FOR CRUVHE PREVENT~ON and CONTROL AFFIUATED with the UN~TED NATIONS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. b HElS~NK~ INST~TUTE FOR CRUVHE PREVENT~ON AND CONTROL AFFIUATED WiTH THE UN~TED NATIONS .1985 NoS 106156 U.S. Department of Justice Nalionallnstitule of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from Ihe person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granted by HELSINKI to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJfiS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis sion of the copyright owner. ISSN 0780-3656 ISBN 951-46-8819-8 Helsinki 1985. Valtion painatuskeskus /ohISft:J Helsinki Institute for Publication series Crime Prevention and Control, No. 5 affiliated with the United Nations P.O.Box 178 00171 Helsinki, Finland CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS IN EUROPE Report of the ad hoc Expert Group on a cross-national study on trends in crime and information sources on criminal justice and crime prevention in Europe JUL z4 1987 A.aQUl1~HTI®NS Helsinki 1985 FOREWORD During the second half of 1984, a group of experts from various European states met at the Helsinki Institute for Crime Prevention and Control, affiliated with the United Nations, to consider the responses to the Second united Nations Survey on Crime Trends, Operations of Criminal Justice Systems and Crime Prevention Strategies (1975- 1980), and to draw conclusions and recommendations regard ing crime prevention and control in the European region. The work of the group was designed both to provide a substantive contribution to the discussion on the subject, with special reference to the Seventh united Nations Con gress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (Milan, Italy. 26 August - 6 September 1985), and to promote the international exchange of data on crime prevention and control. The experts participating in the project were Professor Jerzy Jasinski, Professor Hans Jurgen Kerner, Professor Knut Sveri, Professor Katja Vodopivec and Mr. Patrik Tornudd. Mr. Matti Joutsen and Mr. Seppo Leppa assisted in the completion of the report, with the close cooperation of the united Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Branch of the Centre for Social Development and Humanita rian Affairs. The rapporteur for the group was Mr. Matti Joutsen, who also edited the final report. The following report contains the results of the delibera tions of the experts, as well as their conclusions and recommendations regarding both c .. ime control policy and further development of data collection and analysis. In supporting the recommendation of the United Nations Commit tee on Crime Prevention and Control, adopted by the Econo mic and Social Council in its Resolution 1984/48, that the United Nations Secretariat should continue to carry out such surveys of crime trends, the experts also made several suggestions for the improvement of the survey. (Cf. the Report of the First Meeting of the ad hoc expert group, 27- 31 August 1984, HEUNI.) The use of criminal justice statistics in general, and their use in cross-national analysis in particular, has an extensive history. The oldest criminal justice statistics are the court statistics and statistics on penalties. Al ready in 1830, Mittermaier and Condolla grappled with the difficulty of international comparisons. In his Physique sociale (1835) Quetelet has drawn attention to the fact that criminality is not defined in the same way in all the countries and that only individual groups of punishable acts can be compared while crime as a whole cannot. On the suggestion of Quetelet, and in order to verify his view of the "regularity and constancy of human acts" by means of international comparisons, statisticians tried to induce the states to classify criminal offences according 1 4085008669 --~I to an internationally standardized nomenclature. Such early efforts, for example those made by the International Statistical Institute in cooperation with~the International Commission for Penal Law and Prisons at the beginning of this century, were largely unsuccessful in practice due to the overriding interest of individual states in focusing solely on violations against their own criminal law. Since its inception the united Nations took an active in terest in the promotion of the cross-national exchange of information on criminal justice systems. The United Na tions Global Survey of Crime Trends covered the years 1936- 1947. By 1959, a standard classification of offences had been developed for use in 77 states. In it all the defini tions had been brought into agreement with national penal legislations. However, national legislation changes very rapidly, and the proposal soon became obsolete, underlining the need for continued work by the United Nations. In 1950 INTERPOL began to publish international comparisons of recorded offences. INTERPOL draws attention to the necessity for caution in analyzing the data and to the fact that comparisons between states are not possible. The Council of Europe has been engaged in the development of international comparisons from the 1960s onwards. Since 1983 the Council has published annual surveys of the prison popUlations in member states. These statistical surveys are useful because they cover a clearly delineated section of the criminal justice system. The circle of respondents, however, is limited to member states of the Council. Another exemplary example of international cooperation is provided by the comparative statistical surveys undertaken by Scandinavian states. These are based on a thorough understanding of the system in the states in question. A renewed initiative to introduce comparative international statistics was made at the Fourth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (Kyoto, 1970). In 1977 the Secretary General of the United Nations conducted a survey which, because of its scope, was called the First united Nations Survey on Crime Trends, Operations of Criminal Justice Systems and Crime Prevention Strategies. In the European region, 14 States responded to this Survey_ In 1982, the Survey was repeated, and this time a total of 22 European States responded. The respon ses to this latter Survey form the basis for the data referred to in this report. Most of the data provided in the responses, and thus also most of the data cited in the present report, are taken from generally available published statistics. These sour ces of data are invaluable in studying the background to the crime prevention and control measureS of a state, and every effort should be made to encourage the development of such published statistics. At the same time, however, the users of these statistics should be cautioned against using them In comparisons, and especially against using them in attempts to demonstrate successes or failures of the ~rime control policy of certain states in comparison to others. The report contains two main parts. The first part is the cross-national analysis of operations of cciminal justice systems, analyzing the flow of cases through an idealized version of the criminal justice system: from the commission of an offence, through reporting and recording, investiga tion, prosecution and adjudication to corrections. The analysis is not intended to imply that this reflects in fact what happens to typical cases. Indeed, many cases are dealt with effectively and informally outside of the crimi nal justice system. Furthermore, many states have official procedures which could not be described in the scope of pre-established categories. The second part of the report consists of the individual criminal justice profiles, as prepared by the experts. These are short and concise descriptions of the operations of the criminal justice system of the state in question. The profiles have been drafted on the basis of the respon ses to the Second united Nations Survey by the experts, after which they were sent to the national correspondents of the states in question for comments. In one case, there was no national correspondent who could be contacted, and in some isolated cases the correspondent could not be contacted, or did not have the opportunity to reply. In the cases of the states represented by the experts partici pating in the work of the group, the experts themselves attended to the verification of the data. Obviously, any European report based on such diverse sour ces of data and elaborated by a handful of experts under the constraints set by the preparations for the Seventh United Nations Congress must unavoidably contain a number of misunderstandings, misrepresentations and even errors. Even so, the report may open new perspectives and provide experiences which can be used in future surveys. The Helsinki Institute, in thanking the participating ex perts for their significant contribution, the United Na tions Secretariat for its close assistance and cooperation, and especially the responding Member States of the European ~egion for the valuable data provided, presents the report of the expert group in the hope that it will provide not only valuable data on the present situation in regards to crime trends and the opecation of the criminal justice system, but also that it will provide insights into new innovations and choices in the pursuance of a crime control policy which will effectively contribute to the prevention and control of crime. Helsinki, 16 May 1985 Helsinki Institute for Crime Prevention and Control, affiliated with the United Nations Inkeri Anttila Matti Joutsen Director Senior Researcher TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword I. Conclusions and recommendations regarding crime control policy 1 II. Conclusions and recommendations regarding statis- tical issues 7 III. The results of the cross-national analysis 11 1. Introduction 13 1.1. The purpose of the report 13 1. 2. Criminal justice systems 14 1.3.