Transcript pps - European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction

Alternatives to imprisonment:
Scope and evidence
Alex Stevens
This presentation
• Why do we need alternatives to
imprisonment?
• What alternatives are used in Europe?
• Do they operate as alternatives, or as
additions to imprisonment?
• What are the effects of alternatives to
imprisonment on drug use and crime?
• What are the information needs in this
area?
Prison populations are rising…
Mean imprisonment rates (per 100,000 pop'n)
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
EU15
New EU
Other CofE
2000
2001
2002
2003
Source: Council of Europe Penal Statistics (SPACE I)
2004
2005
… as crime falls
Indices of self-reported victimisation in 12 EU
countries (base=1995)
100
Theft
90
Burglary
80
Robbery
70
Sexual incidents
60
Assaults and threats
50
1995
1999
2004
Sources: International Crime Victimisation Survey & EU Crime and Safety Survey
al
La ta
Li tv
N Lu x thu ia
or e a n
UK
t h m ia
:E
er bo
n u
ng
la U Ir el rg
nd SA an
an ja d
d ils
W *
De a le
n s
G ma
er rk
m
Ne Es any
th ton
er ia
Cz
la
R
ec o nd
h ma s
Re n
p ia
Po u bl
rt ic
UK Sl uga
: S ove l
co nia
t
S w la n
ed d
Au en
G stria
eo
Be rgi
lg a
i
Fr um
an
Fi ce
nl
a
Po nd
US
la
A
n
Fe
Sp d
de
ai
n
ra
l p Ita
r is ly
Hu on s
ng *
Cy ar y
p
G ru s
re
Bu ec
lg e
ar
ia
UK
:
M
Prison density (pop'n per 100 places)
Prisons are overcrowded
250
200
150
100
50
0
Source: Council of Europe Penal Statistics (SPACE I), * US Bureau of Justice Statistics
… and prisons do not work
• Deterrence
 Imprisonment does not deter (Tonry 2004)
• Rehabilitation
 Longer sentences lead to more reoffending
(Gendreau 1999)
• Incapacitation:
 Small effects at high cost (Kuziemko &
Levitt 2004)
• Retribution
 If in doubt, do not inflict pain (Christie, 1981)
Alternatives to imprisonment…
•
•
•
Decriminalisation
Diversion of drug users from prosecution
Quasi-compulsory treatment
 Treatment of drug using offenders that is ordered,
motivated or encouraged by the criminal justice
system and takes place outside regular prisons.
 Person retains the choice to go to treatment or face
the usual sanction for their crime.
 The alternative sanction should be the same as
would be faced for any other person who committed
that crime
• People should not be punished for refusing or failing in
treatment.
Types of Quasi-Compulsory Treatment orders available in various EU countries
Country
Type of order
Stage of CJS
Targeted offenders
Type of diversion
Austria
§ 35 SMG
“Vorläufige Zurücklegung der Anzeige
durch den Staatsanwalt“
From police custody or
during the
prosecution
process
Drug crimes
Acquisitive Crimes
Suspension of prosecution
§ 37 SMG
„ Vorläufige Einstellung durch das Gericht“
From police custody or
or pre- trial
detention
Drug crimes
Acquisitive Crimes
Suspension of court hearings
§ 39 SMG
„ Aufschub des Strafvollzuges“
“Therapie statt Strafe“
From pre- trail
detention or at
court hearings
Any crime committed by an
offender who is substance
dependent
Suspension of prison sentence
England
Drug Rehabilitation Requirement
At trial sentencing
Offenders eligible for a
community sentence who
are drug dependent
Condition attached to a
Community Order
Germany
§ 35, 36 BtMG Strafaussetzung
„ Therapie statt Strafe“
Pre- trial detention,
Pre-trial hearings, or
during sentence.
Offenders facing prison sentences
of less than 2 years
Suspension of sentence under
probation supervision
§ 37 BtMG
Zurückstellung der Strafe im Rahmen der
Ermittlung
Deferment of
prosecution
because of low
seriousness of
offence
Offenders who are already
participating in a treatment
programme and who
commit minor crimes.
Suspension of prosecution
§ 38, 39 BtMG
Aussetzung der Strafe um Rahmen der
Strafverfolgung
Pre-trial detention, or
youth/juvenile
detention
Offenders facing prison sentences
of less than 2 years
Suspension of sentence under
probation supervision
§ 56 StGB
Bewährungsauflage
Court hearings
Crimes committed in connection
with drugs
Specific order of the court
Ex art. 91 c. 3 T. U. 309/90
Court hearings, or
during sentence
Drug dependent offenders facing
less than 6 years remaining
of a prison sentence (except
Mafiosi)
Suspension of imprisonment
under supervision of
probation
Italy
QCT Europe - Crimes leading to QCT sentence
100%
80%
60%
Property
Drug dealing
40%
Violence
20%
G
er
m
an
y
d
Sw
i tz
er
la
n
tr i
a
ly
Ita
Au
s
En
g
la
n
d
0%
Alternatives to imprisonment?
The case of England & Wales
700
Index (1995=100)
600
500
400
Community sentences
including drug treatment
New sentenced prison
admissions
300
200
100
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
… and the prison population has risen
Annual prison population, England & Wales, 19952007
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1995
1998
2001
2004
2007
Decriminalisation as the real alternative
Number of prisoners under sentences for drug and
other offences in Portugal, 1997-2005
12,000
Non-drug offences
Drug offences
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Effects of alternatives – The QCT Europe Sample
UK – 157
Austria – 150
Switzerland – 85
Italy – 300
Germany – 153
Total – 845 people
Half in QCT
Half in ‘voluntary’ treatment
Drug use
EuropASI Drug Use Score
Reductions in Drug Use
0.2
'Voluntary'
0.15
QCT
0.1
0.05
0
Intake
6 months
12 months
18 months
Crime
Days
Reductions in mean reported days of offending
(in past 6 months)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
'Voluntary'
QCT
Intake
6 months
12 months
18 months
Limitations
• Sample sizes were relatively small in each
country.
• The sample did not compare QCT clients to
prisoners (it was not possible to randomise
sentencing).
• Results based on self-report.
• There were large differences between
treatment centres in the quality and outcomes
of treatment.
Information needs
•
Is QCT being used as an alternative to imprisonment?
•
Does QCT ‘work’?
 Number of people entering alternatives to imprisonment
each year.
 The profile of their offences.
 The number of people entering prison each year.
 Replication of quasi-experimental studies.
 Randomised controlled trials.
• Using variety of indicators (toxicology, police data).
 ‘Realistic’ evaluations (Pawson & Tilley, 1998).
•
• Including qualitative methods
What makes QCT work better?
 How to improve inter-agency cooperation?
 Motivational enhancement:
• Contingency management?
• Graduated sanctions?
•
 Residential or outpatient?
Cost-effectiveness of QCT.
Finally
to QCT Europe partners:
• Thanks
 Paul Turnbull, Tim McSweeney, Neil Hunt,
Ambros Uchtenhagen, Susanne Schaaf,
Kerrie Oeuvray, Daniele Berto, Wolfgang
Werdenich, Barbara Trinkl, Viktoria Kerschl,
Wolfgang Heckmann
• QCT Europe was funded by the European
Commission’s 5th Framework RTD Programme
• For more information:
 www.connectionsproject.eu
 [email protected]