Statistics on Crime and Criminal Justice. Working Group Meeting. Luxembourg, March Ampère Room, Bech Building

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION EUROSTAT Directorate F: Social Statistics Doc. CR/WG2014/08.rev1 MINUTES Statistics on Crime and Criminal Justice Working Group Meeting Luxembourg, March 2014 Ampère Room, Bech Building

2 1. Welcome and introduction The meeting was chaired by Jean-Louis Mercy, head of Eurostat Unit F4 (Quality of Life Statistics) who welcomed the participants to the meeting. Twenty-four Member States were represented at the meeting (Bulgaria, Greece, Romania and Malta did not attend). The other countries represented at the meeting were Turkey, Norway, Switzerland and Serbia. In addition, representatives from the Commission Directorates General Home Affairs and Justice, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the European Sourcebook and the European Institute for Crime Prevention and Control (HEUNI) were present. 2. Adoption of the agenda (Doc. CR/WG2014/01) Mr Mercy presented the draft agenda. A proposal by Eurostat to discuss item 6 on the International Classification of Crime for Statistical purposes (ICCS) immediately following the discussion of the proposed Eurostat-UNODC joint data collection was accepted and the agenda was adopted. 3. Adoption of the draft minutes of the previous meeting (Doc. CR/WG2013/10) The chair then invited the Working Group to approve the draft minutes of the previous meeting held on 27 February The minutes were adopted without any modifications. 4. Commission policies and activities 4.1 DG Home Affairs Richard Caine from DG Home Affairs (Organised Crime) first described the two recent data collections that had been conducted for DG Home Affairs through Eurostat and the National Statistical Institutes. The first concerned money laundering, where the results were published in a Eurostat Working Paper at the end of The second related to trafficking in human beings, where the latest data are now being analysed and are due to be published later in The outcome of these two data collection exercises will be evaluated within the Commission before any regular data collections on either money laundering or trafficking in human beings are planned. Mr Caine also informed the Working Group about a study on cybercrime planned for 2014, in which DG Home Affairs would like to collect data for a set of cybercrime indicators that are currently being developed. This study will not be conducted by Eurostat although Eurostat will provide technical advice. 1

3 Mr Caine said that DG Home Affairs could conduct the study through its own network of national contacts within the Expert Group on Policy Needs for Data on Crime and could copy the details to the Eurostat Working Group. Alternatively, DG Home Affairs could submit the data request directly to the members of the Eurostat Working Group, who would then forward the request to the appropriate authorities. The members of the Working Group were invited to indicate if they would prefer the request to go directly to them. In the discussion that followed, there was no conclusive view from members of the Working Group on whether the DG Home Affairs Expert Group or the Eurostat Working Group should be the main contact point for the DG Home Affairs cybercrime study. However, Mr Caine offered to circulate more details about the indicators proposed for the study on cybercrime, together with details of a separate study on corruption, where statistical indicators are also being developed, albeit at a less advanced stage than on cybercrime, and a copy of the recent mid-term review of the Statistics Action Plan as soon as this is published. Mr Bisogno of the UNODC offered to share with DG Home Affairs the UNODC experience of collecting data on cybercrime and corruption arising from their activities in these areas. 4.2 DG Justice Bärbel Heinkelmann from DG Justice (Procedural Criminal Law) outlined the importance of statistical data for preparing policy initiatives and impact assessments and for following up the implementation of EU legislation. Particular areas of policy interest are the rights of victims and defendants at different stages of the criminal justice system, the use of pre-trial detention, the relationship between offences and sanctions, and the exchange of information on non-eu nationals and non-residents as well as on cross-border cases. Lucie Davoine (Gender Equality) then described the lack of regular data on gender-based violence and the activities of the European Commission to support gender equality in the EU. These include the exchange of good practices in Member States, awareness raising and targeted funding to prepare for and to implement EU gender equality legislation. On the second day, Elsa Garcia-Maltras (General Justice Policies and Judicial Systems) informed the Working Group about the Commission s needs with respect to monitoring the effectiveness of judicial systems. Data on the number of cases processed in civil and criminal courts and on the costs of the court system would be important inputs into the EU Justice Scoreboard. Ms Garcia-Maltras also pointed out that although court statistics are already being collected by the Council of Europe s European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), the results are available only every two years, whereas annual data are required for the European Commission s Justice Scoreboard. In the discussion following the presentations, participants referred to the range of different definitions and procedures within national criminal justice systems which highlight the need for clear guidance to Member States on the statistical information required in future data collections. 2

4 5. Proposal for the 2014 joint Eurostat-UNODC data collection (Doc. CR/WG2014/02) Steve Clarke (Eurostat) introduced the proposal for a joint Eurostat-UNODC annual data collection, which aims to provide the European Commission with more detail on offences and victim/offender demographics at different stages of the criminal justice system. The source of the information will be existing administrative information available within national authorities. The UNODC annual questionnaire will become the primary instrument for the data collection in order to avoid the duplication of data requests from Eurostat and the UNODC. Some additional information will be collected by Eurostat covering items not already included on the UNODC questionnaire, such as more detail on sexual assault and drug use/supply offences and on the functioning of the courts. Member States were asked to ensure that the appropriate contact points required in the different national justice authorities are established in advance of the data collection. Enrico Bisogno (UNODC) then underlined the UNODC support for the joint data collection exercise which is seen as an important step in improving the availability of statistics on crime and criminal justice at a European level. The Working Group supported the Eurostat proposal and emphasized the need for clear definitions in relation to offences, stages and individuals. In the discussion, it was agreed that Eurostat would issue the English version of the prefilled UNODC questionnaire to countries covering the period Countries will be asked to provide the latest data for 2013 and to update where necessary any earlier data for in line with the more detailed guidance on definitions that will be provided. In conclusion, Eurostat said that further development work would now take place with UNODC to prepare for the data collection in June 2014, including the drafting of guidance on the definitions to be used. In addition, the UNODC will invite the UN Permanent Missions to approve the change in data collection arrangements in the countries covered by the joint data collection. 6. Data on drug law offences from Eurostat and EMCDDA (Doc. CR/WG2014/03) Steve Clarke introduced the item by explaining that the objective is to cooperate with the EMCDDA in order to avoid the duplication of data collection on drug law offences. Following a comparison of drug law offences data from Eurostat and EMCDDA, some of the differences could be explained by the different data definitions, counting units and data collection practices being used. Luis Royuela (EMCDDA) said that the EMCDDA is revising its data collection tool to provide more comparable data on drug law offences, and will take into account Eurostat s data requirements. The revised EMCDDA data collection is planned to be implemented in At this point it should be possible for Eurostat to obtain data on the number of drug law offences directly from EMCDDA. Members of the Working Group identified some of the difficulties in comparing the two data collections and referred in particular to the fact that in some countries the use of certain drugs is not necessarily considered to be a criminal act. 3

5 Following the discussion, it was agreed that Eurostat would continue to issue its data request for statistics on drug law offences in 2014 and would cooperate with EMCDDA in the development of a revised EMCDDA data collection tool. From 2015 Eurostat should then be able to stop asking Member States for data on drug law offences, as the information should be available via the EMCDDA. Eurostat will circulate the list of Reitox national contact points, so that the members of the Working Group are aware of the national authorities supplying data to the EMCDDA. 7. Government finance data on the costs of police, courts and prisons (Doc. CR/WG2014/03) Steve Clarke informed the Working Group about the latest data available from the Eurostat national accounts directorate concerning government expenditure on police, courts and prisons. The Working Group was asked for its view on whether the government expenditure data could be used with statistics from the national criminal justice systems to derive meaningful indicators such as expenditure per prisoner, per police officer etc. In the discussion, several members of the Working Group were concerned about linking statistics from the criminal justice system with government expenditure data taken from the national accounts. Furthermore, data relating to expenditure on government services were considered to be particularly sensitive to differences in definitions and coverage within and between countries and do not include the additional expenditure on security within the private sector. EIGE supported the collection of data on the costs of the police, courts and prisons and emphasized the importance of taking the gender perspective into account. The COFOG breakdown of government expenditure on public order and safety was considered to be useful within the context of national accounts data. However the Working Group had reservations about combining the data with statistics from the criminal justice system to derive new indicators and Eurostat does not propose to develop such indicators without undertaking a more detailed study on their appropriateness. 8. International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes (ICCS) Enrico Bisogno (UNODC) informed the Working Group about the latest developments concerning the ICCS, a hierarchical classification of acts that are considered to be criminal offences in a significant number of countries. The draft classification comprises 11 top level categories and a range of additional variables that can be used to disaggregate data in terms of the type of event and the characteristics of the victim and perpetrator. In March 2014 the UNODC launched an exercise with volunteer countries to further test the application of the classification and the results will be taken into account in the version of the ICCS to be sent to all countries for consultation in July-September The final version of the ICCS will be submitted to the UN Statistical Commission in February 2015 and to the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice in May In parallel with the testing, the UNODC will be developing a manual to implement the ICCS. 4

6 Following the presentation, some countries interested in taking part in the testing asked if the April deadline could be extended, and the UNODC replied that some degree of flexibility would be possible although the aim was to achieve the testing before a meeting of the UNODC expert group planned later in May. More than half of Member States have volunteered to take part in the testing, which can be at different stages of the criminal justice system. Remaining EU Member States who are also interested in taking part were invited to contact Mr Bisogno. 9. The EIGE Gender Equality Index and administrative data on gender-based violence Ligia Nobrega (EIGE) described the conceptual and measurement frameworks underpinning the EIGE Gender Equality Index and emphasized the current lack of comparable data on gender-based violence in the EU. Indicators are required that cover the different dimensions of gender-based violence identified by the UN: physical, sexual, psychological, economic and current/former intimate partner violence. The reference framework for the Gender Equality Index sub-domain of direct violence is the minimum set of gender indicators recommended by the UN 1 and included in the guidance note of the 58 th session of the Commission on the Status of Women 2. The recent FRA survey on violence against women (section 10. below) is one useful source of data but there is no decision as of yet to repeat it at regular intervals. Administrative registers are an alternative source of data available in different countries although the information is not recorded in a harmonized way across Member States. EIGE will consider using administrative data if the data are reliable and available for all Member States, but it was stressed that for comprehensive and reliable information on violence against women, either a special survey on violence against women or a victimisation survey is required. Ms Nobrega then presented the online mapping tool 3 developed by EIGE which identifies the different administrative data sources in Member States that contain information on genderbased violence. The mapping tool grew out of a study by EIGE in 2013 on the relevance, reliability and quality of administrative data on gender-based violence. The study found that the quality of administrative data is normally better in police and justice sources compared with the health sector, where the collection of data on gender-based violence is more limited. Ms Nobrega emphasized that further improvements in administrative data sources on genderbased violence are still required, particularly in relation to the definitions used and the reliability and accessibility of the data. 10. FRA survey on violence against women Sami Nevala (FRA) then gave an overview of the FRA survey 4 on violence against women, which had been published in March Based on face-to-face interviews involving 42,000 women (1,500 in each Member State) the survey provides statistics on the prevalence of physical and sexual abuse, psychological violence, sexual harassment, stalking and victimisation in childhood

7 The survey also collected information on the emotional and psychological effect of violence on victims, how the violence was reported and the victim s satisfaction with the assistance received. Mr Nevala concluded that the survey raises awareness of the extent of violence against women in the EU and may help to encourage Member States - who have not yet ratified the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention) - to do so. More specific conclusions arising from the study relate to the importance of women and men being positively involved in awarenessraising efforts, the need to treat intimate partner violence as matter in which the state should intervene, and the importance of implementing the EU Victim s Directive, under which Member States must ensure that victims of crime have access to appropriate support services. Mr Nevala added that the role of health care professionals is also an important factor in addressing violence against women, given that a significant proportion of victims contact doctors or hospitals after a violent attack. 11. Summary of conclusions The Working Group did not express a preference for being the main contact point for the DG Home Affairs cybercrime study DG Home Affairs will circulate via Eurostat more details about the proposed cybercrime and corruption studies to the Working Group members, together with a copy of the mid-term review of the Statistics Action Plan The Working Group supported the proposal for the joint Eurostat-UNODC data collection starting in 2014, to be accompanied by guidelines on the definitions to be used Eurostat will continue to collect data on drug law offences in 2014 and will cooperate in the development of a revised EMCDDA data collection tool for future data on drug law offences Eurostat will circulate to the Working Group members details of the Reitox national contact points for information Indicators that combine government expenditure data from the national accounts and criminal justice statistics require more detailed study before they are used in publications Member States interested in taking part in the testing of the International Classification of Crime for Statistical purposes were invited to contact the UNODC. 6

8 12. Feedback from meeting satisfaction survey At the end of the Working Group meeting participants were invited to complete a satisfaction survey concerning the organisation, content and value of the meeting. All respondents were satisfied with the overall value of the meeting, although some had difficulty in accessing the papers in the restricted folder of the CIRCABC system. Regarding presentations, the feedback indicated a preference for short presentations, supported by PowerPoint presentations or other documentation to facilitate information sharing. Eurostat May