1 / 70

DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS PHASE 3 – POL

PAT MAYHEW. DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS PHASE 3 – POLICE TRAINING Pristina, 22 nd – 24 th September 2010. SESSION 1. Introductions Where this training fits into the CARDS Project How the sessions are organised.

hung
Download Presentation

DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS PHASE 3 – POL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PAT MAYHEW DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS PHASE 3 – POLICE TRAINING Pristina, 22nd – 24th September 2010

  2. SESSION 1 • Introductions • Where this training fits into the CARDS Project • How the sessions are organised

  3. MY BACKGROUND • Now retired – freelance consultant • Previously Director of Crime and Justice Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand • Consultant Criminologist, Autralian Institute of Criminology • Research Fellow, National Intitute of Justice, USA • Most of career – Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate • Managing and doing research • Ran the British Crime Survey • Responsible for statistics on police-recorded crime • And other police figures - e.g. detections, arrests, police manpower

  4. INTRODUCTIONS FROM PARTICIPANTS

  5. STRENGTHENING JUSTICE & HOME AFFAIRS STATISTICS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS

  6. THE THREE PHASES: PHASE 1 (RESEARCH) • Set out relevant international standards and EU acquis • Picture of the strengths & weaknesses of data collection systems • Identify gaps and needs of statistical systems • It involved: • Desktop research • 7 research missions • One output: • Technical Assessment Reports for 7 countries / territories

  7. PHASE 2: GUIDELINES • To identify common data collection challenges • To discuss and adopt specific draft programme guidelines • To agree a set of regional indicators • To prioritise training needs and adopt outlines of training programmes • It involved: • Preparation of draft Programme Guidelines • Feedback from project countries / territories • Discussion and adoption at First Regional Workshop • One output: • Programme Guidelines adopted

  8. PHASE 3: TRAINING • To design and deliver targeted training activities • To improve national capacities to record and report JHA statistics in line with international standards and EU acquis • To identify areas for further work and improvements • It involves: • Training to be carried out by international experts together with national focal points and national counterparts • Training delivered to police, prosecution, courts, and institutions in areas of migration / asylum / visa

  9. FIRST REGIONAL WORKSHOP (SKOPJE, MAY 2010) • Goals • To present the technical assessment reports • To identify common data collection challenges • To adopt specific draft guidelines • To prioritise training needs • To adopt the outlines of the training program • To agree on a set of regional indicators

  10. CONCLUSIONS: CHALLENGES FOR CCJ STATISTICAL SYSTEMS IN WESTERN BALKANS • Developing person-based systems • Developing better computerised systems to record data • Assigning a unique Integrated File Number (IFN) to person-records in order to track persons across the whole CCJ system • Defining clear written counting rules to record crime incidents • Training all responsible staff with regard to implementation • Enhancing statistical analysis of the data collected • Improving public dissemination of the data collected • I WILL DEAL WITH SOME BUT NOT ALL OF THESE ISSUES

  11. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PROGRAMME GUIDELINES

  12. SESSION 2: OVERVIEW OF REPORTS OF POLICE DATA AT INTERNATIONAL & NATIONAL LEVEL • The need for valid data and common standards – some preaching! • Main international compilations of police figures • Two examples of national reports • England & Wales • New Zealand • Introduction to suggested Regional Indicators and Pilot Data Collection Exercise • introduction only – to be discussed in Sesssion 5

  13. THE NEED FOR VALID STATISTICS • For knowledge-based crime policy.... • You need to know ‘the facts’ • To interpret your knowledge.... • You need to compare across years, and across countries • To compare.... • Your data need to be comparable within your own jurisdiction over time, and – ideally – with other jurisdictions • To be comparable.... • Means that common standards have been applied – within the jurisdiction, and over time, and – ideally – the same as other jurisdictions • Based on Kauko Aromaa (HEUNI)

  14. COMMON STANDARDS • Work developing fast within the UN and the EU • Guidance manuals from the UN and EU (massive!) • But there are considerable difficulties in reaching comparability because of: • Different legal frameworks and definitions of offences • Different policing and prosecutorial arrangements • Differing capacities in criminal justice agencies • Different operational requirements that the statistics serve • Different counting rules (Session 3)

  15. INTERNATIONAL REPORTS • Not very long-standing • All come with substantial caveats • World Health Organisation – covers violence (probably least comparable) • United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operation of the Criminal Justice System (UN – CTS) • European Sourcebook • Eurostat: Statistics in Focus – Crime and Criminal Justice

  16. UNITED NATIONS

  17. EUROPEAN SOURCEBOOK

  18. EUROSTAT

  19. NATIONAL REPORTS • Massive variety of styles • Usually annual • Sometimes with other criminal justice system information; sometimes not • Sometimes with special topics; sometimes not • USA – ‘Index’ crimes only • Nearly all publically available • Now also usually available on the web • Data sometimes downloadable

  20. ENGLAND & WALES

  21. ENGLAND & WALES (2) • Latest publication covers: • Extent of and trends in crime • Violent and sexual crimes • Acquisitive and other property crime • Publications perceptions • Detection of crime • Geographic patterns of crime Most chapters draw on police figures and British Crime Survey Discontinuance in police figures • Major changes in offence coverage in 1998 • e.g., minor assaults • Also changes in police recording practices • e.g., counting by victims

  22. NEW ZEALAND

  23. NEW ZEALAND (2)

  24. OFFENCES FOR THE REGIONAL INDICATORS • See Handout # 2 • The following offence types are considered core crimes to be covered in 12th UN Survey by the end of 2010: • Intentional Homicide • Violent Crime • Assault • Sexual Violence • Rape • Robbery • Property Crime • Theft • Motor Vehicle Theft • Burglary • Domestic Burglary/Housebreaking • Drug Possession/Use • Drug Trafficking • Kidnapping for Ransom

  25. SUGGESTED REGIONAL INDICATORS (1)

  26. SUGGESTED REGIONAL INDICATORS (2)

  27. PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE

  28. SESSION 3: WRITTEN RULES FOR RECORDING AND COUNTING CRIMES AND SUSPECTS • What is the present consistency in recording (without written rules)? • What are the main rules? • The principal offence rule • Multiple offences • Multiple offenders and suspects • Resource and training implications

  29. PRESENT CONSISTENCY • DISCUSSION

  30. COUNTING RULES IN POLICE STATISTICS “…. the rules applied in each country to count offences included in crime statistics. Such rules vary … hence introducing differences in recorded crime rates that do not reflect actual differences in the levels of crime”. Aebi 2003, p. 1. What we know is that there are NO CONSISTENT counting rules across the Western Balkans, or across other countries See Handout # 4 However, there is some ‘best practice’ guidance

  31. THE PRINCIPLE OFFENCE RULE (POR) • International guidelines suggest it may be appropriate to apply a POR when counting and reporting offences. • Written counting rules should say whether a POR rule is applied or not • In the Western Balkand, only Albania applies a POR • In other Western countries, about half apply a POR, and half do not • The main thing is to know (if there is no POR, the crime count is higher) • Ideally,the POR should be consistent across agencies – police, prosecutors, courts • BUT changing to a POR will reduce the crime count, and cause a ‘break’ in the crime statistics series

  32. THE PRINCIPLE OFFENCE RULE - EXAMPLE

  33. MULTIPLE OFFENDERS / SUSPECTS If there is more than one offender involved in an offence, six of the Western Balkans countries count one offence (including Kosovo) In one country, the number of offences = the number of offenders In terms of suspects, it is reasonable to count two

  34. MULTIPLE OFFENCES • What happens when a victim reports more than one offence at the same time? For example, different incidents of domestic violence... • In all the Western Balkans, the rules are that all offences are counted, with the exception of Albania • The important thing is for the rules to be understood and consistently applied

  35. OTHER COUNTING RULES ISSUES DOC. N. 8: HOME OFFICE COUNTING RULES IS USEFUL Some issues are: • Whether to record a crime, misdemeanour, or incident at all? • ‘No crime-ing’ after recording • ‘Evidenced-based’ recording or ‘prima facie’ recording (i.e. taking the victim’s word) • Crimes per victim or per episode?– e.g. shoplifting in several shops • Classification and re-classification WHAT IS CURRENTLY MOST OFTEN DONE MAY BE THE BEST STARTING POINT FORFORMALISING WRITTEN RULES

  36. RESOURCE AND TRAINING IMPLICATIONS • Who would take the lead in formulating written rules? • How would prosecutors be involved? • What learning opportunities would personnel be given? • What testing mechanisms would be put in place? • How would the written rules be revised? DISCUSSION

  37. SESSION 4: PARTICULAR ISSUES FROM THE RECOMMENDATIONS • Victim-offender relationships • Relevant to Recommendations # 2 & 8 • Also relevant to Pilot Data Collection Exercise • Ethnicity and citizenship • Recommendation # 8 • Also relevant to Pilot Data Collection Exercise • Recidivism of offenders • Recommendation # 2 • Organised crime ‘marker’ • Recommendation # 3

  38. VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS • The primary interest is in: • People known to each other >>> not known to each other • Important for ‘stranger violence’ • People who are (or were) partners (‘partner violence’) • Violence by ex-partners seen as important as violence by current partners • People who are in a domestic relationship ranging wider than partners (‘domestic violence’) • There are several possible classifications

  39. VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS See Handout # 5 INTERNATIONAL CRIME VICTIMISATION SURVEY 1 Spouse, partner (at the time) 2 Ex-spouse, ex-partner (at the time) 3 Boyfriend (at the time) 4 Ex-boyfriend (at the time) 5 Relative 6 Close friend 7 Someone he/she works/worked with 8 None of these 9 Refuses to say

  40. VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS See Handout # 5 UN MANUAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM OF CRRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS (pp. 55 AND 60)

  41. VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS – OTHER ISSUES • Relationship can only be recorded if there is a relationship offences • Relationships when there is more than one victim? • Relationships when there is more than one offender? • Whose account of the relationship does one take – the offender or the victim’s? • DISCUSSION

  42. ETHNICITY AND CITIZENSHIP • See Handout # 6 • Recommendation 8 wants ethnicity & citizenship collected for suspects and offenders • Also in Pilot Data Collection Exercise • Ethnicity & citizenship are both data fields in the police recoding form • but not clear how they are completed • Judicial statistics recorded nationality: Albanian, Serb, Montenegro, Muslim, Turk, RAE, Foreigner, Other • DISCUSSION

  43. RECIDIVISM OF OFFENDERS (1) • See Handout # 3 • It is unusual to report on offender recidivism in publications on ‘crime statistics’ • More often reported in relation to prosecution or courts statistics • There are some problems • What is a recidivist? What counts? • Anyone previously arrested? • Only those previously sanctioned? But what about police warnings and cautions?

  44. RECIDIVISM OF OFFENDERS (2) • See Handout # 3 • The Pilot Data Collection Exercise seems problematic • Asks for “recidivists of the same offence”. What is the same offence? • What if the suspect is recidivist of the same offence AND another offence? The totals won’t add up. • DISCUSSION

  45. ORGANISED CRIME ‘MARKER’ See Handout # 7 Recommendation 3: Should KPIS include a specific field for indentifying organised crime cases? • Some consensus about what organised crime is: • Structured groups of three or more people, not randomly formed, but not ‘static’ relationships • Committing serious crime • Over a period of time • For financial or other material benefit • Using intimidation, and / or threat, and / or violence • BUT ….. obvious problems in ‘ordinary’ police officers knowing • A ‘marker’ might be viable, but further checks would be needed by the Organised Crime Section • DISCUSSION

  46. SESSION 5: CURRENT REPORTS, REGIONAL INDICATORS AND PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE • Overview of the current reports • What they are – but also discussed in Session 6 • Current reports in terms of the • Regional Indicators • Pilot Data Collection Exercise

  47. CURRENT REPORTS

  48. OFFENCES FOR THE PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE Which of these is going to cause problems? How far are the definitions in footnotes in Handout # 3 the same?

  49. INFORMATION TO BE COLLECTED IN THE PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE • Number of offences recorded by the police, by offence type • Number of persons recorded by the police as suspects, by offence type • Profile of persons recorded by the police as suspects, by offence type and • Sex • Age • Citizenship • Ethnicity • Recidivism • Victim-offender relationship, by offence type • Profile of victims recorded by the police, by offence type and • Sex • Age • Citizenship • Ethnicity Which of these is going to cause problems? Some issues have been discussed in Session 4

  50. SESSION 6: PUBLICATION OF RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION • How are the current ‘publications’ received? • What tables are most needed, used and liked? • What are the main problems in compiling them? • How could these problems be resolved? • DISCUSSION • How feasible is internet publication? • How feasible in publication in English? • Do current publications matching different user requirements? • DISCUSSION • 5. Ways forward with analysis and interpretation

More Related