• It’s smarter to invest in diversion than in prisons

    by Youthlaw on May 16, 2013

    A review of the evidence shows that prison is costly, has negligible or negative effects on re-offending and, in the case of young people, may inflict long-term damage, thereby squandering the opportunity for rehabilitation and diversion that is presented with young people.[1]

     Prison is costly

    The cost of new prison infrastructure and expansion of prisons to accommodate an increasing prison population within Victoria is in the hundreds of million of dollars. The 2013–2014 Victorian State Budget committed an extra $131.5 million on top of the $819 million prison funding announced last year to extending the prison system. Despite these budget commitments, it is predicted that Victoria’s prison system will still fall 1,400 beds short of the required capacity by 2016.[2]

    Diversion early in the criminal justice process offers a less costly and more effective way of addressing youth offending, especially when compared to the cost of detention or further matters coming before the court. Community based diversion and support programs cost about one tenth of what detention of a young offender in a youth justice facility costs Government.[3]

     Prisons are pretty ineffective in preventing reoffending

    Imprisonment in many cases is likely to have a negative impact on a young offenders offending trajectory. In Victoria, the most recent data shows re-offending rates of 57 per cent amongst juveniles sentenced to detention.[4] It is widely accepted incarceration foster further criminality.

    Resourcing programs in the community that address the underlying causes of young people’s offending by promoting rehabilitation and reintegration are key to preventing their trajectory into the criminal justice system and reducing reoffending.  This is particularly the case given the well known indicators of disadvantage that are characteristic of young people entering the criminal justice system, such as mental illness, substance abuse, homelessness and poverty. There is significant cross-over between individuals with child protection backgrounds and those in the youth justice system. Statistics show that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) young people are over-represented in Victorian detention at a ratio of 14:1.[5]

    Various alternative sentencing measures such as non custodial sentences, diversion and youth justice conferencing have been evaluated and shown to have greater success than prison at keeping young people out of the justice system:

    • A study from NSW reported young offenders given non-custodial sentences had a 16% lower reoffending rate than those given custodial sentences. [6]
    • KPMG found that within 24 months only 19 per cent of group conference participants reoffended, compared to 43 per cent of young people placed on Probation or a Youth Supervision Order.
    • Rates of reoffending of young people participating in Victoria Police’s ROPES program are around 10 to 12 per cent.[7]
    • A local program in Victoria, Right Step, which deals with more complex cases than ROPES, has a 65 per cent success rate amongst participants.[8]

    Prison damages life outcomes

    Prison can significantly diminish the health, economic and social outcomes in a young person’s life whilst also increasing the risk factors associated with offending.

    A number of studies on post-release outcomes have attempted to illustrate the damage to individuals of periods in detention. According to one UK study, those finding work post-release report the lowest rates of recidivism, bolstering the anecdotal link between unemployment and crime. However, the prospects for finding work are considerably lower for those with a criminal record, with approximately one-quarter finding employment after leaving prison.[9] YMCA Victoria estimates that 57 per cent of people with a criminal record cannot find work.[10]

    Another United Kingdom study by an economics think tank estimated that the indirect costs of detaining a young person (including reduced chances of employment and increased likelihood of homelessness) added at least 40,000 Pounds to the total bill of a year-long prison sentence.[11] The total cost outweighed the savings to government and community of reduced offending by a ratio of 28:1.

     Justice reinvestment in diversion

    There are considerable opportunities to implement a justice reinvestment scheme in Victoria and divert money away from adult prisons in Victoria. Justice reinvestment involves a portion of funds allocated to prisons being redirected to programs that tackle the underlying causes of crime in targeted communities (such as vulnerable young people), which over time will help lessen the prison population.

    A recent government-commissioned review of the juvenile justice system in New South Wales recommended justice reinvestment as the most attractive policy option in terms of effectiveness and cost.[12]

    It’s time for the Victorian Government to seriously explore such a scheme.


    [1] Sentencing Advisory Council (SAC), Does Imprisonment Deter? A Review of the Evidence, (2011); Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC), What makes juvenile offenders different from adult offenders? Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice (2011).

    [2] VAGO (2012).

    [3] Current cost estimates are approximately $528 per person per  day in youth detention, compared to $52-54 a day for community based alternatives. (Minister for Community Services Strengthening Youth Justice and Helping Young People Avoid a Life of Crime, media release, 3 May 2011).

    [4] Department of Human Services (Victoria) (DHS), Recidivism Among Victorian Juvenile Justice Clients 1997-2001 (2001), p.18.

    [5] AIC, Juveniles in Detention in Australia 1981-2008 (2010), p.33.

    [6] DHS (2001), p.17. See Michael Cain, Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders in New South Wales (1996).

    [7] KPMG, Evaluation Report on Victoria Police ROPES program (2010).

    [8] Louise Clifton Evans, ‘Moorabbin police’s step in right direction’, Moorabbin Leader, 29 September 2011. Available at: http://moorabbin-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/step-in-right-direction-1/

    [9] Prison Reform Trust, Out for Good: Taking responsibility for resettlement (2012), p.54.

    [10] YMCA Victoria, ‘Opening doors and hearts for real change: The Bridge Project’ (2011). Available at: http://www.leadershipvictoria.org/projects/opening-doors-and-hearts-for-real-change–the-bridge-project-with-video

    [11] New Economics Foundation, Punishing Costs (2010), p.5.

    [12] Noetic Solutions, A Strategic Review of the New South Wales Juvenile Justice System (2010).

    { 0 comments }

    No right to independent police investigation

    by Youthlaw on March 26, 2013

    No right to independent police investigation

    In a disappointing decision handed down yesterday, the Victorian Supreme Court ruled that there was no right to an independent investigation of a police complaint.

    Our client, Mr Nassir Bare, was a 17 year old Ethiopian Australian young man who alleged that a police officer had used excessive force against him in 2009.  The allegations included serious assault, being capsicum sprayed while handcuffed, and being subjected to racial slurs by police.

    Nassir  requested an independent investigation into these allegations to the then Office of Police Integrity (OPI).  Nassir had genuine concerns and fears that information about him or his complaint would result in reprisals from local police if internally investigated.

    The OPI found that while the complaint warranted investigation, the investigation of the complaint would still be referred back to police.    This decision from Justice Williams vindicates a scheme whereby police officers can investigate themselves.

    The very idea of police investigating complaints against themselves is as comfortable as the notion of the Church investigating complaints of alleged sexual abuse by church members.  This inappropriateness has been widely recognised around the world in other international jurisdictions where there are independent bodies set up to investigate such complaints.

    In Victoria, we are fortunate to have a Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act which clearly states that a ‘person must not be treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way’.  Yet, in Nassir’s case, what remedies did he have available to him having been victim to the alleged police assault?  It is clear that his right had been infringed, and it would seem only fair and just that his complaint should be investigated thoroughly, independently and transparently so that there was some effective remedy for that breach.  The Victorian Supreme Court didn’t think so.

    Youthlaw works with many young people who have experienced excessive use of force by police, or have been subject to other inappropriate police conduct.  In most cases, these are young people who are vulnerable and reluctant to exercise their right to complain further about their experiences.  For many young people, there is fear of reprisals from police and a genuine disbelief that their complaint will be effectively and fairly investigated by an organisation responsible for the alleged misconduct.   There is little faith in the system as it currently stands, and yesterday’s decision makes a mockery of the rights of Victorians who may have been subject to unlawful and inappropriate conduct by police.

    In Nassir’ case, he had real concerns about the police internally investigating his complaint, and rightly so given the details of the recent race discrimination case (http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victoria-police-settle-racial-harassment-case-20130218-2emfd.html) that found police had a practice of targeting young African men.  Given some other recent media around the integrity of internal police complaints (http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/police-oversight-biased-against-public-complaints-20130316-2g7i2.html), is it any wonder that people have legitimate concerns about making a complaint against police?

    If we value the rights of individuals and their right to be free from cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment from law enforcement officers, then we must have an independent body that can effectively investigate such complaints.  With the OPI now subsumed into the new independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC), it is clear that IBAC will not carry this investigative function any better than the OPI without a significant overhaul.   The Victorian government must provide for a public complaints system that is about accountability, transparency and fairness.  A truly independent investigation body is required so young men such as Nassir feel confident to make complaints and not fear repercussion.

    We commend Nassir for his courage to take his case further, to test the waters and to stand up for his rights to have his complaint heard by an independent body.  We also thank the pro bono legal team, law firm Maddocks, and counsel Jason Pizer and Emrys Nekvapil for their commitment, dedication and hard work in assisting Nassir to do this.

     

    { 1 comment }

    Stamping out racially discriminatory police practices

    by Youthlaw on February 18, 2013

    Very welcome news of a Victoria Police inquiry later in the year into their stop and search practices & cross cultural training.

    This inquiry is part of the settlement of the race discrimination casein the Federal Court, initiated by six courageous young African men, who have been assisted by Flemington Kensington Community  Legal Centre.

    The case relates to allegations from 2005 to 2009 by young men living around the Flemington and Kensington area of regularly being stopped by police for no legitimate policing reason, being subjected to racial discrimination, including assaults, racial taunts and abuse, and racial profiling are commonly made by other young people.

    An analysis of data from the police LEAP database by Melbourne University Professor Ian Gordon, commissioned on behalf of the six men, found that:

    • African men around Flemington and North Melbourne were roughly 2.5 times more likely to have their interaction recorded by police than the rest of the population.
    • African men from the area committed significantly fewer crimes than men of any other ethnicity.
    • When dealing with African men, police were more likely to use terms such as “gang”, “no reason” and “move on”.
    We also know many other young men of African back ground from other areas of Melbourne have similar experiences with police, however they may never make complaints either because there is not any independent, effective complaint system or because of fear of retribution.

    Part of the historic agreement reached between Victoria Police and the young men involves an important Victoria Police inquiry that will examine Victoria Police policy on field contacts  (including their use of stop and search powers) and their cross-cultural training system.

    We forward to working with Victoria Police to ensure we have a truly open, in-depth, comprehensive and effective review of racially discriminatory stop and search practices by Victoria police.

    A public report will be prepared by the end of the year outlining proposed actions police will take in response to the inquiry.

    { 1 comment }

    ← Previous Entries