Parliamentary committee reviews of police oversight agencies : a Queensland case study

The suggested model of an ideal public sector corruption commission includes oversight by a parliamentary committee with an attached parliamentary inspector (Prenzler, 2009). However, little research has been conducted on parliamentary oversight of corruption commissions. In Queensland, a role of the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee, which has the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Commissioner attached, is to review the Crime and Misconduct Commission every three years. This paper considers the public written and oral submissions made to the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee in the four reviews of the Crime and Misconduct Committee conducted to date (2004, 2006, 2009 and 2012). By doing this, the paper will begin to identify the gaps in our understanding of the relationship between parliamentary committees and public sector corruption commissions and the processes used by parliamentary committees to provide oversight of corruption commissions.

Looking behind the increase in custodial remand populations

Numbers, rates and proportions of those remanded in custody have increased significantly in recent decades across a range of jurisdictions. In Australia they have doubled since the early 1980s, such that close to one in four prisoners is currently unconvicted. Taking NSW as a case study and drawing on the recent New South Wales Law Reform Commission Report on Bail (2012), this article will identify the key drivers of this increase in NSW, predominantly a form of legislative hyperactivity involving constant changes to the Bail Act 1978 (NSW), changes which remove or restrict the presumption in favour of bail for a wide range of offences. The article will then examine some of the conceptual, cultural and practice shifts underlying the increase. These include: a shift away from a conception of bail as a procedural issue predominantly concerned with securing the attendance of the accused at trial and the integrity of the trial, to the use of bail for crime prevention purposes; the diminishing force of the presumption of innocence; the framing of a false opposition between an individual interest in liberty and a public interest in safety; a shift from determination of the individual case by reference to its own particular circumstances to determination by its classification within pre‐set legislative categories of offence types and previous convictions; a double jeopardy effect arising in relation to people with previous convictions for which they have already been punished; and an unacknowledged preventive detention effect arising from the increased emphasis on risk. Many of these conceptual shifts are apparent in the explosion in bail conditions and the KPI‐driven policing of bail conditions and consequent rise in revocations, especially in relation to juveniles. The paper will conclude with a note on the NSW Government’s response to the NSW LRC Report in the form of a Bail Bill (2013) and brief speculation as to its likely effects.

Mapping the conditions of penal hope

This article examines the conditions of penal hope behind suggestions that the penal expansionism of the last three decades may be at a ‘turning point’. The article proceeds by outlining David Green’s (2013b) suggested catalysts of penal reform and considers how applicable they are in the Australian context. Green’s suggested catalysts are: the cycles and saturation thesis; shifts in the dominant conception of the offender; the global financial crisis (GFC) and budgetary constraints; the drop in crime; the emergence of the prisoner re‐entry movement; apparent shifts in public opinion; the influence of evangelical Christian ideas; and the Right on Crime initiative. The article then considers a number of other possible catalysts or forces: the role of trade unions; the role of courts; the emergence of recidivism as a political issue; the influence of ‘evidence based’/‘what works’ discourse; and the emergence of justice reinvestment (JR). The article concludes with some comments about the capacity of criminology and criminologists to contribute to penal reductionism, offering an optimistic assessment for the prospects of a reflexive criminology that engages in and engenders a wider politics around criminal justice issues.

Police-referred restorative justice for juveniles in Australia

This preliminary paper provides an overview of the legislative and policy context of restorative justice measures for juveniles in each Australian state and territory, highlighting the diverse characteristics of current restorative practices. Further, it provides an indication of the numbers and characteristics of juveniles who are referred by police to restorative justice measures and the offence types for which they are most commonly referred. A number of key points about the application of restorative justice measures to juveniles in Australia’s jurisdictions are highlighted, including that juveniles were referred to conferences primarily for property crimes and that Indigenous juveniles comprised higher proportions of those sent to court than to conferencing. This paper argues that more detailed data on the offending histories, offence types and offence seriousness of juveniles referred by police to restorative justice processes would enable a more finely-grained analysis of restorative justice for juveniles in Australia.

Children's exposure to domestic violence in Australia

Children's 'witnessing' or exposure to domestic violence has been increasingly recognised as a form of child abuse, both in Australia and internationally. Although it is difficult to accurately assess the scope of the problem, research has demonstrated that a substantial amount of domestic violence is witnessed by children. As this paper outlines, witnessing domestic violence can involve a range of incidents, ranging from the child 'only' hearing the violence, to the child being forced to participate in the violence or being used as part of a violent incident. In this paper, current knowledge about the extent of children's exposure to domestic violence in Australia is described, along with the documented impacts that this exposure can have on children. This includes psychological and behavioural impacts, health and socioeconomic impacts, and its link to the intergenerational transmission of violence and re-victimisation. Current legislative and policy initiatives are then described and some community-based programs that have been introduced in Australia to address the problem of children's exposure to domestic violence are highlighted. The paper concludes that initiatives focused on early intervention and holistic approaches to preventing and responding to children's exposure to domestic violence should be considered as part of strategies developed to address this problem.

Taking victims seriously? : the role of victims' rights movements in the emergence of restorative justice

It is widely accepted in the literature on restorative justice that restorative practices emerged at least partly as a result of the recent shift towards recognising the rights of victims of crime, and increasing the involvement of victims in the criminal justice system. This article seeks to destabilise this claim. Although it accepts that there is a relationship between the emergence of a strong victims' rights movement and the emergence of restorative justice, it argues that this relationship is more nuanced, complex and contingent than advocates of restorative justice allow.

What makes juvenile offenders different from adult offenders?

Historically, children in criminal justice proceedings were treated much the same as adults and subject to the same criminal justice processes as adults. Until the early twentieth century, children in Australia were even subjected to the same penalties as adults, including hard labour and corporal and capital punishment (Carrington & Pereira 2009). Until the mid-nineteenth century, there was no separate category of ’juvenile offender’ in Western legal systems and children as young as six years of age were incarcerated in Australian prisons (Cunneen & White 2007). It is widely acknowledged today, however, both in Australia and internationally, that juveniles should be subject to a system of criminal justice that is separate from the adult system and that recognises their inexperience and immaturity. As such, juveniles are typically dealt with separately from adults and treated less harshly than their adult counterparts. The United Nations’ (1985: 2) Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the ‘Beijing Rules’) stress the importance of nations establishing a set of laws, rules and provisions specifically applicable to juvenile offenders and institutions and bodies entrusted with the functions of the administration of juvenile justice and designed to meet the varying needs of juvenile offenders, while protecting their basic rights. In each Australian jurisdiction, except Queensland, a juvenile is defined as a person aged between 10 and 17 years of age, inclusive. In Queensland, a juvenile is defined as a person aged between 10 and 16 years, inclusive. In all jurisdictions, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is 10 years. That is, children under 10 years of age cannot be held legally responsible for their actions.

Trends in juvenile detention in Australia

This paper provides an overview of key trends in juvenile detention in Australia, based on data contained in the Australian Institute of Criminology’s (AIC’s) Juveniles in Detention in Australia Monitoring Program database and then provides a discussion of two key trends in juvenile detention—the national increase in the proportion of juvenile detainees that is remanded (rather than sentenced) and the increase in the over-representation of Indigenous juveniles in detention.

A qualitative investigation of drug use among Pakistani road users

Background Statistics on drug use by Pakistani drivers are not available, yet considerable numbers of drivers are believed to be drug addicted. The National Drug Abuse Assessment 2006/07, conducted by the United Nation Office on Drugs and Crime and the Ministry of Narcotics Control Pakistan reported that opiate users numbered 628,000, of which 77%were chronic heroin abusers. Injecting drug users have reportedly doubled in the decade to 2006 and drug use has been linked with many major crashes involving professional drivers. Aims This study explored a broad range of risk taking behaviours of road users, including drug use. It also investigated associations between risky road use and fatalism and other cultural beliefs. Methods This paper reports findings relating to drug driving in the cities of Lahore, Rawalpindi and Islamabad. Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted with bus, truck, and taxi drivers, policy makers and field police officers. Results Interviews suggested widespread use of illicit drugs, particularly among bus, truck and taxi drivers. Reasons for drug use included recreational purposes, stimulants during long driving episodes, and substance addiction. Furthermore, the use of drugs and any association with road crashes was generally viewed as linked to fatalism rather than to any fault of an individual. In other words, people did not believe there was an association between drug use and road crashes, even if they had personally experienced such. Police knowledge of drug use among drivers was evident, although there is no formal drug driving testing regime in Pakistan. Discussion and conclusions The substantial increase in drug use among the population in recent years highlights a significant public health challenge in Pakistan. This qualitative research, although recognized as not representative of the broader population, suggests that there is significant cause for concern about drug driving, especially among professional drivers, and a need for further investigation and intervention.

Misperceptions about child sex offenders

Sexual offending against children is a highly emotive issue. It is nonetheless important that public policy initiatives to prevent and/or respond to child sexual abuse are based on the available evidence about child sex offenders. This paper addresses five common misperceptions about the perpetrators of sexual offences against children. Specifically, the issues addressed include whether all child sex offenders are ‘paedophiles’, who sexually abuse children, whether most child sex offenders were victims of sexual abuse themselves, rates of recidivism among child sex offenders and the number of children sex offenders typically abuse before they are detected by police. The evidence outlined in this paper highlights that there are few black and white answers to these questions. Perpetrators of sexual crimes against children are not, contrary to widespread opinion, a homogenous group. Rather, there are a number of varied offending profiles that characterise child sex offenders. Gaining an understanding of the nuances of this offender population is critical if children are to be protected from sexual abuse.

Computer security incidents against Australian businesses : predictors of victimisation

Drawing on data from the Australian Business Assessment of Computer User Security (ABACUS) survey, this paper examines a range of factors that may influence businesses’ likelihood of being victimised by a computer security incident. It has been suggested that factors including business size, industry sector, level of outsourcing, expenditure on computer security functions and types of computer security tools and/or policies used may influence the probability of particular businesses experiencing such incidents. This paper uses probability modelling to test whether this is the case for the 4,000 businesses that responded to the ABACUS survey. It was found that the industry sector that a business belonged to, and business expenditure on computer security, were not related to businesses’ likelihood of detecting computer security incidents. Instead, the number of employees that a business has and whether computer security functions were outsourced were found to be key indicators of businesses’ likelihood of detecting incidents. Some of the implications of these findings are considered in this paper.

Re-imagining youth justice

Persistent high levels of recidivism among young offenders (Luke and Lind 2002; Weatherburn et al. 2012) and the over‐representation of Indigenous young people (Cunneen and White 2011; Snowball 2008; Tauri 2012) have long been features of youth justice in Australia. Other problems – such as the increased rates of young people committing sex offences (Dwyer 2011; O’Brien 2010), increasing numbers of young people criminalised for new offences such as ‘sexting’ (Lee and McGovern 2013), and increasing numbers of young female offenders being drawn into youth justice systems (Carrington 2006; Carrington and Pereira 2009) – have emerged more recently. In this paper, we draw on the concept of ‘imaginary penalities’ (Carlen 2010) to argue these chronic problems are partly informed by ‘imaginary’ understandings of how and why young people (re)offend; reflect ‘imaginary’ understandings of what works to address young people’s (re)offending; and reflect ‘imaginary’ ideals about the primary purposes of the youth justice system. We acknowledge up front that answers to these questions require a great deal of new empirical research. This paper is only a beginning that sets out exactly what such an ambitious project might look like.

What's Queer About Queer Criminology?

The term ‘‘queer criminology’’ is increasingly being used in criminological discussions, though there remains little consistency with regard to how it is used and to what it refers. It has been used broadly to describe criminological research on LGBTQ people and their interactions with the justice system, more specifically to describe those analyses that identify and critique the heteronormative knowledges or binarized understandings of gender and sexuality within criminal justice research, and also to label theoretical and conceptual pieces that argue for a greater connection between queer theory and criminology. However, there are some important distinctions between ‘‘queer criminology’’ and ‘‘queer theory’’ more widely, particularly the deconstructive approaches of the latter. This chapter explores the engagements between queer theory and ‘‘queer criminology,’’ specifically focusing on whether ‘‘queer criminology’’ adopts an understanding of ‘‘queer’’ as an attitude, and as signifying a deconstructive project—a position that features in many strands of queer theoretical work. It will argue that while there are different ways of engaging with ‘‘queer’’ as a concept, and that each of these engagements produces different kinds of ‘‘queer’’ projects, ‘‘queer criminology’’ does not always engage with the deconstructive approaches drawn from queer theory. Ultimately, this can limit the ways that ‘queer criminologists’’ are able to address injustice.

Against Rehabilitation; For Reparitive Justice

The difficulties of re-imagining the possible relationships between crime and justice in capitalist societies, and imagining the possible meanings of democracy in societies characterised by gross inequalities of knowledge, and exclusion of the majority from political decisions are well known. One such difficulty stems from the impossible necessity of maintaining stances of both constant reform and constant critique (see Carlen, 2012). Confronted with economic and cultural inequalities which routinely deny ideals of justice and democracy, there can be a temptation to suppress (or bracket-off) troubling knowledge of criminal justice's and democracy's maligned underbellies and instead talk 'as if' criminal justice's ideal play of governance is always and already realised in its rhetoric. In some senses, this 'as if' talk is aspirational and it is difficult to see how it could be otherwise if more just conceptions of criminal justice and more democratic forms of democracy are to be conceived. However, when, as often happens, aspirational criminal justice concepts become routinised and acted upon as if they can be realised without fundamental social change, they become penal imaginaries, part of a taken-for-granted ideological baggage which, because it is taken-for-granted, obstructs critique (see Carlen, 2008). One such penal imaginary is the concept of rehabilitation, a concept which has a long history of justifying almost every kind of non-lethal response to lawbreaking and which is currently being reborn yet again in theories of criminal desistance and anti-prison campaigns as well as in the more invidious rehabilitation industry with its sales of programmes for cognitive reform.