Report EM 2005 - E - CEP, the European Organisation for Probation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Current issues and problems included the low numbers on the pilots; equipment not yet performing to the required standard; the GPS signal sometimes being lost or inaccurate; inadequate coverage of exclusion zones; the reluctance of criminal justice agencies to use active tracking with offenders with known victims; and an inefficient process for exchanging information between contractors and practitioners. All this would be picked up in the evaluation of the pilots that was currently being undertaken by a team of researchers from Birmingham University. The aim of the research was to assess how the pilots were implemented and how well the equipment performed; to examine the views of offenders, victims and practitioners on tracking; to assess the effect of tracking on offenders; and to consider its costs and effectiveness. An interim, unpublished report had been produced in April 2005. The final report was due by December 2005 [this has now changed to March 2006]. Looking ahead, he foresaw some improvements to the technology including the introduction of Assisted GPS and GPRS communication; all tracking devices being able to hold location fixes; and more comprehensive coverage of exclusion zones. It was also proposed to expand the scope of the pilots, and the types of tracking used, within all three pilot areas. The pilots would be extended to run at least until December 2005 [this has now changed to June 2006]. Expanding the pilots in this way would have a number of benefits. It would increase the rate of take-up and ensure that the target of 40 tracked offenders in each pilot area at any one time was reached; it would boost the number of sex offenders on the pilots; it would allow exclusion monitoring to be tested in all three pilot areas; it would enable the improved technology to be brought in as quickly as possible; and it would strengthen the evaluation. In relation to costs, he said that the average daily cost of passive tracking was now £40 (€60), reduced from £68 (€100) in September 2004. The average cost of hybrid or exclusion monitoring was higher and was currently being discussed with the service providers. However, the estimated costs of the expanded pilots were expected to fall just within the 2005/06 budget for tracking of £2.5m (€3.7m). The lessons learned from the pilots to date were that the technology was still developing and there were useful enhancements in prospect; the technology had the potential to track offenders with known victims in real time, but needed to be more reliable; and the successful operation of the pilots needed the close co-operation of all relevant agencies. In the plenary discussion following the presentations, it was noted that there was a tension between the demand for location data for investigation purposes, and the need to protect individual rights. This tension was a common theme. In some countries, for example Switzerland, the courts were readier to protect personal data from third parties. In the USA, in contrast, tracking information was shared widely and this was expected. Data could also be disseminated by administrative means, bypassing statutory schemes. 12
More generally, there was a question about who should have access to the data. In some cases, the police would be justified in seeing it. As to how long location data should be kept, it was noted that the research benefits would be maximised if data were kept for a number of years. 5. THE WORKSHOPS The conference offered a choice of six workshops, as shown below. The first four were conducted in English, the last two in French. 1. Electronic monitoring of juveniles 2. Offender perspectives on electronic monitoring 3. Electronic monitoring in an immigration context 4. Ethical issues and quality standards 5. Analysing net-widening in the context of electronic monitoring 6. Electronic monitoring and social supervision. The programme included two workshop sessions, each of 90 minutes. A plenary session the following day allowed workshop leaders to summarise the discussions in their workshop for the conference as a whole. 5.1 Electronic monitoring of juveniles Mary Wyman Mary Wyman told participants about the Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programme for juvenile offenders, and the use of tracking technology with juveniles in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. Research by Oxford University showed that the electronic monitoring of juveniles worked better with a human element (for example supervision) than it did on its own. Participants discussed the length of curfews for juveniles. The maximum in England and Wales was three months, and this was considered to be possibly too short. In the context of longer curfews, participants were attracted to the practice in Holland of starting with very intensive curfews and gradually allowing more free time as a reward for compliance. Participants were interested in the caseloads, the unit costs of electronic monitoring, and the ethics of monitoring young people. It was recognised that politicians needed to be seen to be doing something about juvenile crime. There were no real areas of disagreement in the workshop, but there was some discussion about the reliability of monitoring equipment, and about whether staff in Youth Offending Teams would get on with electronic monitoring staff. 13
Page 1 and 2: ELECTRONIC MONITORING REPORT ON 4TH
Page 3 and 4: 1. INTRODUCTION The fourth European
Page 5 and 6: 3. INTRODUCTORY SESSIONS 3.1 Electr
Page 7 and 8: information about EM. There were al
Page 9 and 10: Israel, the Isle of Man and the Sta
Page 11 and 12: Looking ahead, he thought that futu
Page 13: Second, the battery. The tracking d
Page 17 and 18: 5.3 Electronic monitoring in an imm
Page 19 and 20: 5.5 Analysing net-widening in the c
Page 21 and 22: was more likely to have a strong fu
Page 23 and 24: 7. CLOSING THE CONFERENCE 7.1 Summi
Page 25 and 26: FINAL LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 4 th EUR
Page 27 and 28: Service penitentiaire d'insertion e
Page 29 and 30: Reclassering Nederland Mr. Arturo B
Page 31 and 32: Scottish Executive Ms. Susan WILTSH
Page 33 and 34: Northern Kentucky University Regent
Page 35: University of Leeds School of Law D

Report EM 2005 - E - CEP, the European Organisation for Probation

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?