Download
1 / 17
170 likes | 277 Views
Presentation to Portfolio Committee for Justice and Constitutional Development.
E N D
Presentation to Portfolio Committee for Justice and Constitutional Development The CSIR Crime Prevention Centre supports the introduction of the Child Justice Bill and congratulates the Minister and Department of Justice and in particular the UN Child Justice project for the rigorous research and development process that has resulted in the Bill under consideration. We also support the submission made to this committee by the Child Justice Alliance, of which we are a part. We will not repeat or duplicate any matters raised in that submission. Our submission today is based on our concern that this Bill should be adequately supported in implementation and should succeed and contribute to a safer South Africa for all.
Presentation to Portfolio Committee for Justice and Constitutional Development • Three issues: • The principles underpinning the Bill and how these will be mainstreamed into the CJS and the thinking and behaviour of the South African people • Street children and how we ensure equity for the most disadvantaged children • One Stop Centres as delivery mechanisms for Child Justice
Preamble • We support the principles of the Bill but urge that particular attention must be paid to extend the intended benefit of the Bill equally to all children accused of committing offences. • Failing such attention we believe that children who are already disadvantaged and/or marginalised will be further marginalised or even victimised by the Bill. • In this regard we do not believe that the Bill provides adequately for so called “street children”. We refer specifically to the need for an “appropriate adult” to attend various processes and propose that the state should be required to appoint such an “appropriate adult” where there is not one available to the child.
Preamble • The Bill sets out to “entrench the notion of restorative justice in respect of children”. • We believe this to be a very important principle of the Bill and regard the introduction of the Bill as an opportunity to shift the mindsets of service providers and the South African people from a punitive to restorative bias. Yet we believe that this is a massive challenge. • The people of South Africa have suffered a depth and breadth of victimisation that has resulted in a combination of anger and fear. Much of this is directed at our young people, especially young men. Young men in South Africa are most vulnerable to becoming both victims of violence and offenders. • Whilst not all victims of violence go on to offend, it is known that well over 90% of violent offenders first experience violence as victims or bystanders to violence. Thus we know that in many cases the victim and the offender are one person.
Preamble • Early intervention on their behalf is an essential tool in breaking the same cycles of violence that make it hard for people to accept the notion of restorative justice. • For this Bill to achieve its goals it will require widespread understanding of these concepts – and belief in restorative justice as a mechanism for long term safety. Our exposure to service providers and communities alike leads us to believe that we are a long way from either understanding or belief. • It is likely that the majority of South Africans believe that the Criminal Justice system does not deal harshly enough with criminals. In such a climate the introduction of this Bill is surely threatened by a lack of willingness to support its basic principles. • We cannot find in the supporting documentation (Budget and Implementation Plan) an indication of either capacity or budget that will be made available for change management in this regard.
Preamble • Budget and individual departmental responsibility for training has been allocated but this is not enough. • In work done in support of the Bill during the course of the last year, we have encountered resistance from service providers (in particular the police) and community workers alike, warning that they will be vilified in communities if young men are arrested and then diverted into programmes that are perceived to be a “soft option”. • On the first day of this process the chair referred to such programmes as “getting some air” – it is difficult for us as a community to attribute value to programmes that are often hard to measure as they are based on qualitative rather than quantitative action and their real benefits are often long term rather than immediate. • Many sectors in our society
Preamble • The Bill should be supported by a communication campaign that is based on a scientific understanding of community perceptions and the concerns of service providers. • Failing such support the Bill will encounter resistance and be much harder to implement. • The communication campaign should introduce the concepts of restorative justice, allow for debate regarding the consequences of restorative versus punitive justice, examine the long term material and social costs of punitive justice, educate regarding diversion and expose diversion successes.
Chapter One • 2b (i) Greater thought should be given to street children in terms of “fostering children’s sense of dignity and worth” • 2b (iv) There is no indication of how communities will be involved. This is an opportunity to define clear and practical roles for community, rather than falling into the common trap of demanding support and not providing guidance in terms of what support means. Is there a budget allocated anywhere for community involvement? • 3 (i) (h) No indication of how children lacking in family support will have equal access. • 3.(3) (c) Should add: “access to adequate sanitation and hygiene”. (It is known that street children for instance are often dirty and smell bad. It is impossible to claim that their sense of dignity and worth, or their access to services, will be equal absent an opportunity to be clean.
Chapter Three • 7. (3) (iv) There should be an adult available to every child. • 11. (1) (b) An appropriate adult should be appointed by the state. Failing this the child who has no such adult available is disadvantaged. • 16. Release of child to place of safety. There is a generally acknowledged shortage of places of safety. This clause will again disadvantage the most disadvantaged children. It is noted that in certain sections there is reference to “the child’s legal representative” – 28(3) – the more disadvantaged the less likely a child will have representation of any kind – concerns about equity.
Chapter Four • 21(2) An appropriate adult must attend the assessment of the child failing exemption according to 22(3).l • Propose that 22(6)(b) should read: “If all reasonable efforts to locate a parent or an appropriate adult have failed, the probation officer must appoint an appropriate adult to attend the assessment in support of the child”. • All other sections regarding the presence or role of an appropriate adult should be read in this light.
One Stop Centres • An assessment of Stepping Stones One Stop Centre was undertaken at the end of 2001. The intention of the report was to provide management support in terms of understanding the infrastructure, capacity and resource requirement of such a centre and to measure this against its potential as a delivery mechanism for Child Justice. • A series of semi-structured interviews to provide qualitative information • Comparisons of views to achieve a balance between factual input and opinions based on own context and experiences. • The findings were presented to the stakeholders and participants of Stepping Stones at two workshops in order to confirm the analysis and recommendations. • Impact was assessed against: • Previously three different court buildings • 13 police stations where children in conflict with the law were serviced
One Stop Centres Stepping Stones has reduced: • transport time and costs • chaos of finding a child and case in the system • time taken to follow up and chase documentation • incidence of children ‘falling through the system’. Success indicators: • centre (departmental relationships, co-ordination effectiveness and efficiency) • benefits to children in conflict with the law (success rate, diversion, efficiency of service). • Secondary impact of the services can be seen on the family, parents and the community
One Stop Centres • The inclusion of a secure care facility as part of the facilities of a one-stop centre would greatly enhance the provision of probationary and social development services, as well as facilitating the speedy and efficient process of children in conflict with the law through the system. • In addition, no programme is currently available for youth that re-offend. • Diversion services would be greatly enhanced if; firstly, a reform school was available in the province. • Secondly, a bridging programme was available for children to assist in coping with the diversion programmes. • Thirdly, correctional supervision was included as part of the co-ordinated services of the centre facilities and services.
One Stop Centres • Psychological services, • Trauma counselling and victim support, • Remedial assessment and occupational therapy, • Clinic services, • Access to a doctor for confirmation of age assessments (the involvement of the Department of Home Affairs would assist further). • SAPS need to include a Detective Unit to facilitate the speed of cases appearing before court. Currently detectives from all 13 police stations in the magisterial district are required to investigate cases and appear before court. • The assistance of the Department of Education is required to assist in reintegrating children back to schools and to undertake crime prevention education and intervention programmes.
One Stop Centres • Components integrate functions and case management. • Working relationships have been established over time and through respect for individuals. • The members work together as a “family” towards a common vision, and recognise their individual growth (maturity, insights, assertiveness, competence and expertise in the field) over the past few years. • Members are committed to their professions and demonstrate this through the service delivery, innovation, leadership and self-development. (But members feel that their departments do not support them adequately nor recognise their professionalism). • Common values include compassion, patience, respect for rights of the child and a commitment to make a difference with children in conflict with the law.
One Stop Centres • Key infrastructure required for a One-Stop Child Justice Centre includes: • a facility for all four components to work together, • appropriate design and layout of the facility, • clarity of roles and responsibilities – acknowledge the difficulty of integrating across departmental line functions and hierarchies • guidelines protocols and service agreements, • participatory management, • clarity on centre resources (vehicle, computers etc) – how to share, • a data management system • clear and transparent appointment processes. • It is proposed that a facility is made available for correctional supervision to be included as part of the integrated services.
Conclusion The task ahead is complex and difficult. It is vital that lessons learnt are mainstreamed into implementation: • The Bill is based on some sophisticated concepts and principles; there are those, particularly at centres such as Stepping Stones, who understand and are already implementing the actions that flow from these principles. They should be regarded as role models and encouraged and motivated to continue their good work. (This requires careful and clever Human Resource management). • We must ensure that the Bill does not suffer as a result of lack of understanding and change management. We cannot assume compliance at any level and there must be extensive support for entrenching both the principles and procedures of the Bill. • Integrated approaches are obviously sensible but rarely work. We must enable clear leadership and minimise conflict of interest and duplication of effort. • We must not underestimate the importance of community support, without which implementation will be even harder.
