1 / 65

Giulia Mugellini – Transcrime, University of Milan

Giulia Mugellini – Transcrime, University of Milan. DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS PHASE 3 – POLICE TRAINING Sarajevo, 30 September – 1 st October 2010. SESSION 1. Introductions

perdy
Download Presentation

Giulia Mugellini – Transcrime, University of Milan

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. Giulia Mugellini – Transcrime, University of Milan DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS PHASE 3 – POLICE TRAINING Sarajevo, 30 September – 1st October 2010

  2. SESSION 1 • Introductions • Programme Guidelines Recommendations • How the sessions are organised

  3. MY BACKGROUND AND RECENT WORK • International Ph.D. in Criminology – University of Milan • Internship at UNODC RAS section • Lecturer of Crime Statistics and Advanced Crime Statistics at University of Milan since A.A. 2008/2009 • Researcher at Transcrime • Managing and doing research • Analysis of data on crime and security • Business Crime Victimisation Survey • Observer European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics since 2007

  4. INTRODUCTIONS FROM PARTICIPANTS

  5. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PROGRAMME GUIDELINES

  6. SESSION 1: The System Approach of CCJ Statistics • “3 x 3” approach • Because focused on statistics produced by 3 agencies: • POLICE statistics • PROSECUTION statistics • COURT statistics • “the output of one agency is the input to another” UNODC 2003, pp. 16-18 • Because focused on 3 processes in each agencies: • DATA ENTRY: which and how data are collected by the relevant agencies (Police, Prosecution and Court) • DATA FLOW: how data are passed on from local to central level within each agency • DATA OUTPUT: how data are analysed and disseminated to the public by the different agencies

  7. COURTS POLICE PROSECUTION DATA ENTRY DATA ENTRY DATA ENTRY DATA FLOW DATA FLOW DATA FLOW DATA OUTPUT DATA OUTPUT DATA OUTPUT SESSION 1: The 3 x 3 Approach

  8. SESSION 1: 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)

  9. SESSION 1: CENTRALIZED VS DECENTRALIZED CCJ SYSTEM “One of the major characteristics distinguishing different types of criminal justice statistics is the degree of centralization of data collection and processing, which is typically a reflection of the degree of administrative centralization of the criminal justice system itself”. UN Manual , 2006, p. 6

  10. SESSION 2: WRITTEN RULES FOR RECORDING AND COUNTING CRIMES AND SUSPECTS • What are the main counting rules? • The existence of written counting rules regulating the way in which data are recorded in police crime statistics;. • Across countries in Europe • Across Western Balkans • In BiH • Whatis the presentconsistency in recording (withoutwrittenrules)? • Resource and training implications

  11. 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 #10 However, there is some ‘best practice’ guidance

  12. WHAT ARE THE MAIN COUNTING RULES? • The moment when data are collected in crime statistics (Input statistics: data are included in statistics when the crime incident is reported to police/ Intermediate statistics: some point in time between the input and the output/Output statistics: data are recorded in statistics when the police have completed the investigation); • The application of the principal offence rule; • The recording of multiple offences; • The recording of offences committed by more than one person

  13. Fig. 1 – Existence of written counting rules across European countries. Year 1999-2007. Source: European Sourcebook and CARDS’ TARs Western Balkans: three out of seven countries do not have written counting rules. in some countries, even if there are counting rules of the MoI, these seem not to be adequately shared across all the criminal justice actors. 13

  14. EXISTENCE OF WRITTEN COUNTING RULES IN BiH • There are no uniform counting rules issued by a central institution and applied uniformly in all of BiH. • In FBiH and in RS there are “written instructions to the police stations to fill in the standard statistical forms”. • BDBiH has not written instruction for statistical data collection at the level of police. • These rules are not shared by all authorities at the state level. • Source: TAR for BiH, p. 11. 14

  15. Fig. 2 – The moment when crime data are recorded across European countries. Year 1999-2007. Source: European Sourcebook and CARDS’ TARs European countries: The majority of European countries has input statistics. Nine countries out of thirty-six use output statistics. Twelve record intermediate statistics. Western Balkans: the majority of WBs presents intermediate statistics, Albania, Croatia and Serbia present output statistics. 15

  16. HOW DOES THE MOMENT WHEN CRIME DATA ARE COLLECTED AFFECT POLICE CRIME STATISTICS? • The main thing is to know: if there are input statistics, the crime count is higher Fig. 3 - Index average number of total recorded offences per 100,000 population in 36 European countries, grouped according to specific counting rule. Period 2003-2007. Source: author’s elaboration of European Sourcebook data 16

  17. THE MOMENT WHEN CRIME DATA ARE RECORDED IN CRIME STATISTICS IN BiH • Clear information on the moment when crime data are collected for inclusion in statistics was collected for Republika Srpska: “when the incident has been classified as a crime by the police (input statistics)” TAR BiH, p. 11. • Information on this counting rule applied in the other entities of BiH? 17

  18. Fig. 4 – Application of principal offence rule. Year 1999-2007. Source: European Sourcebook and CARDS’ TARs European countries: About half apply a POR, and half do not Western Balkans: only Albania applies the POR. 18

  19. THE PRINCIPAL OFFENCE RULE (POR) • International guidelines suggest it may be appropriate to apply a POR when counting and reporting offences. • BUT changing to a POR will reduce the crime count, and cause a ‘break’ in the crime statistics series. • What is important to know is that if there is no POR, the crime count is higher Fig. 4 - Index average number of total recorded offences per 100,000 population in 36 European countries, grouped according to specific counting rule. Period 2003-2007. Source: author’s elaboration of European Sourcebook data

  20. THE PRINCIPLE OFFENCE RULE - EXAMPLE

  21. THE PRINCIPAL OFFENCE RULE IN BiH • Clear information on the application of the principal offence rule was collected for Republika Srpska: “in cases involving more than one criminal offence all offences are counted separately ” TAR BiH, p. 11. • Information on this counting rule applied in the other entities of BiH? 21

  22. Fig. 5 – Recording of multiple offenders (suspects). Year 1999-2007. Source: European Sourcebook and CARDS’ TARs European countries: counts only one offence when more than one person commit it. Western Balkans situation: the majority of WBs records offences committed by more than one person as one offence, only Kosovo under UNSCR 1244 records them as two or more offences. 22

  23. MULTIPLE OFFENDERS / SUSPECTS IN BiH • In Kosovo under UNSCR 1244 the number of offences = the number of offenders • In terms of offences is reasonable to count one offence but in terms of suspects, it is reasonable to count two • Clear information on the application of the principal offence rule for offenders was collected for Republika Srpska: “an offence with more than one perpetrators is counted as one offence, with several persons involved ” TAR BiH, p. 11. • Information on this counting rule applied in the other entities of BiH?

  24. Fig. 6 – Recording of multiple offences (serial offending). Year 1999-2007. Source: European Sourcebook and CARDS’ TARs European countries: the majority records multiple offences as two ore more offences Western Balkans situation: the majority of WBs records multiple offences as two ore more offences, only Albania records them as one offence. 24

  25. MULTIPLE OFFENCES • The main thing to know is: if serial offending is recorded as two or more offences, the crime count is higher Fig. 7 - Index average number of total recorded offences per 100,000 population in 36 European countries, grouped according to specific counting rule. Period 2003-2007. Source: author’s elaboration of European Sourcebook data

  26. MULTIPLE OFFENCES IN BiH • Clear information on the counting of multiple offences was collected for Republika Srpska: “serial offending is typically counted as only one case and as one offence” TAR BiH, p. 11. • Information on this counting rule applied in the other entities of BiH?

  27. 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

  28. PRESENT CONSISTENCY IN COUNTING RULES IN BiH • DISCUSSION

  29. DESIRED SITUATION FOR BiH • Necessity of written counting rules at the level of entities and at the state level? • Who would take the lead in devising written rules at the level of entities and at the state level? • 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

  30. SESSION 2: DATA ON THE SUSPECTED OFFENDERS AND THE VICTIMS • Details on suspects and victims • Sex and Age • Relevant to Recommendations #4 & #12 • Also relevant to Pilot Data Collection Exercise • Victim-offender relationships • Relevant to Recommendations #4 & #12 • Also relevant to Pilot Data Collection Exercise • Ethnicity and citizenship • Recommendation #4 & #12 • Also relevant to Pilot Data Collection Exercise • Recidivism of offenders • Recommendation #4 & #12

  31. DATA ON THE SUSPECTED OFFENDERS AND THE VICTIMS IN BiH • “Data on the suspected offender are recorded in the crime registries of the police in the FBiH, RS and BDBiH. However, only few personal details of the suspected perpetrators are recorded.” TAR of BiH, p. 7. • In particular for suspected offenders and victims are recorded details only on: • Age category (minor/adult) • Recidivism (specify) • No information on the offender’s sex, age, citizenship or ethnicity and offender-victim relationship

  32. AGE See UN classificationforstandardisation. < 14 14-16 16-18 18-21 21-24 24-29 29-39 39-49 49-59 > 59 Un-known

  33. 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

  34. VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS See Handout # 11 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

  35. VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS See Handout # 11 UN MANUAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM OF CRRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS (pp. 55 AND 60)

  36. ETHNICITY AND CITIZENSHIP • See Handout # 12 • Example of ethnicity classification from other countries • What about citizenship? • DISCUSSION

  37. RECIDIVISM OF OFFENDERS • 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?

  38. DESIRED SITUATION FOR BiH • Necessity of collecting information on these details for suspects and victims? • How could it be implemented? Necessity to change the incident form to register crime? Necessity to add fields in the tables used to transmit the data? DISCUSSION

  39. OFFENCES FOR THE PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE Which of these is going to cause problems? How far are the definitions in footnotes in Handout # 5 the same? DISCUSSION

  40. 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 See Handout # 5. Which of these is going to cause problems? Some issues have been already discussed in Session 2

  41. SESSION 3: DATA OUTPUT - OVERVIEW OF REPORTS OF POLICE DATA AT INTERNATIONAL & NATIONAL LEVEL • The need for valid data and common standards • Main international compilations of police figures • Two examples of national reports • England & Wales • New Zealand

  42. 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 of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics • Eurostat: Statistics in Focus – Crime and Criminal Justice

  43. UNITED NATIONS

  44. EUROPEAN SOURCEBOOK

  45. EUROSTAT

  46. 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

  47. ENGLAND & WALES

  48. ENGLAND & WALES (2) • Latestpublicationcovers: • Extentof and trends in crime • Violent and sexualcrimes • Acquisitive and otherproperty crime • Publicationsperceptions • Detection of crime • Geographicpatternsof crime • Mostchaptersdraw on policefigures and British Crime Survey.

  49. ENGLAND & WALES – GOOD EXAMPLES (1) 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

  50. ENGLAND & WALES – GOOD EXAMPLES (2) Information on the age of the victims of crime

More Related