“Vivre en probation” : l’expérience de la probation et sa place dans la trajectoire de vie des contrevenants

La probation est aujourd’hui profondément ancrée dans notre système de justice pénale. Parmi les programmes de surveillance communautaire (probation, condamnation avec sursis ou libération conditionnelle), elle constitue de loin le programme le plus commun, avec près de 98 000 contrevenants adultes soit 61 % de la population adulte placée sous surveillance correctionnelle au Canada. Pour autant, les chercheurs ne manifestent depuis plusieurs décennies que peu d’intérêt pour la question. La mesure se banalisant, la recherche s’étiole. L’orientation de la recherche a amené le sujet à la marge des études sur la punition. En réponse à une demande existante (Phelps, 2015), ce mémoire est guidé par une approche sociologique centrée sur l’échelle individuelle, au niveau macroscopique. Il vise à la compréhension de l’expérience des contrevenants placés en probation.

The European Council’s Guidelines for the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice 2020: Subverting the ‘Lisbonisation’ of Justice and Home Affairs? CEPS Essay No. 13, 14 July 2014

In its Conclusions of 26-27 June 2014, the European Council has adopted the new “Strategic Guidelines for Legislative and Operational Planning for the coming years within the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ)”. These Guidelines reveal a pre-Lisbon Treaty mindset among the EU member states and the Justice and Home Affairs Council. This essay argues that the Guidelines are mainly driven by the interests and agendas of national Ministries of Interior and Justice and are only “strategic” to the extent that they aim at first, re-injecting ‘intergovernmentalism’ or bringing back the old EU Third Pillar ways of working to the new EU institutional setting of the AFSJ and second, at sidelining the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and rule of law in the AFSJ. The paper argues that the European Council Guidelines seek to prevent the advances in Justice and Home Affairs cooperation as envisaged in the Treaty of Lisbon, particularly its emphasis on supranational democratic, legal and judicial accountability. As a consequence of this move to ‘de-Lisbonise’ JHA cooperation, fundamental rights and rule of law-related initiatives will be neglected and the interest of the individual will be displaced from the centre of gravity in the coming AFSJ 2020 policy agenda.

The UN General Assembly Resolution on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Proceedings - an Example for Europe. IES Policy Brief Issue 2013/04 • May 2013

Summary. The EU’s attempts to adopt an EU-wide instrument on the right to access to legal aid in criminal proceedings have not been successful so far. The important issue was originally part of Measure C of the Roadmap for criminal procedural rights,1 but due to political difficulties legal aid was dropped from the agenda. However, on a different plane agreement was reached on this topic as the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has adopted the world’s first international instrument dedicated to access to legal aid in December 2012.2 This policy brief argues that the EU should carry on in the ‘spirit’ of these recent developments and adopt a directive providing suspects and defendants with access to legal aid. 1 Council Resolution of 30 November 2009 on a Roadmap for strengthening procedural rights of suspected or accused persons in criminal proceedings, OJ C 295/1, 4 December 2009; hereafter will be referred to this Council Resolution as the ‘Roadmap’; for further information see M. Jimeno-Bulnes, ‘The EU Roadmap for Strengthening Procedural Rights of Suspected or Accused Persons in Criminal Proceedings’, 4 EUCrim (2009), 157-161. 2 United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems, A/Res/67/187, 20 December 2012; from here on will be referred to this as the ‘Resolution’.

The EU Counter-Terrorism Policy Responses to the Attacks in Paris: Towards an EU Security and Liberty Agenda. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 81/February 2015

This paper examines the main EU-level initiatives that have been put forward in the weeks following the attacks in Paris in January 2015, which will be discussed in the informal European Council meeting of 12 February 2015. It argues that a majority of these proposals predated the Paris shootings and had until that point proved contentious as regards their efficacy, legitimacy and lawfulness. The paper finds that EU counterterrorism responses raise two fundamental challenges: A first challenge is posed to the freedom of movement, Schengen and EU citizenship. Priority is being given to the expanded use of large-scale surveillance and systematic monitoring of all travellers including EU citizens, which stands in contravention of Schengen and the free movement principle. A second challenge concerns EU democratic rule of law. Current pressures calling for the adoption of measures such as the EU Passenger Name Record challenge the scrutiny roles held by the European Parliament and the Court of Justice of the EU on counterterrorism measures in a post-Lisbon Treaty setting. The paper proposes that the EU adopts a new European Agenda on Security and Liberty based on an EU security (criminal justice-led) cooperation model that is firmly anchored in current EU legal principles and rule of law standards. This model would call for ‘less is more’ concerning the use, processing and retention of data by police and intelligence communities. Instead, it would pursue better and more accurate use of data meeting the quality standards of evidence in criminal judicial proceedings.

“Vivre en probation” : l’expérience de la probation et sa place dans la trajectoire de vie des contrevenants

La probation est aujourd’hui profondément ancrée dans notre système de justice pénale. Parmi les programmes de surveillance communautaire (probation, condamnation avec sursis ou libération conditionnelle), elle constitue de loin le programme le plus commun, avec près de 98 000 contrevenants adultes soit 61 % de la population adulte placée sous surveillance correctionnelle au Canada. Pour autant, les chercheurs ne manifestent depuis plusieurs décennies que peu d’intérêt pour la question. La mesure se banalisant, la recherche s’étiole. L’orientation de la recherche a amené le sujet à la marge des études sur la punition. En réponse à une demande existante (Phelps, 2015), ce mémoire est guidé par une approche sociologique centrée sur l’échelle individuelle, au niveau macroscopique. Il vise à la compréhension de l’expérience des contrevenants placés en probation.

The criminalization of domestic violence : promises and limits /

"January 1996."

An analysis of diagnostic and rehabilitation efforts - 1976. Analytic study 5/6. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Driver and Pedestrian Programs, Washington, D.C.

[Tampa ASAP annual report]. Appendix H and J tables. 1976.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Driver and Pedestrian Programs, Washington, D.C.

Report of the Department of Justice.

Mode of access: Internet.

NIJ reports : a selective notification of information program of the National Institute of Justice.

Produced under contract J-LEAA-013-81.

A beginning blueprint for crime and delinquency prevention and control in Illinois.

"Chairman: Arthur J. Bilek."

An overview of the Illinois Criminal History Records Information (CHRI) System : part I of the 1993-94 criminal history records audit.

"December 1994."

CHRI user's manual : criminal history record information /

This guide provides examples of juvenile and adult arrest fingerprint cards with instructions and additional record forms.

Data sources on probation, conditional discharge, supervision, and periodic imprisonment in Illinois /

Includes bibliographies.

Female criminality 1970-1980 : the U.S. and Illinois /

"April 1983."