministry of Justice, Crown Prosecution Service and female prison estate. In general, CJS functions involving direct contact with offenders had fewer females than males (and vice versa for those that do not), but the proportions have been slowly getting more equal since 2011. Female representation among senior staff was considerably lower than in the general workforce for all CJS organisations, but proportions have been rising. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2016. 172p. Source: Internet Resource: A Ministry of Justice publication under Section 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991: Accessed December 7, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/572043/women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-statistics-2015.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/572043/women-and-the-criminal-justice-system-statistics-2015.pdf Shelf Number: 147933 Keywords: Crime StatisticsCriminal Justice SystemsFemale OffendersFemale Police OfficersFemale VictimsVictims of Crime |
Author: Meyer, Maureen Title: Mission Unaccomplished: Mexico's New Criminal Justice System Is Still a Work in Progress Summary: After eight years of reform, Mexico has a new criminal justice system -- at least on paper. When the Mexican Congress passed a series of constitutional reforms to Mexico's justice system in 2008, it was lauded as an important step towards making the criminal justice system more effective, efficient, and transparent and as one of Mexico's most powerful and ambitious tools to counter impunity and corruption. Given the magnitude of the reforms, the federal and state governments were given eight years to make the full transformation from a primarily inquisitorial, written-based system to an adversarial, oral-based system in which the prosecution and defense present competing evidence and arguments in open court. As of June 18, 2016, the transition to the new criminal justice system (Nuevo Sistema de Justicia Penal) is officially over. But a fully reformed system is far from being a reality in the country. The reformed system had to be implemented in Mexico's 31 states and Mexico City for the investigation and prosecution of crimes at both the federal and state levels. Although authorities asserted that by the June 18 implementation deadline, the new system was operating to some extent in all of the country for state-level crimes, they reluctantly acknowledged that only four states met all the criteria to consider the system fully operational (Coahuila, Nuevo León, Yucatán, and Chihuahua). Regarding crimes under federal jurisdiction, Mexican authorities said in an interview with WOLA that the new system is operating in 28 states; however, in states with high levels of violence and the presence of organized crime, such as Guerrero, Tamaulipas, Jalisco, and Baja California, the new system just began to operate in June 2016. Federal crimes are under the authority of the Attorney General's Office (Procuraduría General de la República, PGR) and include crimes related to drug trafficking and organized crime. Apart from a disorganized and slow implementation process, the full transition to the new system will be delayed until prosecutors and judges conclude thousands of cases opened under the inquisitorial or "old" system, which has faced backlogs for decades. In the old system, federal prosecutors usually take over seven months before presenting charges against a suspect and on average each prosecutor handles forty cases. Additionally, on June 15, 2016—just three days before the transition to the new system officially ended—the Mexican Congress finally approved a key set of amendments (miscelanea penal) that defined the operational and procedural aspects of the adversarial system, including relevant due process exceptions in organized crime cases. Implementing these amendments will also delay the complete transition to the adversarial system. Given these complications, an evaluation by the Mexican think tank CIDAC estimated that the full implementation of the new system could take 11 more years, meaning that it could be until 2027 that people prosecuted in Mexico fully benefit from the new safeguards of the reformed system. Details: Washington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), 2016. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 19, 2016 at: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Mission-Unaccomplished-Justice-Reform-Mexico_WOLA.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Mexico URL: https://www.wola.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Mission-Unaccomplished-Justice-Reform-Mexico_WOLA.pdf Shelf Number: 144888 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Fishman, Nancy Title: Greater Oklahoma City Chamber Criminal Justice Reform Task Force: Report and recommendations Summary: For years, Oklahoma County has been grappling with an overcrowded and run-down jail. With discussions abounding about whether to replace it with a larger facility, the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce convened a task force to examine the county’s local justice system and needs. Chaired by Clayton Bennett, chairman of the Oklahoma City Thunder, the task force included business leaders, criminal justice stakeholders, the judiciary, county and city officials, state agencies, and others. It also brought in Vera to help analyze why the jail was overcrowded, how it was used, and whether that use served the county’s public safety needs effectively. This report presents Vera’s recommendations to the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber Criminal Justice Task Force for how the county can safely reduce its jail population. While data collection practices limited some of the analysis, key findings and associated recommendations are reported. Summary Jails in the United States have experienced dramatic growth over the past 30 years. Between 1983 and 2013, annual jail admissions nearly doubled, from 6 million to 11.7 million. Oklahoma County has followed these national trends, with the county jail population increasing five-fold since 1983— from 495 to 2,581 people. The county opened a new, larger jail facility in 1991. Since then, conditions and overcrowding at the jail have reached crisis proportions. Originally designed to house 1,200 people, it now houses more than twice that many. Partnering for change With concerns about the jail mounting, and new discussions starting about whether to replace it—at significant cost to the county—the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce convened Greater Oklahoma City Chamber Criminal Justice Task Force ("the Task Force"). The Task Force brought in the Vera Institute of Justice in February 2016 to help analyze why the jail was overcrowded, how it was used, and whether that use served the county’s public safety needs effectively. Vera presented its findings to the Task Force, and provided recommendations and guidance for how the county can safely reduce its jail population. While data collection practices limited some of the analysis, key findings and associated recommendations are reported below. Jail overview > The jail is severely overcrowded and is running at double capacity. The average daily population was 2,581 people even though the facility was originally built for 1,200. Second to municipal charges, the most common reason for bookings were non-criminal behavior—such as temporary commitment to jail for a non-criminal violation and failure to appear in court. > The most common underlying felony, misdemeanor, and municipal charges of those detained in the jail were alcohol- and drug-related. Of the 10 most common crimes, the majority were nonviolent. > Black people were over-represented—while there were almost equal numbers of black and white people in the jail, white people account for 58 percent of the county population and black people make up only 15 percent of the county population. > Oklahoma County’s rate of female incarceration was high compared to the national average for a county of its size. Twenty-seven percent of people who entered jail last year were women. Key findings and recommendations > The independent agencies and decision-makers in Oklahoma City and County who make up the local justice system do not coordinate or collaborate, and do not share an understanding of how the jail should be used. Moreover, the criminal justice agencies have not been collecting, analyzing, or sharing the data that would enable them to understand who is in the jail and why, or to make informed, data-driven decisions. Vera proposes increased governance and oversight of the local justice system to eliminate these problems and improve data collection practices. This includes the creation of a permanent, staffed policy advisory body that can spearhead and sustain reforms. > One-quarter of all jail admissions were for the lowest-level offenses: municipal and traffic violations such as public drunkenness and not having a driver’s license at the time of a traffic stop. Vera recommends the county keep as many of these people out of jail as possible, through strategies like expanding the use of citations rather than arrest and booking. Admissions on low-level charges account for much of the volume in the booking area of the jail, and contribute to overcrowding and delays. > Ability to pay bail is the chief determining factor in who stays in jail and who is released pending the resolution of their cases. Vera estimated that 80 percent of people in the Oklahoma County jail were being held pretrial. Vera recommends the county create an effective, evidence-based process to decide who stays in jail while their case proceeds and who goes home. Improving the existing processes for non-financial release for appropriate defendants is the first step, but ultimately the county system should include national best practices like the use of a validated risk assessment tool, individualized decision-making by a judge that takes into account one’s ability to pay, and a robust range of pretrial supervision options. > Almost half of people who entered the jail in 2015 were released within three days. However, for those not released within three days, the average length of stay was 41 days. In a one-day snapshot of the jail population on June 1, 2015, one-third of incarcerated people had been there for six months or longer. Vera recommends the county improve processes that move cases through the court system, to alleviate delays and systemic inefficiencies that keep people in jail longer than they need to be. > Of the almost 30,000 people who entered the county jail in 2015, many suffer from addiction, mental illness, or both. Vera recommends the county expand mental health and substance use treatment diversion options for these people, and focus resources on those who are repeatedly booked into the jail for low-level offenses. Recommendations in this area include developing preand post-booking diversion strategies and speeding and broadening access to existing drug and mental health specialty courts. > In addition to significant problems caused by cash bail, fines, fees, and costs are levied on individuals at virtually every point in the criminal justice system. Those without the ability to pay these fees often are brought back to jail for their failure to pay criminal justice debt. Vera recommends the county implement strategies that will keep people from entering an endless cycle of debt and re-incarceration, which not only harms individuals and their families but also imposes recurring costs on both the county and Oklahoma City, without improving public safety. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2016. 96p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 23, 2016 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/oklahoma-city-chamber-criminal-justice-task-force-report/legacy_downloads/OK-chamber-final-report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/oklahoma-city-chamber-criminal-justice-task-force-report/legacy_downloads/OK-chamber-final-report.pdf Shelf Number: 14808 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsInmate PopulationJails |
Author: Henrichson, Christian Title: The Costs and Consequences of Bail, Fines and Fees in New Orleans Summary: The justice system in New Orleans, like most others, is partly supported by "user-funded revenue," meaning the money it collects from individuals charged with a crime. This practice has long been common in the United States, but an emerging body of research has begun to uncover the perverse incentives it creates for justice agencies and the depth of its impact on individuals. This report is an in-depth study of the costs and consequences of user-funded revenues in New Orleans, a city where the effects of this practice are likely to be particularly acute because of a poverty rate that is nearly twice the national average and a jail incarceration rate that is among the highest in the nation. Although there are steep challenges in New Orleans, there are also factors that bode well for reform. The jail population, while still nearly twice the national average, has been declining and is now the lowest it's been in decades. Furthermore, there are a number of new jail population reduction efforts— under the leadership of the mayor and city council—and a federal consent decree has led to an increased focus on improving conditions inside the jail. Data is often a prerequisite for reform. So to uncover the costs and consequences of the user-funded justice system in New Orleans, Vera researchers examined agency financial reports and justice-agency administrative records to measure (1) annual justice system expenses and user-pay revenue (namely financial bail and conviction fines and fees), (2) how much justice agencies and bond agents benefit from these revenues, (3) the financial impact of bail for defendants, (4) the financial impact of conviction fines and fees for defendants, and (5) the consequences of a user-funded system, including the human cost of jail and the disparate impact on black communities. Through analysis of 2015 financial reports and administrative court records, Vera found that: • Law enforcement, judicial, and corrections agency expenses totaled $265 million. • User-funded revenues totaled $11.5 million and comprised bond fees ($1.7 million), conviction fines and fees ($2.8 million), traffic court fines and fees ($5 million), and “other” sources that include asset seizures and drug testing fees ($1.9 million). • User-funded costs paid to commercial bond agents totaled $4.7 million for non-refundable bond premiums. • User-funded revenues comprise a sizable share of the budget for four agencies: traffic court (99 percent), municipal court (18 percent), criminal district court (32 percent), and Orleans Public Defenders (41 percent). • The cost of posting a surety bond averaged—inclusive of bond fees—$2,408 in criminal district court and $451 in municipal court. • 1,275 individuals, in criminal district court, spent an average of 114 pretrial days in jail because they could not pay their bail; 1,153 individuals, in municipal court, spent an average of 29 pretrial days in jail because they could not pay their bail. • More than 8,000 people were assessed conviction fines and fees totaling $3.8 million. o In criminal district court, 2,156 individuals were assessed a total of $2.4 million in fines and fees; o In municipal court, 6,175 individuals were assessed a total of $1.4 million. • Conviction fines and fees per individual averaged $1,125 in criminal district court and $228 in municipal court. • In 2015, municipal court issued 3,014 warrants for failing to pay (or failing to appear for payment) and criminal district court issued 990 warrants. Over those 12 months, 536 people were arrested on such warrants, all but 88 of them stemming from municipal court cases. (This includes people who were sentenced well before 2015 but were arrested in that year.) • The transfer of wealth that results from bail, fines and fees falls disproportionately on black communities: $5.4 million of the $6.4 million (84 percent) for bail premiums and fees and $2.7 million of the $3.8 million (69 percent) for conviction fines and fees were assessed to black defendants. • Once assessed fines and fees, black defendants were issued an arrest warrant in relation to unpaid fines and fees at higher rates than white defendants for both misdemeanor cases (43 percent versus 29 percent) and felony cases (18 percent versus 14 percent). Vera’s surveys and interviews with individuals previously involved in the New Orleans criminal justice system reveal that many relied on a number of people—including partners, parents, and children— to raise the money to pay the costs associated with justice system contact. And many still have trouble paying all their costs. This suggests that, for most respondents, raising the money for bail, fines and fees was a hardship that they either could not overcome, or one for which they had to rely on the resources of their community to meet. The total range of potential criminal justice costs goes far beyond those Vera analyzed through administrative records. So it is little surprise that more than half of survey respondents reported they and their family spent over $4,500 on costs associated with their most recent court case – including bail, fines, fees, transportation to court, attorney fees, and money put into their jail commissary account, among other expenses. The majority of people we surveyed reported that these costs had a major or moderate negative impact on their family's financial stability. Interviews with court-involved individuals and justice system stakeholders underscored the financially detrimental impact of user-funded costs on families, the stress of ongoing financial obligations to the justice system, the role of these criminal justice costs in exacerbating justice involvement, and the ways in which these costs damage perceptions of fairness and trust. The greatest cost, however, may be the human cost of jail (such as the risk of harm in jail and the deprivation of liberty) for those unable to bail, fines and fees, which Vera estimates to be substantially greater than the cost of jail to taxpayers. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2017. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 25, 2017 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans/legacy_downloads/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans-technical-report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans/legacy_downloads/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans-technical-report Shelf Number: 140663 Keywords: BailCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal FinesCriminal Justice DebtCriminal Justice SystemsFinancial SanctionsJails |
Author: Laisne, Mathilde Title: Past Due: Examining the Costs and Consequences of Charging for Justice in New Orleans Summary: Every year, government agencies in New Orleans collect millions of dollars in the form of bail, fines and fees from people involved in the criminal justice system and, by extension, from their families. Millions more are transferred from the pockets and bank accounts of residents to for-profit bail bond agents. These costs have become the subject of considerable public attention. Some view them as a necessary way to offset the expense of operating the criminal justice system. But because many "users" of the system have very low incomes or none at all, there is growing concern that charging for justice amounts to a criminalization of poverty, especially when people who can't pay become further entangled in the justice system. Take bail, for example: In theory, bail aims to ensure that people charged with crimes actually face justice in court, and high bail is intended to keep potentially dangerous defendants behind bars while their cases are pending. But here in New Orleans, as in many systems across the country, bail amounts are not calibrated to reflect a person’s ability to pay. As a result, poor families scrape together bail from money that they need to live on. And those who can't raise the money sit in jail not because they’re a risk of flight or a danger to the public, but simply because they can’t pay. Similarly, a host of fees for the use of the courts and other justice system resources, along with fines imposed as part of a person’s sentence if convicted, are levied in amounts that many poor and low-income people can't easily afford or afford at all. As part of a study to better understand the cost and consequences of bail, fines and fees for individuals in New Orleans, researchers at Vera interviewed people who have faced these costs. Two of their stories are illustrative. When Veronica was arrested and detained, her mother risked losing her house to raise the $2,500 to purchase a bail bond and pay associated government fees. It’s money she’ll never get back, but it was the only way to get her daughter out of jail after she had already spent 10 days behind bars. Keith, who is 61, still struggles to pay off thousands of dollars in court costs and restitution as a result of writing a bad check in 2014. He is making monthly payments that at times have deprived his family of basic necessities, including running water, and have strained his marriage almost to the breaking point. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2017. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 25, 2017 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans/legacy_downloads/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans/legacy_downloads/past-due-costs-consequences-charging-for-justice-new-orleans.pdf Shelf Number: 145425 Keywords: Bail Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Fines Criminal Justice Debt Criminal Justice SystemsFinancial Sanctions |
Author: Glod, Greg Title: Incentivizing Results: Lessons From Other States' Probation Funding Formula Reforms and Recommendations to Texas Lawmakers Summary: Prison is an important and necessary component of the criminal justice system. It is, in many cases, necessary to incarcerate offenders who pose a danger to society even with strict and modern monitoring. That being said, the state should supervise offenders outside the prison walls if the interests of public safety and liberty are best served by forgoing incarceration. When implemented effectively, probation keeps neighborhoods safer, saves money, and produces more successful outcomes for nondangerous offenders. When taking into account risk level, recidivism rates for individuals who are sentenced to community supervision (also known as probation) are lower than for those who are incarcerated. Key Points • Most probation funding to counties comes from the state based upon the amount of offenders being directly supervised. • This funding formula does not incentivize counties to implement strategies that maximize results but may cost counties more on the front-end. • Several states have altered their probation funding formulas to incentivize counties to reduce the amount of offenders going to state correctional facilities and to get a portion of the savings back.. • Texas could make minor changes to its current funding formula to achieve better probation results and save millions on incarceration costs Details: Austin, TX: Texas Public policy Foundation, 2017. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 11, 2017 at: http://www.texaspolicy.com/library/doclib/2016-11-PP27-IncentivizingResults-CEJ-GregGlod.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.texaspolicy.com/library/doclib/2016-11-PP27-IncentivizingResults-CEJ-GregGlod.pdf Shelf Number: 144934 Keywords: Community SupervisionCosts of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice SystemsOffender SupervisionProbation |
Author: Oklahoma Justice Reform Task Force Title: Final Report Summary: Since 2010, 31 states across the country have decreased imprisonment rates while reducing crime rates. Yet Oklahoma's prison population has grown by nine percent in the last five years, reaching 28,580 inmates as of June 2016. As a result of the large and growing inmate population, Oklahoma has the second highest imprisonment rate in the country, 78 percent higher than the national average in 2015. More concerning, since 1991, Oklahoma has had the highest female imprisonment rate in the country. These trends have burdened state taxpayers with extraordinary costs, with Oklahoma spending over half a billion dollars on corrections in FY2015. At this rate, Oklahoma's prison population is projected to grow 25 percent or 7,218 inmates by 2026. One-quarter of this overall growth will be driven by increases in the female prison population, which is projected to grow by 60 percent over the next ten years. The projected prison population growth is estimated to cost the state at least $1.2 billion in capital expenditures to build or lease three new prisons and an additional $700 million in operating costs over ten years. Seeking a better public safety return on corrections spending, state leaders from all three branches of government joined together in May of 2016 to request technical assistance through the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, a public-private partnership between the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, and The Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew), to be provided by the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI). Governor Fallin issued Executive Order 2016-24 in July of 2016, establishing the bi-partisan, inter-branch Oklahoma Justice Reform Task Force (Task Force) and charging it with "developing" comprehensive criminal justice and corrections reform policy recommendations designed to alleviate prison overcrowding and reduce Oklahoma's incarceration rate while improving public safety. Over a six-month period, the Task Force analyzed the state's sentencing, corrections, and community supervision data and reviewed the latest research on reducing recidivism and improving public safety. The Task Force found that: Seventy-five percent of people admitted to prison were sentenced for nonviolent crimes; over half of individuals sentenced to prison for nonviolent offenses have one or no prior felony convictions, and 80 percent have no history of violent crimes. Research demonstrates that incarceration is no more effective at reducing recidivism than alternatives to prison and can actually increase the recidivism rates of lower-level individuals. Despite the risk of increasing recidivism for lower-level, non-violent offences, Oklahoma uses prison over alternatives more often than other states and has focused many of its prison beds on those sentenced for nonviolent crimes with limited criminal history. Sentences for nonviolent offenders in Oklahoma are longer compared to other states, and release options are underutilized and/or delayed. Despite research demonstrating that longer prison terms do not reduce recidivism more than shorter prison terms, less than 10 percent of the individuals released from prison are paroled, and drug and property offenders are released on average nine months past their parole eligibility date. Based on this analysis and the directive from Governor Fallin, the Task Force developed a comprehensive, data-driven, evidence-based package of 27 policy recommendations, supported by a substantial majority of Task Force members, and specifically aimed at improving public safety by holding offenders accountable and reducing recidivism. These policies, if signed into law, would avert all of the projected prison population growth, and ultimately reduce the current prison population by seven percent, saving $1.9 billion in prison costs over the next ten years. Details: Oklahoma City: The Task Force, 2017. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 13, 2017 at: http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/OJRTFFinalReport%20(1).pdf?embeddedLinkType=document Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/OJRTFFinalReport%20(1).pdf?embeddedLinkType=document Shelf Number: 145119 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Harrison, Linda Title: Evaluation of the Youthful Offender System (YOS) in Colorado: A report of findings per C.R.S. 18-1.3-407(10)(b) Summary: In 2016, The Colorado Division of Criminal Justice undertook a semiannual evaluation of the Department of Correction's Youthful Offender System. This report presents recidivism rates and a broad picture of the operations of YOS as observed from the perspective of the residents, staff, and managers. Division researchers surveyed staff (with 68% response rate) and residents (with a 97% response rate), conducted interviews with YOS staff and officials, and analyzed data provided by DOC. From multiple data collection efforts, various themes emerged to answer the research questions that guided the study. Summary Overall, the YOS operations are generally consistent with statute and likely represent the intent of the drafters of the original YOS legislation. However, the data collected for this evaluation occurred at a time of considerable organizational change at YOS. Concerns about the lack of consequences for negative behavior have resulted in a new emphasis on accountability by the administration, of both staff and residents. As with prior evaluation findings, education/vocational training is valued by both staff and residents; over 80% of residents said they would choose YOS again because of these opportunities. YOS administrators continue to expand the programming, and these improvements should continue as space becomes available in the multipurpose building (scheduled for completion in the spring of 2017). The average age at intake increased between 2006 and 2013, which was to be expected due to changes in 2010 statute that removed most juveniles ages 14 and 15 from direct file consideration and the 2009 statutory modification that extended the age of sentencing to include 19 and 20 year olds. Between 2013 and 2015 the age of YOS intakes remained very stable at approximately 18.8 years, but a slight increase has been observed in 2016. This is likely to continue with the advent of Senate Bill 15-182, allowing the transfer of offenders up to age 24 from DOC to YOS. The majority of YOS staff (80.2%) reported that they consistently see themselves as role models, and another 17.5% saw themselves as role models "sometimes." With a strong staff and administration, and the continued expansion of programs and activities, YOS is positioned to positively impact the lives of many offenders. The proportion of offenders successfully completing their sentence at YOS has remained around 90.0% over the past three years. The 2-year felony reconviction rate after program completion is 25.7%, and only 11.7% were reconvicted of a violent felony crime within 2 years. These are very positive outcomes, especially given the very serious nature of the YOS population. Recommendations 1. The average age of incoming YOS participants has been increasing as a result of statutory modifications regarding YOS eligibility. YOS intakes are now, on average, nearly 19 years old. YOS administrators should continue their efforts, currently underway, to examine existing educational programming and staffing to ensure that it is relevant to an older population. In addition, over one-third (38.2%) of YOS intakes in 2016 were functionally illiterate, reflecting the need for a wide range of educational programming necessary to meet the needs of this older population. Additionally, YOS administrators should continue its efforts to expand programming related to parenting since many of the YOS residents are parents of young children. This includes exploring ways to expand parent/family engagement opportunities. 2. The recent turnover of management staff at YOS has resulted in an organization in transition. Administrators should make every effort to communicate their vision and expectations to line and program staff to ensure that staff morale and the YOS program mission are not compromised as YOS evolves. 3. Efforts to fill the vacant mental health position must be prioritized by YOS administrators. This recommendation was made in 2012, 2014 and now again in 2016. This is a critically important position, and survey comments from staff and residents reflect a broad recognition of this gap in services. Administrators should work with human resource officials to identify ways to attract qualified and committed applicants. 4. Concerns about gang activity were voiced by both staff and residents. The current review of YOS programming by DOC administrators as it relates to gang activity should continue, and the historical practice of not recognizing gang-related behavior (described in the 2014 YOS evaluation report) should be reconsidered. Considerable research exists regarding gang intervention programming, and this material should be reviewed and incorporated into new programming at YOS. 5. Programming for the women continues to challenge YOS administrators despite ongoing efforts to improve services for this population. With the upcoming completion of the multipurpose building, efforts should focus on expanding the women's access to programming and recreational activities. 6. The YOS management team should continue its work building and maintaining excellent relationships with community stakeholder employers who assist with job fairs, resume/interview skills, and hiring. 7. YOS administrators should carefully document the outcomes of the new "youth transfers" pursuant to Senate Bill 15-182. This bill allows for the identification and placement of certain individuals who were directly sentenced to prison to be placed in YOS if DOC administrators believe they could benefit from the program. Details: Denver: Colorado Department of Public Safety, 2016. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 15, 2017 at: http://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/reports/2016-12_YOSRpt.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/reports/2016-12_YOSRpt.pdf Shelf Number: 146288 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsJuvenile Justice AdministrationJuvenile OffendersYouthful Offenders |
Author: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Brazil Institute Title: Handling Systemic Corruption in Brazil. A Conversation with Judge Sergio Fernando Moro Summary: Inspired by the hopeful evolution of the nation’s crisis, the Brazil Institute launched in July 2016 a lecture series to explore the various institutional aspects of this historic, ongoing transformation in Latin America’s largest country. The initiative, reflective of a broader Wilson Center focus on the global fight against corruption, brings to Washington audiences the judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, legal experts, and practitioners engaged in the evolution of justice and rule of law in Brazil. The series is conducted in partnership with the American University's Washington College of Law program on Legal and Judicial Studies. Edited proceedings of each lecture will be available online, with lectures from the entire series collected in a volume to be published in the second semester of 2017. It is our hope that the statements gathered in this series will shed light on the ongoing efforts of a diverse group of actors to strengthen Brazilian institutions, and deepen the dialogue on rule of law both within and beyond Brazil. - Details: Washington, DC: The Institute, 2016. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2017 at: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/bi_rule_of_law-sergio_moro_finalv2.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Brazil URL: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/bi_rule_of_law-sergio_moro_finalv2.pdf Shelf Number: 144443 Keywords: Criminal Justice systemsPolitical Corruption Rule of Law |
Author: Motivans, Mark Title: Federal Justice Statistics, 2013-2014 Summary: Describes the annual activity, workloads, and outcomes of the federal criminal justice system from arrest to imprisonment, using data from U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA), Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC), and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). This report presents data on arrests and investigations by law enforcement agency and growth rates by type of offense and federal judicial district. It also examines trends in drug arrests by the DEA, provides the number of offenders returning to federal prison within 3 years of release, and includes the most recent available data on sentences imposed and their lengths by type of offense. See also Federal Justice Statistics, 2013 - Statistical Tables and Federal Justice Statistics, 2014 - Statistical Tables. Highlights: During 2014, federal law enforcement made 165,265 arrests, a 12% decrease from 188,164 arrests in 2013. In 2014, the five federal judicial districts along the U.S.-Mexico border accounted for 61% of federal arrests, 55% of suspects investigated, and 39% of offenders sentenced to federal prison. There were 81,881 federal immigration arrests made in 2014 - one-half of all federal arrests. Cocaine (25%) was the most common drug type involved in arrests by the Drug Enforcement Administration in 2014. Ninety-one percent of felons in cases terminated in U.S. district court in 2014 were convicted as the result of a guilty plea, 6% were dismissed, and 3% received a jury or bench trial. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2017. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 12, 2017 at: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fjs1314.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fjs1314.pdf Shelf Number: 144814 Keywords: Administration of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice StatisticsCriminal Justice SystemsFederal Justice System |
Author: Cortes, Nancy G. Title: Perspectives on Mexico's Criminal Justice System: What Do Its Operators Think? Survey of Judges, Prosecutors, and Public Defenders Summary: Justice in Mexico, a research and public policy program based at the University of San Diego, released the English version of the latest publication in the Justiciabarometro series, Justiciabarometro 2016- Perspectives on Mexico's Criminal Justice System: What do its operators think?, thanks to the generous funding from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. The 2016 Justiciabarometro provides a comparative analysis of the justice system operators' demographics and perspectives, as well as comparisons to similar data collected in 2010. Survey participants included 288 judges, 279 prosecutors, and 127 public defenders in 11 Mexican states, with a response rate of 56%, a 2.4% margin of error, and a 95% confidence interval. Details: San Diego: Justice in Mexico, Department of Political Science & International Relations, University of San Diego, 2017. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 21, 2017 at: https://justiceinmexico.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/2016-Justiciabarometro_English-Version_Online.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Mexico URL: https://justiceinmexico.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/2016-Justiciabarometro_English-Version_Online.pdf Shelf Number: 145065 Keywords: Court ReformCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsJudgesProsecutorsPublic Defenders |
Author: Moloeznik, Marcos Pablo Title: Security and Justice in Jalisco: Scenarios and proposals Summary: In the year 2015, the escalade of violence closes with a crisis of (in) security in the state of Jalisco which is unparalleled in its recent history. In that context, the demand for public security and justice has become the main concern and request by the citizenry, in accordance with the results of the most reliable opinion polls, as well as of the more diverse and representative sectors of our entity. In view of the State's failure to fulfill its obligation to guarantee the right to security for everyone who lives in our community, the University of Guadalajara, in compliance of all and every one of its substantial functions (teaching, generating knowledge and establishing links), has been systematically carrying out significant contributions in the areas of security, human rights and the justice for years. The work is a compilation of 25 collaborations, divided in five thematic sections. The great majority of the authors identify with the theories of multidimensional and integral security which claim that the phenomena of violence, crime and delinquency are based on structures of socioeconomic difference, contexts of poverty, marginality and weak social cohesion. This interpretation also leads to maintaining that government institutions suffer from notable insufficiencies, among them the lack of professionalism of government employees, corruption, opacity and lack of transparency, as well as the absence of planning and administration of the public budgets. In the first thematic section block, "Strategic vision and critical issues", the four collaborations that make it up study from the historic factors to the problems of implementing public policies in Jalisco as a whole and, in particular, in the metropolitan area of Guadalajara. The topic of the link between public security and penal justice is approached as two factors that should be integrated accompanying each other. The second section "Violence and high-impact crimes", compiles studies that compare homicides at national and state levels; the manifestation of the different kinds of violence and the study of disappearances, kidnapping and torture. These contributions expose how the official statistics are unequal and omit the description of reality, basically with political purposes, in order not to look like a state that has high crime indicators that could tint the image of local government officials, and inhibit tourism or capital investment. The six chapters making up the section "Human Rights and vulnerable groups" make a realistic analysis of the human rights violations in the state, emphasizing the lack of independence of the State Human Rights Commission. They cover the topics of suicide, juvenile delinquency, gender violence and the difficulties migrants face on their route throughout Jalisco. These analyses reflect the vulnerability besetting a lot of sectors of the population. The fourth section is devoted to the "Institutions and capacities of the state of Jalisco". It consists of five chapters that analyze the Judiciary power and the relation among the implementation of the new penal justice system; police corps, their weaknesses and capacities; the public advocacy and the public security system (or systems), which must be encouraged as a State policy. The panorama that is emerging is worrying: The justice system lacks independence and the police bodies, coordination; which has led to the proposal of a unified command, which in Jalisco has been advertised as one of the steps to follow. The articles strongly stress the weaknesses of these institutional subsystems, and they almost take for granted that they do not have the strength to implement the reforms to penal justice and the coordination of police corporations. Furthermore, if these institutional capacities are too weak to confront common crime, all the more reason to believe that they would be unable to do their job, that they would be overpowered rapidly if the cjng were to grow in influence and managed to consolidate in the state of Jalisco. In addition, in the light of the new adversarial Justice system, the aforementioned section includes recommendations made from good practices documented in the last few years in those federated entities that have already implemented them. The final section "Federacion Jalisco in the frame of national security", contains four chapters that close the book with excellent analyses on CJNG penetration and growth and the presence and role of the Army. It is pointed out that due to both, the existence of a criminal group whose name locates it in the state and to the increased presence of the Army and the Federal Police to face it; Jalisco risks a growth in the presence of organized crime, which will force the participation of the federal forces. In short, this work implicitly presents the possible scenarios for Jalisco: An increase of violence that would require the federal forces to head the effort to curb the enemy or, on the contrary, that the Jalisco leaders face reality, become aware of the magnitude of the phenomenon of (in) security, and implement the necessary reforms. This publication makes concrete recommendations, provides tools, raw materials and information to understand the security crisis that can be brewing. It is up to society and government officials to use it to put together a new security agenda. Details: Guadalajara: Universidad de Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, 2016. 259p Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 1, 2017 at: http://www.casede.org/BibliotecaCasede/Novedades-PDF/Security_%20justice_Jalisco.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Mexico URL: http://www.casede.org/BibliotecaCasede/Novedades-PDF/Security_%20justice_Jalisco.pdf Shelf Number: 145221 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsHomicidesPublic SecuritySecurityViolenceViolent Crime |
Author: Queensland. Audit Office Title: Criminal Justice System -- Reliability and Integration of Data Summary: Queensland's criminal justice system prevents, detects, and investigates crimes. It delivers judicial processes, manages prisoners and offenders, and provides rehabilitation services. The Queensland Police Service and the Department of Justice and Attorney-General (through its Queensland Courts Service, Queensland Corrective Services, and Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions) are the prime agencies for delivering these services. Throughout this report, we refer to these entities collectively as criminal justice entities. These entities collect valuable data on occurrences (crimes, traffic matters, missing persons, domestic violence, and other incidents), people, and property, and on their activities. They use the data when making decisions about their activities and when allocating resources. The government relies on the statistics and reports generated from this data to set its policy direction. The public rely on it for an appreciation of levels of community safety. Between 2010-11 and 2015-16, the Queensland Police Service recorded 2 174 144 occurrences with 2 809 283 reportable offences into the Queensland Police Records Information Management Exchange (QPRIME) system. The Queensland Police Service define a reportable offence as any act reported to, or becoming known by, the police that they consider, prima facie (at first view, before investigation), to be in breach of the criminal law. The Queensland Police Service has an unacceptable amount of crime data across the state that is incomplete, inaccurate, and wrongly classified. Contributing to this are officers' poor understanding or use of data classification rules, poor guidance, inappropriate data classification practices and inadequate quality assurance controls. As a result, reported crime statistics are questionable at best and unreliable at worst, and should be treated with caution. Underlying the crime statistics, we undertook a statewide assessment of Queensland Police QPRIME system data. Between 2010-11 and 2015-16, we found 22 per cent of all occurrence reports with reportable offences recorded in the Queensland Police Records Information Management Exchange (QPRIME) system, were incomplete, inaccurate or both. We also identified trends in withdrawn and unfounded offences that warranted investigation Details: Brisbane: Audit Office, 2017. 81p. Source: Internet Resource: Report 14: 2016-17: Accessed May 5, 2017 at: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/qao_criminal_justice_system_data_report_14_april_2017.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/qao_criminal_justice_system_data_report_14_april_2017.pdf Shelf Number: 145319 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCrime StatisticsCriminal InvestigationCriminal Justice StatisticsCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Halloran, Nick Title: The NSW Prison Population Simulation Model: A policy analysis tool Summary: Aim: To describe a simulation model of the NSW prison system and demonstrate its utility as a tool for examining the effects of changes to the criminal justice system that influence the number of prisoners in custody Method: The model consists of four states (bail, remand, custody and parole) and a set of parameters governing flows into and out of those states as well as lengths of stay in each state. Data for the model were sourced from police, court and correctional databases. Results: The prison system is extremely sensitive to changes in the percentage of persons refused bail. A one percentage point change in the percentage of persons refused bail by a court increases the remand population by 7.66 per cent, the sentenced prisoner population by 6.03 per cent and the parole population by 6.15 per cent. Conclusion: It is feasible to build a simple model of the prison system which is easy to maintain but nonetheless useful in analysing the likely consequences of changes in arrest, bail and sentencing policy. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2017. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice Number 203; Accessed May 10, 2017 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2017-NSW-Prison-Population-Simulation-Model-CJB203.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2017-NSW-Prison-Population-Simulation-Model-CJB203.pdf Shelf Number: 145396 Keywords: BailCriminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice SystemsInmatesParolePrison Population |
Author: Lacy, Diane Title: Analysis of the Criminal Justice System's Data Architecture Summary: The criminal justice system in the United States is a complex national enterprise consisting of a multitude of independent units of government (jurisdictions and agencies) that must coordinate their activities in order to achieve a common goal: an efficient and effective justice system. To effectively coordinate these activities, system stakeholders must effectively share information. However, due to its diversity and decentralization, the justice system lacks a common framework for sharing data - in other words, it lacks a common data architecture. The primary hypothesis of this project was that while the justice community has invested significantly in developing information sharing standards, which are critical components of a data architecture, it has not developed a complete "enterprise" view of the justice process that properly identifies all of the components required to understand the entire enterprise, nor has it properly scaled these exchanges to maximize their utility across organizational boundaries. The results of this research affirm this hypothesis - there is little demonstration that the justice system has developed a comprehensive enterprise model of a criminal justice data architecture. However, this research has also moved the discussion forward by developing a framework for assessing the state of the justice data architecture. Justice stakeholders can use this framework to capture, document, and measure the components that exist, and they can add to it to develop a robust criminal justice data architecture. The goals of this project were to - 1) document the current as-is state of the criminal justice system's data architecture compared to its ideal future to-be state, and identify gaps between the two, and 2) develop a common framework or structure for defining the information sharing requirements and capabilities of the criminal justice process - a data architecture metamodel and framework. To accomplish these goals, researchers defined the structure of the framework following principles of Enterprise Architecture, Service Oriented Architecture, and Business Process Modeling. Following this framework, researchers used the framework to document the as-is and to-be states of the criminal justice data architecture. Details: Sacramento, CA: SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, 2017. 88p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 21, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250964.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250964.pdf Shelf Number: 146798 Keywords: Criminal Justice DataCriminal Justice SystemsInformation Sharing |
Author: Chemonics International Inc. Title: Changes for Justice Project: Final Report Summary: The Changes for Justice (C4J) Project was funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) under Contract No. DFD-I-00-08-00070-00, a Task Order under the Encouraging Global Anticorruption and Good Governance Efforts (ENGAGE) Indefinite Quantity Contract (IQC) awarded to Chemonics International with a start date of May 12, 2010. The C4J contract effective end date was May 11, 2014, but the project received a cost extension until May 11, 2015. The C4J Project was based on several recent USAID efforts to support the bureaucratic reform processes of the Indonesian Supreme Court and the Attorney General's Office (AGO), including the Justice Sector Reform Program (JSRP) focused on the AGO, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC)/USAID Indonesia Control of Corruption Project (ICCP), focused on the Supreme Court, and the Indonesia Anticorruption and Commercial Court Enhancement (In-ACCE) Project, focused on five first-instance general (district) courts with jurisdiction for commercial and anticorruption cases. C4J was designed to sustain those earlier projects' reforms, compare the knowledge and experiences of each, and deepen the reforms by improving management and increasing transparency and accountability within Indonesia's judicial and prosecutorial systems. The goals of the C4J Project were divided into three parts: Sustaining and Broadening Reforms in the Supreme Court (Component 1); Sustaining and Broadening Reforms in the Attorney General's Office (Component 2); and Special Initiatives (Component 3). Key activities included institutional reforms in human resources, budget and financial management, case management, information technology, education and training programs, and public services. Technical activities included development and launching of prosecution guidelines, a new prosecutorial code of conduct, a new certification program for judges on juvenile cases, and an integrated justice sector training program on combatting threats to biodiversity. Special Initiatives of the project under Component 3 included installation of public information desks, creation of Version 1 of a new case tracking system (CTS) in three pilot district courts during the first year of the project, and a new program to combat threats to biodiversity in three pilot districts, including district courts, district prosecutors' offices, and rural communities. These pilot programs proved to be an excellent model for testing, evaluating, and rolling out reforms. Details: Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development, 2015. 130p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 9, 2017 at: http://www.chemonics.com/OurWork/OurProjects/Documents/C4J%20Final%20Report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Indonesia URL: http://www.chemonics.com/OurWork/OurProjects/Documents/C4J%20Final%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 147179 Keywords: CourtsCriminal CourtsCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsPolitical Corruption |
Author: Lammy, David Title: The Lammy Review: An independent review into the treatment of, and outcomes for, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic individuals in the Criminal Justice System Summary: Across England and Wales, people from minority ethnic backgrounds are breaking through barriers. More students from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds are achieving in school and going to university. There is a growing BAME middle class. Powerful, high-profile institutions, like the House of Commons, are slowly becoming more diverse. Yet our justice system bucks the trend. Those who are charged, tried and punished are still disproportionately likely to come from minority communities. Despite making up just 14% of the population, BAME men and women make up 25% of prisoners, while over 40% of young people in custody are from BAME backgrounds. If our prison population reflected the make-up of England and Wales, we would have over 9,000 fewer people in prison5 - the equivalent of 12 average-sized prisons. There is greater disproportionality in the number of Black people in prisons here than in the United States. These disproportionate numbers represent wasted lives, a source of anger and mistrust and a significant cost to the taxpayer. The economic cost of BAME overrepresentation in our courts, prisons and Probation Service is estimated to be L309 million a year. This report is the product of an independent review, commissioned by two Prime Ministers. The review was established to 'make recommendations for improvement with the ultimate aim of reducing the proportion of BAME offenders in the criminal justice system'. It reflects a growing sense of urgency, across party-political lines, to find solutions to this inequity. The Review This review has two distinctive features, the first of which is its breadth. The terms of reference span adults and children; women and men. It covers the role of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the courts system, our prisons and young offender institutions, the Parole Board, the Probation Service and Youth Offending Teams (YOTS). A comprehensive look at both the adult and youth justice systems was overdue. Secondly, whilst independent of the government, the review has had access to resources, data and information held by the criminal justice system (CJS) itself. In the past, too much of this information has not been made available to outsiders for scrutiny and analysis. As a result, this review has generated analysis that breaks new ground on race and criminal justice in this country. The focus of the review is on BAME people, but I recognise the complexity of that term. Some groups are heavily overrepresented in prison - for example Black people make up around 3% of the general population but accounted for 12% of adult prisoners in 2015/16; and more than 20% of children in custody. Other groups, such as Mixed ethnic adult prisoners, are also overrepresented, although to a lesser degree. The proportion of prisoners who are Asian is lower than the general population but, within categories such as 'Asian' or 'Black' there is considerable diversity, with some groups thriving while others struggle. This complexity mirrors the story in other areas of public life. In schools, for example, BAME achievement has risen but not in a uniform way. Chinese and Indian pupils outperform almost every other group, while Pakistani children are more likely to struggle. Black African children achieve better GCSE exam results, on average, than Black Caribbean children.16 Wherever possible this report seeks to draw out similar nuances in the justice system. The review also addresses the position of other minorities who are overlooked too often. For example, Gypsies, Roma and Travellers (GRT) are often missing from published statistics about children in the CJS, but according to unofficial estimates, are substantially over-represented in youth custody, for example, making up 12% of children in Secure Training Centres (STC). Muslims, meanwhile, do not fall within one ethnic category, but the number of Muslim prisoners has increased from around 8,900 to 13,200 over the last decade. Both groups are considered within scope for this review Details: London: U.K. Government, 2017. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 11, 2017 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/643001/lammy-review-final-report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/643001/lammy-review-final-report.pdf Shelf Number: 147210 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsEthnic GroupsMinority GroupsRacial DisparitiesRacial Prejudice |
Author: Council of State Governments. Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Missouri: Overview Summary: Like many states, Missouri has confronted a number of challenges to the public's confidence in its criminal justice system. At the same time, the state is seeing a variety of troubling trends that need to be addressed, including an uptick in violent crime, a fast-growing female prison population, and a sizeable portion of prison admissions that are driven by failures on supervision. In May 2017, Missouri Governor Eric Greitens, then Chief Justice Patricia Breckenridge, Senate President Pro Tempore Ron Richard, and House Speaker Todd Richardson requested support from the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and The Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew) to explore a justice reinvestment approach to address these challenges. As public-private partners in the federal Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), BJA and Pew approved Missouri's request and asked The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center to provide intensive technical assistance through JRI to help collect and analyze data and develop appropriate policy options to help contain corrections spending and reinvest in strategies that can reduce recidivism and increase public safety. Executive Order 17-17, signed by Governor Greitens in June 2017, established the Missouri State Justice Reinvestment Task Force comprising designees from all three branches of Missouri's government and state and local criminal justice system stakeholders. Under the direction of the task force, CSG Justice Center staff will conduct a comprehensive analysis of data collected from various relevant state agencies and departments within all three branches of the state's government. To build a more comprehensive picture of statewide criminal justice trends, data on jail and community corrections will be collected from local governments and analyzed where possible. CSG Justice Center staff will also convene focus groups and lead interviews with key stakeholders in Missouri's criminal justice system. Based on the findings from these extensive quantitative and qualitative analyses, the task force will develop options for the legislature's consideration that are designed to both increase public safety and contain the cost of corrections. The task force will also explore opportunities to reinvest in strategies that will further public safety and cost savings. This overview highlights some recent criminal justice trends in Missouri. The task force will explore these issues, and many others, in greater depth in the coming months. Details: New York: Justice Center, 2017. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 28, 2017 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/JR-in-Missouri_Overview.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/JR-in-Missouri_Overview.pdf Shelf Number: 148516 Keywords: Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice SystemsJustice Reinvestment |
Author: Japan. Ministry of Justice Title: White Paper on Crime 2016 Summary: 1. Original White Paper on Crime - This White Paper is a summary and translated version of an annual publication of the Ministry of Justice, Japan, the "White Paper on Crime" 2016 (original text is in Japanese). Translations in this Paper are tentative and are to be considered solely as reference. For more statistics and further details, refer to the original Japanese version. 2. Data Sources - Statistics, Tables, Figures and other information presented in the White Paper on Crime are mainly provided by the respective bureaus/departments of the Ministry of Justice. Statistics and data are also obtained from various research or surveys conducted by relevant agencies, as well as the following official statistics. Criminal Statistics of the National Police Agency (Criminal Investigation Bureau, National Police Agency) Annual Report of Statistics on Prosecution (Judicial System Department, Minister's Secretariat, Ministry of Justice) Annual Report of Judicial Statistics (General Secretariat, the Supreme Court) Annual Report of Statistics on Correction (Judicial System Department, Minister's Secretariat, Ministry of Justice) Annual Report of Statistics on Rehabilitation (Judicial System Department, Minister's Secretariat, Ministry of Justice) "Population Census" and "Population Estimates" (both referred as "Population Data") ( Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications) 3. Others - (1) The statistical data up to May 14, 1972, do not include the data for Okinawa Prefecture (2) Unless otherwise indicated, the names of ministries and agencies referred to in this White Paper are based on the changes made in January 2001 by the reorganization of ministries and agencies of the Government. 4. Coverage of statistical materials - Data in this Paper are based on statistical materials available by the end of July 2016. Unless otherwise indicated, the most recent annual figure is of the year 2015. Any corrections made on the data offered or publicized by relevant agencies will be reflected in subsequent editions of this Paper if it deemed necessary. Details: Tokyo: Ministry of Justice, 2016. 103p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2018 at: http://hakusyo1.moj.go.jp/en/65/nfm/mokuji.html Year: 2016 Country: Japan URL: http://hakusyo1.moj.go.jp/en/65/nfm/mokuji.html Shelf Number: 149073 Keywords: Crime Statistics Criminal Justice SystemsCriminal Statistics |
Author: Perrin, Benjamin Title: Report Card on the Criminal Justice System #2 Summary: Canada's criminal justice system is facing a litany of serious challenges, including significant underreporting of crime by victims, delays and inefficiencies, rising costs, and considerable overrepresentation of Indigenous people in prison. In 2016, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute issued its inaugural Report Card on the Criminal Justice System: Evaluating Canada's Justice Deficit, which brought these issues to light using quantitative data and a systematic approach to measuring the strengths and shortcomings of the criminal justice system in each province and territory. It spurred public commitments by several provincial and territorial governments to improve their criminal justice systems. In this second report card, we use recently collected data to update the performance of the criminal justice system in each province and territory and in Canada as a whole. Using Statistics Canada data and quantitative statistical methods, we assess each province and territorys criminal justice system based on five major objectives: public safety, support for victims, costs and resources, fairness and access to justice, and efficiency. Nationally, some trends stand out in the system's performance over the last five years. There have been notable improvements in crime rates, which have dropped, there are now fewer police officers required per capita, and there have been increases in per crime legal aid expenditures on criminal matters, a measure of access to justice. On the other hand, the weighted non-violent crime clearance rate has declined, meaning proportionately fewer cases are being solved, the incidents of breach of probation per 1,000 crimes have risen, and the cost of corrections per capita has also gone up. Furthermore, Indigenous people are greatly overrepresented as a proportion of those in prison. There were some notable changes in the provinces and territories between the 2016 and 2017 report cards, including improvements in Ontario (which was the most improved) and Nunavut, and declines in Quebec and British Columbia. Details: Ottawa: Macdonald Laurier Institute, 2018. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 14, 2018 at: https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_JusticeReportCard_Final_web2.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Canada URL: https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_JusticeReportCard_Final_web2.pdf Shelf Number: 149463 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Human Rights Watch Title: "Caught in a Web": Treatment of Pakistanis in the Saudi Criminal Justice System Summary: Despite over a decade of reforms, the Saudi criminal justice system continues to trample over the rights of Saudi and non-Saudi defendants to due process and fair trials. The glaring defects in the criminal justice system are especially acute for the twelve million foreigners living in Saudi Arabia, over one-third of the country's total population, who face substantial challenges obtaining legal assistance and navigating Saudi court procedures. About 1.6 million Pakistanis, most of them foreign migrant workers, make up the second-largest migrant community in Saudi Arabia. "Caught in a Web" is based on interviews with Pakistani citizens detained and put on trial in Saudi Arabia in recent years, as well as family members of other Pakistani defendants. Pakistani detainees, former detainees, and their family members detailed the Saudi criminal justice system and Saudi courts' rampant due process violations, including long periods of detention without charge or trial, no access to legal assistance, pressure on detainees from the authorities to sign confessions and accept predetermined prison sentences to avoid prolonged arbitrary detention, and ineffective translation services for defendants. Some defendants reported ill-treatment and poor prison conditions. Due process violations were most consequential for defendants involved in serious cases such as drug smuggling and murder, which often carry the death penalty. Saudi Arabia executes more Pakistanis than any other foreign nationality annually, mostly for heroin smuggling. The report calls on the Saudi government to improve its legislation and practices to create real protections against arbitrary arrest, due process, and fair trial violations, and it calls on the Pakistani government to ensure that Pakistani detainees in Saudi Arabia have access to consular services and legal representation. Details: New York: HRW, 2018. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 16, 2018 at: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/saudiarabia0318_web.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Saudi Arabia URL: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/saudiarabia0318_web.pdf Shelf Number: 149486 Keywords: CourtsCriminal Justice SystemsDefendantsDiscriminationHuman Rights Abuses |
Author: Open Society Justice Initiative Title: Corruption that Kills: Why Mexico Needs an International Mechanism to Combat Impunity Summary: In 2017, Mexico experienced its deadliest year in two decades, with homicides exceeding 25,000. Despite the many crimes which have been committed in Mexico, however, criminal accountability still remains virtually absent. The extraordinary violence Mexico is experiencing, and the questions it raises about collusion between state actors and organized crime, demand a commensurate response. This report calls for an international mechanism-based inside the country, but comprised of national and international staff-which would have a mandate to independently investigate and prosecute atrocity crimes and the corrupt acts that enable them. This report follows the Open Society Justice Initiative's 2016 report, Undeniable Atrocities, which found reasonable basis to believe that Mexican federal forces and members of the Zetas cartel have perpetrated crimes against humanity. Corruption That Kills was produced by the Open Society Justice Initiative in partnership with eight Mexican organizations: the Mexican Commission for the Defense and Promotion of Human Rights, the Diocesan Center for Human Rights Fray Juan de Larios, Families United for the Search of Disappeared Persons, Piedras Negras/Coahuila, I(dh)eas Human Rights Strategic Litigationos, the Mexican Institute of Human Rights and Democracy, Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez Human Rights Center, the Foundation for Justice and Rule of Law, and PODER. Details: New York: Open Society Foundation, 2018. 74p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 16, 2018 at: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/corruption-that-kills-en-20180502.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Mexico URL: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/corruption-that-kills-en-20180502.pdf Shelf Number: 150193 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsDrug Policy ReformHomicidesHuman RightsPolitical CorruptionViolence |
Author: Zeman, Petr, ed. Title: Research on Crime and Criminal Justice in the Czech Republic (selected results of research activities of IKSP in the years 2012-2015) Summary: The Institute of Criminology and Social Prevention (IKSP) is a research organisation under the Czech Ministry of Justice. It is engaged in research, study and analysis in the fields of criminology, criminal law, penal and security policy. IKSP's unique position is given by the fact it is the only specialised institution in the Czech Republic engaged in the systematic development of criminological research. The Institute was founded in 1960, making it the second oldest criminological institute in Europe. Its research and analysis focuses on areas such as the effectiveness of criminal law and other measures aimed at reducing crime, victimology, penology, crime prevention or the manifestations and causes of crime and related socio-pathological phenomena. IKSP's activity is based on MiddleTerm Plans of Research Activities, which express basic thematic strands of its research over four-year periods and include the main research tasks (projects) to meet these objectives. The duration of these research projects is typically 3-4 years. In addition to the research tasks listed in the Middle-Term Plan, IKSP also performs a range of other activities corresponding to its field of specialization. It provides the Czech Ministry of Justice and other state authorities and institutions with information and other material in the areas of criminology, criminal justice and penal policy for the performance of their tasks, and proposes policy, legislative, organizational and other measures in these areas. It organizes professional events such as seminars, conferences and workshops alone or in cooperation with other organizations and institutions, and participates in the life of both the domestic and international scientific community. IKSP's employees are involved in the professional training of police officers, public prosecutors, judges, probation officers and prison service staff, and are also involved in teaching criminology and related subjects at Czech universities. To disseminate IKSP's research results and other findings in the field of criminology and criminal justice, the Institute publishes its own edition of professional literature comprising two publications series - STUDIES and SOURCES. In the STUDIES series it publishes the results of original IKSP's research and in the SOURCES series it publishes Czech translations of relevant international legal regulations, international documents, foreign research studies and other important legal and criminological materials. Each year, IKSP elaborates and publishes an analysis of the trends of crime and its selected types in the Czech Republic. It also contributes to the development of criminology in the Czech Republic through the elaboration and publication of methodology handbooks for criminological research. The research tasks included in the Middle-Term Plan, however, are the most important part of IKSP's activities. This involves original criminological research that systematically brings new findings that can be used to both the development of a theoretical base in the field and the formulation of specific policy, legislative, organisational, situational and other measures in the area of penal policy. This publication aims to present the results of IKSP's research conducted under the preceding Middle-Term Plan to foreign colleagues and interested parties who do not understand Czech. The IKSP's Middle-Term Plan of Research Activities for 2012-2015 determined the following basic thematic strands of research: (a) the needs of society in the field of criminal and sanctions policy and resulting suggestions for changes in penal legislation, better law enforcement, and improvement of the system of sanctions; (b) serious forms of crime presenting significant security risks for the state (organised crime, corruption, economic crime, inter-ethnic conflicts, migration, extremism, violent crime, crime and social pathology associated with drugs), including risks arising from opening up society and phenomena related to globalisation; (c) trends in crime, its selected forms and related socio-pathological phenomena, offenders and victims of crime; (d) possibilities and methods of prevention, evaluation of the effectiveness of prevention programmes and methods. These thematic strands were addressed in 2012-2015 through eleven research projects. Their results have become the basis for, inter alia, more than two tens of monographs by IKSP's employees published in the Institute's internal edition in recent years. This publication provides English summaries of these monographs, broken down into individual research projects as part of which they were prepared. This follows similar English-language overviews of IKSP's research results under previous Middle-Term Plans issued in 2003, 2005, 2009 and 2012, which are available on the Institute's website (www.kriminologie.cz). Details: Prague: Institute of Criminology and Social Prevention, 2017. 170p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 19, 2018 at: http://www.ok.cz/iksp/docs/440.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Czech Republic URL: http://www.ok.cz/iksp/docs/440.pdf Shelf Number: 150271 Keywords: Criminal Justice ResearchCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Bird, Mia Title: The Impact of Proposition 47 on Crime and Recidivism Summary: Passed by voters in November 2014, Proposition 47 brought broad and significant changes to California's criminal justice system. Undertaken in the wake of public safety realignment in 2011, Proposition 47 reduced the penalties for certain lower-level drug and property offenses and represented a further step in prioritizing prison and jail space for higher-level offenders. The policy has sparked continued debate around two key questions: Did Proposition 47 increase crime? We find no evidence that violent crime increased as a result of Proposition 47. While California saw an uptick in the violent crime rate from 2014 to 2016, this trend appears to have preceded the reform and is due in large part to unrelated changes in crime reporting after 2014. We find some evidence that Proposition 47 affected property crime. Statewide, property crime increased after 2014. While the reform had no apparent impact on burglaries or auto thefts, it may have contributed to a rise in larceny thefts, which increased by roughly 9 percent (about 135 more thefts per 100,000 residents) compared to other states. Crime data show that thefts from motor vehicles account for about three-quarters of this increase. Despite recent upticks, California's crime rates remain comparable to the low rates observed in the 1960s-even with the dramatic reductions in incarceration ushered in by recent criminal justice reforms. Did Proposition 47 reduce recidivism? Recidivism rates decreased due to Proposition 47. Using data from 12 California counties, we find that among individuals released after serving sentences for Proposition 47 offenses, the two-year rearrest rate was 70.8 percent, 1.8 percentage points lower than for similar individuals released before the reform. The two-year reconviction rate for individuals released under Proposition 47 was 46.0 percent, 3.1 percentage points lower than their pre-reform counterparts. These overall declines were driven by substantial reductions in recidivism rates for Proposition 47 offenses. Rearrest and reconviction rates for these offenses were 10.3 and 11.3 percentage points lower, respectively, than for similar individuals before the reform. Our findings suggest that the measure reduced both arrests by law enforcement and convictions resulting from prosecutions by district attorneys. However, we are not able to separate the reform's effects on reoffending from its effects on the practices of criminal justice agencies. Proposition 47 redirected the savings from reduced incarceration to treatment interventions, with the goal of reducing recidivism. While it is too early to know if this shift in funding has affected recidivism rates, in the coming years the state and counties will be better able to assess the impact of increased interventions and to identify promising strategies. As California continues to pursue criminal justice reforms, understanding the effects of Proposition 47 and local treatment programs will be essential to achieving further reductions in recidivism and maintaining public safety. Details: San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California, 2018. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 13, 2018 at: http://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/r_0618mbr.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/r_0618mbr.pdf Shelf Number: 150527 Keywords: Crime RatesCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsProposition 47Public Safety RealignmentRecidivismTreatment Programs |