UNODC Handbook on Management of High-Risk Prisoners

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

UNODC Handbook on Management of High-Risk Prisoners Handbook on the Management of High-Risk Prisoners CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES Cover photo: “As long as I am alive, you will surely be in grief.” ©Alessandro Scotti UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Vienna Handbook on the Management of High-Risk Prisoners CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES UNITED NATIONS New York, 2016 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. xxx ISBN xxx eISBN xxxxx © United Nations, March 2016. All rights reserved, worldwide. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. This publication has not been formally edited. Publishing production: English, Publishing and Library Section, United Nations Office at Vienna. Acknowledgements This Handbook was written for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) by Prof. Dr. Shane Bryans and Tomris Atabay, consultants on penal reform and criminal justice issues. The Handbook was reviewed at an expert group meeting held in Rome on 10 and 11 March 2015. UNODC wishes to acknowledge with appreciation the contributions received from the following experts who participated in that meeting: Carla Ciavarella, Bill Cullen, Camila Dias, José Julio Díaz Moreno, Udom Ekpedeme, Federico Falzone, Alison Hannah, Jörg Jesse, Roberta Palmisano, Fabio Pinzari, Elena Nanni, Barbara Napelli, Nelson Rauda Portillo, María Noel Rodríguez, Guido Scuncio, Sharon Shalev, Laura Von Mandach, Michael Wiener, Veronique Wright and Vitolds Zahars. Contributing throughout the development of the Handbook were Piera Barzanò (UNODC) and Philipp Meissner (UNODC), who also conducted the review of the final draft. Further valuable comments and feedback were provided by Joanne Jousif (UNICRI), Michael van Gelderen (OHCHR), Michael Langelaar (DPKO), Mary Murphy (ICRC) and Joaquin Zuckerberg (UNODC). Some of the material included in the Handbook is based on earlier work produced by Colin Allen, Christine Fisher and Danny McAllister. UNODC also wishes to acknowledge the support provided by the Government of Italy, in particular the Department for Prison Administration of the Ministry of Justice, in hosting the Expert Group Meeting to review the draft Handbook. iii Contents Introduction 1 1. The management of high-risk prisoners: summary of key issues 9 1.1 Humane treatment and dignity of the person 9 1.2 Minimal number of prisoners held in high-security conditions 11 1.3 Individualized assessments 11 1.4 Risk management 12 1.5 Least restrictive measures necessary 13 1.6 Maximum security conditions 14 1.7 Security balance 14 1.8 Staff recruitment and training 15 1.9 Special groups and mental health 15 2. Prison staff 17 2.1 Recruitment and selection of staff 18 2.2 Training and development of staff 20 2.3 Conditions of service and staffing levels 23 2.4 Prison management 24 2.5 Professional standards and ethics 25 2.6 Importance of interpersonal skills and guidance 27 2.7 Manipulation and conditioning of staff 28 2.8 Staff working in prisons holding high-risk prisoners 29 3. Assessment, classification and allocation 33 3.1 Individualized risk assessment 34 3.2 Classification 40 3.3. Sentence planning 46 4. Accommodation and general living conditions 51 4.1 Accommodation 52 4.2 Bedding and clothing 54 4.3 Space, light, ventilation and heating 55 4.4 Food and water 57 4.5 Sanitation, cleanliness and personal hygiene 58 4.6 Special conditions of imprisonment 60 4.7 Prisoners under sentence of death 61 v 5. Ensuring effective security 63 5.1 Physical security 64 5.2 Procedural security 66 5.3 Dynamic security 71 5.4 Concentric circles of protection 72 5.5. Prison security frameworks 73 5.6 Security audits and covert testing 74 5.7 Security trends related to high-risk prisoners 76 6. Operating safe and orderly prisons 79 6.1 Order in prison 80 6.2 Control strategies to achieve order 81 6.3 Use of force 85 6.4 Prisoner disciplinary system 89 6.5 Restrictions and disciplinary sanctions 92 6.6 Complaints, grievances and requests 96 6.7 Prison intelligence 99 6.8 Incident management 100 6.9 Prisoners who go on hunger strike 102 7. Constructive regimes 105 7.1 Work 107 7.2 Education 109 7.3 Sport and exercise 112 7.4 Religion 113 7.5 Programmes to help prevent offending 115 7.6 Responding to mental health-care needs 119 7.7 Preparation for release 121 8. Contact with the outside world 127 8.1 Letters and telephone calls 129 8.2 Access to media 132 8.3 Visits 133 8.4 Contact with legal advisers 138 9. Summary of key principles for the management of high-risk prisoners 141 Annex International Instruments, Standards and Principles (cited in the Handbook) 149 vi Introduction Who the Handbook is for This Handbook is one of a series of tools developed by UNODC to support countries in the implementation of the rule of law and the development of criminal justice reform. It is designed to be used by prison managers and prison staff, in particular, but will also be relevant for other actors involved in the criminal justice system, such as policymakers, leg- islators, and members of non-governmental organizations. It can be used in a variety of contexts, both as a reference document and as a training tool. While some elements of the Handbook may not be achievable immediately in some jurisdictions, particularly in post- conflict situations, the Handbook provides national authorities with guidelines for the development of policies and protocols that meet international standards and good practice. What the Handbook covers The focus of this Handbook is the management of prisoners1 who are assessed as being a high risk to society or other individuals. It does not cover children deprived of their liberty2 or prisoners who present a risk to themselves (for example, through suicide or self-harm).3 For the purpose of this Handbook, high-risk prisoners are defined as those prisoners assessed as posing a significant risk to: • Security (i.e. risk of escape): Prisoners who require comprehensive security measures to keep them in custody. 1 The term “prisoner” is used to refer to all persons detained or imprisoned on the basis of, or allegation of, a criminal offence, including pretrial, under-trial detainees and convicted and sentenced prisoners. 2 According to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the institutionalization of children should be avoided to the maximum extent possible. When exceptionally deprived of their liberty, children maintain the right to be treated according to specific safeguards and procedures detailed in the CRC as well as international standards and norms, such as the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty and the United Nations Model Strategies and Practical Measures on the Elimination of Violence against Children in the Field of Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. 3 There may be instances where high-risk prisoners also present a risk to themselves. In such circumstances, prison authorities should take appropriate action to prevent the high-risk prisoner from committing suicide or self- harm. For guidance on managing prisoners who present a risk to themselves, see World Health Organization (2014): Prisons and Health. 1 2 HANDBOOK ON THE MANAGEMENT OF HIGH-RISK PRISONERS • Safety (i.e. risk to the safety of others): Prisoners who show dangerous behaviour towards prison staff or other prisoners. • Stability (i.e. risk to the order of the prison): Prisoners who require a range of control measures to ensure that their behaviour complies with the rules of the prison. • Society (i.e. risk of conducting criminal activity outside the prison): Prisoners who direct activities related to organized crime, terrorism, drug trafficking, or the intimidation and corruption of witnesses, the judiciary, lawyers or jurors. The restrictive policies and measures addressed in this Handbook are applicable only to those high-risk prisoners who have undergone a proper risk assessment process, and who have been found to require such measures strictly on the grounds of prison security, safety and order or to protect society. They do not apply to prisoners whose classification as high risk has been determined on the basis of their political beliefs (including the non-violent expression of their ideological views), and who may be imprisoned on the basis of their ethnicity or any other status. On the other hand, the safeguards contained in this Handbook apply to all prisoners, whether or not they have been through an appropriate assessment process. The Handbook considers the prison management challenges that high-risk prisoners pose as well as actions that prison administrations should take to ensure prison security, safety and order and to protect society from criminal activity directed from within the prison. Each chapter provides extracts from relevant international standards relevant to high-risk prisoners; prison management guidelines; and case examples. At the end of the Handbook is a set of recommendations, primarily directed to prison authorities, which summarize the key princi- ples and suggestions made in each chapter. These recommendations are also relevant to other actors involved in developing policies and legislation relating to the management of high-risk prisoners, including civil society organizations involved in prison monitoring or the delivery of constructive regime activities. The intention of the Handbook is to complement existing publications of UNODC, the Department for Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), which provide detailed consideration of specific themes and prisoner groups.4 The topic of post-release support for high-risk prisoners is outside the scope of this Handbook, but is covered in detail in the UNODC Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders.
Recommended publications
  • Prison Education & Library Services for Adult Prisons in England Policy Framework Reference: Click Here to Enter Text. Issue
    Prison Education & Library Services for adult prisons in England Policy Framework Reference: Click here to enter text. Issue Date: 01/04/2019 Implementation Date: 01/04/2019 Replaces the following documents (e.g. PSIs, PSOs, Custodial Service Specs) which are hereby cancelled: PSI 20/2000 Education Key Performance Indicator: Measuring basic skills attainment. Introduces amendments to the following documents: The education related elements of the following PSIs and Output 2 from the Prisoner Employment, Training & Skills Service Specification no longer apply to prisons in England – please note that they do still apply in Wales and the elements not related to education, e.g. employment, are still applicable in England and Wales: PSI 06/2012 Prisoner employment, training and skills PSI 32/2012 Open University, Higher Education and distance learning PSI 02/2015 Prison Library Service Prisoner Employment, Training & Skills Service Specification, Output 2 Action required by: HMPPS HQ Governors Public Sector Prisons and over 18s Young Offender Institutions in Heads of Group England Community Rehabilitation Companies Contracted Prisons in England (CRCs) HMPPS-run Immigration Removal National Probation Service Centres (IRCs) HMPPS Rehabilitation Contract Youth Custody Estate Services Team Other providers of Probation and Women’s Estate Community Services Mandatory Actions: All groups referenced above must adhere to the Requirements section of this Policy Framework, which contains all mandatory actions. For Information: The aim of this Policy Framework is to detail the minimum mandatory requirements which are needed to deliver education and library services in adult prisons in England. The Policy Framework supports the implementation of reforms that give Governors1 greater control of education within their prisons and the ability to set the strategic vision for their establishment’s education programme, ensuring this is delivered in the best way for their prisoners.
    [Show full text]
  • The Life and Afterlife of Photography in the Wire Paul M
    Access Provided by University of Michigan @ Ann Arbor at 07/25/11 2:21PM GMT The LaST RITeS oF D’aNgeLo BaRkSDaLe: The LIFe aND aFTeRLIFe oF PhoTogRaPhy IN The Wire Paul M. Farber i can never see or see again in a film certain actors whom i know to be dead without a kind of melancholy: the melancholy of Photography itself. —roland Barthes, Camera Lucida1 Somebody snapping pictures, they got the whole damn thing. —D’Angelo Barksdale, The Wire2 I In a 2005 public forum celebrating The Wire hosted by the Museum of Television & Radio, major figures from the production team and cast gathered to discuss the series and its impact. Cocreators David Simon and ed Burns, among others, fielded questions from critick en Tucker before taking inquiries from the audience. one woman, who introduced herself as a criminal attorney, credited the show’s many on-screen and offscreen contributors for their “realistic” elaboration of the investigation process. In the world of The Wire, a criminal investigation offers the narrative frame for each season. But, as a caveat to her praise, she offered one tar- geted counterpoint, a moment in the series in which histrionics seemed to trump authenticity. She highlighted a scene occurring toward the end of the first season, a breakthrough in the series’ first sustained case involving the Barksdale drug ring. In this episode, police investigators and a state attorney attempt to turn D’angelo Barksdale, wayward nephew of king- pin avon Barksdale, toward testifying against his uncle’s syndicate. Throughout the season, as the Barksdales became wary of the case against Criticism, Summer & Fall 2010, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Citizens Kidnapped by the Islamic State John W
    CRS Insights U.S. Citizens Kidnapped by the Islamic State John W. Rollins, Specialist in Terrorism and National Security ([email protected], 7-5529) Liana Rosen, Specialist in International Crime and Narcotics ([email protected], 7-6177) February 13, 2015 (IN10167) Overview On February 10, 2015, President Barack Obama acknowledged that U.S. citizen Kayla Mueller was killed while held in captivity by the terrorist group known as the Islamic State (IS). This was the fourth death of an American taken hostage by the Islamic State: Abdul-Rahman Kassig (previously Peter Kassig), James Foley, and Steven Sotloff were also killed. The death of Mueller and the graphic videos depicting the deaths of the other three Americans have generated debate about the U.S. government's role and capabilities for freeing hostages. In light of these deaths, some policymakers have called for a reevaluation of U.S. policy on international kidnapping responses. Questions include whether it is effective and properly coordinated and implemented, should be abandoned or modified to allow for exceptions and flexibility, or could benefit from enhancements to improve global adherence. Scope The killing of U.S. citizens by the Islamic State may be driven by a variety of underlying motives. Reports describe the group as inclined toward graphic and public forms of violence for purposes of intimidation and recruitment. It is unclear whether the Islamic State would have released its Americans hostages in exchange for ransom payments or other concessions. Foley's family, for example, disclosed that the Islamic State demanded a ransom of 100 million euros ($132 million).
    [Show full text]
  • The Unofficial Prisoner Cell Block H Companion Free
    FREE BEHIND THE BARS: THE UNOFFICIAL PRISONER CELL BLOCK H COMPANION PDF Scott Anderson,Barry Campbell,Rob Cope,Barry Humphries | 312 pages | 12 Aug 2013 | Tomahawk Press | 9780956683441 | English | Sheffield, United Kingdom Prisoner (TV series) - Wikipedia Please sign in to write a review. If you have changed your email address then contact us and we will update your details. Would you like to proceed to the App store to download the Waterstones App? We have recently updated our Privacy Policy. The site uses cookies to offer you a Behind the Bars: The Unofficial Prisoner Cell Block H Companion experience. By continuing to browse the site you accept our Cookie Policy, you can change your settings at any time. Not available This Behind the Bars: The Unofficial Prisoner Cell Block H Companion is currently unavailable. This item has been added to your basket View basket Checkout. Added to basket. May Week Was In June. Clive James. Lynda Bellingham. Last of the Summer Wine. Andrew Vine. Not That Kind of Girl. Lena Dunham. Match of the Day Quiz Book. My Animals and Other Family. Clare Balding. Confessions of a Conjuror. Derren Brown. Hiroshima mon amour. Marguerite Duras. Just One More Thing. Peter Falk. George Cole. Tony Wilson. Life on Air. Sir David Attenborough. John Motson. Collected Screenplays. Hanif Kureishi. Holly Hagan. Falling Towards England. Your review has been submitted successfully. Not registered? Remember me? Forgotten password Please enter your email address below and we'll send you a link to reset your password. Not you? Reset password. Download Now Dismiss. Simply reserve online and pay at the counter when you collect.
    [Show full text]
  • Judgment Day the Judgments and Sentences of 18 Horrific Australian Crimes
    Judgment Day The judgments and sentences of 18 horrific Australian crimes EDITED BY BeN COLLINS Prelude by The Hon. Marilyn Warren AC MANUSCRIPT FOR MEDIA USE ONLY NO CONTENT MUST BE REPRODUCED WITHOUT PERMISSION PLEASE CONTACT KARLA BUNNEY ON (03) 9627 2600 OR [email protected] Judgment Day The judgments and sentences of 18 horrific Australian crimes MEDIA GROUP, 2011 COPYRIGHTEDITED BY OF Be THEN COLLINS SLATTERY Prelude by The Hon. Marilyn Warren AC Contents PRELUDE Taking judgments to the world by The Hon. Marilyn Warren AC ............................9 INTRODUCTION Introducing the judgments by Ben Collins ...............................................................15 R v MARTIN BRYANT .......................................17 R v JOHN JUSTIN BUNTING Sentenced: 22 November, 1996 AND ROBERT JOE WAGNER ................222 The Port Arthur Massacre Sentenced: 29 October, 2003 The Bodies in the Barrels REGINA v FERNANDO ....................................28 Sentenced: 21 August, 1997 THE QUEEN and BRADLEY Killer Cousins JOHN MURDOCH ..............................................243 Sentenced: 15 December, 2005 R v ROBERTSON ...................................................52 Murder in the Outback Sentenced: 29 November, 2000 Deadly Obsession R v WILLIAMS .....................................................255 Sentenced: 7 May, 2007 R v VALERA ................................................................74 Fatboy’s Whims Sentenced: 21 December, 2000MEDIA GROUP, 2011 The Wolf of Wollongong THE QUEEN v McNEILL .............................291
    [Show full text]
  • Aging in Prison a Human Rights Problem We Must Fix
    Aging in prison A human rights problem we must fix Photo: Nikki Khan THE AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE Prison Watch Project Developed by Mary Ann Cool, Bonnie Kerness, Jehanne Henry, Jean Ross, Esq., AFSC student interns Kelsey Wimmershoff and Rachel Frome, and those people inside who gave this issue voice and vision 1 Table of contents 1. Overview 3 2. Testimonials 6 3. Preliminary recommendations for New Jersey 11 4. Acknowledgements 13 2 Overview The population of elderly prisoners is on the rise The number and percentage of elderly prisoners in the United States has grown dramatically in past decades. In the year 2000, prisoners age 55 and older accounted for 3 percent of the prison population. Today, they are about 16 percent of that population. Between 2007 and 2010, the number of prisoners age 65 and older increased by an alarming 63 percent, compared to a 0.7 percent increase of the overall prison population. At this rate, prisoners 55 and older will approach one-third of the total prison population by the year 2030.1 What accounts for this rise in the number of elderly prisoners? The rise in the number of older people in prisons does not reflect an increased crime rate among this population. Rather, the driving force for this phenomenon has been the “tough on crime” policies adopted throughout the prison system, from sentencing through parole. In recent decades, state and federal legislators have increased the lengths of sentences through mandatory minimums and three- strikes laws, increased the number of crimes punished with life and life-without-parole and made some crimes ineligible for parole.
    [Show full text]
  • Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders
    Introductory Handbook on The Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES Cover photo: © Rafael Olivares, Dirección General de Centros Penales de El Salvador. UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Vienna Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES UNITED NATIONS Vienna, 2018 © United Nations, December 2018. All rights reserved. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Publishing production: English, Publishing and Library Section, United Nations Office at Vienna. Preface The first version of the Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders, published in 2012, was prepared for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) by Vivienne Chin, Associate of the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Canada, and Yvon Dandurand, crimi- nologist at the University of the Fraser Valley, Canada. The initial draft of the first version of the Handbook was reviewed and discussed during an expert group meeting held in Vienna on 16 and 17 November 2011.Valuable suggestions and contributions were made by the following experts at that meeting: Charles Robert Allen, Ibrahim Hasan Almarooqi, Sultan Mohamed Alniyadi, Tomris Atabay, Karin Bruckmüller, Elias Carranza, Elinor Wanyama Chemonges, Kimmett Edgar, Aida Escobar, Angela Evans, José Filho, Isabel Hight, Andrea King-Wessels, Rita Susana Maxera, Marina Menezes, Hugo Morales, Omar Nashabe, Michael Platzer, Roberto Santana, Guy Schmit, Victoria Sergeyeva, Zhang Xiaohua and Zhao Linna.
    [Show full text]
  • Aging of the State Prison Population, 1993–2013 E
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics MAY 2016 Special Report NCJ 248766 Aging of the State Prison Population, 1993–2013 E. Ann Carson, Ph.D., BJS Statistician, and William J. Sabol, Ph.D., former BJS Director he number of prisoners sentenced to more than FIGURE 1 1 year under the jurisdiction of state correctional Sentenced state prisoners, by age, December 31, 1993, 2003, authorities increased 55% over the past two decades, and 2013 Tfrom 857,700 in 1993 to 1,325,300 in 2013. During the same period, the number of state prisoners age 55 or older Sentenced state prisoners increased 400%, from 3% of the total state prison population 1,000,000 in 1993 to 10% in 2013 (figure 1). Between 1993 and 2003, 800,000 the majority of the growth occurred among prisoners 39 or younger ages 40 to 54, while the number of those age 55 or older 600,000 increased faster from 2003 to 2013. In 1993, the median age 40–54 of prisoners was 30; by 2013, the median age was 36. The 400,000 changing age structure in the U.S. state prison population 200,000 has implications for the future management and care 55 or older of inmates. 0 1993 2003 2013 Two factors contributed to the aging of state prisoners Year between 1993 and 2013: (1) a greater proportion of Note: Based on prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year under the jurisdiction prisoners were sentenced to, and serving longer periods of state correctional authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Friday Prime Time, April 17 4 P.M
    April 17 - 23, 2009 SPANISH FORK CABLE GUIDE 9 Friday Prime Time, April 17 4 P.M. 4:30 5 P.M. 5:30 6 P.M. 6:30 7 P.M. 7:30 8 P.M. 8:30 9 P.M. 9:30 10 P.M. 10:30 11 P.M. 11:30 BASIC CABLE Oprah Winfrey Å 4 News (N) Å CBS Evening News (N) Å Entertainment Ghost Whisperer “Save Our Flashpoint “First in Line” ’ NUMB3RS “Jack of All Trades” News (N) Å (10:35) Late Show With David Late Late Show KUTV 2 News-Couric Tonight Souls” ’ Å 4 Å 4 ’ Å 4 Letterman (N) ’ 4 KJZZ 3The People’s Court (N) 4 The Insider 4 Frasier ’ 4 Friends ’ 4 Friends 5 Fortune Jeopardy! 3 Dr. Phil ’ Å 4 News (N) Å Scrubs ’ 5 Scrubs ’ 5 Entertain The Insider 4 The Ellen DeGeneres Show (N) News (N) World News- News (N) Two and a Half Wife Swap “Burroughs/Padovan- Supernanny “DeMello Family” 20/20 ’ Å 4 News (N) (10:35) Night- Access Holly- (11:36) Extra KTVX 4’ Å 3 Gibson Men 5 Hickman” (N) ’ 4 (N) ’ Å line (N) 3 wood (N) 4 (N) Å 4 News (N) Å News (N) Å News (N) Å NBC Nightly News (N) Å News (N) Å Howie Do It Howie Do It Dateline NBC A police of cer looks into the disappearance of a News (N) Å (10:35) The Tonight Show With Late Night- KSL 5 News (N) 3 (N) ’ Å (N) ’ Å Michigan woman. (N) ’ Å Jay Leno ’ Å 5 Jimmy Fallon TBS 6Raymond Friends ’ 5 Seinfeld ’ 4 Seinfeld ’ 4 Family Guy 5 Family Guy 5 ‘Happy Gilmore’ (PG-13, ’96) ›› Adam Sandler.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hostage Through the Ages
    Volume 87 Number 857 March 2005 A haunting figure: The hostage through the ages Irène Herrmann and Daniel Palmieri* Dr Irène Herrmann is Lecturer at the University of Geneva; she is a specialist in Swiss and in Russian history. Daniel Palmieri is Historical Research Officer at the International Committee of the Red Cross; his work deals with ICRC history and history of conflicts. Abstract: Despite the recurrence of hostage-taking through the ages, the subject of hostages themselves has thus far received little analysis. Classically, there are two distinct types of hostages: voluntary hostages, as was common practice during the Ancien Régime of pre-Revolution France, when high-ranking individuals handed themselves over to benevolent jailers as guarantors for the proper execution of treaties; and involuntary hostages, whose seizure is a typical procedure in all-out war where individuals are held indiscriminately and without consideration, like living pawns, to gain a decisive military upper hand. Today the status of “hostage” is a combination of both categories taken to extremes. Though chosen for pecuniary, symbolic or political reasons, hostages are generally mistreated. They are in fact both the reflection and the favoured instrument of a major moral dichotomy: that of the increasing globalization of European and American principles and the resultant opposition to it — an opposition that plays precisely on the western adherence to human and democratic values. In the eyes of his countrymen, the hostage thus becomes the very personification of the innocent victim, a troubling and haunting image. : : : : : : : In the annals of the victims of war, hostages occupy a special place.
    [Show full text]
  • Electronic Monitoring for Washington, D.C
    f The Costs and Benefits of Electronic Monitoring for Washington, D.C. John K. Roman, Ph.D. Akiva M. Liberman, Ph.D. Samuel Taxy September 2012 P. Mitchell Downey 1 ©2012. The Urban Institute. All rights reserved. The views expressed are solely those of the authors and should not be attributed to the District of Columbia Crime Policy Institute, the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. This project was supported by Grant No. 2009-JAGR-1114 awarded by the Justice Grants Administration, Executive Office of the Mayor, District of Columbia. The funding provided for this grant was awarded to the Justice Grants Administration through the Byrne Justice Assistance Act Grant Program, through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the SMART Office, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not represent the official position or policies of the United States Department of Justice or the District of Columbia Executive Office of the Mayor. 2 Executive Summary This cost-benefit analysis (CBA) describes the costs of operating electronic monitoring (EM) and the savings (benefits) to city and federal agencies and to society from reduced recidivism compared to standard probation. Estimated Impact of EM on Recidivism The program’s effectiveness in reducing reoffending and rearrest are developed from a thorough review of all prior (rigorous) research on EM.
    [Show full text]
  • Hostage-Taking
    Chapter II Hostage-Taking The development of the international humanitarian law rules that prohibit hostage-taking followed a similar trajectory to those relating to collective pun- ishment recounted in the previous chapter, although the transition from per- mitted practice to a prohibited one was much more abrupt. The taking of hostages had been embraced by belligerents as a means of warfare from ancient times right up to the Second World War, after which it was transformed almost overnight into one of the most egregious violations of international humani- tarian law, a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Previously, hostages were exchanged pursuant to interbelligerent agreements and taken from com- munities as a means of ensuring compliance with demands and for the purpose of deterring hostile acts. Those held were frequently executed in the event of disobedience, killed in response to the acts of others. As such, the taking and particularly the killing of hostages was based on a notion of collective respon- sibility, whereby those held were liable to death, injury, or continued detention for the acts or omissions of the target group or its members.1 The use of hostages was common during the wars of Ancient Greece and Rome. These were usually exchanged or taken to ensure the maintenance of truces and other agreements, and although an injured State often “wreaked a terrible vengeance on the foreign hostages,” they were, for the most part, treated with courtesy and consideration.2 Early international law writers, such as Grotius and de Vattel, supported the taking of hostages, but opposed their killing, if the hostages themselves were innocent of any crime.3 But killed they were, through- 1 Unless otherwise stated, hostage-taking is used in this chapter to mean both the taking and the killing or ill treatment of hostages.
    [Show full text]