Delay in the current system blurs the necessary link between the offence and the resulting sentence, writes James Corrigan
Crime committed by children is on the rise in Ireland, with recent Garda figures showing an alarming increase. The Garda and the courts say that a hard core of young offenders is responsible for a large proportion of youth crime and that the lack of spaces in secure accommodation means many of the cases are struck out and offenders are released to continue reoffending. Gardaí believe many of these young people go on to become adult offenders.
Dealing with the problem of youth crime and persistent young offenders is complex. It requires both long-term strategies in terms of prevention and diversion and more immediate interventions for those who have already entered the criminal justice system.
The Children Act, 2001, does provide a new and comprehensive framework for the development of youth justice, but implementation of the legislation has been slow. The most recent indication from the Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, is that new community sanctions (as an alternative to custody) will come on stream in mid 2004, subject to the availability of resources.
Tackling the problem of persistent young offenders requires targeted interventions, which engage the children and statutory agencies at the point of entry to the youth justice system as well as at the point of sentence.
Speaking last year, Mr McDowell expressed his concern about the problem of delay between detection and trial (sentence), particularly in the case of juvenile offending. Saying that "justice delayed is justice denied", the Minister warned that the present pattern of delay fundamentally undermined the capacity of the system as a whole to respond effectively to crime and to deter it.
Not only does delay lower the chances of a conviction (for example, the memories of victims and witnesses may fade) and increase the overall costs to the State, it also blurs the necessary link between the offence and the resulting sentence for the offender and, more critically, will hold back any targeted intervention in terms of sentence. In the meantime, many children will continue to reoffend while awaiting the next stage of their case.
Addressing the problem of persistent young offenders by reducing delays in the system became a British government target after the 1997 general election. A pledge to halve the time between arrest and sentence for persistent young offenders was achieved in 2001 and sustained for the past three years. Key to delivery has been effective inter-agency co-operation, which has developed at national and local level.
The Youth Justice Board for England and Wales is tasked with overall leadership and co-ordination, while local agencies came together to ensure delivery. Inter-agency delivery agreements, drawn up by local agencies, are based on a partnership approach, which recognises that delay at any stage will have implications for the performance of all criminal justice agencies.
Local inter-agency agreements therefore focus on tackling delay from point of arrest to completion and include early identification of persistent offenders; early charging and first appearance in court; improved file quality and timeliness by the police; timely listing of cases in court; effective case management by courts, police and the prosecution; provision of bail support packages and timely presentencing reports by local youth offending teams; and timely sentencing by magistrates and judges.
In addition to significant reduction in delays, many areas are seeing a reduction in the numbers of persistent young offenders and a reduction in reoffending rates (although overall impact can only be measured in the longer term).
Sentencing is certainly critical to tackling the problem of youth crime, particularly when it follows an effective and timely management of the case. The Children Act is framed on the generally accepted belief that the use of custody for children should be an option of last resort. It therefore places a strong emphasis on community interventions as a means to prevent offending and reoffending.
Experience from Britain on the use of community sentences is that they offer a realistic alternative to custody and provide a means to address reoffending. Of particular relevance has been the introduction of Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programmes (ISSP), which are aimed at persistent young offenders.
As an alternative to a short custodial sentence, offenders receive an ISSP which runs for a maximum of six months and provides purposeful activity (training, education, etc.) and intensive surveillance in the community delivered through electronic tagging and intelligence-led policing.
Local youth offending teams, which operate in each local authority area, are made up of representatives of police, probation, social services, health, education, drugs and housing officers and are responsible for the implementation of the court orders. Early results are positive in terms of the immediate impact on young offenders, and there is a significant cost-saving relative to custody.
Dealing with the problem of persistent young offenders is a complex issue for the youth justice system in Ireland. As the system has relied heavily on custody, even where spaces in secure accommodation are not available, no adequate intervention has been possible for many of the children, and reoffending has continued. Delays in the youth justice process have exacerbated the problem as the chances of conviction and resulting intervention have decreased, costs have increased and offenders make less connection between their crimes and their consequences, thus continuing to reoffend.
The Children Act has expanded the options a court will have at its disposal when dealing with a young person, but its implementation on a phased basis means that many of the community sanctions remain to be implemented.
The British experience is that inter-agency co-operation at national and local level can help to deliver key objectives such as reducing delays and providing a viable alternative to custody. This delivers benefits in terms of a reduction in reoffending, a decrease in the numbers of persistent young offenders and having fewer children in custody.