Nordic Baltic seminar Lithuania 3 March 2011

Transcription

1 IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC MONITORING IN NORWAY Nordic Baltic seminar Lithuania 3 March 2011 Project manager Jan-Erik Sandlie Alternative sanctions Community sentence Driving whilst intoxicated sentence Drug treatment court sentence Alternative execution of prison sentence Home detention Electronic monitoring, front door Electronic monitoring, back door Prison sentence in treatment senter (front) Prison sentence in treatment senter (back)

2 The main reasons for implementing electronic monitoring in Norway Lack of prison capacity Humane and trustworthy alternative to prison, with better rehabilitation and prevention of recidivism Lower the use of imprisonment Flexibility Cost effectiveness 3 History April 2006; Government plan - capacity problems June 2007; The political decision was made to establish a limited pilot project over 2 years. Changes in the Execution of sentences act. June 2008; the contract with Guidance signed August 2008; the legislation came into force 1. September 2008; the first offender serving with EM in Norway 4 2

3 The Norwegian model The aim is to maintain and advance the social and economic capabilities of the offender Well-qualified multidisciplinary staff of both prison officers and social workers Close and dynamic supervision of the offender; both support and control. A detailed schedule is to be followed The Correctional Services have the superior responsibility of all parts 5 Establishment and implementation Administrative decision, execution of prison sentence 6 pilot units. 6 of 19 counties Capacity of 130 offenders, later 150 Offender group: sentenced to 4 months or less of imprisonment, or those with less than 4 months left of a longer sentence, front door and back door. The offender har to apply Radio frequency Estimated cost 100 Euro 6 3

4 Complete EM system Monitoring equipment Control centre computer system Control centre software Procurement by competitive tender Deployment to defined timetable Co-operative relationship 7 8 4

5 Organization The Correctional Services have the superior responsibility of all parts The Correctional Services Department in the Ministry of Justice is administrating and coordinating the pilot The regional level is the decision- making authority The local level is responsible for all parts of the execution of the sanction. Placed within the probation service office. Correctional Services IT Centre (KITT) is responsible for the technical equipment and operating the control centre. 9 Pilot units 6 (7) pilot units, with great geographic and demographic variations Between 7 and 12 employees, including a teamcoordinator Chief probation officer is head of EM unit Well-qualified multidisciplinary staff of both prison officers and social workers Positive experience with mixed staff 10 5

6 General conditions Suitable accommodation Approval from other persons in the residence over the age of 18 Suitable occupation (15-40 hours per week) Zero-tolerance of drug and alcohol Minimum 2 meetings with the probation services per week Close and dynamic supervision of the offender; both support and control. A detailed schedule is to be followed

7 13 Implementations Total Front door Back door

8 Applications Total Recieved Granted 30 % 55 % 60 % 15 Type of offence 2010 Other; 4 % Fraud/ breach of trust; 11 % Drug offences; 7 % White Collar offences; 9 % Crimes of violence; 6 % Gain (Theft etc); 2 % Drunken driving; 45 % Road traffic offences; 15 % 16 8

9 Breaches Community sentence 13 % 15 % 12 % Driving whilst intoxicated sentence 15 % 13 % Drug treatment court sentence 68 % Home detention 4 % 7 % Electronic monitoring, 8 % 5 % 5 % 17 Evaluation of the pilot project in Norway The Prison and Probation Staff Education Centre have the commission to evaluate the pilot project in the period , the first report to be 2 major reports to be publicized 2011/2012 about the offenders and their families 1 internal evaluation with focus on the organizational perspective, containing 5 minor reports: organisation, resources, qualifications, technics, summary 18 9

10 Evaluation of the pilot project in Norway On-going questionnaire from offenders, so far about 800 answers Major results: -Offender and family are positive -Satisfied with the control activities -Satisfied with the Probation Service -Work and family are the main reasons to apply - Tougher, but better than prison - Lonesome 19 Future plans Some extend in the pilot project from April 2011 with one unit in Bergen, covering the county of Hordaland. Considering EM as a alternative to custody, pre-trial house arrest Considering a nationwide and permanent programme, potentially increase to about 400 offenders Considering adjustments to increase the target group and length of order 20 10

11 Political climate more positive 21 11