Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Presented by the Crime & Justice Research Network and the Australian and New Zealand Critical Criminology Network Edited by Chris Cunneen & Michael Salter
Publishedby TheCrimeandJusticeresearchNewtork UniversityofNewSouthWales December,2008 http://www.cjrn.unsw.edu.au NationalLibraryofAustraliaCataloguinginPublicationdata Proceedingsofthe2008CriticalCriminologyConference[electronicresource]:conductedbythe CrimeandJusticeResearchNetworkandtheAustralianandNewZealandCriticalCriminology Network/editorsChrisCunneen,MichaelSalter. ISBN:9780646507378(pdf) Subjects:CriminologyCongresses. Authors/Contributors:Cunneen,Chris.Salter,Michael.UniversityofNewSouthWales.Crimeand JusticeResearchNetwork.AustraliaandNewZealandCriticalCriminologyNetwork. DeweyNumber:364
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FORWARD
CHRISCUNNEEN MICHAELSALTER
LATEMODERNDEVELOPMENTSINSENTENCINGPRINCIPLESFOR INDIGENOUSOFFENDERS:BEYONDDAVIDGARLANDSFRAMEWORK
THALIAANTHONY
ACRITICALPERSPECTIVEONMENTALHEALTHDISORDERSANDCOGNITIVE DISABILITYINTHECRIMINALJUSTICESYSTEM 30
EILEENBALDRY,LEANNEDOWSE,PHILLIPSNOYMAN,MELISSACLARENCEANDIANWEBSTER
WOMENCENTREDCORRECTIONS:ANAIVEVIEW
LILLIANM.BARRY
46
THEEFFECTOFTERRORISMANDTERRORISTTRIALSONAUSTRALIAN PRISONREGIMES
DAVIDBROWN
61
ISOLATIONASCOUNTERINSURGENCY:SUPERMAXPRISONSANDTHEWAR ONTERROR 77
BREECARLTON
COLONIALGENOCIDEANDSTATECRIME
MICHAELGREWCOCK
91
VICTIMSASSURVIVORS
JANJORDAN
141
THEGROWTHOFVICTIMAGENCYINAUSTRALIANJURISPRUDENCE: LIMITATIONSANDCHALLENGES
TYRONEKIRCHENGAST
159
THERISEOFAGLOBALCARCERALCOMPLEX:FROMGARRISONSTATETO GARRISONPLANET184
JUDEMCCULLOCH
WOMENSBODIES,MORALPANICANDTHEWORLDGAME: SEXTRAFFICKING,THE2006FOOTBALLWORLDCUPANDBEYOND
SANJAMILIVOJEVIC
222
ORGANISEDABUSEANDTHEPOLITICSOFDISBELIEF
MICHAELSALTER
243
EXPLORINGTHEGROUPIDENTITYFUNCTIONOFCRIMINALLAW
MOLLYTOWNESOBRIEN
285
LOSINGTHEWARONDRUGS:PROHIBITIONANDPROLIFERATION
MARGARETPEREIRA
311
TRAFFICKINGINPERSONSASLABOUREXPLOITATION
MARIESEGRAVE
322
STUNNINGDEVELOPMENTS:SOMEIMPLICATIONSOFTASERSIN AUSTRALIA
EMMARYAN
341
PRISONERS,WORKANDRECIPROCALREINTEGRATION
ROBWHITEANDGARRYCOVENTRY
361
1
Forward
Wearepleasedtopresenttherefereedproceedingsofthe2008CriticalCriminology ConferenceonbehalfoftheCrimeandJusticeResearchNetworkandtheAustralia andNewZealandCriticalCriminologyNetwork. Theseproceedingsshowcasethediversecriminologicalviewpointspresentedatthe conferencethisyear.Fortyfivepapersweredeliveredacrosstwodaysby researchersfromAustraliaandoverseas,withoveronehundredandfifty academics,policymakersandstudentsinattendance. The2008conferencewasthesecondCriticalCriminologyconference.The proceedingsofthefirstconferenceheldatSydneyLawSchoolis2007arecurrently publishedbyFederationPressasTheCriticalCriminologyReader,editedbyChris CunneenandThaliaAnthony.Theannualconferenceisemergingasthekeyforum forcriticalcriminologyintheAustralasianregion Wewouldliketothankthecontributorstothiscollectionandtoacknowledgethe refereeswhogaveuptheirtimetoreviewthesepapers,including:AlexSteele,Gary Coventry,EileenBaldry,BreeCarlton,DavidBrown,SharonPickering,Michael Grewcock,JulieStubbs,RobWhite,JanJordon,CaitlinHughesandJudeMcCulloch. ChrisCunneen MichaelSalter FacultyofLaw UniversityofNewSouthWales Sydney
2
LatemoderndevelopmentsinSentencingPrinciplesforIndigenous Offenders:beyondDavidGarlandsframework
ThaliaAnthony FacultyofLaw UniversityofSydney t.anthony@usyd.edu.au ThispaperexploresthelatemodernshiftsinthecharacterisationofIndigenous offendersinsentencingjudgmentsandlegislationinNewSouthWales(NSW)and theNorthernTerritory(NT).ItconsiderswhetherDavidGarlands(2001)thesis (developedinrelationtotheUnitedKingdomandtheUnitedStates)appliesto judicialandpoliticalconceptualisationsofIndigenousoffenders.Garlandidentifies ofashiftincriminaljusticeconceptualisationsfrompenalwelfarisminthePost WWIIperiodwhenoffendersarecontextualisedinsocialrelationstolawand orderinlatemodernity(1970s)whenoffendersaredecontextualised. ThispaperwillarguethatGarlandsframeworkdoesnotfullyexplainrationalitiesin sentencingoffendersinIndigenouscommunities.Whilejudicialdiscoursesin sentencingIndigenousoffendersresonatewithGarlandsobservationsaboutthere emergenceofemphasisonthevictimsinterest,retributionandprotectionofthe widercommunityprotection,itdoesnotaccountforachangingviewaboutthe functionalityofIndigenouscommunities.Apostcolonialnarrativeofsentencingin latemodernityintheNTandNSWidentifiestheongoingcontextualisationof Indigenousoffenders.However,thiscontextisadysfunctionalcommunity.The communityisbothcondemnedandinneedofrescue,particularlythroughabolder assertionofpostcolonialcrimecontrol.Thescapegoatintheserescueeffortsisthe Indigenousoffender.
3
GarlandsCultureofControlandthecontrolAustralianIndigenousculture IntheCultureofControl,Garland(2001)claimedthatinthepostWWIIperiod, offenderswereconceivedofandtreatedasproductsofsocialrelationships.They werecapableofreformandrehabilitation.Inthe1970s,armedwithanothing worksattitudetopenalwelfarismaswellasthebroaderwelfarestate,politicians, andeventuallyjudges,begantoviewtheoffenderasmorallycorruptandbeyond repair(alsosee:Melossi2000).Punitiveurgesweregivenfreerreigninpublic discoursesoncrimecontrol,offenderswerecondemnedandharshersentences werehandeddown. Garlandsthesisthatalawandorderdiscourseemergedinlatemodernpoliciesis silentoncrimepoliciesastheyrelatetoIndigenouspeopleorracialminorities.In theCultureofControl,whichcomparestheUnitedKingdomandtheUnitedStates, theonlymentionofraceisthatthesituationforethnicminoritiesisworsebecause theyarepartofanexcludedunderclassthathasbeenintensivelytargetedbylaw enforcersinlatemodernity(Garland2001). DoubtshavebeenraisedaboutwhetherAustralianIndigenousoffenders experiencedpostWarpenalwelfarism(Hogg2001;Broadhurst1987).Assimilation policiesreignedintheAustralianpostWarWorldIIcontext.Indigenouspeoplewere decontextualisedfromtheircommunitiesandalignedwiththeexpectationsofthe nonIndigenouscommunity.EnforcementofIndigenousassimilationpolicieswas farfromliberal;therewasforcedunpaidlabour,forcedremovalofchildrenfrom theirIndigenousfamiliesandrestrictionsonmovement,marriageandthepractice ofculture(ALRC1986). Nonetheless,astheprotectionistaspectsofassimilationpolicieswitheredawayin the1960s,andtheliberalaspectsseepedin,incarcerationratesforIndigenous peoplesoared.ThiswasbecauseIndigenouspeoplewerereleasedfromthe strangleholdofgovernmentsettlementsandchurchmissions,andallowedtolivein
4
towns.Indoingso,theymovedintotheambitofthestreetpoliceandintoprisons (Hogg2001).Bythelatetwentiethcentury(whichDavidGarlandwouldregardas latemodernity),incarcerationrateshadescalated.Thiswasrevealedbythe1991 reportoftheRoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody.Indigenous peoplecontinuetobedramaticallyoverrepresentedincustody(Joudo&Curnow 2008,3;ABS2007,6).1 While,theshifttoIndigenousincarcerationinprisonsandpolicycustody(as opposedtogovernmentsettlementsandmissions)wasamatterofIndigenous policiesratherthancrimepoliciesinthe1960sand1970s,therehavebeeninmore recenttimesahardeningofjudicialviewsandgovernmentsentencingpolicies towardsIndigenousoffenders.Sincethelate1990s,sentencesforIndigenous offendershavebecomeharsherascourtsandgovernmentshavesoughttomakean outcastofthem.ThisculminatedinCommonwealthlegislationin2007that removedthecapacityofcourtstotakeintoaccountIndigenousculturaland customaryfactorsinsentencingNorthernTerritoryIndigenousoffenders(Northern TerritoryNationalEmergencyResponseAct2007(Cth)s91).Itisfromthelate1990s forwhichthispaperconsiderswhetherGarlandslawandorderframeworkexplains thetougherstanceonsentencingtowardsIndigenousoffenders. ThispapersuggeststhatGarlandsframeworkintheCultureofControldoesnot accountforprocessesofcolonialandpostcolonialcontrolofIndigenouspeoplein settlersocieties.Whilehisschemaisabletoexplainthecondemnationofthe offender,itisunabletoaccountfortheparticularjudicialandgovernment rationalisationofharshsentencingofIndigenousoffenderstocondemnnotonlythe individual,butalsotheIndigenouscommunity.Also,itisnotonlythefailureof penalwelfarismthatrequiresatougherapproachtosentencing,butalsothefailure ofpostcolonialsocietyandpoliciesincontrollingIndigenouspeople.Notably,the
5
failedpolicyofselfdeterminationneedstobeaddressedthroughthereassertionof paternalistpolicies. AparadoxhasemergedwheresentencingseekstoprotecttheIndigenous communityneedsfromtheoffender,whileatthesametimetheoffender representsthedysfunctionalcommunity.Inotherwords,theoffenderis condemnedforharmtothecommunity,butinturnthecommunityisalso condemnedforhavinganoffenderamongitsranks.Sentencinghasbecome increasinglyharshduetotheneedtoteachboththeoffenderandtheIndigenous communityalesson. Methodologyandsometrends ThispaperwillanalysesentencingprinciplesappliedtoIndigenousoffendersin NSWandtheNT,whereIndigenousfactorshavebeenatissue.Itaddressesthe changingapproachfromthe1970suntil2008,includinglegislativechanges governingthesentencingofIndigenousoffendersincourts.Itdemonstratesthatin the1970swhenIndigenousfactorsfirstemerged,courtsconsideredsocio economichardship,crossculturalbreakdownfromahistoryofcolonisationand differentculturalexpectations(especiallyinmoretraditionalcommunities)as mitigatingfactors(NSWLawReformCommission2000,[2.26]). Sincethelate1990s,duetotheperceivedfailureofIndigenouscommunitiesand Indigenouspolicies,beingIndigenoushasemergedinsomecasesasanaggravating factor.SentencinghasbecomeavehiclefordealingwiththefailedIndigenous societies.Mostrecently,theapproachhasbecomeoneofunderminingcultural factorsirrespectiveofwhethertheyareaggravatingormitigating.Thisrepresents anobjectivewhichperhapsGarlandsapproachismostunequippedtoexplain:the efforttoundermineanyrecognitionofculturaldifferencethroughsentencing.
6
i. Whyfocusonsentencing? Sentencingisarelativelyminorcontributortotheoverrepresentationof Indigenouspeopleincustody.Factorssuchaspolicingaredescribedasfarmore significantinincarcerationrates(RoyalCommissionIntoAboriginalDeathsIn Custody1991,[13.2.20];Cunneen2001,85).However,ananalysisofsentencing revealstherationalisationforpunishment.Unlikepolicediscretion,theuseof judicialdiscretioninthesentencingprocessistransparent,inthesensethatjudges mustprovidereasonsandthesereasonsaremadepublic.Inthepast,discretionhas beenusedtotakeintoaccountanoffendersIndigenousbackgroundorcommunity circumstances. Judicialsentencinginterplayswithgovernmentpolicyonsentencing.Itmayignitea reactivepolicyresponseinordertocurbdiscretion.Forexample,theCrime (SentencingandBail)AmendmentAct2006(Cth),whichremovedcustomarylawand culturalfactorsinsentencing,canbeseenaresponsetocasessuchasTheQueenv GJ[2005]NTCCA20)thattookthesefactorsintoaccount.Ontheotherhand, sentencingmaypreemptrestrictivesentencinglegislation.Forexample,RvJurisic 45NSWLR209,whichsetdownguidelinesentences,preemptedtheCrimesAct 1900(NSW),ss52Aand52AAthatlegislatedsentencinggrids.Therefore, sentencinginfluencestrendsinpublicpolicyandillustratesthecompeting characterisationsofIndigenouspeoplesininformingthetrends. ii.HowhavecourtsaccountedforIndigenousfactorsinsentencing? Judgescangenerallyexercisediscretionintakingintoaccountabroadrangeof factorsthataggravateormitigateacriminalsentence.Theseincludethegravityof theoffence,thenatureofthevictim,theimpactoftheoffenceandthecharacterof theoffender.Legislationalsoprovidesforsuchdiscretionandinsomejurisdictions
7
listsasetofinexhaustivecriteriathatmaybeconsideredinsentencing.2Where specificfactorsarementionedsuchasinNSWandNTsentencinglegislation,there isadditionallygeneraljudicialdiscretiontotakeintoaccountanyotherrelevant factors.3 Untilrecently,nosentencinglegislationforadultoffendersreferredtoIndigenous orcustomarylawfactors,andotherthantheCrimes(Sentencing)Act(ACT)s33(m), nojurisdictionreferredtotheculturalbackgroundoftheoffender.Itiswithinthe legislativeprovisionsallowingforotherfactorstobeconsideredinsentencingthat Indigenousbackgroundhasbeenraised(Fougere2006,4243).4Accordingly, Indigenousmitigatingfactorshavedevelopedthroughthecommonlaw.The situationchangedin2006whenlegislationwasenactedtospecificallycurb considerationofcustomarylawandculturalpractisesinsentencingCommonwealth andNToffences. iii.WhyacomparativeapproachtosentencinginNSWandtheNT? TherehasbeenatendencytofocusonremoteorurbanIndigenouscommunitiesin explainingthesentencingofIndigenousoffenders.Recently,policymakers,the mediaandcommentatorshavehadafascinationwiththesentencingofIndigenous childsexoffendersinremoteIndigenouscommunities(seeBrough2007,22; Ruddock2006,1819;Hawke2006;Douglas2005).Acomparativeapproachallows forabroaderappreciationofthetrendinIndigenoussentencingandthejudicial representationofIndigenouscommunitiesoutsideremotecommunities.
SeeCrimes(SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW)s21A;SentencingAct1995(NT)ss5,6,6A; SentencingAct1991(Vic)s5;SentencingAct1995(WA)ss78;SentencingAct1997(Tas)s80;Criminal Law(SentencingAct)1988(SA),s29A;PenaltiesandSentencesAct1992(Qld)s9. 3 InNewSouthWales,thecourthasdiscretiontotakeintoaccountanyotherobjectiveorsubjective factorthataffectstherelativeseriousnessoftheoffence(Crimes(SentencingProcedure)Act1999 (NSW)s21A).IntheNT,thereare20factorsthatmaybetakenintoaccountaswellasotherrelevant factors(SentencingAct1995(NT)ss5,6,6A). 4 Forexample,courtshavetakenintoaccountcustomarylawunders5(2)(s)oftheSentencingAct (NT),whichstatesthatanyotherrelevantcircumstancemaybetakenintoaccountwhen sentencinganoffender.
2
8
NSWandtheNTgiverisetodivergentstockstoriesaboutIndigenouscommunities andcrime.Ontheonehand,lawyers(andsubsequentlyjudges)relyontradition andlackofcivilisationorunderstandingofnonIndigenouslawandconceptsto explainoffendinginNTcommunities(seeNorthAustralianAboriginalJustice Agency2006,1).ThejudicialapproachesintheNTalignwithwhathasbeen describedascriminologysvulgarisedculturalheritageapproach(seeBroadhurst 1997,413).Certainly,criticshaverecentlyhighlightedthecrudewayinwhich informationaboutcultureissubmittedtothecourts(seeDouglas2005). Ontheotherhand,lawyersinNSWpointtothebreakdownoftraditionalstructures inNSWIndigenouscommunities;theinabilityofcommunitymemberstoconform withaforeignpostcolonialsociety,andasusceptibilitytoitspostcolonialvices suchasalcoholism.ThejudicialapproachesthatdevelopedinNSWresonatewith thecriminologyparadigmsofconflicttheoryandstraintheory. Acomparativeapproachcanrevealadeeperrationaleinsentencingbeyond addressingaparticularcrimeproblem,andtowardsabroadanxietyaboutthe failureofIndigenouscommunitiesexperiencingvariousphasesofinteractionwith thepostcolonialstate.InbothNSWandtheNTthereareappealcourtdecisionson IndigenousfactorsinsentencingthatillustratetheshiftawayfromIndigenous factorsinsentencing. SentencingdevelopmentsinNSWandtheNTfromthe1970stothelate1990s andbeyond Fromthelate1970stothelate1990s,thecourtsrationalisedIndigenousoffending intermsofprevailingcriminologicalcategorisationssuchasstrain,conflictor culturaltheories.Thissectionaddresseshowthesecharacterisationsemergedin NSWandtheNT.Whilethisperiodofhighandincreasingcustodylevelsfor IndigenouspeoplecannotbedescribedasconcomitantwithGarlandspenal welfarism,itnonethelesssawanapproachinsentencingthatrecognisedthat
9
IndigenouspeoplewereintegratedintoIndigenouscommunities.Garlandstresses thatpenalwarfarismischaracterisedbythesearchfordeepsocioeconomiccauses ofcrime. Fortwentyyearsfromthelate1970s,NSWandNTCourtswouldreasonthat communitywasalegitimatefactorinIndigenouspeopleslives,includingthatof offenders.Evidenceofcommunitytieswassubmittedandacceptedtoexplainboth causationandprospectsofrehabilitation.Afactorthatmayexplainthelegitimacy oftheIndigenouscommunityasasentencingfactoristheprevailingpolicyofself determination.Whilethereisnodirectconnection,itmayatleastbeseenasan environmentthatcondonedajudicialapproachthatsawanoffendersmembership ofanIndigenouscommunityasapotentialmitigatingfactorinsentencing. i.DevelopmentsIndigenoussentencingfactorsinNSW:socioeconomicfactors AleadingcasesthatinfluencedthedevelopmentofIndigenousmitigatingfactorsin NSWcommonlaw,wastheHighCourtdecisioninRvNeal(1982).Thiscase concernedaconflictbetweenanonIndigenousofficeroftheDepartmentof AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderAffairsandtheChairmanoftheYarrabah communitycouncil.TheIndigenousoffenderwasconvictedofunlawfulentryand assault(throughspitting).TheHighCourtreducedthesixmonthimprisonment termtotwomonths.Twoofthefourjudges(MurphyandBrennanJJ)heldthatthe paternalisticandracistenvironmentofthereserveshouldmitigatethesentence. TheirHonourswereconcernedtohighlightthetensionsbetweenthepostcolonial systemandtheIndigenouscommunity.TheMagistrate,whosesentencewas reinstatedbytheHighCourt,consideredNealscommunityasfunctional.His Honourstatedthatordinarily,theAboriginalpeopleinthecommunityliveahappy life(citedinRvNeal1982,315perMurphyJ).Nonetheless,theHighCourtaccepted thatwithinthesecommunitieswasracisttensionthatcouldprovokeviolentcrimes againstnonIndigenousstateofficers.
10
ThecaseofRvNealhadwascitedasauthoritybyJusticeWoodoftheNSW SupremeCourtwhenhelaiddowntheFernandoprinciples.Theseinfluential principlesrecognisedthestraincausedinIndigenouscommunitiesbyvirtueof socioeconomicdisadvantage,dispossession,alienationandalcoholism(Omeri 2006,76).InRvFernando(1992),anAboriginalmaninWalgettacommunity describedasbeleagueredwithalcoholismandsocioeconomicdisadvantage stabbedhisdefactopartnertotheneckandlegafterexcessivealcohol consumption.Hewasasemieducatedman,whohadbeenremovedbywelfareand senttoanisolatedproperty,andhehadacriminalhistoryforoffencesrelatedtothe excessiveconsumptionofalcohol.Thiscontextmitigatedhissentencetonine monthsimprisonment,withanadditionalthreeyearparoleperiod. Indeliveringhisjudgment,JusticeWooddevelopedeightprinciplesforsentencing Indigenousoffendersfromdysfunctionalcommunities.JusticeWoodemphasised thatAboriginalityisnotamitigatingfactorbutmaythrowlightonthe circumstancesoftheoffenceand/oroffender(RvFernando1992,62).Justice Wood(1992,62)emphasisedtheneedtosendamessagetothecommunitythat domesticviolencewillnotbetolerated.However,thiswasbalancedwitha contextualappreciationofthecircumstancesoftheoffenderandthelimitedutility ofalongprisonsentence.HisHonour(1992,62)stated,ForAboriginaloffenders whohavecomefromadeprivedbackground,includingcommunitieswithalcohol abuse,orwhoha[ve]littleexperienceofEuropeanways,alengthyimprisonment termmaybeparticularly,evenunduly,harshandconsiderationshouldbeto rehabilitation.
11
ii.DevelopmentsIndigenoussentencingfactorsintheNT:culturalfactors IntheNorthernTerritory,theFernandoprinciplesrelatingtocommunity dysfunctionhavenotbeenappliedascommonlyasinotherstatesandterritories acrossAustralia.Astrongersentencingpatternemergedthataccountedfor Indigenouslaws,culturalexpectationsandpunishment.Theregulatoryimpactof traditionalsocietieswasnotprivilegedoverAngloAustralianlawinthatitdidnot provideadefenceforcriminalliabilitybutcouldbeafactorinsentencing.Inthis limitedwayforaccommodatingIndigenouslaws,judgesviewedIndigenouslaws andcommunityexpectationsasalegitimatefactorbearingonthedefendant. ThetendencytoaccountforculturalfactorsintheNTgainedmomentuminthe 1980swhentraditionalpunishmentwastreatedasamitigatingfactorin sentencing.CourtsfactoredintraditionalpunishmenttoaccountfortheIndigenous communityscondemnationoftheoffence.Itreflectedrecognitionofthecontextof Indigenouspeople.However,itsseedswereplantedinKriewaldtJsjudgmentsin the1950s(Rogers1999;Finnane2006).Anearlycasethatdealtwiththeissueof traditionalpunishmentinreducingasentencewasJackyJackyAnzacJadurinvThe Queen(1982)(seeCaseNote1982).There,theFederalCourtstatedthatto acknowledgethecommunitysretributionisnottocondoneitbuttorecognise certainfactswhichexistonlybyreasonofthatoffendersmembershipofa particulargroup(JadurinvTheQueen1982,429). Afewyearslater,inRvCharlieLimbiariJagamara(Unreported,SupremeCourtof theNorthernTerritory,28May1984;SeeFisher1985),atraditionalWarlpiriman, aged75,wasconvictedofmanslaughterforunintentionallykillingamanwithwhom hiswifewasassociating.Hespearedthemaninordertoteachhimalessonfor bringingshametohimselfandthecommunitybyviolatingthecommunity'slaws relatingtotraditionalmarriage.Theverytraditionalaccused,whohadlivedbyhis communityslawsinWillowraandhadnotencounteredanonIndigenousperson untiltheageof30years,waspunishedforthekilling.Theaccusedwasbanished
12
fromhiscommunity,speared,cut,stabbed,beatwithanullanullaandhitwitha tomahawk. InsentencingCharlieLimbiariJagamara,MuirheadJtookintoaccountthe backgroundoftheoffenderandthetraditionalpunishmenttoreducehissentence merelytotherisingofthecourt(amountingtoamatterofmoments).Justice Muirheadheld, IfIimposeasentenceofimprisonment,andinthiscaseIhavenowishtodo so,theproblemsoftheAboriginalpeoplewouldprobablybeexacerbated, andhiswithdrawalfromAboriginalsocietywouldincreasethedifficulties. Thisistrulyaculturalmatterwhichhasbeentackledenergeticallybythe people.Theaccusedhasalreadysufferedpunishmentsfarmoreseverethan anythatIwouldbeauthorisedtoinflict...(citedinFisher1985). InRvMinor(1992,181),theNTCourtofCriminalAppealheldthatIndigenous punishmentshouldbetakenintoaccountwhereitcanbeshowntobeofpositive benefittothepeaceandwelfareofaparticularcommunity.Itwouldallowforthe communitytoputtheepisodebehindthemandremovefeudsarisingfromthe defendantsactions(RvMinor1992,181perAscheCJcitingthetrialjudgesremarks withapproval).JusticeMildren(1992,193)stated: Inmyopinion,asentencingJudgeisentitledtohaveregardnotonlytothe interestsofthewidercommunity,butalsotothespecialinterestsofthe communityofwhichtherespondentisamember. Finally,inRvJaneMiyatatawuy(1996),anAboriginalwomanstabbedherhusband inthechest,therebypuncturinghislung.Theoffencewasinbreachofa recognisancetobeofgoodbehaviour,whichhadbeenimposedontheoffenderfor anearlierconvictionofassaultuponherhusband.Therewasevidencethata custodialsentencewoulddestroythemarriageintheeyesoftheAboriginal
13
communityandtheoffenderhadalreadybeendealtwithundercustomarylaw.The Courtreleasedtheoffenderonagoodbehaviourbond.MartinCJ(1996,575) stated: Amostsignificantcircumstancebearinguponthesentencewasthatconcerning theresolutionorsettlementofmatterswithintherelevantaboriginal communityandtheintegralrehabilitationoftheoffender. TheseNorthernTerritoryjudgmentsrevealthatnotonlywastheoffender contextualisedwithintheIndigenouscommunitytoexplaintheoffendingand punishment,butthecommunitywasalsoviewedasaneffectivesitefordealingwith crimesandoffenders.Thecommunitysauthoritywasimportantnotonlyfor restorationoftheoffender,butalsorestorationofthecommunity.Thisisa dimensionofpunishmentthatisnotaccountedforinthepenalwelfaremodel, whichisonlyfocusesontheroleofrehabilitatingandreintegratingtheoffender withinmainstreamsocialrelations. Judicialreactions:refocusonmorallycorruptindividualsandcommunities Fromthelate1990s,therewasanotableretreatfromanapproachthatprivileged restorationofoffendersandcommunitiesinjudicialsentencing.5Viewinghopeless attemptstoreducecrimealongwithabroaderideologythatperceivedthefailures ofIndigenouspoliciesjudgesrepositionedtheIndigenousoffenderwithinthe widernonIndigenouscommunityanditsexpectations.Thisstagealignswith Garlandslatemodernturn,whereoffenderswerecondemnedasmorallycorrupt andbeyondreform,andthevictimiselevatedinsentencingconsiderations. However,forIndigenouspeopleitalsowenthandinhandwitharejectionofthe offendersIndigenouscommunityandthevalidityoftheirIndigenousidentity.
Asopposedtocirclesentencing.
14
IntheNorthernTerritory,judgesbegantoviewtraditionalIndigenous communitiesasdysfunctionalandgivingrisetoacrimephenomenon.Theyneeded todispensewithculturalaspectsthatviolatedAngloAustralianlaws.InNSW, judgesregardedIndigenouscommunitiesasnolongerIndigenousenough.Despite thefactthatmanymembersofAboriginalcommunitiesaroundNSWconsider themselvespartofanAboriginalcommunity,judgesviewedthebreakdownof cultureassosevere,Aboriginalfactorswouldhavenobearingontheirlives. However,whereculturewasviewedastraditionalenough,judgestooktheview thatitshouldnthaveabearingontheirlivesandhavemadesentencesharshto conveythismessage.So,inbothjurisdictions,thereisagrowingjudicialviewthat culture,customorhistoricaldisadvantagearenolongerlegitimatecontextsfor explainingoffending. i.NSW:DownplayingtheFernandoprinciples Intheearly21stcentury,theNSWCourtofCriminalAppealconfinedtheapplication oftheFernandoprinciples.CommentatorshavecriticisedtheCourtforpresenting theoffenderorthecommunityasnotAboriginalenough(seeFlynn2005,18; Edney2006).ThejudgesdrawartificiallinesbetweenfullandpartAboriginal peoplethatareinconsistentwiththelegaldefinitionofAboriginality(seeShawv Wolf1999).Also,theAboriginalcommunitymustberemote,itappears,tofitwithin theFernandoprinciples.ThenotabledecisionsofRvCeissman(2001),RvWalter& Thompson(2004)andRvNewman,RvSimpson(2004)willbediscussedbelow. InCeissman(2001),theNSWCourtofCriminalAppealrejectstheapplicationofthe FernandoprinciplestoanAboriginalmanfromadisadvantagedbackground.Wood CJnotesthefactthattheoffenderisnotfromaremotecommunityorevena particularlocalorruralsetting(2001,[30]).HisHonourstatesthatthefactthatthe respondent'sgrandfatherwaspartaboriginalwouldnotattractspecial consideration(2001,[33]).NotonlyisAboriginalitynotenoughtojustifyleniency becauseitwouldcreateaspecialclassofpersonsthatwouldbediscriminatory
15
(2001,[32]);butalsothisoffendersAboriginalitywasnotenoughtoactivate considerationoffactorsleadingtoleniency. Indissent,SimpsonJnotesanumberoffactorsthatinvoketheFernandoprinciples: therespondentgrewupinextremepoverty;hereceivedlittleeducation;his parentsweredrugaddictswithacriminalhistoryandhelivedwithhis grandparents;hewitnessedseriousphysicalviolencebetweenhisparents;his grandmotherdiedattheageof10yearsandhisparentsbothdiedwithinthenext year;whenhewas14hisgrandfatherdied(2001,[55][56]).Theoffenderwas ultimatelyimprisonedtofourandahalfyears(nonparole)fortraffickingcocaine duetotheguidelinesentencesinNSW. Walter&Thompson(2004)wasanappealagainstsentencesimposedontwo Aboriginalmen.Theybothpleadedguiltytorobbery(ofapairofjeans,abaseball cap,mobilephoneand$35)andactualbodilyharm.Theycommittedtheseoffences afterbeingrefusedtoletthementeralocalnightclub,allegedlybecauseofthe colouroftheirskin(Flynn2005,17).Theoffenceswereagainstawhitebystander waitingtoentertheclub.Theoffenderswereundertheinfluenceofalcoholatthe timeoftheoffence. AnissuebeforetheNSWCCAwaswhetherthetrialjudgeerredinapplyingthe FernandoprinciplesbecauseThompsondidnotcomefromadysfunctionalfamily anddidnothaveahistoryofdeprivedsocioeconomiccircumstancesorofalcohol abuse(2004,[58]perGrove,SullyandKirbyJJ).Thiswasdespitetheadmissionof evidencethatThompsonwasadoptedintoawhitefamilyattheageofthree monthsandphysicallyandemotionallyabusedbyhisstepmotherwhocalledhim littleblackbastard.However,thedysfunctionwasinsufficientandtheCrown appealwassuccessful. InthejudgmentsofRvNewman,RvSimpson,threeoffenderspleadedguiltyto enteringintoadwellingwithintenttocommitaseriousoffence.Theoffenderswent
16
intothehouseofa67yearoldvictiminGriffith,NSW.Theoffenderswere intoxicatedatthetimeandlookingformoneytobuyalcohol.JusticeHowie recognisedthattheAboriginaldefendantshadahistoryofdrugandalcoholabuse. However,hisHonourwentontodistinguishtheseAboriginaldefendantsfrom defendantsinaremotecommunitywhoaremorelikelytosuccessfullyattractthe Fernandoprinciples.TheurbansurroundingsofGriffithwerenotsufficiently AboriginalfortheCourtofCriminalAppeal.Edney(2006,8)arguesthatthesecases attempttoconfinethereachofFernandobyfundamentallymisapprehendingthe natureofIndigenousidentityinapostcolonialsociety. ii.NorthernTerritory AlthoughtheFernandoprincipleshavenotbeenreliedonasoftenintheNTasin otherjurisdictions,theprincipleshavenonethelessbeendiminishedinsignificance overthepastdecade.Therehasbeenanincreasingrelianceonthenatureofthe offence.Ratherthanthesentencingprocesspickuponthecommunitycontextto lendleniencytotheoffender,thecommunityscrimeratejustifiestheharsher sentence.ThejudgmentsofAmagulavWhite(1998)andRvWurramarra(1999) revealthatbeinganoffenderinanIndigenouscommunitymayhavebecomean aggravatingfactorinsentencing,andtheoffenderisusedasanexampletostamp outviolence,irrespectiveoffactorsofremoteness,alcoholismanddysfunction. InAmagulavWhite(1998),acasewhereamanonGrooteEylandtwaschargedwith aggravatedassaultonhiswife,theNorthernTerritorySupremeCourtdidnotto applytheFernandoprinciplestomitigatethesentence.Rather,theCourttookthe viewthattheseriousnessoftheoffence(asimilaroffencetothatwhichoccurredin Fernando)warrantedaharshersentence.TheCourtemphasisedtheneedtosend thecorrectmessagetothecommunityandovercomethefairlywidespreadbelief a.CommunitydysfunctionanddownplayingtheFernandoprinciples
17
thatitisacceptableformentobashtheirwivesinsomecircumstances;thisbelief mustbeerased. ThisapproachwasechoedinRvWurramara(1999).ThiswasanothercaseatGroote Eyland,whereamanstabbedhiswifeandneighbour.Inthatcase,theNorthern TerritoryCourtofCriminalAppeal(1999,36)heldthatthefactthatanoffender and/orhisvictimmaycomefromanAboriginalcommunitywhichwasdeprivedor dysfunctionalandwherealcoholabuseandviolentcrimemaybemoreprevalent andmoretoleratedthaninthegeneralcommunity,bynomeansshouldleadtoa lowersentence.TheCourtstressedthatthevictimswereparticularlyvulnerablein deprivedanddysfunctionalcommunities,andareentitledtolooktothecourtsfor protection.Offencesofseriousviolencecallforcondignpunishment.Finally,The courtshavebeenconcernedtosendthecorrectmessagetoallconcerned,that isthatAboriginalwomen,childrenandtheweakwillbeprotectedagainstpersonal violence(1999,26). IntheNorthernTerritorytherehasbeenashiftingemphasisinconsiderationsof traditionalpunishmentinsentencing.Whiletraditionalpunishmentcontinuesto reduceasentence,itisnotsomuchbecauseofitsimportanceforrestoring communityrelations,butratherbecauseofthedoctrinalprincipleofdouble jeopardy.Inrecentcases,suchasRvRiley(2006)thecourtshavereluctantly providedtraditionalpunishmentasamitigatingfactorduetodoublejeopardy alone. Indicativeofthistrendisthehesitanceingrantingbailwherethereisastrong possibilitythattheoffenderwillfreelyreturntothecommunitytoreceive traditionalpunishment:Barnes(1997)andAnthony(2004).InBarnes(1997),BaileyJ refusedtograntthedefendantbailthatwouldallowhimtoreturntohiscommunity tobepunishedunderIndigenouslaw.HisHonoursreasoningwasthattheCourt b.Traditionalpunishment
18
cannotfacilitatewhatwouldamounttoacrimeanditwouldnotbeinthe defendant'sinteresttofacilitatehisreleasetobeunlawfullystabbedandbashed beforesubmittingtosuchsentenceasmaybeimposedaccordingtolaw(see McGrath19971998).InAnthony(2004),MartinCJdidnotallowtheapplicantto returntohiscommunityofLajamanubecausetheCourtcannotcondone traditionalpunishmentasitwasanunlawfulactundertheAngloAustralianlaw.6 ThismayindicateamovetowardsprosecutingIndigenouspeopleresponsiblefor administeringtraditionalpunishment,despiteconsentonthepartofthose involved. Since2003therehavebeentwomajorcaseswherefirstinstancejudgmentshave allowedpromisedmarriageasamitigatingfactorinstatutoryrapeoffences:Halesv Jamilmira(2003)andTheQueenvGJ(2005).Thesecontroversialdecisionswere overturnedonappeal.Theappealdecisionshaveemphasisedboththeneedto punishtheoffenderandsendamessagetothecommunitythatpromisedmarriage wasnotamitigatingfactorinstatutoryrape.Partofthewillingnessofthefirst instancecourtstoallowareductioninsentencesforpromisedmarriagecasesisthat until2003,underNorthernTerritorylegislation,itwaslawfultohavesexwitha minorifthesocalledoffenderwasmarriedtothevictimundercustomarylaw.7 Furthermore,until2003sexwithunderagedpromisedbrides(althoughoccurring formanyyears)wasnotprosecuted(HalesvJamilmira2003perMildrenJ). Nonetheless,theappealcourts(includinginthefirstcaseofitskindHalesv Jamilmira)havebeenunwillingtoconsiderpromisedmarriageasaculturalcontext formitigatingasentence.
(at[23],[25]) S.129(1)CriminalCode,NorthernTerritoryreadwiththedefinitionofunlawfullyins.126andthe definitionofhusbandandwifeins1.ThiswasnotedinGJ(2005,[32]),HalesvJamilmira(2003,[50]). AsaresultofamendmentstotheCodepassedin2004,itisnolongernecessaryfortheprosecution to prove that the intercourse was "unlawful" in this sense. Further, the maximum penalty for statutoryrapehasbeenincreasedfromsevento16yearsimprisonment.
7 6
c.Customarylawandpromisedmarriages
19
PromisedmarriageinNorthernTerritorycommunitieshasbeenregardedasa featureofcustomarylawintraditionalAboriginalsociety.Itisstillconsideredby somecommunitymemberstodayasessentialtothecontinuationofAboriginal cultureandceremonies(Kimm2004,62),andtothemaintenanceoftraditional economies(2004,66),althougharrangementsvaryamongcommunities.Generally, promisedbridesarearewardforinitiates.Girlsfromappropriateskingroupswere promisedtomenwhohadundergoneinitiationandprovidedfoodorpaymentto thepromisedwifesfamily.Assuchitsafeguardedthetransmissionofthelaw (2004,62).Younggirlsmaybeseenasthefoundationofsociety(2004,66). Alternatively,girlsareforcedinthearrangementandharshlypunishediftheyfailed intheirobligationsofmarryingolderhusbandswithoutcomplaintsometimesbya violentdeath(2004,62). Sexualrelationswithgirlsthathadreachedpubertywereallowedinmany Indigenouscultureswithcustomarymarriage,butsexualassaultwascondemned.In thecasesdiscussedbelow,theoffenderswereconvictedofstatutoryrapeontheir promisedwives.Theoffendershadweretraditionalmenandcustodiansof traditionalknowledge,withlittlecontactwiththenonIndigenoussystem(see HalvesvJamilmira2003,[13]perMartinCJ).Theywereawarethatthesexual intercoursewasnotrequiredundercustomarylawandinsomeinstancesthatit amountedtoanoffencebothundertheIndigenousandnonIndigenouslaws.Itwas alsoanoffenceintheeyesofthecommunity.Aftertheoffences,someofthe communitiessoughttoimposetraditionalpunishmentontheoffenders.Whilethe offendersacceptedthewrongfulnessoftheact,theydidnotconsidertheoffenceas seriousasitmayhavebeenifthegirlswerenotpromisedtothem. InHalesvJamilmira(2003),a49yearoldIndigenousmanfromManingrida,Jackie PascoeJamilmira,wasconvictedforstatutoryrapewitha15yearoldgirlwhowas hispromisedwife.Hewasalsoconvictedofdischargingafirearmlikelytoendanger others,whichwasseenasathreattothe15yearoldgirlandherfriends.Onappeal, Jamilmirasubmittedthathissentenceshouldbemitigatedonthegroundsthatit
20
wascustomarypracticetohavesexwithapromisedwifeirrespectiveofherage. Initiallythesentencewas15months,thenonappealtotheNorthernTerritory SupremeCourt,24hours. OnappealtotheNorthernTerritoryCourtofCriminalAppeal,themajoritywas unwillingtofindthattheactwasnecessitatedbycustomarypractice.Ittherefore heldthatthe24hoursentencewasmanifestlyinadequate.TheCourtallowedthe Crownappeal.However,theCourtwasstillconstrainedbythefactthatNorthern Territorylegislationatthetimeallowedunderagedsexwithincustomarymarriage, andtraditionalpunishmentwouldbeinflicted.TheCourtthereforehandeddowna sentenceof12monthsthatcouldbesuspendedafteronemonthhadbeenserved. TheCourtdidnotrelyoncustomarylawfactorsinmitigatingthesentencebecause therewasnoevidencethattheoffenderwasrequiredtodowhathedidevenifthe offenderbelieveditgavehimcertainrights(seeDouglas2005,189).TheCourtheld thatitsrolewastoprotectAboriginalwomen,deterothersinthecommunityand servethepublicinterest(HalesvJamilmira2003,[34]perMartinCJ).TheCourtalso soughttopositiontheIndigenousoffenderwithinthecontextofthebroader Territorycommunity.MartinCJ(2003,[26])recognisesthatfordecadestheaverage offirsttimemothersatManingridawas15years,however,theperspectiveofthe widerTerritorycommunity[ofthese]breachesisagoodreasontoreinforce theoperationsofthelaw.HisHonourgoesontonotethattheprotectionofgirls undertheageof16isavalueofthewidercommunitywhichprevailsoverthatof thissectionoftheAboriginalcommunity(2003,[26]). InTheQueenvGJ(2005),a55yearoldmanwithnopriorconvictionswascharged withunlawfulassaultandstatutoryrapeofa14yearoldgirlintheYarralin communitywhowashispromisedwife.Theaccusedlivedaccordingtohis Aboriginallaws,withlittlecontactwiththenonIndigenoussociety.Englishwashis fourthlanguageandhadnotmetanonIndigenouspersonuntiltheageof30.The circumstancesoftheoffencewerethatthevictimsgrandmotherhadsentthe
21
victimtobewiththeaccused(herpromisedhusband),asshebelieveditwasthe victimsobligationundercustomarylaw.Theaccusedsuspectedthatthevictimwas havingasexualrelationshipwithayoungboy,andwenttothevictimarmedwith twoboomerangs(2005,[11][12]).Theaccusedhitherandhadanalintercoursewith her(2005,[17]).FromtheoutsetGJassertedthathehadactedwithinhis traditionalrights(2005,[12]).Atfirstinstance,MartinCJimposedasentenceof24 months(5monthsforaggravatedassault,19monthsforintercoursewithaminor). Thesentencecouldbesuspendedafterservingonemonthsimprisonment. TheNorthernTerritoryCourtofAppealallowedtheCrownsappealandrejected traditionallawasamitigatingfactor.Thesentencewasincreasedtothreeyearsand 11months,whichcouldbesuspendedafterserving18months.Thefocusofthe Courtonthevictim.ThiswasprojectedinRileyJsobservation.Whentaking submissionsfromtherespondentabouttherighttopreservecustomandtradition, hisHonourasked,Butwhataboutthevictim?Hasanyoneaskedherifshewantsto preservecustomsandtraditions?(citedinBrown2007,14). DeterrencetoIndigenouspeopleinthecommunitywhomayseektofollow traditionallawsinthiswaywasalsoasignificantfactorinthesentencingofGJ. MildrenandSouthwoodJJstressedtheneedtoteachpeopleinGJscommunityto betterunderstandtheseimportantprinciplesofthecriminallaw(TheQueenvGJ 2005,[37],[67]).SouthwoodJ(2005,[73])stated: Wheresentencingandthemannerofsentencinghasthepurposeof educatingboththeoffenderandthecommunitycaremustbetakento ensurethatanoffenderisnotseentobedoublypunishedandisnotmadeto shoulderanunfairburdenofcommunityeducation. TheaccusedsoughtleavetoappealthedecisiontotheHighCourtofAustralia. However,suchleavewasrefused(GJvTheQueen[2006]HCATrans252(19May 2006)).Assuch,thecourtshaveensuredthatpromisedmarriageisnotacontext
22
thatmitigatestheseverityofthecrime.Onefactoristheelevationofthevictim,as DavidGarlandslatemodernframeworkreveals.However,Garlandssuggestion thattheoffenderisdecontextualisedisnotrealised.IntheNorthernTerritory,there isregardtotheIndigenousoffenderscontextbutforthepurposesof condemnationratherthanacceptanceorreintegration. 6.Somedevelopmentsinsentencinglegislation OnefactorthatinfluencedtheharshersentencinginTheQueenvGJwasa legislativeamendmentthatrequiredsexoffendertoservealongercustodial sentencethanJamilmira,aswellastheillegalisationofunderagesexwithin customarymarriage.8AnothermajorpolicychangeintheNorthernTerritorywas thehigherburdenplacedonthedefendantinadmittingculturalorcustomary evidenceundertheSentencingAmendment(AboriginalCustomaryLaw)Act2004 (NT).9However,thisdidnotprovideanybarriersforthedefencelawyersinGJ. However,oneoftheclearestindications,thatthesentencingIndigenousoffenders hasnotjustbeenaboutharsherpenalties,whichGarlandsapproachwouldsuggest, butratheraboutdiminishingtheroleofcommunitycontextinsentencingisthe NorthernTerritoryNationalEmergencyAct2007s91.10ThisCommonwealth statutoryprovision(whichappliestotheNorthernTerritoryandoverridesany conflictingTerritorylaw)excludestheconsiderationofcustomarylaworcultural practiceswhensentencingforNorthernTerritoryoffences.Theprovisionmeans thatthesefactorscanneitherserveasaggravatingnormitigatingfactors.Thus,the purposeisnotonlytomakesentencesharsher,buttoremovetheroleof Indigenousfactors.
Themaximumpenaltyforstatutoryrapeincreasedfromsevento16years. Thisinserteds104AintotheSentencingAct.Theintentionoftheamendmentwastopreventthe introduction by nonIndigenous lawyers in the main of information to the courts that was ill informedorincorrectintermsofcustomarylaw(Calma2007,84). 10 ThereisasimilarprovisionthatappliestoCommonwealthoffencesundertheBailandSentencing Act2006(Cth).
9 8
23
Indigenousoffendersaretobeconceivedonlyasamemberofthebroadernon Indigenouscommunity.PrimeMinisterHoward(2006)explainedthatthesereforms weremeanttoovercomethecourtsmisguidednotionofAboriginallawor customarylaw,ratherthanAngloAustralianlaw.11Thelawservestooverridethe roleofIndigenouscommunitiesinsentencingontheapprehensionthatthese communitiesaredysfunctionalandtheredecliningrole(asevidencedbytheinter generationalconflict)andsuchdeclineshouldbehastenedtoconformwithnon Indigenouspostcolonialsociety. 7.Conclusion DavidGarlandsthesisintheCultureofControl(2001,12)resonateswiththe sentencingofIndigenousoffendersintermsofidentifyingthereemergenceofthe urgetopunish,toallocateblame,condemnandexcludeandtoavengethevictim andaboveallprotectthepublic.However,judicialapproachestoIndigenous offendersisnotsimplypartofaconceptionofthefailedwelfarestateandpenal welfarism(seeGarland2001,20).ItisalsopartofaviewthatIndigenous communitiesaredysfunctionalandgiverisetomorallycorruptindividuals. Indigenouscommunitiesareconceivedasdysfunctionaleitherbecausetheirculture hasbrokendownorbecausetheircultureistooheavilyexpressed.However,judges seektoprotecttheIndigenouscommunityatthesametimethattheycondemnthe Indigenouscommunityforgivingrisetoacrimeproblem.Thecommunityneedsto beprotectedfromitself.Sentencesaretodetertheindividualbutalsotodeterthe Indigenouscommunity.Crimecontrolthereforegoeshandinhandwithpost colonialcontrolbeyondtherationalitiesoflatemodernurgestopunish.
ThereformsweresupportedinFebruary2008andbythecurrentFederalgovernment: SpokespersonforJennyMacklin,IndigenousAffairsMinister,inKarvelasandKearney(2007).
11
24
References AustralianBureauofStatistics2007,PrisonersinAustralia,ABSCatNo.4517.0. AustralianLawReformCommission1986,TheRecognitionofAboriginalCustomary Lawshttp://austlii.law.uts.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/1986/3/2.html Broadhurst,Roderic1987,ImprisonmentoftheAborigineinWesternAustralia, 19571985,inHazlehurst,KayleenM(ed)Ivoryscales:BlackAustraliansandthe law,UniversityofNSWPress,Sydney. HarryBlagg(2008),ColonialCritiqueandCriticalCriminology:IssuesinAboriginal LawandAboriginalViolenceinThaliaAnthonyandChrisCunneen(eds),The CriticalCriminologyCompanion,HawkinsPress,Sydney. Brough,Mal2007,SecondReadingSpeech,Families,CommunityServicesand IndigenousAffairsandOtherLegislationAmendment(NorthernTerritoryNational EmergencyResponseandOtherMeasures)Bill2007,HouseofRepresentatives Hansard,ParliamentoftheCommonwealthofAustralia,7August,2007,22. Brown,Ken2007,Customarylaw:sexwithunderagepromisedwives,32(1) AlternativeLawJournal11. Calma,Tom2007,TheIntegrationofCustomaryLawintotheAustralianLegal System25(1)LawinContext74. Casenote,1982,JackieAnzacJadurinvtheQueen,AboriginalLawBulletin, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AboriginalLB/1982/69.html Cunneen,Chris2001,Conflict,PoliticsandCrime:AboriginalCommunitiesandthe PoliceAllen&Unwin,Sydney.
25
Douglas,Heather1998,TheCulturalSpecificityofEvidence:TheCurrentScopeand RelevanceoftheAnungaGuidelines21(1)UNSWLawJournal27. Douglas,Heather2005,Sheknewwhatwasexpectedofher:thewhitelegal systemsencounterwithtraditionalmarriage13FeministLegalStudies181 Garland,David2001,TheCultureofControl:CrimeandSocialOrderin ContemporarySociety,OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford. Hawke,Sarah2006,Childrapistsgivenincreasedsentences,PMProgram, AustralianBroadcastingCorporation,7June, http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2006/s1657758.htm Hogg,Russell2001,Penaltyandmodesofregulatingindigenouspeoplein Australia3(3),PunishmentandSociety355. Howard,John(2006),SouthernCrossRadio,19May. Edney,Richard2006,TheretreatfromFernandoandtheerasureofIndigenous identityinsentencing6(17)IndigenousLawBulletin8. FinnaneMark(2006),Thetidesofcustomarylaw,ANZLHEJournal, http://www.anzlhsejournal.auckland.ac.nz/pdfs_2006/Keynote_1_Finnane.pdf Fisher,Mary1985,CasenoteonRvCharlieLimbiariJagamara,8AboriginalLaw Bulletin11. Flynn,Martin2005,NotAboriginalenoughforparticularconsiderationwhen sentencing6(9)IndigenousLawBulletin15.
26
Fougere,Christine2006,Customarylawandinternationalhumanrights:The QueenvGJLawSocietyJournalAugust,42. Joudo,JacquelineandCurnow,Jane2008,DeathsincustodyinAustralia:National DeathsinCustodyProgramannualreport2006,ResearchandPublicPolicySeries, No.85,AustralianInstituteofCriminology,Canberra. Karvelas,PatriciaandKearney,Simon2007,LaboreyesexpandedNTscheme,The Australian,1December, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22851342601,00.html Kimm,Joan2004,AFatalConjunction:TwoLawsTwoCultures,FederationPress, Sydney. LawReformCommissionofWesternAustralia2005,AboriginalCustomaryLaw: TheinteractionofWesternAustralianlawwithAboriginallawandculture,Final Report,ProjectNo.94. Lofgren,N1997,AboriginalCommunityParticipationinSentencing21(3)Criminal LawJournal127. McGrath,S(19971998),Traditionalpunishmentprevented:BarnesvTheQueen 4(8)IndigenousLawBulletin18. Melossi,Dario2000,ChangingRepresentationsoftheCriminal,inGarland,David andSparks,Richard(eds),CriminologyandSocialTheory,OxfordUniversityPress, Oxford. NewSouthWalesLawReformCommission2000,Sentencing:Aboriginal Offenders,ReportNo.96,http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/R96CHP2
27
NorthernTerritoryLawReformCommittee2003,ReportoftheCommitteeof InquiryintoAboriginalCustomaryLaw, http://www.nt.gov.au/justice/docs/lawmake/ntlrc_final_report.pdf NorthAustralianAboriginalJusticeAgency,SubmissiontotheSenateLegaland ConstitutionalAffairsCommitteeInquiryintotheCrimeAmendment(Bailand Sentencing)Bill2006,No.12 http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/legcon_ctte/completed_inquiries/2004 07/crimes_bail_sentencing/submissions/sub12.pdf Rogers,Nannette1999,AboriginallawandsentencingintheNorthernTerritory SupremeCourtatAliceSprings19861995PhDThesis,UniversityofSydney RoyalCommissionIntoAboriginalDeathsInCustody1991,NationalReport,Vol.2. Ruddock,Philip2006,SecondReadingSpeech,CrimesAmendment(Bailand Sentencing)Bill2006,HouseofRepresentativesHansard,Parliamentofthe CommonwealthofAustralia,28November,2006,1819. Omeri,Sheryn2006,ConsideringAboriginality,LawSocietyJournalAugust74. Cases AmagulavWhite[1998]NTSC61 GJvTheQueen[2006]HCATrans252(19May2006) JackyAnzacJadurinvTheQueen(1982),44ALR424 HalesvJamilmira(2003)13NTLR14 MunungurrvTheQueen(1994)4NTLR63 Shaw&AnorvWolf&Ors(1999)163ALR205 RvAnthony[2004]NTSC5,142ACrimR440 RvBarnes[1997]NTSC123
28
RvCeissman[2001]NSWCCA73 RvCharlieLimbiariJagamara(Unreported,SupremeCourtoftheNorthernTerritory, 28May1984) RvDaniel[1998]1QdR499 RvFernando(1992)76ACrimR58 RvJaneMiyatatawuy(1996)87ACrimR574 RvJurisic45NSWLR209 RvMinor(1992)105FLR180 RvLane,HuntandSmith(1980)SCCNos1617,1819,2021(Unreported,Northern TerritorySupremeCourt) RvNeal(1982)149CLR305 RvNewman,RvSimpson[2004]NSWCCA102 RvRiley[2006]NTCCA10 RvStott(1977)SCCNo83(Unreported,NorthernTerritorySupremeCourt) RvWalter&Thompson[2004]NSWCCA304 RvWurramara1999NTSCCA45 RobertsonvFlood(1992)111FLR177 ShannonvTheQueen(1991)57SASR14 StevensvCentrelink[2003]NTSC16 TheQueenvGJ[2005]NTCCA20 Legislation BailandSentencingAct2006(Cth) Crimes(Sentencing)Act2005(ACT) Crime(SentencingandBail)AmendmentAct2006(Cth) Crimes(SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW) CrimesAct1900(NSW) CriminalCode(NT) CriminalLaw(SentencingAct)1988(SA) NorthernTerritoryNationalEmergencyResponseAct2007(Cth).
29
PenaltiesandSentencesAct1992(Qld) SentencingAct1995(NT) SentencingAct1997(Tas) SentencingAct1991(Vic) SentencingAct1995(WA)
30
AcriticalperspectiveonMentalHealthDisordersandCognitive DisabilityintheCriminalJusticeSystem
EileenBaldry,LeanneDowse,PhillipSnoyman,MelissaClarenceandIan Webster SchoolofSocialSciencesandInternationalStudies UniversityofNewSouthWales e.baldry@unsw.edu.au Introduction Thegrowingpresenceofpeoplewithmentalhealthdisordersandcognitive disabilities(MHD&CD)incriminaljusticesystems(CJS)worldwideisofpublic concern.Evidencepointstowidespreadoverrepresentationofsuchpeoplein prisonerpopulationsandmoregenerallyinthecriminaljusticesystem,bothas victimsandoffenders(Belcher1988,Aderibigbe1996,Harrington1999,Reed& Lyne2000).Thefinancial,personal,socialandhumancostsoflargenumbersof peoplewithMHD&CDbeinghousedintheCJSareenormous. Conceptualisingthecomplexsocialprocesses,systemicresponsesandindividual impairmentexperienceswhichcombinetoheightenthevulnerabilityofpeoplewith MHD&CDtocomingintocontactwiththeCJSandtotheirmultifacetedtrajectories within,outandoftenbackintothesesystemsisnowmorecriticalthanever.There iscurrentlyincongruencebetweensystemsdealingwithsuchpeople,andthe absenceofshareddatameansthatpathwaysthroughthesesystemscannotbe identified.Thusindividualandsysteminteractionsareobscure.Onestartingpointis tomappathwaysthroughthesystemsthemselvesandtodevelopapictureoftheir keyinterconnectionsanddisjunctionsforthisgroupofpeople.Undertakingsucha projectintroducesarangeofdilemmaswhichcrossboundariesfromthetheoretical, methodological,ethicalandpolitical,totheinstitutionalandpersonal.
31
ThispaperreportsontheearlyinsightsemergingfromanAustralianstudy,whichis mappingthecriminaljusticeandhumanservicetrajectoriesofacohortofpeople withMHD&CDwhohavebeeninprison.Thestudycombinesextantadministrative datafromarangeofcriminaljustice,healthandhumanserviceagenciestocreatea linkeddatasetofrecordsrelevanttoindividualsinthecohort.Importantlyitaimsto movethinkingintheareabeyondtraditionallysiloeddisciplinaryapproachesseenin studiesgroundedincriminologyorimpairmenttotakeaccountofinsightsfromthe newlyemergingdisciplineofCriticalCriminologyandtointegratethesewith similarlyinnovativeperspectivesdevelopingwithinthedisciplineofCritical DisabilityStudies.Bringingtheseparallelperspectivestogetheropensupanew spacewithinwhichtoreconceptualisethecomplexmatrixofconcernsrelevantto anintenselymarginalisedgroupofpeoplewithdisabilitiesandwhichsuggestsan interconnectedandfluidcontinuumencompassingsocial,systemic,community, institutionalandcriminologicalprocesseswithindividualexperiencesof impairment,disabilityandsocialdiscrimination,disadvantageandexclusion. TheoreticalFrameworksandKeyConcepts InaddressingtheissuescentraltotheexperienceofpeoplewithMHD&CDinthe CJSthisstudyexploresthelinksbetweensocialexclusion,impairmentanddisability andthesystemicimpactsofcriminaljusticeandhumanserviceparadigms. UnderpinningthisapproacharetheparallelandemergingdisciplinesofCritical CriminologyandCriticalDisabilityStudies.CriticalCriminologyseekstolocateand understandthereasonsforcrimewithinwiderstructuralandinstitutionalcontexts. Thesecontextsmaybeconceivedofinvariousformsincludingsocioeconomic, classbased,cultural,racialisedandgendered(AnthonyandCunneen2008:1).It seescrimeandsocialresponsestoitasdeeplypolitical,culturalandcritically challengeablematters.DisabilityStudiesisbasedonthepremisethatthe disadvantagetypicallyexperiencedbythosewhoaredisabledreflectsprimarilythe waysocietydefinesandrespondstocertaintypesof'difference'.Identifiedwiththis perspectiveisthesocialmodelofdisabilitywhichmakesacrucialdistinction
32
betweenimpairmentasaconditionoftheindividualbodyormind(suchas experiencingschizophrenia,intellectualdisabilityorbraininjury),anddisability, whichisthesocialexperienceflowingfromthepresenceofimpairment,including therangeofbarrierstofullparticipationthatexistinasocietywhichprivileges normalcyandmarginalizesdifference(OliverandBarnes1998).Thisframeof analysischallengestheviewofdisabilityasanindividualdeficitordefectthatcanbe remediedsolelythroughmedicalinterventionorrehabilitationby"experts"and amelioratedbyserviceproviders.Rather,itexploresthesocial,political,cultural, andeconomicfactorsthatdefinedisabilityandshapepersonalandcollective responsestodifference. Inconceptualisingtheintersectionsofthesocial,systemicandindividual dimensionswhichoperatetostructuretheexperienceofpeoplewithMHD&CDin relationtocriminaljustice,thecriticaldisabilityperspectiveprovidestwofurther importantinsightsthattheimpairedbodyormindcannotbesimplyrepresented asapassiverecipientofsocialforces(PatersonandHughes1999)andthatdisability mustbemovedfromitsperipheralstatusintheanalysisofthedifference,toa centralposition,retheorizingitasakeyorganizingprincipleintheconstructionof anindividualsidentity(Erevelles2000).Criticalcriminologymakesanattemptto takeaccountofrace,andclassand(lesssuccessfully)genderinasimilarwaywhile currentlyrelegatingdisabilitytothestatusofanadditionaldimensionofsocial disadvantage.Thetheoreticalorientationofthisstudybringsdisabilitytothecentre oftheanalysisandundertakestocombinethesetwoperspectives,suggestinga newwaytomakevisiblethematerialstructures,ideologicaldiscoursesand experiencesofimpairmentthatfundamentallyanddifferentiallystructurean individualslifecourseandexperienceofsocialinclusion/exclusion. Theconceptofsocialexclusionisausefuloneinlinkingthediscoursesofcritical criminologyandcriticaldisabilitystudiesandprovidesausefullensthroughwhich toexaminethecomplexmatrixesofexclusionandmarginalisationexperiencedby peoplewithMHD&CDandtheirinteractionswithsocialsystems.Thesocial
33
exclusionperspectivecombinesaconsiderationofanindividualsriskandprotective factorswithsystemandpolicydrivenproblemsandaccountsforwhatcanhappen whenpeopleexperienceacombinationoflinkedproblemssuchasunemployment, poorskills,lowincomes,unstablehousing,highcrimeenvironments,poorhealth andfamilybreakdown(SocialExclusionUnit2001).Lifecoursestudiesdemonstrate thatchildhoodfactorsarenotreliablypredictiveofcriminaljusticesystem involvement,norareadolescentandadultpersonalriskfactors(Bynner2000).Both theseperspectivesthoughcanbeoverlyindividuallyfocussedattheexpenseofa criticalanalysisofthesystemicpolicydriversandthisstudyseekstoaddressthat tendency.Thissuggeststheneedforaniterativeprocessofidentifying, understandingandremovingobstaclestoresourcescombinedwithadeeper analysisofthedynamicsofbothimpairmentanddisability.Thewaythosedynamics structureanindividualsinteractionswiththesystemsneedtoberecognisedanda reflectiveanalysisconductedofthewaythesysteminitiallystructuresthose dynamics.ThisapproachiscrucialtounderstandingpeoplewithMHD&CDs positioninginthesocialworldandindevelopingstrategiestoassistthemtostay outoftheCJS. ThematicFieldsintheAnalysis SocialExclusionandDisability Peoplewithdisabilitiesareoneofthemostsociallyexcludedgroupsinsociety. Whatmakessocialexclusionsoperniciousfordisabledpeopleisthepowerfulwayin whichbarriersinteracttoperpetuateexclusion(Howard1999).Forexamplepoor educationcanlimittheextentandopportunityforemploymentandtherebyrestrict accesstomoneyandhousing.Suchexclusioncan,whencombinedwithother disadvantages,funnelpeopleintothecriminaljusticesystem.Arecentstudyof levelsofsocialandpsychologicaldisadvantageamongasampleofNSWCourt defendantsconductedbytheNSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearchfound thatninepercentofthesamplehadnotcontinuedschoolbeyondyearseven,thirty
34
percenthadnotcontinuedbeyondyear10,nineteenpercentreporteddifficulties learningnewthingsandtwentyonepercentreportedtheyhaddifficultiesreading andwriting(JonesandCrawford2007:3).Theseratesarefarabovethenational averages(AustralianBureauofStatistics2005).Thisfunnellingismoreevidentin theprisonsystemwheredisadvantageisevenmoreconcentrated. Thisissueissalientforpeoplewithmentalhealthdisorders,particularlythosefrom lowersocioeconomicgroups,giventhattheseillnessestendtoemergeandbe diagnosedinlateadolescence/earlyadulthood(KimCohenetal.2003).Giventhe usuallylongleadtimefromthedevelopmentofsymptomstothepointofdiagnosis andpresumablyintervention,itisverylikelythatyoungpeoplewithemerging mentalhealthissueswhosefamilieshavelittleinthewayofsocialandeconomic capitaltosupportthem,arelikelytohaveexperienceddisruptedschooling.This setsinmotionachainofevents/exclusionsthatintensifytheirdisadvantage.For peoplewithcognitivedisabilitiesaccesstoeducationalopportunitiesisalso compromised.InNSWthe1996McCraereportfoundthatonly30%ofschoolaged childrenandadolescentswithdisabilitiesinNSWattendedGovernmentprimary andsecondaryschoolsandthatmorethanhalfofthesechildrenandadolescents werenotreceivingeducationintheclassroomalongsidetheirpeerswithout disabilities(McRae1996:iv).ThesubsequentVinsonreportsof2002concludedthat manyteachersstruggletogivestudentswithdisabilitiesenoughopportunitiesin theclassroom(Vinson2002:iii). Theexampleofeducationaldisadvantagehighlightstheperniciousnatureofsocial exclusionforpeoplewithMHD&CD.Thedisadvantageouseffectsofpooreducation flowontoemployment,particularlyinasocietywhichvaluesliteracyandnumeracy aboveotherattributesandwhichisrapidlytransformingfromaproductiontoa serviceandtechnologyeconomy(Dowse2007).Inexaminingtheimpactof educationaldisadvantageanditsrelationshiptocriminaljusticetrajectoriesthe impactofneoliberalismandneoconservatismonthelivesofdisabledpeoplealso becomesafeature,demonstratingthatanyconceptualisationofcriminaljustice
35
trajectoriesmusttakeaccountofprocesseswhichextendfrombroadsocialand politicalprocessestothespecificindividualexperience. PovertyhasbeennotedbyHughes(2002:580),ashavingalwaysbeenthekey factorinthemodernconstitutionofdisability.Inrelationtopovertysuchproblems canincludedebt,housingandwelfarebenefits,formingaclusterofdifficultiesthat havethetendencytodevelopintofurtherproblemspirals.Thesocialexclusionary locationofpeoplewithdisabilities,oftenboundupwiththevicissitudesand experiencesofpoverty,leavesthemproneandvulnerabletoexperiencingarange ofjusticiableproblems,thatis,thosethathaveapotentialrecoursethroughlawor thelegalsystem(OGradyetal.2004:261).Theseexamplesalsopointtothecentral importanceofintegratingananalysisofbothsocialandcriminaljusticepolicyin redressingthecomplexdynamicsofdisability,criminaljusticeandhumanservices. ConceptualisingthedisabilityexperienceforpeoplewithMHD&CD Thedifferentiationofimpairment(thebodilyexperience)anddisability(thesocial experiencewhichensuesfromhavingabodily,sensory,cognitiveorpsychic constitutionwhichdeviatesfromsocallednormal)isoneofthecentraldebates exercisingthinkersincontemporarydisabilitystudies.Theargumentscentreonthe politicalexpediencyofrecognising/acceptingaunitarydisabilityexperiencethat connectswiththesocialexperienceofmarginalisationandoppressionechoingthe phenomenaofracismandsexism.Thisfailuretodistinguishbetweendifferent impairmentanddisabilitytrajectoriesresultsinthemarginalisingofsome impairmentgroupsandshoresupthetraditionofunderstandingdisabilityonlyina staticsense(Burkhardt2000). Theconnectionbetweenimpairmentanddisabilityisacriticalpointofdistinction here.Someonemayexperienceasevereimpairment(e.g.mentalillnesssuchas schizophrenia)butnotexperienceitasseverelydisablingduetoarangeoffactors suchashavingthesocialandfinancialsupportoftheirfamily,whileanotherperson
36
mayhavewhatmightbediagnosticallyonlyamildimpairmentbutexperience extremelydisablingconsequences,againduetoarangeoffactorssuchas experiencingpovertyandabuse.Clearlyacriticalinterveningfactorinthis relationshipiscommunitysupportswhichalleviateorattenuatetheimpactof impairment. Asnapshotofthestudycohort Thecohortbeinginvestigatedinthecurrentstudyconsistsof2093peoplewhohave beeninprison.Thesepersons,some2,700,aredrawnfromtwodatacollections the2001NSWPrisonerHealthSurveyandtheNSWStatewideDisabilityServices ofCorrectiveServicesclientdatabase.Thecohortiscomprisedof28%witha mentalhealthdisorder,(definedashavinganyanxiety,affectiveorpsychiatric probleminthepast12months),34%withanintellectualdisabilityand38%a borderlineintellectualdisability.28%areAboriginalorTorresStraightIslanders (ATSI).ThemajorityofATSIpeopleareinthecohortduetointellectualdisability (36%haveanIQ<70and43%areborderlineID),whilsttheremaining21%havea mentalhealthdisorder.Eightyeightpercentofthecohortismale.Females comprise26%ofthementalhealthdisordercomponent,whilstonly7%oftheID cohortand5%oftheborderlineIDarefemale.Thisisnotnecessarilyrepresentative oftheratesofthesedifferentgroupsinthesystemitselfbutratheraconsequence ofthemethodologyforestablishingthecohortofpeoplewithintellectualdisability whichhashadtorelyentirelyontheidentificationofthesefactorsintheprison population.ThestudyisnotintendedtoberepresentativeofthosewithMHD&CD intheCJSbutrathertoprovideameansbywhichtoexaminethepathwayspeople whoareknowntohaveMD&CDtakein,outandwithinthesocialandjustice systems. Thenatureofthedisabilityexperienceinrelationtocriminaljustice
37
Overallitispossibletoclaimthatdisabledpeoplearemorevulnerablethanothers toexperiencingawiderangeofjusticiableproblems,manyofwhichhaveclearand definedlinkstoissuesofsocialexclusion.Disabilityisamongstthemostinfluential predictorsofproblemexperienceinthejusticesystemmoreinfluentialthanother significantpredictorssuchasfamilytype,ageandeconomiccircumstance(OGrady etal.2004:265).Furtherevidenceindicatesthattheexperienceofmultiple problemsinsomecasesindicatesaspiralofjusticiableproblemswherethe experiencesofoneproblemthatisunsolvedthenleadstoanotherandanother. These"multiplicativeeffects"actattwolevels:thedirecteffectsonindividuals,that istosaythatcombiningtheeffectofoneimpairmentonanalreadyimpaired individualisnotsimplyadditivebutexponential;andthenatanotherlevelthereare theexclusionsfromsocialandhealthsupportsystemswhichnarrowlydefine eligibilityonspecificneeds/servicesandnotoncomprehensiveassessmentsofthe person'soverallpredicament.Thisdemonstratesthatwhilepeoplewithdisabilities aremorelikelytoexperienceaprobleminthefirstinstance,theyarealsomore vulnerabletocompoundingofproblemsonceoneisexperienced,aphenomenon describedasaspirallingcycleofproblemsequences(ibid:265).Previousresearch amongstthosecyclinginandoutofprison(Baldryetal2006)suggestthatsuch cumulativedisadvantageislikelytoresultincascadingnegativeeffectsmorepotent thaneachsingleproblemoreventmightsuggesttheviscouscyclephenomenon (Sterman2000)andhighlightsthedynamic,interactiveandsynergisticnatureof thephenomenon. ThisinsightalertsustotheimportanceofnotsimplyregardinganepisodeofCJ contactasanisolatedincident,butthatitislikelytoberelatedtoprioreventsanda precedingstatusofsocialexclusion.Theimportanceofthisinsightistosensitiseus torecogniseclustersofproblemsinthosewhoexperiencemultipleproblems. OGradyetalsresearch(2004)found,inanalysingmultipleproblems,thatthese issuesoccurregularlytogetherorinasequence.
38
Thisfocusonmultipleproblemsasclusters,hasbeenexploredmethodologically byPleasenceetal(2004),whoderivedthefollowingfourclustersascommonto peoplewithdisabilities: 1. Familydivorce,postrelationship,domesticviolenceandissueswithchildren. 2. Homelessnesshomelessness,rentedhousing,unfairpolicetreatment, problemswherelegalactionwastakenagainstpersons. 3. HealthandWelfareimmigration,mentalhealth,welfarebenefits,medical negligence 4. Economicsconsumerissues,money/debt,gambling,neighbours, employmentproblem (adaptedfromOGradyetal.2004) Theclusteranalysisdetailedaboveisoneofmanywaysofmovingbeyondorre writingthecategoriesanddichotomiesthatemergeinanyanalysisdrivenbythe distinctionbetweencommunityandcorrections.Howeverwehopetocapturethe integrateddynamicswhichoperatewithinandacrosseachsite(whetheritbe communityorcriminaljustice)wheretheseidentifiedclusteredissuesinteractto intensifyandmutuallyconstituteeachother.Infacttheabovefourclustershave beenshowntonotonlyoccursingularlybuttoallcooccurforthosecyclinginand outofprison. Severalissueshavebeenidentifiedassalienttotheexperiencesofpeoplewith MHD&CDintheearlyanalysisofcohortdata.Itissuggestedthat,forthisgroupthe patternofserialinstitutionalisationisparticularlypowerful.Muchoftheprevious researchaddressingtheeffectsofinstitutionalisationhasfocusedonthose individualsservinglongsentences.PeoplewithMHD&CDarehowevermorelikely tobeservingshortertermsbutthesearelikelytobemorefrequent.Thisdifferent kindofserialinstitutionalisationislikelytobethoroughlydestabilisinginavariety ofwaysparticularlyinitsimpactonexprisonersabilitytoobtainandsustainstable housing,whereincidenceoffrequentmovingandboutsofhomelessnesshavebeen foundtobesignificantlyassociatedwithreturningtoprison(Baldryetal.2006).
39
Serialinstitutionalisationandhomelessnesshavealsobeenlinkedwithother associateddimensionsofsocialdisadvantagesuchaslackofemploymentorstudy opportunities,lackoffamilysupport,beinglocatedindisadvantagedcommunities andworseningdruguse(ibid:30).Importantlythiscombinationofstressfullife eventsisalsolikelytobelinkedtotheepisodicoccurrencesofimpairmentforthose withmentalhealthdisorders,inbothacausativeandconsequentialsense. Thedistinctionbetweenforensicandnonforensiccasestatusalsoappearsacritical factor.IntheNewSouthWaleslegalsystemforensiccasesareadministeredunder theMentalHealth(CriminalProcedure)Act1990(NSW)andarereviewedregularly aftersentencinginrecognitionofthefactthattheactwascommittedwhilethe personwasundertheinfluenceofamentalillness.Thereviewpanellooksfor improvementinthepersonsmentalhealthbeforerecommendingrelease.People withcognitiveimpairmentareregularlyheldunderthisActonthebasisoftheir legalincompetenceorincapacity.Thisbringsanadditionallevelofcomplexitysince adiagnosisofintellectualdisabilityorcognitiveimpairmentisunchanging,creating thepotentialforsuchpeopletobeheldforlongperiods.Forensicstatusisalsoan arbitrarycategorisationinonerespect:apersonmayhaveamentalhealthdisorder andanintellectualdisabilitybutthesemaynotbeseentobeassociatedwiththe particularoffenceforwhichtheyareincarcerated.Soalthoughtheymaybe experiencinganequalimpairmentasanotherwhoiscategorisedasforensic,they arenotsocategorised. Furthercompoundingproblemsaretheincreasinguseofremandandoftherapeutic servicesinthecriminaljusticesystem.TheAustralianremandpopulationhasmore thandoubledinthepasttwodecadesfrom12%ofthetotalprisonpopulationin thelate1980sto22%today(AustralianBureauofStatistics2007).Remandisnow morelikelytobeusedtoremovesomeonewhohasaseriousbehaviouralissueor forthosewhohavenosupportelsewhereandarethereforeunabletomoveoutofa custodialsituation.PeoplewithMHD&CDarelikelytobeparticularlyvulnerableto beingheldinremandwhen,allotherthingsbeingequal,theywouldnotbeusually
40
heldthere.Thestatusofremandcanmeanthattheindividuallooseshousing,a benefit,anyconnectionwithcommunityservicesandsupportandisexposedto violenceandmistreatmentinprison.Thelimitedbutincreasingavailabilityof therapeuticoptionssuchasmentalhealthcourtsandunitsinprisonsmaybea mixedbenefitwiththeCJSbeingusedtoprovideservicesfromwhichthesepersons mayfrequentlybeexcludedinthecommunity. MethodologicalMatters Thestudytakesseriouslytheneedtoanchorthequantitativeinquiryina theoretically,sociallyandpoliticallyinformedconceptualframework.Theapproach wehavetakentomeetingthesedemandsisaninterdisciplinaryone,combining coreconstructsandtheoreticaldispositionsfromthedisciplinesofsocialscientific inquiry,criticalcriminologyandcriticaldisabilitystudies. Amixedsecondaryanalysis,thatcombinesinductiveandlifecoursestyle assemblyoftheparticipantscriminaljusticeandhumanserviceinvolvementwith quantitativestatisticaltechniques,isused.Bothformsofanalysisdrawonthelinked dataandshowthepathwayspeopletakethroughandbetweenservicessuchas juvenilejustice,police,courts,prisons,health,mentalhealth,housing,community anddisabilityservices. Thisstudyattemptstodevelopandmapnewandemergingconceptualpathways fromcriticalcriminologyanddisabilitystudiesontothereallifetrajectoriesofa cohortofpeoplewithMHD&CDwhohavebeeninprison.Itwillshedlightonthe dynamicwaysthatimpairmentandthenatureofservicesystemsinteracttothrow upbarriersthatpreventpeopleaccessingthehelptheyneedtonegotiatetheir complexandoftenchaoticlives.Thispointstotheimportanceofanindepth qualitativeinquiryasacriticalnextstep.Moreover,wecanexpectthatthisnext phaseoftheresearchcanthrowlightontothevexedquestionofwhetherthe supportsthatareofferedbythesesystemsareamatchforthecomplexsocial,
41
psychological,culturalandpoliticalneedsofthosetheytarget.Itappearsthatthe interplayamongstthesystems,andbetweenthesystemsandtheindividualblurs theboundariesbetweentheself,thecommunityandthesesystemswhichmustbe engagedwithinanefforttonavigateapathwayfromdysfunctiontofunction. Theseinteractionscanalsoexacerbateandcompoundtheinitialproblemorcause newanddifferentandseeminglyunrelatedproblemstoemerge. Conclusion ThesocialexclusionexperiencedbypeoplewithMHD&CDincreasestheir vulnerabilitytoarangeofdisablingexperiencesgeneratedfromwithinthe treatment/management/rehabilitation/retributiveparadigmitself.Thisexperience inturnincreasesvulnerabilityingeneralandthereforeincreasesanoverall susceptibilitytotheforcesofsocialexclusion.Solutionstothispredicamentcannot thereforebefocussedonlyuponindividualpathology,impairmentorchoiceoron justtheCJSbutneedtotargetsystemicchangeatawidercommunityandsocietal level. Missingfromthecurrentdiscussion,butembeddedinthestudyitself,isany considerationofalcoholandothersubstanceusedisordersamongstpeoplewith MHD&CD.Whileadetailedanalysisisbeyondtheremitofthispaper,theseare centrallyimportantissuesbecauseinthemselvestheirusecanbedefinedasa crime.Moresignificantly,theycomplicatealmosteveryaspectoftheareasexplored inthispaper.PeoplewithMHD&CDareindeedthemostmarginalised,themost stigmatisedbyservicesystemsandhaveneedsoverandbeyondthosealready impliedhere(suchastheneedforparticulartreatmentsandtherisksof transmissionofdiseaseetc).Inaddition,theprevalenceofphysicalhealthproblems andassociatedneedscontributetothelevelsimpairmentexperiencedby individualsandtotherangeofservicesthatareneededforthem.
42
Thewayforwardsuggestsitselfasaneedtomovementalhealth/illnessorcognitive impairmentfromacategoricalordiagnosticattributetoacentrallocationinthe conceptualisationoftheindividualwhopresentstotheCJS.MHD&CDoperateasa definingidentityposition,consciousornot,fromwhichsocial,economic,and culturalconsequencesflow.Importantly,thedynamicsofimpairmentareboundup indiagnosticsandmedialmodelsontowhichthelivedexperiencehasalmostno purchase.Thisistheterrainontowhichnewtheoreticalinscriptionsemergingfrom criticalcriminologyandcriticaldisabilitystudiesurgentlyneedtobewritten. PeoplewithMHD&CDcometotheCJSalreadyshapedbytheirimpairments, definedbytheirdimensionsofdifferencefromthenormalandthesocial imperativeswhichthisdifferencecarvesoutintheirindividualexperientiallivesthat is,thedisablingimpactsoftheirdysfunctions.Thesedifferencesplayoutprimarily intheirsocialcontextandthroughasetofsocialrelationsthatshapetheirlived experiencelargelyasoneofsocialexclusionanddisadvantage.Thesedynamics, togetherwithanoverarchingculturalposturesteepedinfearorindifferenceandan individualmilieuofsuspicionorfrustrationseethemlabelledinparticularways. Thesedynamicsfundamentallyshapethenatureofthetheoretical,cultural,social, policy,serviceandpersonalresponsestosuchpeople.Criticallythiscomplexmatrix ofmarginalisationanddisadvantagealltoooftenresultsintheincarcerationpeople withMHD&CD,effectivelyrenderingtheminvisibleinthebroadersocialandbody politic.
43
References Aderibigbe,Y.(1996)DeinstitutionalisationandCriminalization:tinkeringinthe interstices,ForensicScienceInternational,85:127134. Anthony,T.andCunneen,C.(eds)(2008)TheCriticalCriminologyCompanion. Sydney:HawkinsPress. AustralianBureauofStatistics(2005)SchoolsAustralia,2005.AustralianBureauof Statistics:Canberra;Cat.No.4221.0. AustralianBureauofStatistics(2007)PrisonersinAustralia,2007.AustralianBureau ofStatistics:Canberra;Cat.No.4517.0. Baldry,E.,McDonnell,D.,Maplestone,P.andPeters,M.(2006)ExPrisoners, HomelessnessandtheStateinAustraliaTheAustralianandNewZealandJournalof Criminology,39(1):2033. Belcher,J.(1988)AreJailsReplacingtheMentalHealthSystemfortheHomeless MentallyIll?CommunityMentalHealthJournal,24(3):185195. Burkhardt,T.(2000)TheDynamicsofBeingDisabled.JournalofSocialPolicy,29, 645668. Bynner,J.(2000)RisksandOutcomesofSocialexclusion:insightsfromlongitudinal data.InstituteofEducationUniversityofLondon,London. Dowse,L.(2007)StandUpandGiveEmtheFrightofTheirLives.Sydney: UnpublishedPhDThesis,UNSW.
44
Erevelles,N.(2000)EducatingUnrulyBodies:criticalpedagogy,disabilitystudies andthepoliticsofschooling,EducationalTheory,50(1):2547 Greene,J.C.(2008)IsMixedMethodsSocialInquiryaDistinctiveMethodology? JournalofMixedMethodResearch,2(1):722 Harrington,S.(1999)NewBedlam:JailsNotPsychiatricHospitalsNowCarefor theIndigentMentallyIll,TheHumanist,59(3):910 Howard,M,(1999)Enablinggovernment:joineduppoliciesforanationaldisability strategy.London:FabianSociety. Hughes,B.(2002)Invalidatedstrangers:impairmentandtheculturesofmodernity andpostmodernity.DisabilityandSociety,17(5):571584. KimCohen,J.,Caspi,A.,Moffitt,T.,Harrington,H.,Milne,B.andPoulton,R.(2003) PriorJuvenileDiagnosesinAdultswithMentalDisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry.60 (7):709717. Jones,C.andCrawford,S.(2007)ThePsychosocialNeedsofNSWCourt Defendants.CrimeandJusticeBulletinNo108.NSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsand Research. McRae,D.(1996)IntegrationInclusionFeasibilityStudy.Sydney:NewSouthWales DepartmentofSchoolEducation. OGrady,A.,Pleasence,P.,Balmer,N.,Duck,A.andGenn,H.(2004)Disability, socialexclusionandtheconsequentialexperienceofjusticiableproblems.Disability andSociety,19(3):259271. Oliver,M.&Barnes,C.(1998)Disabledpeopleandsocialpolicy:fromexclusionto
45
inclusion,London,Longman. Paterson,K.andHughes,B.(1999)DisabilityStudiesandPhenomenology:the carnalpoliticsofeverydaylife.DisabilityandSociety,14(5):597610. Pleasence,P.,Balmer,N.andBuck,A.(2004)Causesofaction,civillawandsocial justice.Norwich:TSO. Reed,J.L.&Lyne,M.(2000)Inpatientcareofmentallyillpeopleinprison:resultsof ayearsprogrammeofsemistructuredinspection.BritishMedicalJournal320 (7241:1031. SocialExclusionUnit(2001)PreventingSocialExclusionReport.Onlineat www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk.Accessed25.04.08 Sterman,J.S.(2000)BusinessDynamics.SystemsThinkingandModellingfora ComplexWorld.NewYork:McGrawHill. Vinson,T.(2002).ReportoftheIndependentInquiryintoPublicEducationinNew SouthWales.Sydney:NSWTeachersFederation
46
Womencentredcorrections:Anaveview
LillianM.Barry CollegeofHealthandScience UniversityofWesternSydney l.barry@uws.edu.au Introduction Throughfirstimpressionsandearlyinteractionswithintwowomencentred facilities,aRemandandCorrectionalCentreforWomen(RCCW)andaWomens TransitionalCentre(WTC),inNewSouthWales(NSW),Australia,obfuscated perceptionsoftheirpenalityaregraduallystrippedaway.Asanaveresearcher (Gokah2006)inpenalsettings,despiteexperiencewithothermarginalisedgroups, myentreintothepenalenvironmentwasinitiallyconfusingandsomewhat misleading.Inlinewiththeethnographicmethodology(Fetterman1998)usedto conductthisresearch,myexperientialignoranceofpenalsettingsmetamorphosed intoavaluableresearchtool(Spradley1979).Andalthoughmyviewofbothpenal institutionsremainspartial,limitedtoaperceptionthatOwen(1994)describesasa keyholeview,Ineverthelessgainedvaluableinsightsintothebroaderrealitiesfor bothstaffandinmatesworkingandlivingwithinapenalfacility. Asaresult,thispaperdiscussestheprocessofpeelingawaytheveiledpenalitythat CarlenandTombs(2006)statedimsthepunitivepurposeofcorrectivefacilitiesfor womenfromview.Itwasthisobscuredpenalitywithinbothfacilitiesthat subsequentlyimpactedupontheimplementationofahorticulturaltherapy program;aresearchprojectwhoseinitialaimwastoexploreholisticrehabilitative benefitsofgardeningforfemaleinmates.Foundationaltotheholisticaimofthe researchprojectwasarecognitionoftheroleofmarginalisationinsocialand economicpovertyforwomeninlinewiththedepartmentalincarcerativeroleof detainment,aswellasitspositedrehabilitativeaims(N.S.W.Departmentof
47
CorrectiveServices2000).However,duetotheprocessofimplementingthis project,particularlyintheRCCW,thefocusoftheresearchbroadenedtoexploring theeffectsofthepenalinstitutiononrehabilitationprogramsforfemaleinmates. ResearchDesign&Methodology TheresearchprojectwasconductedinboththeRCCWandtheWTCforaperiodof fivemonthseachduring2006.ThefirstprojectwascompletedintheRCCWpriorto thecommencementofthesecondprojectintheWTC.Atotalofthirtyinmates participatedinbothresearchprojects,eighteenintheRCCWandtwelveinthe WTC,withacoregroupoffourtosixparticipantsineachfacility. Centraltotheresearchwasagardenprojectfoundedonhorticulturaltherapy principlesthatresonatedwithdepartmentalholisticrehabilitativegoalsof restorationandwellbeing(NSWDepartmentofCorrectiveServices2005). Recognitionofthebenefitstowellbeingofnaturalenvironments,suchasasmall garden,formarginalisedpopulations(Kaplan1995;Lewis1995)formedthe theoreticalbackgroundtotheinitialresearchproject.Inlinewiththisapproach,a smallgardenwasdesignedafteraperiodofcollaborativeconsultationwithinmates andstaff,resultingintheconceptofakitchengarden.Theholisticaimsofthe gardenprojectincludedofferingfemaleinmatesopportunitiestoparticipateand engagewithhorticulturalactivitiescommensuratewithindividuallevelsofinterest andability.Asthegardenprojectwasimplementedineachfacility,the intersectionsofthepenalinstitutionontheseprinciplesforfemaleinmatesandstaff broadenedtheresearchscope.Consequently,explorationsoftheseeffectsupon thegardenprojectanditsrehabilitativeaimsbecametheultimatefocusofthe research. Inlinewiththeethnographicapproachundertakeninthisresearch,thick descriptions(Geertz1993)oftheprisoncultureweredetailedfrominterviewswith inmates,semiparticipantobservationsandreflectivejournalaccounts.Analysisof
48
thedatautilisedaninitialgroundedtheory(StraussandCorbin1990)exploration thatallowedforaninductivedevelopmentofthemesthroughoutandbeyondthe datacollectionphase.Thesethemeswerethendevelopedalongsideafurther drillingoftheliterature,resultinginatheorythatstressedtheroleofthe dominating,oppressive(Weber1978;Foucault1995)andtotalising(Goffman1961) effectsofthepenalinstitution. Situatingmyselfwithinthisresearchinvolvedaprocessofacknowledgingthe differentselvesIbroughttothefield.Theseincludedthatofbeingamother,wife, sister,aneducatedwoman,andsoon.Otherselveswerealsointrinsic,sometimes conflictingpartsoftheselfinthisresearch,suchasbeingcompassionateand caring,aswellastiredandoftenemotionallydrained(Reinharz1997).Therefore,I situatedmyselfwithinthisresearchrecognisingthatIbroughttotheinquirymy ownvaluesandjudgements. Forthepurposesofthispaper,earlyexperiencesofestablishingthegardenproject intheRCCW,andlaterintheWTC,providedthecontextfortheongoing implementationofthegardenprojectinbothfacilities.Aftertheinitialphasesof attemptingtoestablishthegardenproject,particularlyintheRCCW,thegarden projectwasestablishedthroughthedevelopmentofarapportwithacohortof inmateswhoultimatelyengagedwiththeresearchproject. EnteringtheWarehouseANaveView MyfirstimpressionsoftheinterioroftheRCCWwerehighlightedbyafaadeof normalityandseemingeverydayness.Thiswassketchedoutbypleasant architectureandgreenscapedareasthatlinkedtheresidentialandfunctionalareas ofthefacility.Thefaadeoforderlinessinvokedasenseofapparentcalmness throughoutaninitialtouroftheRCCW.Thepenalityofthisfacilityappearedtobe obscuredfromview;phantomlike,hiddenoutofsight,butuncompromisingly present.
49
ThelandscapeandarchitectureoftheRCCWfitwithHannahMoffats(2004) descriptionofwomencentredcorrectionalfacilitieswiththeclusteringof residentialcottagesdesignedtoreplicatedomesticlivingarrangements.Their locationsituatedapartfromsecuredbuildingsappearedtoveilandsoftenthemore punitiverealitiesofafacilitypurposebuilttoincarceratefemaleinmates.That theseresidentialcottageswerelockedandinaccessibletoinmatesforanextended periodthroughoutthedaywasnotimmediatelyapparentasmyobservationofthe cottageswaslimitedtoacursoryviewoftheirexteriorperimeter.Assuch,my guidedtouroftheRCCWdidnotextendtovariousbuildingsvisibletowardsthe rearoftheinstitution.AnyknowledgeIgainedaboutthepurposeofthesebuildings wouldbederivedfromanecdotalinformationgleanedthroughconversationswith femaleinmatesandsomestaffduringtheconductoftheresearchproject.Through theircommentsIlearntthatbadgirlswerehousedinthesehighsecurityquarters andlockedinroomswheretheyweregiveneverythingtheyneeded.Theterm, badgirls,wasregularlyusedderogativelybybothprisonpersonnelandsome inmatesinreferencetofemaleinmatesdeemedtohavetransgressedthepenal codeoftheRCCW. Duringthisinitialtour,however,theRCCWappearedatfirsttoreplicatemore benigninstitutions,suchasalargeeducationalinstitution.Totheuninitiatedor noviceobserver,thewomencentreddesignoftheRCCWappearedtoblanketits penality.However,thepurposefularchitecturalsofteningofitspunitiverolewas exposedwhenaseniormemberofstaffstatedthattheRCCWhadbeendesignedto resembleauniversitycampus;aresemblancethatIcouldnotdeny. InlinewithHannahMoffats(2001)observationthatwomencentredcorrectional facilitieswereoftenarchitecturallybeautifulstructures(p.4),theveneerofthe RCCWwassuccessfulinpartiallydisguisingitscentralpunitivefunctionof incarceratingfemaleinmates.Indeed,thearchitecturalattractivenessoftheRCCW appearedtoinitiallyinvokeanatmosphereofbenevolenceandcalm,obfuscatingits
50
primaryintentofpenalityfrommynaveview.AsCarlen(2004)remindsus,the punitiveroleofwomensprisonshasbeennumerouslyobscuredanditwasthisthat hadsubsequentimpactsontheimplementationofthegardenprojectintheRCCW. Althoughthecreationofwomencentredprisonsaroseoutofinnovativereforms, suchasCanadasCreatingChoicesinitiative(HannahMoffat2002),thepunitive goalsofimprisonmentcontinuetounderscoreandaberrateanyarchitectural softeningofbuildingsandlandscapes.Itwasthissceneofvisualorderlinessmade upofwelldesignedbuildingsandgroundsposingasaprisonthathadatfirstledme intoanambivalentstateofcalmness.However,afterinitialvisitstotheRCCWI couldnotidentifynorpinpointanaccompanyingpersonalsenseofdisquiet.After exitingthefacilityintheearlyphasesofmyfieldwork,Ibrushedoffthissenseof disquietasbeingduetomyinexperienceandlackofexposuretoasecureprison facility. AsIcontinuedtoconductthegardenprojectintheRCCW,itsinherentpunitive functionwasgraduallyexposedasthefollowingbrief,spontaneousdiscussionwith anofficerillustrates.AsIwasescortedthroughthegroundsoftheRCCWattheend ofagardenprojectsessiontheofficerandIdiscussedthegardenprojectsprogress. Duringthisdiscussion,theofficercommentedaboutthepleasantenvironmentof theRCCWforinmates. Theofficersaysitsnotreallyajail. Isay,yeah,itseemslikeitisnt,butitis. Theofficersays,itdoesntactasadeterrent. Theresnotimeformetorespondtothisstatementasthesecuritydooropens andIhavetoexitquicklybeforeitclosesagain. TwofacetsofthisexchangeappearedtometoreiteratethepenalityoftheRCCW. TheofficersreferencetowardsdeterrenceactedtoremindmeoftheRCCWs incarcerativerolethatappearedtobeinconflictwithitsrehabilitativeaims.
51
Equally,theautomationofasecurityprocedurethatappearedtoimpedefurther explorationoftheofficerscommentsactedtoreenforceformetheprimaryroleof penalcodesasthoughtheywerewoventhroughtheminutiaeofeveryday activities.Thisincidentechoedthepenalcodesthatcontinuedtointersectwiththe establishmentandfacilitationofthegardenprojectsrehabilitativeaims. AftercompletingthefirstgardenprojectintheRCCW,anunderlyingsenseof disquietcontinuedtoaccompanymysubsequentvisitstotheWTC.Female inmatesintheWTCarehousedinresidentialhomes,orcottages,convertedto accommodateapproximatelytwentywomenandtheirsmallchildren.Staffoffices weredisguisedwithinthisresidentialfaaderesultingintheWTCbeing indistinguishablefromotherresidencesandsmallbusinesses.BehindtheWTCa smallbackyardandgardenactedasacommonmeetingandactivityareaforfemale inmates.TheWTChadnoobvioussecuritystructuressuchasthoseIhadobserved intheRCCWwiththeonlyobservableformofsecuritybeingachildproofgatethat allowedaccesstothecentrefromtherear. ThestreetscapeaccommodatingtheWTCatfirstappearedtohavenoconnection toanadjacentprisoncomplex.However,asIcontinuedtoconductthegarden projectintheWTCitsunderlyingpenalitywasbroughtintosharperfocus.Through apersonalinsight,thedominatingandtotalisingeffects(Goffman1961)ofamore obscuredsurveillancesystemoninmatesandstaffwasrevealed.Thisinsightwas gainedduringthecourseofagardenprojectsessionwithfemaleinmatesconducted inthecommoncourtyardbehindtheWTC.InamomentofinattentionIglancedup fromouractivityandcaughtmybreathinsurpriseasIrealisedthatanyindividualin theWTCcourtyardwasclearlyvisiblefromtheguardtowerpositionedwithinthe adjacentprisoncomplex.Thisincidentservedasastarkreminderoftherealitythat femaleinmatesintheWTClivedeveryday;thatdespiteitssoftersecurityall inmateswerestillsubjecttorestrictedconfinementwithinacorrectiveinstitutional facility.
52
Asaresultofthisobservation,anapparentlyseparatesecurityfeatureforan unrelatedprisonfacilitygainedsteepprominenceinitsdualroleasanomniscient surveillancemechanismwithinanapparentlybenignsetting.Indeed,itwasnow clearthatthenormalisingfeaturesoftheWTCthroughtheuseofeveryday domesticarchitecturehadsucceededinobscuringmyperceptionofitspenalrole. InlinewithFoucaults(1995)disciplinarycontinuum,thetechnologiesofdiscipline employedtocontainincarceratedwomenhavebecomesuchnormalised componentsofourcriminaljusticesystemthattheyappeartobenormaland natural.Thisisreflectedcogentlybytheimprisonmentofwomeninsofter environmentsthatmorediscretelyenactoursocietysperceivedrighttopunish womenruledtohavetransgressedthelawoftheday. HierarchicalConflicts AccordingtoWalklate(2001),thephysicalenvironmentofprisonaccompaniedby visibleandmoreobscuresecurityrestrictionsdefinethedegradedstatusoffemale inmates.ThisisinlinewithdegradationceremoniesdefinedbyGarfinkel(1956), whereinmatesareremindeddailyoftheirdegradedstatusthroughtheimposition ofsecurityrestrictionsthatmultiplyintersecttheirdailylivedexperiences. Inattemptingtoestablishandconductthegardenprojectineachfacilitythese intersectionsofpenalmechanismsbecameprogressivelylessobscurethrough exposuretoinstitutionalhierarchy.Asaresult,penalcodeswereilluminated throughthehierarchicalinterplaybetweencorrective,managementandspecialist staff,includingvisitingspecialistssuchasmyself,andfemaleinmates.The degradedstatusoffemaleinmatesfitswithFoucaults(1977)discussionaroundthe indigentindividual,whoslifepathisdeterminedasindividualinmatesare navigatedthroughacontinuumfrompovertytoinstitutionalisation.Assuch, femaleinmatesfitwithintheloweststratumofhierarchywithinthepenal institution,illustratedintheRCCWwhencertaininmatesarereferredtoasbad girls.
53
TheroleofhierarchywithinthepenalcodeoftheRCCWbecameevidentduring initialattemptsatestablishingthegardenproject.Thiscouldbeseeninhowthe gardenprojectwroughtconflictingnegativeandpositiveresponsesfromvarious staffmemberssituatedwithinthechainofcommand.Continuedattemptsto establishthegardenprojectintheRCCWledtoaseriesofencounterswitha hierarchicalbrickwallthatenactedsecuritysystemswithintheprisoncomplex.A particulardiscussionwithastaffmemberhighlightingherpessimisticviewofthe gardenprojectscontributiontoprisonprogramsexposedtheimpactofhierarchical expectationsuponstaff,aswellasinmates.AWeberian(1978)obligationtofollow ordersregardlessofpersonalmotivesandinterestswasapparentlyenactedbythis staffmemberinresponsetohierarchicallyimposedordersthatthegardenproject beaccommodatedandimplemented.Inotherwords,thevalidityoftheexisting penalcodes,asexpressedviatheuseofrulesandregulations,becamerationalised asafunctionofeverydayprocedures. Thenormalisingofhierarchicalsystemshadbecomelegitimatedandboundwithin theframeworkofacceptanceofauthoritativepowerrelationshipsbetween individualplayerswithinthechainofcommand.ThisalignswithaWeberianaspect ofdominationthatBrennan(1997)explainsasanimpositionofanorderonanother individualwithouttheirvoluntarypersonalagreementandtowhichtheyhaveno alternativebuttocapitulate(p.82).Weber(1978)clarifiesthisasarelationshipof dominationbyvirtueofauthority,i.e.powertocommandanddutytoobey (p.943). EarlyPhasesofImplementingtheGardenProjectintheRCCW Thesehierarchicalrolesbetweenindividualstaffmembersplayedasignificantrole intheearlyimplementationphaseofthegardenprojectintheRCCW.Thiswas evidentwhen,despiteahierarchicalexpectationthatthegardenprojectbe facilitatedbystaffmemberslowerdowninthechainofcommand,itssmooth
54
implementationintheRCCWwasnotassured.Giventhatpartoftheholisticgoal ofthegardenprojectwastoinvolveinmatesinacollaborativeprocessofdesign,co operationfromindividualRCCWstaffmemberswasintegraltothegardens establishment.Assuch,theearlyphaseofinitiatingthegardenprojectwas apparentlymovingaheadthroughstafffacilitatedcollaborationwithkeyinmates contributingtotheconceptofakitchengarden. However,thisconceptofakitchengardenwasturnedonitsheadattheinceptionof thegardenprojectintheRCCWwhenastaffmemberhigherupinthechainof commandintervened.Thestaffmemberindicatedthatgrowingrowsandrowsof vegetablesposedasecurityrisk.Vegetablessuchastomatoesweredeemedtobe aparticularlystrongsecurityrisk.Asgrowingvegetableswasintegraltotheinitial kitchengardenconcept,theideathattomatoesposedasecurityriskwas unexpected.NotatanystageduringdiscussionswithotherRCCWstaffinvolvedin theinitialcollaborativeprocesshadtherisktosecurityofgrowingvegetablesbeen raised. Theresponseoffemaleinmatestothisinterventionwhohadbeeninvolvedinthe earliercollaborativephasewaslessthanpositive.Asaresult,theearlystagesof implementingthegardenprojectintheRCCWwerememorableforthelackof responsefrompreviouslyenthusiasticinmates.AlthoughIhadsalvagedsomeof thekitchengardenconceptbyarguingthattheproposedkitchengardenvegetables couldbereplacedwithedibleherbs,thearbitraryoverturningoftheinitialconcept forthegardenwaseventuallyexposed.Aftertheeventualestablishmentofthe gardenprojectIdiscoveredthattomatoesandothervegetableswerelatergrownby inmatesinaseparategardeninthegroundsoftheRCCW.Althoughthiswasin apparentconflictwiththeedictthatinlinewithsecurityprotocolsvegetablescould notbegrown,noclearexplanationwasforthcomingregardingthisdevelopmentby prisonmanagement.
55
However,thislaterdevelopmentmayexplaintheearlieractivismthatensuedasa resultoftheoverturningoftheoriginalkitchengardenconcept.Theselastminute changestothekitchengardeninitiallyledtoaformofcovertactivismwherekey inmatesinvolvedintheearlycollaborationboycottedandavoidedthegarden project.Theexceptiontothissilencewasdisplayedwhenaninmatewhoclaimed ownershipovertheoriginalconceptloudlyvoicedherdisapprovalatthechanges thathadbeenmade,statingthatgrowingherbswasnotasuitablesubstitutefor growingvegetables.Fromherexpressionofangeritwasevidentthatthisinmate regardedmeasjustanotheractorintheintransigentpenalcodeoftheprison. Asthegardenprojectcontinued,theearlyresponseofinmatestotheimposed changesincreasinglyappearedtobereflectiveofthecoerciveandintransigent penalityoftheRCCW.Thearbitrary,yetuncompromisingenactmentofpunitive rulesinregardtoinmateactivitiesappearedtohaveamarkedaffectonindividual agency.Thiswasevidencedbyinmatesresortingtosubversiveandcovertformsof expression,suchasboycottingthegardenproject.Assuch,inmatesredefinedtheir situationthroughpresentingthemselvesasthewinner.BosworthandCarrabine (2001)seethisasatypeofcombativeresponsebyindividualinmatestothepenal environment.Thedistortionandmagnifiedimportancegiventoordinary,every dayactivitiesmayequallybeattributedtothetotalisingeffectsoftheclosedpenal environment.Goffman(1961)seesthisasanoverwhelmingofself,oraviolationof territoriesofself,withinthetotalinstitutionthatmaybesomewhatmitigatedby employingindividualactsofselfagencyasincovertformsofactivism. ConfessionsofanActivist TowardstheendofconductingtheprojectintheRCCW,Itoowouldengageina formofcovertactivism.ThiswasafterIhadviewedthevegetablegardenina differentsectoroftheprison,repletewiththeprohibitedrowsandrowsof vegetables.Aseparatecohortofinmatesnowengagedinthegardenprojectinthe RCCWindicatedtheywouldliketogrowtomatoesinthemodifiedkitchengarden.
56
Indefianceofthepreviousprohibitionoftomatoes,weplantedheritagetomato plantsinthegarden.Interestingly,thesevegetablesraisednoqueriesofconcern fromanyprisonstaffmembernowassociatedwiththegardenproject. Whilethesedetailscouldbedismissedaspettyandinconsequentialthey neverthelessimpactedupontherehabilitativeaimsofthegardenproject,halting accesstotheplannedgardeningactivitiesforpreviouslyengagedinmates.Evenin thelessrestrictedenvironmentattheWTC,Iwitnessedsimilarbehavioursfrom inmateparticipantstothoseIhadwitnessedintheRCCW.InmatesintheWTC becamepossessiveovervariouspartsofthegardenandwouldsecretlyremove plantsprovidedforthegardenproject.Despitemyempathyforinmates,Iwasnot immunetofeelingsofangeranddisappointmentwhentheiractionsimpactedupon myeffortsinfacilitatingthegardenproject.Regardlessofmypositionofrelative powerwithinthepenalinstitution,IfoundthatItoohadrespondedtoan institutionalviolationofmyperceptionsofself(Goffman,1961)withalternate emotionsofempathyandcynicismtowardfemaleinmates. Conclusion Whiletheearlyestablishmentofthegardenprojectinbothfacilitiesrevealsmy initialnaivetindealingwiththepenalenvironment,nevertheless,the implementationofthegardenprojectinboththeRCCWandtheWTCresultedinan erosionoflayersofnormalityanddomesticitythathadactedtopartiallydisguise theirpenalityfrommyview.AssuchthepenalcodesofboththeRCCWandthe WTCwereexposedtorevealtheprimarypenalityofeachcorrectionalfacility.This wasplayedoutthroughtheearlyestablishmentphasesofthegardenproject, particularlyintheRCCW,withbothstaffandinmatesactingwithintheconstructsof hierarchytominimisethetotalisinganddominatingimpactsoftheinstitutionon everydayactivities.AsIstumbledmywaythroughthemurky,contradictorymireof theprisonenvironmenttherealitiesoflivingwithinacorrectionalfacilityforfemale inmatesalongsidetheworkingrealitiesforprisonstaffweregraduallyexposed.
57
Thesofteningofarchitecturalandlandscapefeaturesofbothwomencentred correctionalfacilitiesreflectsCarlen(1998)whostatesthattheconflationof disciplinaryprocesseswithwomencentricidealscontinuetoreflecthistoricalpenal conceptsofdegradationandhumiliation.Despitethewomencentredfocusofthe RCCWandtheWTC,itwasclearthattheinitialgoalsofthegardenprojectwere subjecttothedominantpenalconstructsofhierarchyandtotalisation.Assuch,the dominantcodesofpenalityevidentinboththeRCCWandtheWTChadactedto impactupontheholistic,rehabilitativeaimsofthegardenproject,inconflictwith departmentalrehabilitativerhetoric.
58
References Bosworth,M.,&Carrabine,E.(2001).Reassessingresistance:Race,genderand sexualityinprison.Punishment&Society,3(4),501515. Brennan,C.(1997).MaxWeberonpowerandsocialstratification:Aninterpretation andcritique.Aldershot:AshgatePublishingLtd. Carlen,P.(1998).Sledgehammer:Women'simprisonmentattheMillennium. London:MacMillanPressLtd. Carlen,P.,&Tombs,J.(2006).Reconfigurationsofpenality:Theongoingcaseof thewomen'simprisonmentandreintegrationindustries.TheoreticalCriminology, 10(3),337360. Fetterman,D.M.(1998).Ethnography:Stepbystep.(2nded.).California:Sage. Foucault,M.(1977).Thecarceral.InJ.Muncie,E.McLaughlin&M.Langan(Eds.), Criminologicalperspectives.London:Sage. Foucault,M.(1995).Disciplineandpunish:Thebirthoftheprison.London:Random House. Garfinkel,H.(1956).Conditionsofsuccessfuldegradationceremonies.American JournalofSociology,61(5),420424. Geertz,C.(1993).Theinterpretationofcultures.London:FontanaPress. Goffman,E.(1961).Asylums:Essaysonthesocialsituationofmentalpatientsand otherinmates.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooksLtd.
59
Gokah,T.(2006).Thenaiveresearcher:DoingsocialresearchinAfrica. InternationalJournalofSocialResearchMethodology,9(1),6173. HannahMoffat,K.(2001).Punishmentindisguise:Penalgovernanceandfederal imprisonmentofwomeninCanada.Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress. HannahMoffat,K.(2002).Creatingchoices:Reflectingonchoices.InP.Carlen (Ed.),Womenandpunishment:Thestruggleforjustice(1sted.,pp.199219). Devon,UK:WillanPublishing. HannahMoffat,K.(2004).FeminineFortresses:Womancentredprisons?InP.J. Schram&B.KoonsWitt(Eds.),Gendered(in)justice:Theoryandpracticein feministcriminology(pp.290317).LongGrove,Illinois:WavelandPress,Inc. Kaplan,S.(1995).Therestorativebenefitsofnature:Towardanintegrative framework.JournalofEnvironmentalPsychology,15(3),169182. Lewis,C.A.(1995).Humanhealthandwellbeing:Thepsychological,physiological, andsociologicaleffectsofplantsonpeople.ActaHorticulturae,391,3130. N.S.W.DepartmentofCorrectiveServices.(2000).Women'sActionPlan2:2000 2003.Sydney:N.S.W.DepartmentofCorrectiveServices. NSWDepartmentofCorrectiveServices.(2005).Wellwomen:Aholisticapproach tothemanagementoffemaleoffenders.PaperpresentedattheFifthNational CorrectiveServicesAdministratorsForum:WorkingwithFemaleOffenders., Penrith:NSW. Owen,B.(1998)."Inthemix":Struggleandsurvivalinawomen'sprison.NewYork: StateUniversityofNewYork.
60
Reinharz,S.(1997).WhoamI?Theneedforavarietyofselvesinthefield.InR. Hertz(Ed.),Reflexivity&voice(pp.320).ThousandOaks,California:Sage Publications. Spradley,J.(1979).Theethnographicinterview.NewYork:Holt,Rinehart& Winston. Strauss,A.,&Corbin,J.(1990).Basicsofqualitativeresearch.Groundedtheory proceduresandtechniques.California:SagePublicationsInc. Walklate,S.(2001).Gender,crimeandcriminaljustice.Devon,U.K.:Willan Publishing. Weber,M.(1978).Economyandsociety:Anoutlineofinterpretivesociology(J. Winckelmann,Trans.4ed.Vol.One&Two).Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
61
TheeffectofterrorismandterroristtrialsonAustralianprison regimes
DavidBrown FacultyofLaw UniversityofNewSouthWales d.brown@unsw.edu.au Introduction Australiasdomesticcriminaljusticesystemshaverecentlywitnessedanumberof caseswhichillustratethedistortingeffectsofahyperpoliticisationofcriminal justiceenactedunderthespectreofterrorism.Iamthinkinghereinparticularofthe HicksandThomastrialsandcontrolordersandthecasesofHaneef,UlHaqueand Benbrika. Thatpoliticisationofcriminaljusticeprocessesisevidentinvariousways. Politicisationofthelawmakingprocessesby,tomentionbutafew examples,exertingtightexecutivecontrolovertheprocess,minimising legislativeinput;theextraordinaryattempttokeepdraftlegislationsecret andtominimisetheopportunityforpubliccomment,followedbythe attempttostrongarmtheStatesintopassingcomplementarylegislation preciselyinordertoevadepotentialConstitutionalchallenge. Politicisationofthecontentofcriminallawoffencesintroducedwhich(a) includereferencetopoliticalmotives,and(b)drivepotentialculpability backintimewellbeforetheexistinglawofattemptsandconspiracy, towardswhatLuciaZednercallsprecrime(2007:262).
62
Politicisationofinvestigativeprocesses,illustratedintheUlHaquecase wherefairlyearlyon,ASIOandtheAFP,knowingUlHaquehadbeenina LashkareTaibatrainingcamp,neverthelessdecidedhewasnorisk,and onlychargedhimwithterroristoffencessomeeightmonthslaterwhenhe refusedtocooperatewiththeAFPrequeststobecomeaninformant againstFaheemLodhi.Inshortthechargewasbroughtasleverageor reprisal,inthecontextofconductonthepartofASIOofficerswhich AdamsJintheNSWSupremeCourtfoundtoconstitutethecriminal offencesofkidnappingandfalseimprisonment. Politicisationofthetrialprocessinavarietyofways,includingthe requirementforexceptionalcircumstancestoexistforbailtobegrantedin terroristcases;theholdingofremandeesinoppressiveconditionswhich affecttheirabilitytoparticipateintheirowntrials;thechoosingofjudges designatedtobeappropriatetositinsecuritycases;thepoliticalvettingof lawyersthroughrequiringsecurityclearances;withholdinginformation fromdefencelawyers;andasrevealedintheBenbrikacase,subjectingthe accusedtowhatBongiornoJfoundtobeanunfairtrialbecauseofthe wholecircumstancesinwhichtheyarebeingincarceratedatHMPBarwon andthecircumstancesinwhichtheyarebeingtransportedtoandfrom court(RvBenbrikaandOrs[2008]VSC8020March2008para91). Politicisationevidentinexecutiveresponsestojudicialdecisionsadverseto thegovernment,includingMinisterAndrewsresponsetoHaneefbeing grantedbailrevokinghisvisaandthegovernmentsresponsetoJack Thomassacquittalonappealapplyingforacontrolorderaswellasthe controlorderbroughtagainstHicksafterapoliticallynegotiatedguilty plea(whichseemstobecurrentlyintheprocessofunravelling(see http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0.21985.23860726661.00.html)
63
Politicisationintheformofjudicialsubmissiontotheclaimsofterror, securityandrisk,illustratedinthereadinessofthefederalmagistratesto grantcontrolordersintheHicksandThomascases,wheretheevidence wasarguablyweak.IntheHickscaseitseemsespeciallyludicrousto suggestthatHicksisinanymentalstateafterprolongedpretrial detentioninGuantanamoBayundersolitaryconfinementtorepresentany crediblethreat.InThomasscasetheevidenceseemedthinandthe applicationbasedmoreinfacesavingthanwellfoundedfears.Following thiswasthejudgmentoftheHighCourtinThomaswherethemajoritywas preparedtooverturnwellestablishedlimitstoexecutivepowers. Politicisationofcorrectionalprocesses,intheBenbrikacaseeffectingan unfairtrialthroughoppressiveprisonandtransportconditions,andinthe UlHaquecaseinaformofpoliticaltheatre,illustratedbyUlHaques arrestonterroristchargesandhighlypublicisedtriptoGoulburnHRMU supermaxonanAAterroristclassification(despiteASIOandtheAFP havingearlierdecidedhedidnotpresentathreat,indeedthatitwassafe forhimtobecatchingthetrainbetweenBankstownandtheUniversityof NSWtocontinuehismedicalstudies). Eventssurroundingthesecasesillustratethewaythatthespectreofterrorismand thetechnologiesofriskandthepoliticsoffearitengenders,havedistorted domesticcriminaljusticeprocessesthroughaprofoundhyperpoliticisation, overreachingclaimsofexecutivesovereignty,lackofrespectfortheseparationof powers,politicaltrumpingofjudicialdecisionsandtheuseofthecriminalprocess, thecourtsandthecorrectionalsystem,asaformofpoliticaltheatre. InthispaperIwouldliketoconcentrateontheeffectsofthespectreofterrorism andofterroristrelatedtrialsonAustraliandomesticprisonregimes.Thepaperis moreofafutureresearchprogramorwishlistthanareflectionofworkalready done.ItisbutasmallpartoftheAustralianpenalculturesprojectbeingconducted
64
withanARCgrantbyateamofcolleaguesincludingChrisCunneen,EileenBaldry, AlexSteel,MelanieSchwartz,MaggieHallandmyselfatUNSWandMarkBrown andDianaJohnsatMelbourne. EffectsonPenalregimes Thelikelihoodhereisthattheprospectofhavingsuspectedandconvictedterrorists inprisonwillintensifytendenciesto: ClassificationNSWhasaspecificAA(men)andCategory5(women) terroristclassificationintheCrimes(AdministrationofSentences) Regulation2001Reg22 thecategoryofinmateswho,intheopinionofthe Commissioner,representaspecialrisktonationalsecurity(for example,becauseofaperceivedriskthattheymayengagein,or inciteotherpersonstoengagein,terroristactivities)andshould atalltimesbeconfinedinspecialfacilitieswithinasecurephysical barrierthatincludestowersorelectronicsurveillanceequipment. Separationandsegregationeitherinseparatesections,wingsorpods, orinseparatefacilitiessuchasGoulburnHRMU. Designandregimefeatureswhichminimisehumancontact,limit exerciseandtimeoutofcells,limitassociationbetweenprisoners. Theintroductionofspecifictechniquesandpracticessuchasmore frequentandintrusivestripsearching,theuseoforangejumpsuits (whichNSWCCLarguesisdegradingandhumiliatingandtherefore contrarytoUNStandardMinimumRulesforTreatmentofPrisoners),the useofbodybeltstowhichfootshackleshandshacklesareattached,a significantlygreaterrestrictiononmovementthantraditionalhandcuffs.
65
Furtherresearchwillhopefullyestablishwhenthesepracticeswere introducedinvariousjurisdictionsandtheextenttowhichtheyhave beencopiedeitherfromUSsupermaxfacilitiesorfromGuantanamoBay practice. Significantupgradingofsecurityandinstallationofhightechsecurity devices.CarltonandMinoguesuggestthisishappeningatBarwonin Victoriawiththeeffectthatsupermaxconditionsarebeingintroduced andnormalisedinthemainstreamprisonsystem. Restrictiononaccesstocommunications,visitors,readingmatterand increasedconcernaboutmobilephones,alreadysomewhatofan obsession. Prisondesigntheresearchwilllookforevidencethattheconcernto targethardenprisonsorsectionsofprisonsagainstpotentialexternal attack,internalrevolts,hostagetakingandescapescanbe demonstrated. Anincreasedmilitarisationofprisonregimesandprisonofficers, strengtheningofspecialarmedsectionsorunits,increasedliaisonwith policeandmilitary, Certainofthesepracticescametolightrecentlyinrelationtothecurrent Melbournetrialsof12suspectsaroundthecentralfigureofBenbrika.InRv BenbrikaandOrs(Rulingno20)[2008]VSC80(20March2008)BongiornoJ, joinedDavidDyzenhousandRaynorThwaitesjudicialcoalitionofthewilling judgespreparedtoupholdtheruleoflawinthefaceofexecutiveclaimsabout nationalsecurity(20076:10).Heupheldadefencesubmissionforastayonthe basisthattheconditionsofimprisonmentintheAcaciaunitatBarwonwere suchthatafairtrialwasnotpossible.Thedefenceargumentwasthat
66
theoppressiveconditionsinwhichtheyarecurrentlyincarceratedand transportedishavingsuchaneffectontheircapacitytoattendtotheir owninterestsindefenceofthechargesagainstthemthatthetrialthey arecurrentlyengagedinisunfairandwillbecomemoresoastime passes.RvBenbrika[2008]VSC80para80. BongiornoJruledthat Theminimumalterationstotheaccusedsconditionsofincarcerationand travelwhichwouldbenecessarytoremovetheunfairnesscurrentlyaffecting thistrialareasfollows: 1. Theybeincarceratedfortherestofthetrialatthe MetropolitanAssessmentPrison,SpencerStreet. 2. Theybetransportedtoandfromcourtdirectlyfromandto theMAPwithoutanydetour. 3. Theybenotshackledorsubjectedtoanyotherrestraining devicesotherthanordinaryhandcuffsnotconnectedtoa waistbelt. 4. Theynotbestripsearchedinanysituationwheretheyhave beenunderconstantsupervisionandhaveonlybeeninsecure areas. 5. Thattheiroutofcellhoursondayswhentheydonotattend courtbenotlessthanten. 6. Thattheyotherwisebesubjectedtoconditionsof incarcerationnotmoreonerousthanthosenormallyimposed onordinaryremandprisoners,includingconditionsasto professionalandpersonalvisitors. (para100). Anadjournmentwasgrantedtoenablethesechangestobemade,followingan earlierrulingthatScreensinthecourthadtoberemoved.Herethenweseethe utilityofthenotionofafairtrialinchallengingoppressiveprisonconditionsunder
67
whichsuspectsonterrorismrelatedchargesareheldonremand.Whilewelcoming thisdevelopmentitisimportanttopointoutthatsuchscrutinyistiedtotheon goingtrial,sothatonceprisonersareconvicted,otheravenuesforcontesting oppressiveconditionshavetobepursued. Howhasthespectreofterrorismrevalorisedtheroleofthesupermaxprison? RoyKingprovidesaveryusefulreviewofsupermaxprisonsinTheriseandRiseof Supermax:AnAmericanSolutioninSearchofaProblem?PunishmentandSociety 1(2)(1999)163186.HetracestheoriginstothelockdownsatMarionprisonin Illinoisin1983aftertwoprisonofficerswerekilledonthesameday.Theeventsat MarionaredrawnonfortheAustralianfilmGhostsoftheCivilDead.IntheUS somethinglike25,000prisonersareindesignatedsupermaxfacilitieswhereastheir takeupinEuropehasbeenminimal.ArguablyAustraliaismoreakintoEurope,with stillsmallnumbersofprisonersindesignatedsupermaxfacilities. Akeydifficultyhereisthatthenotionofsupermaxhastakenonaculturaland politicallifewhichobscuresthelonghistoryofsecondarypunishment,trac, punishmentandsegregationsectionsandconditionsinAustralianprisonsfrom thepenalcolonieson.Totheextentthatsupermaxispresentedassomething completelynewthisishighlymisleading.Theemergenceofsupermaxmustbe putinthecontextoftheparticularAustralianhistoryofpunishmentsections,ofthe prisonwithintheprison,fromplacesofsecondarypunishmentlikeMortonBay, NorfolkIsland,throughGrafton,Katingal,theHRMU,Pentridge,JikaJika,Barwon Acaciaunit,andsoon. Theargumentisthatitisimportanttorecogniseandacknowledgeourownlong traditionsofsuperpunishmentregimes,ontowhichsupermaxhasgrafted particularpracticessuchasshackling,jumpsuits,lockdowns,etc.Similarargument overpracticessuchasstripsearching,whichasDebbieKilroyintheQueensland contextandJudeMcCullochandAmandaGeorgeinachapterinforthcomingbook
68
onPrisonViolenceeditedbyJudeandPhilScraton,pointoutintheVictorian context,hasbeengoingonveryaggressivelyandinlargenumbersforatleast25 years.Adangeristhatinturnthesepracticesatthehardendofthepenalsystem willspreadmoredeeplyintothewholemaximumsecuritysector. Aninsightintosupermaxpracticesandintoamajoravenueofpotentialmonitoring isprovidedbytheNSWCouncilforCivilLibertiesinitsShadowReportpreparedfor theUNCommitteeagainstTorture,27July2007andtheConcludingobservationsof theCommitteeagainstTortureinrelationtoAustralia,15May2008.InitsShadow ReporttheNSWCCLrecommendedthattheStateparty(Australia)invitethe SpecialRapporteuronTorturetovisitthesupermaxprisonwithinaprison(HRMU) attheGoulburnCorrectionalCentre.InanAddendumtotheShadowReportthe CCLlaterconsideredtheHRMUingreaterdetailandaftersettingoutabriefhistory oftheHRMUitargued: ThattheconditionsintheHRMUarehavinganadverseimpactonthe mentalhealthofitsinmates; ThatmentallyillprisonersarebeingplacedintheHRMUunder segregationconditionsratherthaninthespecialistacutepsychiatricwing oftheprisonhospitalatLongBayasillustratedintheScottSimpsoncase whereaclearlymentallyillaccusedwasheldinsegregationonremandat theHRMUforalmost12months,andgivenantipsychoticmedicationbut notherapeutictreatment.WhenlaterplacedinacellattheMRRChekilled acellmatewithin15minutes.Twoyearslaterhewasfoundnotguiltyof murderonthegroundsofmentalillness.Twoweeksaftertheverdicthe hangedhimselfinacellatLongBay. Thatthesystemofahierarchyofsanctionsandprivilegesusedinthe HRMUcloselyresemblestheflawedanddiscreditedsystemusedin
69
KatingalandthatthelessonsoftheNagleRoyalCommissionhavebeen forgotten(p13paraA42). Thatthoseheldonterrorismrelatedchargesarenotpermittedtoseethe OfficialVisitor. ThatthereisnomechanismforHRMUinmatestochallengetheir placementandcontinueddetentioninthefacility.Thecourtshaveno powertointerveneandtheNSWCommissionerofCorrectiveServiceshas suggestedthatsomeHRMUinmateswillremaininthefacilityfortheterm oftheirnaturallives. Thattherehavebeenallegationsofpoliticalinterferenceintherunningof theHRMUandaconstantstreamofselectivegovernmentand departmentalleaksfromtheHRMUtothepopularmedia. TheUNCommitteeAgainstTortureintheirConcludingObservationsinrelationto AustraliatheCommitteestatedthatitwas:concernedovertheharshregime imposedondetaineesinsupermaxprisonsandinparticularovertheprolonged isolationperiodsdetainees,includingthosependingtrail,aresubjectedtoandthe effectsuchtreatmentmayhaveontheirmentalhealth.(p8,para24)The CommitteerecommendedthattheStatePartyshouldreviewtheregimeimposed ondetaineesinsupermaximumprisons,inparticularthepracticeofprolonged isolation(Rec24).AndthattheAustgovernmentshouldadviseonwhattheydone aboutthiswithinoneyear Prisonsasincubatorsofterrorism:prisonconversion Therehasbeensomerathersensationalistmediacoverageoftheissueof conversionsofprisonerstoIslamprisonerstoIslamandpotentiallytoterrorist
70
sympathies(especiallyinrelationtoGoulburnHRMU).Thetenorofsomeofthe mediaconcernscanbeseenfromtheheadingsofarticles: HardMenTurntoIslamtoCopeWithJail,Goulburnssupermosque, StephenGibbsSMHNov192005. InmatesstudyingalQaedamanualSMHDec2007 NSWCorrectiveServicesandthesupermaxjihadisCrikey23April2007. AuthoritiesfearprisonersplottingjailbreakduringprayersABC23April 2007. SimilarstoriesinUKinclude: IseeRichardReidsinjaileverydayTelegraph30/12/2001 MuslimstriedtoconvertmeinjailTelegraph30/12/2004 Ourprisonsarefertilegroundsforcultivatingsuicidebombers:Why convictsaresusceptibletothelureofradicalIslamTheTimesJuly30 2005. Thereissomelimitedinternationaljournalliteratureonprisonconversionsto Islam,withreferenceparticularlytotheUSandUK.(SeeegSpalekandELHassan (2007);RuppandErikson(2006);andFrance:Siegel(2006).) Someofthemorealarmistaccounts(egMarkHamm,2006)arguethattherehave been175,000IslamicconvertsintheUSsince11Sept2001,withannualconversion PrisonsterroristbreedinggroundsTheAgeJuly2006.
71
runningat35,000constituting18%oftheUSprisonpopulation.Particularinstances aregivenofinmateswhoconvertedandlatercommittedterroristoriented offences,suchasJosePadillaofthedirtybombplot;JamalAhmidan,2004Madrid bombings;MuktarIbrahim,Londonbombings;RichardReid,shoebomber;and severalChristianIdentityfiguressubsequentlyconvictedofhatecrimesorterrorist offences.TestimonyalongtheselineshasbeengiventotheUSSenateCommittee ontheJudiciary,SubCommitteeonTerrorism,TechnologyandHomelandSecurity in2003,seeStatementofDrMichaelWaller,14October2003.SeealsoSilverberg, 2006. IntheUScontextthishasledtoamajordebateabouttheroleofreligioninprisons, restrictionsonaccesstotheKoraninvariousstatesandamoratoriumonthehiring ofMuslimchaplainsinsome.(ColumbiaHumanRightsLawReview,20056).Charles Colson(ofWatergatefame)kickedthisattackonMuslimchaplainsinprisonalongin EvangelizingforEvilinourPrisonsJune242002WallStreetJournalandithasbeen takenupstronglybytheneoconsandChristianright. Theissueofconversionisemergingasanissuewhichislikelytobecomemore significant,butatthemomentisbeingpickedupatalocallevelunderconcerns abouttheradicalisationofprisoners.Oneresponse,accordingtotheNSW CommissionerofCorrectiveServices,istargethardeningofstaff,whichmay include24hourprotectionandsecurityfortheirhomesandfamilies(Woodham, 2005:58). Conclusion 1. Thespectreofterrorismhasproducedadistortinghyperpoliticisation ofarangeofcriminaljusticeprocesses,judgingbyrecentAustralian trials.
72
2. Ithashadandislikelytoincreasinglyhaveeffectswithinprisonsin termsofclassification,prisonconditions,prisonpracticesgreater segregation,isolation,securityetc,possiblyprisondesign,although thereareconsiderabledangershereinseeingallthesedevelopmentsas newasagainsttracingthelonghistoryofsecondaryorsuper punishmentregimesandpractices. 3. Itseemslikelythatthepresenceofchargedorconvictedofterrorist offenceswillstrengthenpoliticalandpublicsupportforhigh security/segregation/supermaxsections,althoughagain,thereisa longhistoryoftheirjustificationwithreferencetonotionsof(ordinary criminal)monsters,worstoftheworst,intractablesetc 4. Thenotionofprisonsasterroristincubatorsandtheissueofconversion toIslamwithinprisonsisbecomingofincreasingconcerninthe internationalcontext,especiallyintheUS,butalsoinEurope(France, Spain),andtoalesserextentinAustralia.IntheUSespecially,religionin prisonisbecomingsomewhatofanideologicalbattlegroundwhilein Australiaincreasedsecurityandintelligenceconcernisbeingdevotedto theradicalisationofprisoners.
73
References AnneAldisandGraemePHeard(eds)(2007)TheIdeologicalWaronTerror RoutledgeLondon. Arena,MichaelandArrrigo,BruceA(2006)TheTerroristIdentity:Explainingthe TerroristthreatNewYorkUnivPress,NewYorkandLondon. Brown,Michelle(2005)SettlingtheConditionsforAbuGhraib:ThePrisonNation AbroadAmericanQuarterlySeptember97397. Butler,Judith(2004)PrecariousLife:ThePowersofMourningandViolenceLondon: Verso. Carlton,Bree(2007)Imprisoningresistance:LifeandDeathinanAustralian Supermax,SIC:Sydney. ChandlerMichaelandGunaratna,Rohan,CounteringTerrorism(2007)Reaktion BooksLondon. Cohen,StanandTaylor,Laurie(1972)PsychologicalSurvival:theExperienceofLong TermImprisonmentPenguinBooks:Middlesex. CharlesColson(2002)EvangelizingforEvilinourPrisonsJune24WallStreet Journal. ColumbiaHumanRightsLawReview,(20056)Silenceofprayer:AnExaminationof theFederalBureauofPrisonsMoratoriumontheHiringofMuslimChaplains, CHRLR37:523
74
Dyzenhaus,D.andThwaites,R(2007)LegalityandEmergencyTheJudiciaryina TimeofTerrorinA.Lynch,EMacDonaldandGWilliams(eds)LawandLibertyinthe WaronTerror,TheFederationPress:Sydney. Fletcher,Karen,(1999)ThemythoftheSupermaxSolutionAlternativeLaw Journal24(6)2748. Funnell,Neal(2006)Wherethenormisnotthenorm:TheDepartmentof CorrectiveServicesandtheHarmUAlternativeLawJournal31(2)7074. Garland,David(2001)TheCultureofControlChicagoUnivPress;Chicago. GhostsoftheCivilDead Gordon,Avery(2006)AbuGraib,ImprisonmentandthewaronterrorRaceand Class48(1). Hamm,Mark(2006)ReligiousConversioninPrison www.nlectc.org/training/nij2006/hamm.ppt Haney,CraigandLynch,Mona(1997)Regulatingprisoninthefuture:a psychologicalanalysisofSupermaxandsolitaryconfinementNewYorkUniversity ReviewofLawandSocialChangeVolXXIIINo4. Ignatieff,Michael(2005)TheLesserEvil:PoliticalEthicsinanAgeofTerror, EdinburghUnivPress;Edinburgh. Kaplan,Amy(2005)WhereisGuantanamo?AmericanQuarterlySeptember831 857. King,Roy(1999)TheriseandRiseofSupermax:AnAmericanSolutioninSearchof aProblem?PunishmentandSociety1(2)(1999)163186.
75
King,Roy(2005)TheEffectsofsupermaxconfinementInLieblingandMaruna (eds)TheEffectsofImprisonmentWillanCullompton. Loader,IanandWalker,Clive(2007)CivilisingSecurity,CambridgeUniversityPress, Cambridge. Matthews,Bernie(2006)Intractable,PanMacmillan:Sydney. NSWCouncilforCivilLiberties,ShadowReportpreparedfortheUNCommittee againstTorture,27July2007. Rhodes,LornaA(2004)TheChoicetobeBadinTotalConfinement:Madnessand ReasonintheMaximumSecurityPrisonBerkeley:UnivofCalifPress. Roberts,GregoryDavid(2003)ShantaramScribePublications:Melbourne. Rupp,E.andErikson,C.(2006)Prisons,RadicalIslamsNewRecruitmentinUS,and comparisonwiththeUK,SpainandFrance,PaperdeliveredtotheInternational StudiesAssociation. Siegal,PascaleCombelles(2006))RadicalIslamandtheFrenchMuslimprison populationTerrorismMonitorVolIVno1527July. Silverberg,Mark(2006)WahhabismintheAmericanPrisonSystemat http://www.jfednepa.org/mark%20silverber/wahhabi_america.htm Spalek,BasiaandElHassan,Salah,(2007)MuslimConvertsinPrisonTheHoward JournalVol46No299114. Useem,Bert,Liedka,RaymongandPiehl,AnneMorrison(2003)Popularsupport fortheprisonbuildupPunishmentandSociety5(1)532.
76
Waller,Michael(2003)StatementtotheUSSenateCommitteeontheJudiciary, SubCommitteeonTerrorism,TechnologyandHomelandSecurity,14October 2003. Ward,DavidandWerlich,Thomas,(2003)AlcatrazandMarion:Evaluatingsuper maximumcustodyPunishmentandSociety5(1)5375. WoodhamRon(2005)SecurityincorrectionalsystemsinOTooleandEyland(eds) CorrectionsCriminology,HawkinsPress;Sydney. Legislation Crimes(AdministrationofSentences)Regulation2001(NSW) CriminalCodeAct1995(Cth) Cases RvBenbrika[2008]VSC80 RvulHaque[2007]NSWSC1251
77
IsolationasCounterInsurgency:SupermaxPrisonsandtheWaron Terror
BreeCarlton FacultyofArts MonashUniversity bree.carlton@arts.monash.edu.au Thispapercriticallyexaminesthetreatmentandconditionsexperiencedbythe VictorianPendennisdefendantsandspecificallythecoerciveuseofisolationwithin highsecurityanditsintendedeffects.Indefiniteisolationappliedincombination withotherbrutalisingpracticeshasbeentheongoingfocusofmuchconcernand criticisminthecontextofthepost9/11treatmentofunconvicteddetaineesinUS runoffshoremilitaryprisonssuchasGuantanamoBayandthenowclosedAbu GhraibPrisoninIraq.Whilethecurrentsaturationofcriticalcommentaryinthisarea characterisesindefinitedetentionwithouttrialandotherbrutalexcessesasnew emergencyorexceptionalresponsesdeployedintimesofcrisis,thispaper contendsthatsuchfeaturesareinfactfundamentalcornerstonesofcivilhigh securityregimesinwesterndemocraticstates.Isolation,sensorydeprivationand overload,exposuretotemperateextremes,24hourlockdownandtotal surveillance,shackles,stripsearches,behaviouralmodificationinitiativesandmind gamesarefrequentlydeployedinhighsecurityinresponsetoastringofofficially constructedthreatsandcrises. Inthisrespectrecenteffortstocombatterrorismmerelyproviderenewed legitimacytotheongoingprojectofprisonsecuritisationandotherdraconian initiatives,whichunderpinaseriesofresponsestoofficiallyconstructedand perceivedrisksandcrises(Sim,2004).Inrealitythecoerciveapplicationofisolation inconjunctionwithotherbrutalisingexcessesanddeprivationsisnotanew phenomenon.Thereisalonghistoryinvolvingthecoerciveuseofisolationtoinstil
78
totalpsychicandbodilycontroloverprisonersdesignatedthreatening,non compliantorhighriskwithincivilsystems(Rodriguez2006;Churchilland Vanderwall1992).Inacknowledgingthesecontinuities,thispapersituates conditionsexperiencedbythePendennisdefendantsinVictoriainthehistorical contextofisolationasaformofinstitutionalcounterinsurgencyorweaponofwar inwesternstatedomesticandmilitaryprisons. IsolationasCounterInsurgencyinAustralianPrisons:PastandPresent Australianstatesarecurrentlywitnessingtheescalationandintensificationofthe coerciveuseofisolationinthecontextofsupermaxconfinement.Thisproliferation mustbeunderstoodwithinthehistoricalcontextoftheuseandabuseof controversialandexperimentalhitechprisonssuchastheKatingalSpecialSecurity UnitinNSWandtheJikaJikaHighSecurityComplexinVictoria(Carlton,2007, Funnell,2006). InMaytheUnitedNationsCommitteeAgainstTorture(UNCAT)condemnedthe harshconditionsinAustraliassupermaximumprisons,andinparticularthe prolongedisolationimposedonprisoners,includingthosependingtrial,andthe effectsuchtreatmentmayhaveontheirmentalhealth(UNCAT,2008).TheUNCAT reportspeakstoarangeofconcernsinAustraliaincludingtheimpactofanti terrorismlegislationonprisons(specificallytheincreasingmilitarisationofprison cultureandpractice),theAFPsproposedprogramofdeprogrammingandde radicalisationinprisons(AustralianFederalPolice,2006;ABCOnline,22/4/06;AAP, 22/4/06),theconstructionofsuperprisonswithincreasedsystemsofsurveillance, securityandcontrol,andthedevelopmentofanexclusivehighsecurity classificationratingreservedforthosealreadyheldinrestrictivehighsecurity regimesforterroristrelatedoffencesinallAustralianstates(NSWParliament GeneralPurposeStandingCommittee,2005;HumanRightsLawResourceCentre, 2006).
79
Enforcedisolationinthecontextofinstitutionalmilitaryandcivilcontextscontinues toserveasapowerfulcounterinsurgencymeasureorweaponofwartopre emptivelypunishandbreakthosetargetedascombatantspost9/11(Gordon2006; Davis2005).InGuantanamoBayisolationhasbeenusedbytheUSGovernmentto breakthesilenceofdetaineeslikeJosePadillaandelicitinformationand confessions(Beyerstein22/8/07;Richley14/08/07;Begg,2006).Thepublic emergenceofconfessionssuchasPadillasprovidesenormouslegitimisingpower andprovidesweightyjustificationsforantiterroroperationsandthepreemptive punishmentofsuspects.Thisisalsorelevanttotheexperiencesandeffectsof isolationforterrorsuspectsdetainedincivilhighsecurityprisons. TheexperiencesoftheVictorianPendennisdefendantsintheBarwonAcaciaHigh SecurityUnitprovidepowerfulillustrationsofthecoerciveimpositionofisolationin Australiancivilprisons.Inspiteofbeingchargedwithnonviolentoffencesthe twelvehaduntilrecentlybeensubjecttotheA1securityrating,thehighestthatcan beallocatedtoaVictorianprisoner.TheVictorianJusticeDepartmentprovidedlittle informationtojustifytheseextraordinarycircumstancesandtheclassification decisionitselfwassaidtobeinformedinlargepartbyafileofnewspaperclippings (TheAustralian,22/3/07).Thisistypicaloftheprocessessurroundingprisoner segregation,whicharecommonlyinconsistent,arbitraryandlackingtransparency. ForthePendennisdefendants,theA1ratingtranslatedintodraconiansecurity stipulationsincluding23hourlockdowninsensorydeprivedconditions,constant surveillance,theuseofshacklesandstripsearchesandtheremovalofprivileges(R vBenbrikaandorspp.911paras.2838).Untilrecently,themenhadspentmore thantwoyearsconfinedtotheircellsfor20plushourseverydayandonlyallowed oneboxvisitwiththeirfamiliesperweekandonecontactvisitpermonth. AnA1securityratingalsoresultedinstringentsecurityproceduresforthe transportationofthedefendantsfromBarwoninGeelongtocourtinMelbourne. Theseinvolvedfrequentstripsearchesateachpointoftransferbetweenvan,court cellsandthecourtroom:
80
Thevansinwhichtheaccusedtravelaredividedintosmallboxlikesteel compartmentswithpaddedsteelseats.Eachcompartmentholdsoneortwo prisonersThecompartmentsarelitonlybyartificiallight.Theyareair conditionedbyaunitcontrolledbyoneoftheprisonofficerswhotravelsin thedriverscompartment.Theaccusedareundervideosurveillanceatall timesThedoorofeachcompartmentopensonlytotheoutsideofthevan andiskeptsecurelylockedfromtheoutsidewhenanyprisoneriswithin(Rv Benbrikaandorsp10para.35). TheconditionsattractedadversepublicityduringbailhearingsinMarch2007when theairconditioningunitinthevanmalfunctionedonatripfromcourttoBarwon Prison.Thementravelledin50degreetemperaturesbecausesecurityprotocol wouldnotallowatransfertoanothervan.Oneofthemen,ShaneKent,collapsed andanother,EzzitRaadsufferedasthma(HeraldSun,26/3/07).Theotherswho believedtheyweredyingbangedonthedoorsandscreamedforassistance.After thetrialcommencedprisonersregularlyreportedexperiencingdisorientation,travel sickness,fatigueandconfusionsubsequenttotheirtimeinthevanwhichimpacted ontheirabilityconcentrateincourtandthustotakepartintheirowndefence.In March2007SupremeCourtJusticeBongiornoruledthattheconditionsinAcacia couldcompromisethedefendantsaccesstoafairtrial.Inshort,Bongiornoruledhe was: SatisfiedthattheevidencebeforetheCourtestablishesthattheaccusedin thiscasearecurrentlybeingsubjectedtoanunfairtrialbecauseofthewhole ofthecircumstancesinwhichtheyarebeingincarceratedatHMPBarwon andthecircumstancesinwhichtheyarebeingtransportedtoandfromcourt (RvBenbrikaandorsp25para.91). Inlightofthisheruledthat:
81
Removalofthesourceofunfairnessinthistrialrequireseitherthatthe accusedsconditionsofincarcerationbedrasticallyalteredorthattheybe releasedonbail(RvBenbrikaandorsp25para92). BongiornosrulingisunprecedentedinAustralianlegalhistory.PreviousAustralian HighCourtcaseshaverecognisedtherightnottobetriedunfairly(DietrichvR; BartonvR;JagovDistrictCourtofNSW;GlennonvR;CarrolvR).Thisisthefirst time,however,thattheconditionsofincarcerationandtreatmentofprisonershave beenlinkedtothatright(CarltonandMcCulloch,Forthcoming).Bongiornosruling hasnowresultedinthetransferofthedefendantsoutofhighsecurityandintothe MetropolitanRemandCentre. Theintentionofthispaperistohighlightthecontinuitiesbetweenpenalpractices deployedinmilitaryandcivilsystems,specificallytheuseofisolationasacoercive measureusedtoremouldbehavioursorbreakindividualsintoastateofconformity andcompliance.Itisvitaltoacknowledgethatthepresentuseofmilitaryprisonsin thewaronterroralsorepresentdistinctexperiencesandcontextsthatareinmany respectsremovedfromthedomesticrealmofcivilimprisonmentandpenal practice.MilitaryprisonssuchasGuantanamoBayandtheirassociatedpracticesare justifiedastemporaryemergencymeasuresdeployedinwartime.Incontrast, whilecoerciveforcedeployedincivilandparticularlyhighsecurityprisonsitisnot strictlycountenanced,itisnormalisedordisregardedonthebasisoftheviolentand dangerouscriminalidentitiescagedwithin(Rodriguez,2006).Thisisaninteresting pointbecausewhilethereiswillingnesstocritiquetheconditionsexperiencedby unconvictedpeopledetainedinassociationwithterrorismrelatedoffenceswhether inAustraliaorinGuantanamoBaythereisanotthesamelevelofinterestor outrageextendedtoimprisonedindividualsimpactedbythesamepracticesinthe civilsystem. Modernhighsecurity(inthe20thcentury)hasformedthebasisfortheapplication ofpseudoscientificprinciplesandpracticesofbehaviouralmodificationand
82
adjustment.Theserosetoprominencethroughaneraofdisturbingpsychological experimentationandstrategiesdesignedforthepurposesofcounterinsurgency, interrogationandpoliticalimprisonmentinthecoldwarperiod(McCoy,2006; Gordon,2006;PhysiciansforHumanRights,2005;Lucas,1976).Duringthistime, researchinthefieldsofpsychology,particularlycognitivescience,revealedthe powerfulpotentialformanipulatinghumanbehaviour(McCoy,2006).Inthe1950s and1960s,studiesuncoveredthedevastatingimpactsofsensorydeprivationand prolongedisolationonthehumanpsyche(McCoy,2006;PhysiciansforHuman Rights,2005).Otherresearchhighlightedtheimpactofsleepdeprivation,the administrationofpsychotropicdrugandelectroshocktreatments,special behaviouraladjustmentincentiveprogramsandsocialisolation(McCoy,2006; Ryan,1992:83109;Fitzgerald,1975).Muchofthisresearchandexpertise,gleaned fromtheimprisonmentandinterrogationofpoliticaldissidentsinNorthernIreland, SouthAfrica,Russia,EastGermanyandKorea,wasappliedindomesticprison systemsinthe1960sand1970stodealwithprisonersubversionandnon compliance(SeeRyan,1992;Fitzgerald,1977;Lucas,1976:153167).In1970,US psychologistDrJamesMcConnellstatedinhispapertitledPrisonerscanbe brainwashednow: Itgoeswithoutsayingthattheonlywayyoucangaincompletecontrolover apersonsbehaviouristogaincompletecontroloverhisenvironmentI believethedayhascomewhenwecancombinesensorydeprivationwith drugs,hypnosis,andastutemanipulationofrewardandpunishmenttogain almostabsolutecontroloveranindividualsbehaviour.Itshouldbepossible thentoachieveaveryrapidandhighlyeffectivetypeofpositive brainwashingthatwouldallowustomakedramaticchangesinapersons behaviourandpersonality(citedinRyan,1992:95). Duringthistimedomesticprisonscametoserveasalaboratoryforthe experimentalapplicationofarangeofbehaviouralcontrolsdescribedabove. Primaryexamplesincludegradedattitudeandbehaviouradjustmentprogrammes
83
withinNewYorksAdirondacCorrectionalEvaluationandTreatmentCentresetup intheaftermathoftheAtticariots(Fitzgerald,1975);thecontroversialdeployment oftheSpecialTrainingandRehabilitativeTraining(START)behavioural modificationprogramsinMarionFederalPenitentiaryIllinoisandtheinvoluntary administrationofpainfuldrugaversiontherapiesinVacaville,California(Ryan, 1992:83109).Thephrasebehaviouralmodificationinthiscontextfailstoconvey thefullextentofinstitutionalviolenceenactedthroughenforcedisolation,sensory deprivation,useofshacklesandtheforcedadministrationofdrugsamongstaraft ofothercontroversialtreatments(Ryan,1992). Thesepracticesareofficiallyneutralisedaspainlessspatialandpsychological methodstoachieveprisonercontrol.Theyareboundupinandlegitimatedby sanitisingprofessionalterminologyanddiscoursesassociatedwithsecurity, punishmentandincarceration(Rodriguez,2006:148149).Butregardlessofhow suchmeasuresarerepresentedorwhetherthemethodsusedareovertlyphysicalor psychologicalthepointisthatthetheintentistoapplystresstotheindividualin suchawaythatnormalpsychologicalfunctioninganddefencemechanismsbreak downandthevictimbecomesamenabletobehaviourmanipulation(Lucas,1976: 156).Inthissensepsychologicallygearedmethodsofcontrolaredevisedtocurb independentthinking,breakandremoulddifficultorrecalcitrantprisonersintoa stateofconformityandcompliance(Rodriguez,2006;Ryan,1992).Suchaprojectis synonymouswiththeexertionofofficialtortureandviolenceandthiscanonly contributetotheinflictionofphysicalandpsychicpainandharm(Haney,2003). Prisonerpsychologicalandphysicalbreakdownanddespairinresponsetoindefinite periodsspentinisolationandsensorydeprivation,extremeformsofprisoner resistanceandcorrespondingofficialuseoflegitimateyetabusiveforce,selfharm andsuicidearesomeofthedocumentedharmsassociatedwithsupermax(Human RightsWatch,1997;HaneyandLynch,1997;Rhodes,2004).Asidefromtheviolent andabusiveculturesfosteredbyconditions,severepsychologicalandphysical detrimentaleffectswroughtbythedamagingcombinationofsensorydeprivation
84
andisolationarewelldocumentedinreportsbyprisoners,studiesandclinical experience(HaneyandLynch,1997).Theseincludedepression,anxiety, hypersensitivitytoexternalstimuli,hallucinations,perceptualdistortions,temporal andspatialdisorientation,deficienciesintaskperformance,impairedmotor coordination,paranoiaandproblemswithimpulsecontrol(PhysiciansforHuman Rights,2005:6061;Haney,2003:130132;HaneyandLynch,1997).Sucheffects havebeenlikenedtothoseexperiencedbysurvivorsoftorture(Haney,2003; PhysiciansforHumanRights,2005:6263). Whileperenniallyadvocatedbyofficialstohouseworstoftheworstorhighrisk offenders,trendsinwesternprisonsystemssuchastheUK,Australiaand particularlytheUSwherethesupermaxmodelpredominates,suggesttheseprisons arebecomingincreasinglynormalised(Funnell,2006:7074;Davis,2005:124125). Inreality,thesupermaxisusedtohousearangeofprisonersforvariousreasons includingthoseconsidereddisruptive,thoseconcernedwiththeirrights,women andthementallyill(HumanRightsWatch,2003).Reportingonsupermaxconditions intheUSstateofIndiana,HumanRightsWatchobservedthatoncethese institutionsareopenedthereisatendencytofillthemandstandardsforselecting prisonersforwhomharshconditionsarewarrantedgetdilutedinpractice(Human RightsWatch,1997:11).InadditionHumanRightsWatchreportthatonce disruptiveordifficultprisonershavebeentransferredtohighsecuritythereisa tendencytokeepthemthereforextensiveperiodsintheinterestsofsecurity,thus threateningtheirphysicalandmentalwellbeingandenhancingthelikelihoodof repeatedcriminalordisruptivebehaviourandlongerperiodsinhighsecurity (HumanRightsWatch,1997:11). Theadoptionofdraconianpracticestocombatperceivedrisks,threatsandcrises withinprisonisanongoinghistoricalphenomenon(Carlton,2007;Churchill& Vanderwall,1992;Scraton,Sim&Skidmore,1991).Thechangingshapeofthese risksandthreatsarederivedinandbolsteredthroughimageryandenemies
85
associatedwithwartime,whetheritbewaroncrime,warondrugsorwaron terror(Gordon,2006).AsGordon(2006:53)observes: Whatisdistinctiveinthepostwarperiodistheinventionofperpetualwars, generalwarswithoutend,madeonfalsepromisesofsecurityandwaged againstevershiftingspectralenemies,drivenbyideologiesoforderand counterinsurgencyandbypoliciestocontainandquarantinetheeffectsof globalpoverty. Thepunishmentofimmanentthreatstoorderandsecurity,whethertheyarerealor imagined,serveasthejustificatorybasisunderpinningtherealisationofreactive statepowerandtheexertionofforceinhighsecuritymoregenerally.Rodriguez argueshereterroritselfbecomesthemoralofthestoryprisonersoughttolivein fear,inreturnforthefeartheyhavewrought(asretroactivethreatstoapresumably civilisedorder)andcontinuetoextract(ascaged,violentquasipeoplealwaysonthe cuspofreturningtofreedomorovertakingthefacility)(Rodriguez,2003:186). InBarwonsAcaciaUnitinVictoriaandGoulburnsHRMU,thosefacingterrorist relatedcharges,someofwhicharenonviolent,havenonethelessbeenconstructed andotheredasenemyandterroristpriortotheirconviction.Thefigureof terroristhasbeendeployedinpost9/11timesinamannerthatmobilisescollective fearinwaysthatrecapitulateandconsolidatepreviousideologiesofthenational enemy(Davis,2005:119).Inthecivilcontextprisonersarecastthroughthe strategicconstructionofstigmatisingstereotypesassociatedwithcriminality, dangerousness,violenceandunmanageability(Scraton&Chadwick,1987).High securityinstitutionsandcoercivepracticesassociatedwithsuchregimesare officiallydeniedorjustifiedontheverybasisofsuchdiscoursesofdangerousness.It isanongoingtrajectorythatunderpinsasystemsubjecttocontinualrevisionand posturinginresponsetoperceivedcrisesandthreats. Conclusion
86
Thispaperhassoughttohighlightcontinuitiesanddistinctionsbetweenthecurrent treatmentofunconvictedterrorsuspectsandotherprisonersincivilsystems. Moreover,ithasoutlinedthemannerinwhichisolationhasbeenadministeredasan institutionalformofcounterinsurgencyorweaponofwar.Ultimatelythispaperhas arguedthatcoercivepracticesassociatedwithpunitiveisolationarecentraltothe institutionaloperationofpowerandpunishmentwithinhighsecurityandthe officialprojectofbehaviouralmodificationandcontrol.Thebrutaltreatmentofcivil prisonersburiedinisolation,however,israrelycountenancedbecauseprisonersare consideredbeyondredemptionandrehabilitation(ScratonandMoore,2005). Theirpunishmentisquietlyregardedasdefensible,aformofnaturaljustice necessitatedbytheircriminalityanddangerousness.Ontheotherhandthe treatmentofunconvictedterrorsuspectsandthePendennisdefendantsmore specificallyoperatesasastrategicofficialperformanceontwolevels.First,itserves asapowerfullegitimisingexerciseforofficials.Seconditinspirescritical commentaryandoutragefocusedaroundhumanrights,thelawfulnessof conditionsandtreatmentimposeduponthosewhoareunconvictedandpotentially innocent.Whilesuchcontributionshavemadeconsiderablegainsforindividual cases,thereremainsaneedtoconfrontandquestionmorecomprehensivelythe extentinwhichconditionsthatgiverisetoabusiveexcessesinprisonaresystemic. Theexaminationofindividualabusecasesandconditionscanneverproducethe systemicreformneededbecausetheyarepremisedontheassumptionthathigh securityinstitutionsaregovernedbylaw,transparencyandaccountabilitywhenthe documentedrealityisthattheyarenot.
87
References AAP(2006)NationalMediaRelease,Seminartoaddressradicalisationinprisons, 24July http://afp.gov.au/media_releases/national/2006/seminar_to_address_radicalisation _in_prisons ABCNewsOnline(2007)Islamusedascamouflageforprisongangs,22April, www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1903490/htm. AustralianFederalPolice(July2006)Nationalmediarelease:seminartoaddress radicalisationinprisons,Canberra:AustralianFederalPoliceMedia. Begg,M.(2006)EnemyCombatant:ABritishMuslimsJourneytoGuantanamoand Back,FreePress:London. Beyerstein,L(2007)PerverseJustice,InTheseTimes,August22 http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3315/perverse_justice/ Carlton,B(2007)ImprisoningResistance:LifeandDeathinanAustralianSupermax SydneyInstituteofCriminology:Sydney Carlton,BandJudeMcCulloch(ForthcomingNovember)Contemporary Comment:RvBenbrikaandors(RulingNo20):TheWaronTerror,HumanRights andthePreemptivePunishmentofTerrorSuspectsinHighSecurity,CurrentIssues inCriminalJustice Churchill,W.&J.J.Vanderwall(eds)(1992)CagesofSteel:ThePoliticsof ImprisonmentintheUnitedStates,Washington:MaissoneuvePress
88
Dowsley,A.(2007)Suspectsfelttheyddieinvan,HeraldSunMarch26 Davis,A.(2005)AbolitionDemocracy:BeyondEmpire,PrisonsandTortureFreePress: NewYork Fellner,JandJoanneMariner(1997)Coldstorage:supermaximumsecurity confinementinIndianaHumanRightsWatch:NewYork Fitzgerald,M.(1977)PrisonersinRevolt,PenguinBooks:Middlesex. Fitzgerald,M.(1975)Controlunitsandtheshapeofthingstocome,Radical AlternativestoPrisonPublications:London FunnellN.(2006)Wherethenormisnotthenorm:TheDepartmentofCorrective ServicesandtheHarmUAlternativeLawJournal31:2:7074 Gordon,A.(2006)AbuGhraib:imprisonmentandthewaronterrorRaceandClass 48:1:4259. Haney,C.(2003)Mentalhealthissuesinlongtermandsolitaryandsupermax confinementCrimeandDelinquency49:1:12456 Haney,C.andMonaLynch(1997)Regulatingprisonsofthefuture:apsychological analysisofSupermaxandSolitaryConfinementNewYorkUniversityReviewofLaw andSocialChangeXXIII:4 HumanRightsLawResourceCentre(2006)SubmissiontoUNHighCommissioner forHumanRightsregardingconditionsofdetentionofunconvictedremand prisonersinVictoria,Australia,HumanRightsLawResourceCentre:Melbourne
89
HumanRightsWatch(2003)IllEquipped:USPrisonsandOffendersWithMental Illness,HumanRightsWatch:NewYork HumanRightsWatch(1997)ColdStorage:SuperMaximumSecurityConfinementin Indiana,HumanRightsWatch:NewYork Lucas,W.E.(1976)Solitaryconfinement:Isolationascoerciontoconform, AustralianandNewZealandJournalofCriminology,9:153167 McCoy,A.(2006)AQuestionofTorture:CIAInterrogationfromtheColdWartothe WaronTerror,MetropolitanBooks:NewYork PhysiciansforHumanRights(2005)BreakThemDown:SystematicUseofTortureby USForces,PhysiciansforHumanRights:Washington Rhodes,L.(2004)TotalConfinement:MadnessandReasonintheMaximumSecurity Prison,UniversityofCaliforniaPress:Berkley Richly,W.(2007)USGovernmentbrokePadillathroughintenseisolation,say experts,ChristianScienceMonitor,August14 http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0814/p11s01usju.htm Robinson,N.(2007)Jailersassumedsuspectsathreat,Australian,March22 Rodriguez,D.(2006)ForcedPassages:ImprisonedIntellectualsandtheUSPrison RegimeUniversityofMinnesotaPress:Minneapolis Rodriguez,D.(2003)StateTerrorandtheReproductionofImprisonedDissent, SocialIdentities,9:2:183203
90
Ryan,M.(1992)Solitudeascounterinsurgency:theUSisolationmodelofpolitical incarceration,inChurchillW.andVanderwallJ.J.(eds)CagesofSteel,Maissoneuve Press:Washington:83109 Scraton,P.&LindaMoore(2005)Degradation,harmandsurvivalinawomens prison,SocialPolicyandSociety5:1:6778 Scraton,P.,JoeSimandPaulaSkidmore(1991)PrisonsUnderProtest,Crime,Justice andSocialPolicySeries,OpenUniversityPress:MiltonKeynes Sim,J(2004)ThevictimisedstateandthemystificationofsocialharminHillyardet al(eds)BeyondCriminology:TakingStateHarmSeriouslyPlutoPress:London:113 32 UnitedNationsCommitteeAgainstTorture(2008)Considerationofreports submittedbyStatepartiesunderArticle19oftheConvention:Concluding observationsoftheCommitteeAgainstTortureAustralia,May16 Cases RvBenbrikaandors[2008]VSC80 DietrichvR(1992)177CLR292 BartonvR(1980)147CLR75 JagovDistrictCourtofNSW(1989)168CLR23 GlennonvR(1992)173CLR592 CarrolvR(2002)213CLR635 RaadvDPP[2007]VSC330
91
Colonialgenocideandstatecrime
MichaelGrewcock FacultyofLaw UniversityofNewSouthWales m.grewcock@unsw.edu.au Introduction WhenKevinRudddeliveredthelongoverdueapologytomembersoftheStolen GenerationinFebruary20081,hepointedlyavoidedanyreferencetotheterm genocide.ForsomeoneasinstinctivelyconservativeasRudd,adoptingthe controversialterminologyappliedtotheforcedremovalpolicybytheBringingThem Homereport(HREOC1997)wasneverontheagenda.So,whenaskedbytheABCs LatelineprogramwhyhehadavoidedusingthetermRuddreplied:thetermhasa specificdefinitionininternationallaw,andIdontbelieveitiseitherappropriateor helpfulindescribingtheeventsastheyoccurredorintakingthecountryforward (ABC2008). Appropriateornot,Ruddsapproachwassubsequentlyendorsedbythe conservativecommentatorGerardHenderson(2008),atrenchantcriticoftheuseof theterm,whoarguedthatdescribingforcedremovalasgenocidemake(s)the resolutionoflongstandingproblemsmoredifficultthantheyotherwisemightbe. Hendersondidnotspelloutwhatformtheresolutionmighttakebutitseemsclear thatcompensationisnotoneofthem.WhenSenatorBobBrownmovedan amendmenttotheapologyspeechmotioncallingforjustcompensationtoall thosewhosufferedloss,allbutBrownsfellowGreenssenatorsvotedagainstit. Whiletheuseofthetermgenocidemightcontinuetobeentwinedwiththe lingeringlegal,politicalandmoralissueofcompensation,thispaperseeksto
1
Thefullspeechcanbeaccessedathttp://www.pm.gov.au/media/Speech/2008/speech_0073.cfm
92
addresssomeofthebroadercriminologicalquestionsraisedbytheconceptof genocideinAustralia.Giventheprominenceofthegenocidedebatewithinthe culturewarsandthescaleofdiscriminationagainstAustraliasindigenous population,criminologists,unlikehistorians,havewrittensurprisinglylittleabout thistopic.Yetmuchofwhatcriminologistshavewrittenabout,suchasthepolicing ofIndigenouspeople,hascolonialismasitsbroadsocialandhistoricalcontext. Moreover,colonialgenocidehasnotbeenthesubjectofrecentcriminological literatureongenocideandstatecrime.Forexample,GreenandWardsonly discussionofthethemeintheir2004bookonstatecrimeistodismissinthree sentencesthenotionthattheforcedremovalofchildrencomeswithina criminologicaldefinitionofgenocide.Instead,theylabelforcedremovalas institutionalisedchildabuse(GreenandWard2004:165166),whichapartfrom beinganinadequatedescriptionoftheassimilationistintentanddevastatingsocial impactofthepolicy,leavesoutthewholeissueofsettlerandfrontierviolence againstAboriginalpeopleandhowthatmightrelatetothevariousremoval practices. Nevertheless,GreenandWardscriminologicaldefinitionofstatecrimestate organisationaldevianceinvolvingtheviolationofhumanrights(GreenandWard 2004:2)doesprovideastartingpointforexaminingthecrucialroleofvarious stateinstitutionsinarangeofstatepracticesthatIsuggestconstitutecolonial genocide. SomeofwhatIwillargueisstillinaveryrudimentaryformandwillrequiretesting throughmuchfurtherresearchanddebate.Italsoformspartofawiderexercise followingonfrommyPhD(Grewcock2007)thatlooksatthevarioussystemsof exclusionhistoricallyimplementedbyAustralianstateinstitutions.Whilethisisstill verymuchaworkinprogress,thecoreargumentthatIamdevelopingisthat exclusionwasoneofthefundamentalfunctionsofAustralianstateinstitutionsand thatitoperatedinrelationtobothinternalandexternalfrontiers.
93
Thecriminologicalimplicationofthisisthatthedeviancethatcanbeattributedto abusiveexclusionarypracticesrestsinpartonthenatureofthestateitself,rather thanaberrantdeparturesfromputativeAustraliandemocraticnormsortheruleof law. WhatIwillbeputtingforwardisthattheprocessesofcolonisationwereresponsible forcolonialgenocideinAustraliaandthatcolonialgenocidearisesfroma continuumofabusivepractices,conductedoverlengthyperiodsoftimeandwith varyinglevelsofdirectstatesupport.Insomesituations,thepolicyrationalesfor thesepracticeshavebeenquitedifferentandthestatedintentionsbehindsomeof thepoliciesbenign.Butasawhole,thesepracticeshaveresultedinthe dispossession,marginalisation,culturaldestruction,socialfragmentationand widespreadkillingofAboriginalpeople. Animportantdistinctiontomakeattheoutsetisthatcolonialgenocideisnot directlycomparablewiththeconcentrated,systematic,statecontrolledmasskilling thatcharacterisedtheHolocaust.Butwhiletheabsenceofgaschambersisa significantpointofdifference,Iwouldarguethatcolonialgenocideissystemicand cannotoccurwithoutstateacquiescenceorcomplicity. Fundamentally,colonialgenocideisabyproductoftheoverallprojectofcreatinga Westerncolonialsettlerstateandasaconsequenceraisesimportantquestions aboutthenatureofthatstate;thevariousmeasuresusedbythestatetolegitimise andlegalisetheseizureofland;thelegitimacyofnationalistnarrativesthat constructalargelypeacefulhistoryofprogressanddevelopment;and contemporaryapproachestoindigenouspeoplethatminimiseordenyhistoriesof disruptiveandviolentstateintervention,compoundedbylongtermneglect. So,howcanthisbeplacedwithinacriminologicalframework?
94
Conceptualissues Fromacriminologicalperspective,colonialgenocideraisestwomainconceptual challenges. Thefirstisthedefinitionofgenocide.AsGreenandWard(2004:166)note,thereare atleast13differentdefinitionsofgenocidebutthetermisgenerallyattributedto thePolishjurist,RaphaelLemkin(1946),whointheimmediateaftermathofthe Holocaust,wasseekingtodescribeacrimewithoutaname. Lemkinwasoneofthekeyarchitectsofthe1948GenocideConventionwhich describedgenocideinArticle2asanyofthefollowingactscommittedwithintent todestroy,inwholeorinpart,anationalethnical,racialorreligiousgroup,assuch: (a)Killingmembersofthegroup; (b)Causingseriousbodilyormentalharmtomembersofthegroup; (c)Deliberatelyinflictingonthegroupconditionsoflifecalculatedtobring aboutitsphysicaldestructioninwholeorinpart; (d)Imposingmeasuresintendedtopreventbirthswithinthegroup; (e)Forciblytransferringchildrenofthegrouptoanothergroup. TheAustraliangovernmentratifiedtheConventionin1949butwithoutany acknowledgementthatitmightberelevanttoAustralia.Duringtheparliamentary debateontheConvention,forexample,oneLiberalMPcommented:Nooneinhis rightmindbelievesthattheCommonwealthofAustraliawillbecalledbeforethe barofpublicopinion,ifthereissuchathing,andaskedtoanswerforanyofthe thingswhichareenumeratedinthisconvention(ArchieCameron,Memberfor Barker,citedinTatz1999) However,theBringingThemHomereportsfindingthattheintentionalremovalof childrenforthepurposesofabsorptionorassimilationviolatedArticle2(e) becauseitaimstodestroytheculturalunitwhichtheConventionisconcernedto
95
preserve(HREOC1997:part4)raisedtheissueoftowhatextenttheConvention alsocoveredculturalgenocideandbyextension,colonialgenocide. WhilethereissomeevidencetosuggestthatLemkindidcontemplatetheinclusion ofculturalgenocideinhisframework,therelationshipbetweenforcedtransferof childrenandmasskillingremainsambiguousandhasbeencentraltothecritiquesof theHumanRightsandEqualOpportunitiesCommissionsuseoftheterm.Isuggest thatrelianceonforcedremovalassetoutinConventionaninsufficientbasisfora criminologicaldefinitionofgenocideandtothatextent,IagreewithGreenand Ward.However,amorefundamentalissueforcriminologistsistheextenttowhich intentionaldestructionormasskillingofaparticulargroupshouldbecentralto definitionsofgenocide. InBringingThemHome,itwasarguedthatintentioncouldstillbeimplied,even thoughtherelevantstatepracticeswerenotsolelymotivatedbyanimosityor hatred.Butforthosewhotaketherequirementofintentliterally(referredtointhe literatureasintentionalists),theabsenceofanystatedpolicytodestroya particulargroupmaybesufficienttoremovetheimpactoffrontierviolencefrom theorbitofgenocidebecauseitwasnottheresultofacoordinatedstatepolicy. ThisisparticularlyrelevanttothecolonialexperienceinAustralia,where,overmany yearsandindifferentregionalcontexts,lowlevelconflictbetweenwhitesettlers andtheindigenouspopulationwaspunctuatedbyoutburstsofintenseandlethal attacksbysettlersandavarietyofstateagencies.Insomeisolatedinstances,most notablyfollowingtheMyallCreekmassacrein1838,thestateintervenedtopunish someofthoseresponsiblebyinthiscasehangingsevenstockmen.Butthiswasnot thenorm.Typically,iftherewasnotdirectstateinvolvement,therewas acquiescenceorvaryinglevelsofstatecomplicity. Thisraisesthesecondmainconceptualissuestatedeviance.IfweadoptGreen andWardsdefinitionofstatecrime,thisisconceptualisedlargelyintermsof
96
organisedhumanrightsabuses.Withinthisframeworkanydefinitionofgenocide wouldconstitutestatecrimewhenmeasuredagainsttheformalhumanrights standardsofthetwentiethcentury. Buthowaresuchnormstobeappliedtothe18thand19thcenturies;especiallyif formalcolonialpolicywasnottodestroytheAboriginalpopulation?Furthermore, howcantheybeappliedtotheassimilationpoliciesofthe20thcentury,which, althoughtheyimplicitlydeniedthelegitimacyofAboriginality,wereinformalterms justifiedasimprovingtheconditionsoflifeofthosetargetedbypoliciessuchas forcedremoval? Theshortanswertothesequestionsisthatifhumanrightsaretobeunderstoodas universal,thentodenytheirapplicationtoearlierperiodsrendersthemhostageto historicalandculturalrelativism.Moreover,despitethedegreeofhegemony historianshaveoftenattributedtodominantideassuchascolonialracism,there wassomedirectresistancetoitsimpact.Primarilythiscamefromindigenous peoplethemselves,whointhemostbasicwayfoughttomaintaintheirrightsto landandcommunity.Buttherewerealsocriticswithinthepoliticalestablishment; divisionsbetweentheColonialOfficeinLondonandlocalauthoritieshereand substantialregionaldifferencesinlevelsofviolenceandthemethodsusedto enforcewhiterule.Inotherwords,therewerepointsofoppositiontostatepolicy andopposingmoralframeworksthroughwhichthestatecouldbeviewedin18th and19thcenturytermsasdeviantandabusive.
97
Historicalcontexts ThesubjugationofAustraliasindigenouspeoplecannotbeunderstoodasafluid transitionfromoneformofsocietytoanother.Ratheritischaracterisedby dislocation,violenceandtheimpositionofcomplexformsofstateauthoritythat werecentraltodenyingtoAboriginalpeopletherightstowhichthesettler populationwereformallyentitled.Neverthelessaretwobroadandoverlapping contextsinwhichconceptualissuessuchasintentionanddeviancemustbe considered. Thefirstisthebattleforlandandtheprocessesofcolonisationandfrontierviolence thatoccurredlargelyduringthelate18thand19thcenturies;thesecondisthe shiftingterrainofofficialstatepoliciesthatrangedfrompeacefulcoexistenceto protectiontoassimilationandincludedpracticessuchasforcedremoval. Colonisation TheinitialcolonisationofAustraliawasastaggeredandconvulsiveprocess,which hadadevastatingimpactontheIndigenouspopulation.Between1788and1911,it isestimatedthattheIndigenouspopulationdeclinedfromaprecolonisation estimaterangingfrom300,000tooveronemilliondownto72,000by1921(Year BookAustralia1994). Notwithstandingthevariationinthepresettlementestimate,thiswasadeclineof genocidalproportionsandwastheproductofdeliberatekilling,kidnapping, diseasessuchassmallpox,dispossessionandmarginalisation.Itrepresentedthe wholesaledisruption,ifnotelimination,ofanestimated400tribalgroupings. ThisprocesswasparticularlyacuteinTasmania,whereapopulationestimatedat between4,000and9,000in1803declinedtolessthan200by1835,allofwhomhad
98
beencapturedanddeportedtoFlindersIslandinBassStrait.By1847,this populationhadfurtherdeclinedto46(Reynolds2001:78). Suchaprofoundpopulationdeclinewascompoundedbytheprevailingideology amongstthecolonialadministrationthattheIndigenouspopulationwoulddieout. Butthisraisesthequestionofwhetherthatprevailingbeliefcanbeequatedwithan intentiontoeliminatetheindigenouspopulation.Theanswertothisisnot straightforward.TheoriginalinstructionsfromtheColonialOfficeinLondonto GovernorPhillipweretotreatthenativeswithamityandkindness(Reynolds 1996:34)anditwaswidelyexpectedthattheIndigenouspopulationwoulddrift awayfromthenewlycolonisedareasandthatcontactwouldbelargelypeaceful andonthecoloniststerms. Butcolonisation,whichhadbeenfarfrompeacefulinotherpartsoftheworld, inevitablyposedthequestionofcontroloflandandunlesstheIndigenous populationofferedabsolutelynoresistance,frontierconflictwasinevitable. HistorianHenryReynolds(1996and2001),whoarguesthatwhatoccurredduring thecolonialperiodisbetterunderstandasaseriesofgenocidalepisodesratherthan theproductofgenocidalstatepolicy,documentshownotwithstandingofficial policy,punitiveraidsquicklybecameanestablishedmethodforintimidatingand drivingawaytheindigenouspopulationintheSydneyarea. Theleaderofoneoftheseexpeditions,MarineCaptainWatkinTench,describedin hisjournalhowtheNSWGovernorsoughttostrikeadecisiveblowagainstatribe intheBotanyBayareainorder,atoncetoconvincethemofoursuperiority,andto infuseanuniversalterror,whichmightoperatetopreventfurthermischief(quoted Reynolds1996:33). OncethesettlementsbeganextendinginlandandintoVanDiemansland,settlers ratherthanorganisedstateagenciesplayedanincreasingroleinenforcingcontrol ofthelandwhichonthebasisofthelegalfictionofpeacefulsettlementhad
99
becomethepropertyoftheCrown.Themethodsusedincludedkilling;kidnapping andrape;isolatingpopulations;denyingaccesstoland;andbreakinguptraditional patternsoflanduse. Collectively,theseweresystemicallyviolentpractices.Reynolds(1996:4)quotesthe ethnographersFisonandHowittwhowrotein1880: Itmaybestatedbroadlythattheadvanceofsettlementhas,uponthefrontieratleast, beenmarkedbyalineofblood.Theactualconflictofthetworaceshasvariedin intensityandduration,asthevariousnativetribeshavethemselvesinmentaland physicalcharacterButthetideofsettlementhasadvancedalonganeverwidening line,breakingthetribeswithitsfirstwavesandoverwhelmingtheirwreckswithits flood. Tracingthedirectroleofthestateincreatingandmaintainingthelineofblood requiresfocusedhistoricalresearch,particularlytotestandfurtherdevelopthe followingpropositions. First,regardlessofformalstatepolicy,frontierviolencewasprolongedand widespreadwithstateinterventiontopunishperpetratorsofviolenceagainst Aboriginalsrareanddeeplyunpopularwithinthepoliticalestablishment. Second,distinctionsbetweenthestateandthesettlersarenotnecessarilyclearcut. Leavingasideissuessuchaswhoorganisedandauthorisedpunitiveexpeditions, squattersandlargelandholderswereeconomicallyandpoliticallypowerful;often exercisedlegalauthoritythroughthemagistracy;andinmanycasescamefrom militarybackgrounds. Third,theimpositionofstateauthoritythroughtheestablishment,forexampleof courts,prisonsandamilitaryandpolicingpresenceinthemoreremoteareaswas
100
importanttothelegitimisationoftheseizuresoflandunderpinningfrontier violence.Iestateinstitutionsweredrawninbehindthesettlers. Fourth,theemergencefromthemid19thcenturyofprotectorswithextensive policingpowersandtherighttocontrolwhereAboriginalpeoplelived,whothey associatedwith,whotheycouldhavesexualrelationswithetcprovidedthe infrastructureforthesystemsofpunitivewelfarismthatwerelatertoinstitute forcedremoval. Suchgeneraltrendspointinthedirectionofstatecomplicityforwhathappenedto Indigenouspeople.Thatthiscouldbedefinedasdeviantevenbytheprevailing standardsofthetimeisindicatedbysomeofthecriticalvoicesthatwereraised. Manyoftheseweremissionariesinfluencedbyearly19thcenturyChristian philanthropy,whichwasanimportantelementofthecampaignsagainstslavery andinfluentialwithintheColonialOfficeinLondon. Withtheirlimitedmessagesofracialequalityanddivinevengeanceforthe treatmentmetedouttotheblacks,thesepeopleweremetwithconsiderableofficial hostilityontheirarrivalinthecoloniesandwereoftenostracisedandisolated.Butit seemsclearthatthevisibledeclineintheIndigenouspopulationwasanissueabout whichtherewasvocalandvehementdissent. However,twonotesofcautionarerequired. First,theviewthatgodcreatedallmenasbrothersdidnotnecessarilychallenge thenotionthatEuropeansweresuperiortoAboriginals.Itwasoftenlittlemorethan codefortheviewthatAboriginalsshouldbeallowedtodieoutinpeace. Second,thosesuchasthemissionaryG.A.Robinson,whowasadrivingforce behindtheestablishmentoftheFlindersIslandsettlementforTasmanias
101
Aboriginals,equatedprotectionwiththeisolationandremovalofAboriginalpeople fromareaswhichhadbeencolonisedbythewhites. So,whiletheoppositionofRobinsonandotherstotheroutineacceptanceof frontierviolenceprovidesanimportantinsightintotheideologicalbattlesofthe time,itisalsoanindicatorofhowpoliciesformulatedintermsexplicitlyopposedto violenceandmistreatmentcouldneverthelessplayapartinproblematisingthe existenceofIndigenouspeopleandinstitutionalisingtheirseparationand differentialtreatmentfromwhites. Inthissense,thenotionofprotectionprovidedanimportantlinkbetweenovert frontierviolenceandthevarioussocialpoliciesdevelopedatastatelevel. Protection/assimilation/forcedremoval Whiletheprotectionpoliciesthatdevelopedduringthelatterpartofthe19th centurywerestilllargelybasedonthenotionthattheIndigenouspopulationwould dieout,theassimilationpoliciesthatdevelopedduringthe20thcenturywerepartly anacknowledgmentthatthepreviousassumptionsaboutinevitableextinctionwere wrong. Likeprotection,theassimilationpolicywasconceivedasavehicleformaintaining whiteAustralia.ItwasunderpinnedbyracistbeliefsbasedonnotionsofEuropean culturalsuperiorityandincludedscientificracistideassuchaseugenics.Theforced removalpoliciesthatwereinstitutionalisedaspartofthisshiftinofficialapproach werebasedontherationalethatmixedracechildrencouldbe assimilated/socialised,whilefullbloodscouldbeisolatedonreservesorinremote settlements. Whileforcedremovalwasjustifiedinbenigntermsasapolicyaimedatrescuing Indigenouschildrenfrombackwardprimitivism,andinmanyareaswasdrivenby
102
stateofficialspreviouslyresponsibleforprotection,thepolicywasultimately reliantuponforceanddesignedtodenytheverylegitimacyofAboriginality. Thiswasanintentional,highlyorganisedpolicythatdeliberatelysoughttobreakup familiesandcommunityties,destroyculturalpractices,andstripawayanysenseof Indigenousidentity. Byimplicationitsoughttoremoveanyprospectofclaimstotraditionallandor widerchallengestotheimpactofcolonialism.Itwasalsotobepursuedwith unremittingbureaucraticendeavour.AccordingtotheChiefProtectorofAborigines inWesternAustralia,A.O.Neville(1947:8081), Thenativemustbehelpedinspiteofhimself.Evenifameasureofdisciplineis necessaryitmustbeapplied,butitcanbeappliedinawayastoappeartobegentle persuasion[T]hedisciplineweproposehereisonlyakintothatwhichweusually imposeuponourselves.Letustryitforagenerationortwo,andweneednotfearthe outcome.ButwhenIsaytryit,Imeanthateveryagencynowinforceandtobe employedforthebettermentofthenativepeoplemustlookuponthepursuanceofthe acceptedunitedpolicyasparamount.Theremustbecompleteandenthusiasticco operationbetweenthosechargedwithitsinitiationandconductwithoutreservation, andnobacksliding,changesorletdownbehindAuthoritysbackmustbepermitted. Politicalinfluencemustkeepout.Therewillbedifficultiesandfailures,buttheendin viewwilljustifythemeansemployedtowipeoutforeveranexistingblotupon Australiasescutcheon,andsucceedintheultimateelevationofaminorityofour peopletosocialequalitywiththemajorityand,whatisequallyimportant,togivethem theabilitytothinkforthemselves. Inthelightofsuchcomments,theextensiveresearchassociatedwiththeHREOC Inquiryandtheongoingtestimoniesofthosewhowerethevictimsofthesepolicies, establishingthatforcedremovalwasbothintentionalanddeviantisnotas problematicasitisfortheinitialcolonialperiod.Theabusesforcedremovalinflicted
103
uponIndigenouspeopleclearlybringsthepolicywithinacriminologicaldefinitionof statecrime.Butisitgenocide? Towardsacriminologicalframework Themainpurposeofthispaperhasbeentosetoutsomeofthekeyelementsofa criminologicaldefinitionofcolonialgenocide.Suchadefinitionwouldnotdraw directlyontheGenocideConvention,withitsimmediateoriginsintheHolocaust, butwoulduseitasamarkeroftheseriousnessofgenocideasacategoryofstate organisedorsanctionedabuse. While20thcenturygenocidecanbecharacterisedasanextremeanddeviant departurefrompreviousformsofrule,generallyoccurringinperiodsofconflictover relativelyshorttimespans,colonialgenocidehasitsrootsinthenatureofthe colonialprocessandcanoccurovermuchlongerperiodsoftime.Moreover,while thecolonialstatecanplayacentralroleindirectingandlegitimisinggenocidal policies,italsoowesitsexistenceinparttotheirsuccess. ColonialgenocideisnotuniquetoAustraliabutitdoeshavesignificantlocal dimensions.TheframeworkIproposeisconsistentwiththestructuralistapproach togenocideanddrawspartlyonthedefinitionofindigenocideformulatedby historiansRaymondEvansandBillThorpe(2001),althoughIseenoparticular reasontoinventanewword. Ithassixelements:(i)theintentionalinvasion/colonisationofland;(ii)the subjugation,forcedmovementandseparationoftheIndigenouspopulation;(iii)the removalfromtheIndigenouspopulationoftheirtraditionalmeansofexistence;(iv) thekillingoftheindigenouspopulationtotheextentnecessarytoallowtotal impositionoftheeconomicandpoliticalrelationsenforcedbythesettlerstate;(v) theclassificationoftheIndigenouspopulationasraciallyandculturallyinferiorto
104
thesettlerpopulation;and(vi)thesystemicdenialofAboriginalitythroughthe destructionoffamily,kinshipandsocialties. Whilemuchworkneedstobedonetorefinethisframework,Isuggestitprovidesa startingpointforacriminologicalanalysisofthelethal,abusiveanddiscriminatory relationshipsbetweenAustralianstateinstitutionsandtheIndigenouspopulation.It alsoestablishesafoundationforlookingatmoreimmediateissuessuchasthe impactofthecriminaljusticesysteminIndigenouspeopleandthedeeply entrenchedinstitutionalprejudicesandpracticesthatoperatewithinit.
105
References ABC(AustralianBroadcastingCorporation)(2008)TonyJonestalkstoPrime MinisterKevinRudd,Lateline,14February, http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2007/s2163296.htm,accessed8June2008. Evans,RandThorpe,B(2001)TheMassacreofAboriginalHistory,Overland, Number163. Green,PandWard,T(2004)StateCrime:Governments,ViolenceandCorruption, PlutoPress,London. Grewcock,M(2007)CrimesofExclusion:theAustralianstatesresponsesto unauthorisedmigrants,PhDthesis,FacultyofLaw,UniversityofNewSouthWales. Henderson,G(2008)Therealmeaningofgenocide,SydneyMorningHerald,8 April. HREOC(HumanRightsandEqualOpportunitiesCommission)(1997)BringingThem Home:ReportoftheNationalInquiryintotheSeparationofAboriginalandTorres StraitIslanderChildrenfromtheirFamilies,Author,Sydney. Lemkin,R(1946)Genocide,AmericanScholar,Volume15,Number2,onlineat http://www.preventgenocide.org/lemkin/americanscholar1946.htm,accessed7 February2008. Neville,A.O(1947)AustraliasColouredMinority:ItsPlaceintheCommunity, Currawong,Sydney. Reynolds,H(1996)Frontier:reportsfromtheedgeofwhitesettlement,Allenand Unwin,Sydney.
106
Reynolds,H(2001)AnIndelibleStain?ThequestionofgenocideinAustraliashistory, Viking,Ringwood. Tatz,C(1999)GenocideinAustralia,AIATSISResearchDiscussionPapers,Number 8,onlineathttp://www.kooriweb.org/gst/genocide/tatz.html,accessed30April 2008. YearBookAustralia(1994)StatisticsontheIndigenousPeopleofAustralia,onlineat http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/1301.0feature%20A r...,accessed18June2008.
107
ExtremeTransport:CustodialTransportinWesternAustralia& Beyond
CliffHoldom OfficeoftheInspectorofCustodialServices WesternAustralia cliff.holdom@custodialinspector.wa.gov.au Thepresentdecadehasseenarapiddevelopmentintheapplicationofhuman rightsstandardstocustodialtransportsystemsandinmechanismstoenhance compliancewithsuchstandards.Thiswasperhapstimelyduetoglobalshifts towardsprivatisedprisonertransportthatdistancedserviceprovisionfrom traditionalgovernmentaccountabilitymechanismsandtowardsuseofpodstyle transportsthatmaximisednotonlysecuritybutsensorydeprivationanddiscomfort ofdetainees. BothtrendsbecamemanifestinWesternAustraliawiththecommencementof custodialtransportserviceson1August2000oftheCourtSecurity&Custodial Services(CSCS)ContractbyAIMSCorporation,whichhadcommissionedafleetof 39podstylevehicles(DoJ2000).1TheLiberalGovernmenthadalsobeenforcedby theDemocratstoestablishanInspectorofCustodialServices,inordertogetits privatisationlegislationthroughtheLegislativeCouncil,whichcreatedasignificant newmechanismforenhancingpublicaccountability.ThepublicationoftheCSCS ContractbygovernmentandofCSCSAnnualReportswasalsoanimportantreform forpublicaccountability,indirectcontrasttotheKennettgovernmentapproach,in whichsuchcontractsweresubjectto"commercialinconfidence".
108
Afternearlyayearofoperation,theInspector,ProfessorRichardHarding, completedhisfirstinspectiononCSCStransportservices(OICS2001).Henotedin hisreportthatthecontracthadbeenpoorlyscopedorunderbid.Indeed,while CabinethadbeentoldinApril1998thatafullyear'soperationwouldcost$8M,its actualcostin2000/01was$16.17M.2 Thereport,however,mainlyfocussedon issuesofsafety,dutyofcareandqualityofservice.Vehicleswerefoundtolack safetyrestraints,naturallight,airflow,dignifiedtoilets,views,seatpaddingand were,eventhen,pronetobreakdown.Restraintswereoverused,especiallyfor womenandminimumsecurityprisonersonmedicalsandfunerals.Itfoundthat: transportationforthoseincustodyisinconsistentinqualityand,atitsworst, unacceptable. Itwasconcludedthatdeficienciesindemandmanagement,contractmanagement, andincooperationoftheparties,especiallyinregardtovehiclesafety,weresuch thatthehazardstothispoint,haveoffsetthebenefits.Thiswasnottooverlook significantadvantagesforPolice,CourtsandcustodialmanagersundertheCSCS Contract,butitdidsignaltheInspector'sconcernwithoutcomesforpeoplein custody,andinparticularinhowtheirhumandignityisrespected. Historysuggeststhatcontractmanagementinitselfcannotberelieduponto safeguardhumandignityandsafety.Thesecondandsubsequentfleetsofconvict shipstoAustraliawereprivatisedtransports.TheSecondFleet,operatedbyslave traders,wasadisasterforitsconvictpassengers,ofwhom24%diedonthejourney, andmanymoresoonafterarrival,comparedwithonly3%onGovtPhillipsFirst fleet.ChaplainJohnsonwhoobservedtheembarkationsaid:Greatnumberswere notabletowalknortomoveahandorfoottheywerefilthyandcoveredintheirown nastiness(Shaw1977,108).
Thesecostsincludedbothcustodialtransportandcourtcustodyandsecurityoperationswhichwere inseparablepartsoftheCSCSContract.
109
GarySturgess,oftheSercoInstitutehasarguedthatitisamyththatthewidely differingoutcomesbetweenthefirstandsecondfleetswasduetoonebeingpublic andtheotherprivatelyoperated(Sturgess2005).HehasfoundthattheFirstFleet wasalsooperatedbywayofprivatecontract,justonewithafarmoresympathetic operator,theevangelicalWilliamsRichards.Nevertheless,onepresumesthatthe leadershipofCaptainPhilip,theextraresourcesheobtainedforcolonisationand dispersalofmarinesthroughoutthefleetratherimprovedtheprospectsofthe originalfleet. HumanrightsinAustraliatodayaresafeguardedvariouslybycommonlaw,bystate andcommonwealthlegislationthatgivesforcetointernationalhumanrights covenants,byhumanrightsandotherpublicaccountabilityagencieswhicheducate theAustraliancommunityandinvestigatebreaches,andbyassenttovoluntary codeswhichelaboratetheapplicationofhumanrightsinparticularsectors.The StandardGuidelinesforCorrectionsinAustralia(2004),assentedtobytherespective MinistersforCorrectionsineachjurisdictionisanexampleofthelatter. Someofthemostbasichumanrightsstandardsapplydirectlytocustodialtransport operationsastheydotoanyothercustodialoperations.Forexample,Article5of theUniversalDeclarationofHumanRights(UN1948)saysthat:Nooneshallbe subjectedtotortureortocruel,inhumanordegradingtreatmentorpunishment. However,itwastheStandardMinimumRulesfortheTreatmentofPrisoners(UN 1957)thatfirstmadespecificprovisionsrelatingtocustodialtransport.Theseare presentedinthefirstcolumnofthetable,withthosefromAustralia'sStandard Guidelinesinthesecondforcomparison:
110
StandardMinimumRules (UN1957)
45(1)Prisonersbeingtransferredareto beprotectedfrominsult,curiosityor publicity. 45(2)Conveyanceswhichsubject prisonersbeingtransferredto unnecessaryhardshipshallbe prohibited. 45(3)Transportistobeattheexpense 1.83Prisonertransportshouldbecarried 1.82Prisonertransportshouldnotbe afflictiveorsubjectprisonersto unreasonablehardshiporunnecessary exposuretopublicview.
oftheprisonadministration,andequal outattheexpenseofthe conditionsshallobtainforallprisoners. AdministeringDepartment,unlessan approvedarrangementexistsbetween theAdministeringDepartmentand anotheragency.TheAdministering Departmentisnotrequiredtomeetthe costsincircumstancessuchaswherea prisonerisgrantedspecialleaveto attendafuneral. TheStandardMinimumRulesonprisonertransporthavebeenreaffirmedand expandedtoalimiteddegreeinsubsequentUNInstruments,includingfor juveniles.3Butwhatdosuchhumanrightsstandardssignify,howshouldtheybe
3
111
regarded?Shouldwemakedowithminimumuniversalstandards,ordotheyneed applicationandelaborationindifferentculturesandsocieties,underneweconomic conditionsandwithnewtechnologies? Forsocalled"firstworld"nationsofEurope,NorthAmericaandAustralasia,itwas LordRamsbotham,theChiefInspectorofHerMajesty'sInspectorateofPrisons (HMIP)justpriortohisretirementin2001whoshowedtheway,publishingthefirst versionofExpectationsCriteriaforAssessingtheConditionsinPrisonsandthe TreatmentofPrisonersasanAppendixtothatInspectorate's19992000Annual Report.412 Expectationswasintendedtoprovidestandardsagainstwhichcustodialinstitutions andservicesinEnglandandWalescouldbeinspected.Thesestandardsweretested insubsequentinspectionsandrefinedthroughtwofurthereditionsandreferenced againstinternationalhumanrightsinstruments.TheThematicReview:Prisoners UnderEscort(HMIP2004a),demonstratedtherelevanceofthesestandards(HMIP 2004b).Thefollowing,tableshowsafewofthereviewfindingsagainstthese Expectations.
Expectationsforprisonsisnowinitsthirdedition;therearealsoversionsforjuvenilesand immigrationdetention.See:http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmiprisons/.
112
Treataccordingtoindividualneeds
Specialneedsnotanticipated& arrangementsmade.
ReturningtotheWesternAustraliacontext,by2004thecontractualrelationship betweentheGovernmentandAIMSwaslookingdecidedlybruised.ThenewLabor Governmenthadapolicyopposingprivatisationofcorrectionalservices,CSCScosts hadcontinuedtoescalatedespitereducingprisonernumbersandtheDepartment CEOhadstatedinhis2003AnnualReportthattheleveloftrustinseniorAIMS management,whichcontinuedtotransferoperationalrisktotheDepartmentandtake littleresponsibilityforserviceissueshaddeteriorated(DOJ2003,2).Therewasadeath incustodyinanAIMSvanon6May2003,and9prisonersescapedfromthe SupremeCourtHoldingRoomson10June2004,promptingtheHookerInquiry (Hooker2004). ThedeathincustodywasquiteextraordinaryinsofarasCharlesRaymondGamble managedtotakehisownlifebyhangingusinghisownshoelacesduringafive minutejourneyfromtheWatchhousetotheCentralLawCourts.TheCoronial inquiryfoundissuesofintersystemsharingofatriskinformationbetweenPolice, Correctionsandthecontractor,andaneedtoremedypoorcamerasurveillanceand hangingpointsinthecellofthevehicle(Hope2004).Thispromptedvideocamera
113
upgradesthroughoutthefleetandthecoveringofgrillsoninnercelldoorsby imperviouslexcenscreenstopreventpotentialhangingpoints.Therewasalsoan efforttoincreasepassengercomfortbycoveringmetalseats,butthisstalledafter onlytwoofthefourlonghaulvehicleswereupgraded. Aswellasfundingtheseminorvehicleupgrades,theDepartmenttookownershipof thefleetfromthecontractor'sfinancierforitsresidualvalueof$300,000,despite AIMShavingin2004,amuchneededfleetreplacementplan.Morepositively, responsibilityformetropolitanjuveniletransportwastransferredbacktothe Department,asweremedicalsandfuneralstometropolitanminimumsecurity prisons,toensurebetterservicequalityintheseareas. ButitwasanincidentintheFederalsphereon1718September2004thatshowed justhowcrucialhumanrightsconsiderationscanbeincustodialtransport operationsinAustralia.AccordingtotheHamburgerInquiry,inthecourseofa transferfromtheMelbourneImmigrationDetentionCentre,VictoriatotheBaxter ImmigrationDetentionFacility,SouthAustraliaovertwodaysbyGSLcontractors, detaineesexperienceduseofforcethatmayhavecausedinjuries,failuretoprovide medicalcare,inadequaterest,foodoraccesstotoilets,sensorydeprivation, humiliation,disregardtoappealsforassistanceandinhumaneanddegrading treatment(Hamburger2005).Interestingly,thevehicleusedwasaprisoner transportvehicleborrowedfromtheVictorianprisonertransportfleet. TheOICSdelayeditsfollowupcustodialtransportduein2004toallowthe DepartmenttorespondtothefindingsoftheHookerInquirywhichhadsharply criticiseditssupervisionoftheCSCSContract.InspectionworkfortheThematic ReviewofCustodialTransportServices,forwhichthepresentauthorwaslead researcherandwriter,commencedinNovember2005(OICSMay2007). However,intheperiodfollowingcompletionoffieldwork,andbeforepublicationof thisReview,twosignificantincidentscametolight.Thefirstofthesewasthedeath
114
inaChubbTransportvaninAuckland,NewZealandinAugust2006of17yearold LiamAshley.TheDepartmentwaspromptedtopublishthereportofitsinternal InspectoratebytheinvestigationandpublicationofabroaderreportbytheOffice oftheOmbudsmen,andthesetwodocumentstogethermakeilluminatingreading (Belgrave&Smith2007,andMacDonald2006).Theobviouspointwasfailureto separateajuvenilefromadults,contraveninglongstandinginternationalhuman rightsconventions.However,theinquiriesalsodocumentedadriftbetween legislationandpractice,monitoringfailures,failuretopassonatriskand segregationinformationtocontractorsandinadequatesurveillancebyChubbstaff. InterestinglytheOmbudsmenconcludedthat:weconsiderstaffopportunitytokeep prisonersundersurveillanceisunsatisfactoryduetothedesignofmanyprisoner transportvehicles,yetstoppedshortofrecommendingblanketvideosurveillanceas theDepartmenthadindicateditcouldnotaffordthis!TheCommissionerof CorrectionsrespondedtohisDepartment'sfailuresinpolicy,procedures,contract managementandvehicledesignbyannouncingatrial,withanintentionto normalisetheuseofhandcuffslinkedtobodybeltsforallprisonersunderescort. Hesaidthiswasnotundignified,norwoulditcausepainordiscomforttoprisoners (Rowe,Louise,MediaCoordinator,DepartmentofCorrectiveServices,Press Release:PrisonVanDeathPromptsTrialofRestraints,Perth,WesternAustralia,July 2008). BackinWesternAustralia,on17October2006,aninterprisontransportvanleft BroomePrisonat8.15amforaninehourjourneytoRoebournePrison.Just3hours intothejourney,somesixtosevenkilometrespasttheSandfireRoadhouse,itbroke downin40.5degreesheat.AIMSorganisedrecoveryvehiclesfromRoebourne, whicharrivedonlyat08.15pmthatnight.Confinedtotheircellsonthetransport andlackingairconditioningoranyeffectiveairflow,prisonersexperienced dangerouslysuffocatinganddistressingconditionsintheirmetalcellsintheheatof theday.Airflowwasespeciallyconstrainedbythepresenceoflexcenoverthegrills oftheinnerdoors,exceptingasmallstriplowerdown.
115
TheyeventuallyarrivedatRoebourneRegionalPrisonat4.15amthefollowing morning,havingbeenconfinedinsmallcellsforsome20hours,exceptduringtheir transfertothesubstitutevehicles,andabrieftoiletstopatSouthHedlandPolice lockup.WhiletheMinisterrequestedthattheDepartmentscrutiniseexisting procedurestoensurethatsimilarincidentsdonotoccurinthefuture,noinquirywas undertaken,noranyspecificreformsannounced(Quirk,Margaret,Ministerfor CorrectiveServices,Hansard,ParliamentofWesternAustralia,Legislative Assembly,pagenumber:8153b8153b/2,2/11/06). TheThematicReviewwastabledinParliamentthefollowingJuly.TheInspector statedinthereportthat: TheReportthatfollowsisthemostcomprehensiveaccountofthechallenges andproblemsofcustodialtransporttoappearintheliteraturetodate.Itshould setaplateaufordiscussionoftheseissuesandthedevelopmentofoperational standardsinalljurisdictions,particularlythosewherelonghaullandtransport isaprominentaspectoftherequiredservices(OICSMay2007,19). Thereportwascertainlysupportedbythoroughfieldwork,analysisofavailable data,consultationwithallpartiesandreviewsofliteratureandbestpracticeinother jurisdictions.ItnotedthatWesternAustralia,isperhapsthelargestsubnational jurisdictionintheworldandthatahighlevelofriskattachestoescortjourneysin regionalareasduetoextremetemperatures,vastdistances,vehiclebreakdown, remotenessfromhelp,stockandwildlifeonroads,driverfatigue,poorroad conditionsandfloodevents. Thereportalsodrewattentiontotherealitythatthemajorityofprisonertransfers, some57%,involvedatransferbetweenametropolitanprisonandaregionalprison orbetweenregionalprisonsandthattheprisonersinvolvedinsuchlonghaul transportswereoverwhelminglyAboriginal.Asat31March2006,24.7%ofprisoners
116
weredisplacedfromtheirhomeregions(OICSMay2007,53).Thisreflectsatrendof increaseddisplacementofAboriginalprisonersfromtheirhomeregions,dueto failurebysuccessivegovernmentseithertopreventAboriginalimprisonmentorto provideadequateprisoneraccommodationandservicesintheregions. DespitesignificantdisruptioncausedbyWesterncolonisation,WesternAustralian Aboriginals,andespeciallythosefromremoteregions,retainstrongcultural sensibilitieswhichtiethemtoparticularareasandextendedfamilygroupingsliving inthoseareasandtoparticularframesofculturalreference(SeeLRCWA2006, Chapter3).YetAboriginalpeopleincustodyaredisproportionatelyrequiredtobear theburdenofriskfromlonghaulcustodialtransportsastheyareshuntedfrom institutiontoinstitutionaroundthestate.CustodialtransportinWesternAustralia, therefore,isanintegralcomponentofajusticesystemtaintedbysystemicracism (LRCWA2005,Part5,94ff). TheThematicReviewmade42recommendationstotherelevantDepartmentsand transportcontractor,including: Unifiedoperational&vehiclestandardsincludingforlonghaulvehicles toilets,redundantairconditioning,standingroom,views; Governmenttoconsideralternativemeansegairtransport,coachesfor longhaultravel; Safetyrestraintstobeprovidedforallpassengers; Comfortbreaksatleastevery2.5hours; Increasevideolinkstoreducetransports; Releaseatminimumwithcash&IDs/assistwithjourneyshome;
117
Ensureprovision(andreserves)offood/water/medicine&nicotine lozenges; Provideforinfirm/pregnant&disabled; Spurnuseofsubstandardpolicelockupstoaccommodateprisonerson transportjourneys; However,whiletheDepartmentofCorrections(astheadministeringDepartment) hadnotionallyagreedtotwentyoftherecommendations,littlenewactionwas triggered,althoughinprincipleadoptionofvehiclestandardsfornewvehicles, includingtheinstallationofpassengersafetyrestraintswasanimportantadvance. Fifteenothershadqualifiedagreementandsevenweredisagreed.TheReviewhad alsocontributedtodevelopmentofnewWesternAustralianstandards,withthe publicationinApril2007ofthefirstversionoftheCodeofInspectionStandards (OICSApril2007).ThesewereaddedtomorerecentlybytheInspectionStandards forAboriginalPrisonerswhichincludesanumberofstandardsofrelevanceto custodialtransportofindigenousprisoners(OICS2008). ProfessorHardingalsowarnedtheCEOofGlobalSolutionsLimited(GSL),as GovernmentconsiderednovationofcontractswithAIMSthroughpurchasebyGSL, ofthelogisticalchallengesofcustodialtransportinWA,andoftheparlousstateof thefleetanddisgracefulPolicelockups(Harding,R:MediaRelease,26/11/07, downloadedfromwww.custodialinspector.wa.gov.au). Sadly,MrIanWard,anAboriginalelderonremand,wasfounddeceasedinaGSL vanatKalgoorliePrisonon27January2008,followinga450kmjourneyinhot conditionsfromLaverton.Amidstsignificantpublicangerandconcern,theMinister orderedaDepartmentalinquirywhichgaveparticularattentiontoremotearea Changedescortarrangementsforjuveniles.
118
vehicle&operationalstandardsandfleetreplacementandrevisitedsomeofthe recommendationsoftheThematicReview(DCS2008). TheDepartmenthassinceenergeticallypursuedreformsinitsmanagementofthe CSCSContract.HeadsofjurisdictioninWA,ledbytheChiefJusticehavealsobeen meetingtoattempttoleveragereformsaimedatreducingunnecessarytransportof adultsandjuvenilesforcourtandremandpurposes.However,enormouschallenges remaininupdatingthevehiclefleet,inimplementingoperationalstandards,in attractingnewstaffduringaresourcesboom,inextendingeffectivemonitoringof services,inreformingtheperformancemanagementrequirementsofthecontract, inreducingcancellationsofmedicalappointmentsandinchanginglegalpractices.It alsoremainstobeseenwhethertheGovernmenthastheappetitefortheadditional expendituresthatasaferandmoredecentcustodialtransportsystemwillrequire. Inthemeantime,theSupremeCourtinVictoria,onthe20March2008madea pivotaljudgementthattouchedoncustodialtransportconditions.Thisconcerned anapplicationforastayoftrialbyallegedterroristBenbrikaandothersonthebasis thatconditionsofconfinementandtransportpreventeddefendantsfrom participatingeffectivelyintheirtrialduetotheirdeterioratingmentalstate(Rv Benbrikaandors(RulingNo.20)VSC80:20).Theyhadbeenheldinadverse conditionsinthesupermaxunitatBarwonforanextendedperiodandexperienced anarduous2.5hourdailytransporttoMelbournefortheirtrial. TheSupremeCourtforeshadowedupholdingthestayiftheDepartmentfailedto complywithchangesincludingthattheybeheldatMelbourneAssessmentPrison, thattheyhavedirecttransporttocourtrestrainedonlybyhandcuffsandwithout extrastripsearches,thattheyhave10hoursoutofcelleachdayandnormalaccess tovisits.Notably,thejudgementdidnotreferencetheVictorianCharterofHuman Rights,norotherhumanrightsinstruments,butsolelythecommonlawrighttoa fairtrial.
119
ReturningtoWA,thereformeffortsoftheDepartmentofCorrectiveServices culminatedinaCustodialTransportForum,heldinPerthon78August2008,which soughtdevelopnationalcustodialtransportoperationalandvehiclestandards.This involvedrepresentativesfromallCorrectionsandPoliceDepartmentsinAustralia andNewZealand,privatesectorrepresentativesfromAustraliaandtheUK,and localparticipationfromtheAboriginalLegalServiceandtheOfficeofthe InspectorateofCustodialServices.Itiscertainlythefirsttimesuchaforumhasbeen heldinAustraliaandcertainlyindicatesthatcustodialtransporthasemergedasan importantareaofattentionforjusticeadministrators.Itiscertainlyworthyofcloser attentionbyresearchers. TheRuddGovernmenthasdeclaredanintentiontosigntheUnitedNations' OptionalProtocoltotheConventionAgainstTortureandOtherCruel,Inhumanor DegradingTreatmentorPunishment(OPCAT).TheHumanRightsandEqual OpportunityCommissioniscurrentlyinvestigatinghowbesttoestablishthe NationalPreventiveMechanisms(NPMs)thatwillberequiredtofulfilour obligationsunderthisProtocol.Thismeansindependentinspectionsofallclosed facilitieswhethercontrolledbypolice,corrections,immigration,healthandwelfare officialsortheircontractors. TheOICSinWesternAustraliaandthecycleofcontinuousimprovementinwhichit isengagedwiththedepartmentandgovernmentisthereforeaharbingerofthings tocome,atleastinthisnation.Specialisedandgenuinelyindependentcustodial inspectionisanessentialcomponentinsystemstoensurethathumanrightsare properlycodifiedandobservedincustodialtransportoperationsandovercome shorttermpoliticalcyclesthatdrivesomuchofpubliccorrectionsdiscourse.Andas DamienMcLean,theWarburtonAboriginalCommunityadviserinthewakeofthe IanWarddeathcommented: Ifyouvegotthebenefitofbeingabletoappointanindependentinspectorof prisonsandsaythatyouvegotone,theflipsideisyouactuallyneedtolistento
120
them(sic)(McLean,Damien,quotedinTheWestAustralian,February27, 2008,7).
121
References Belgrave,J&Smith,M(2007):InvestigationbyJohnBelgrave,ChiefOmbudsmanand MelSmith,OmbudsmanoftheDepartmentofCorrectionsinrelationtothetransport ofprisoners,presentedtotheHouseofRepresentativespursuanttosection29of theOmbudsmenAct1975,GovernmentofNewZealand,Wellington,12June2007. ConferenceofCorrectionalAdministrators(COCA2004):StandardGuidelinesfor CorrectionsinAustralia2004. DepartmentoftheAttorneyGeneral(DOTAGSeptember2006):AnnualReportfor theProvisionofCourtSecurityandCustodialServices,30September2006,Perth (downloadedon18/02/08fromwww.dotag.wa.gov.au/publications). DepartmentofCorrectiveServices(DCS2008):ReviewofPrisonerTransport Services,Perth,February2008. DepartmentofJustice(DoJ2000):ContractfortheProvisionofCourtSecurityand CustodialServicesbetweentheStateofWesternAustraliaandCorrectionsCorporation ofAustraliaPtyLtd,Perth,January2000. DepartmentofJustice(DoJSeptember2003):AnnualReportfortheProvisionof CourtSecurityandCustodialServices,30September2003,(downloadedon18/02/08 fromwww.dotag.wa.gov.au/publications). Hamburger,K(2005):FindingsandRecommendationsfromReportofInvestigationon behalfoftheDepartmentofImmigrationandMulticulturalandIndigenousAffairs ConcerningAllegationsofInappropriateTreatmentofFiveDetaineesduringTransfer fromMaribyrnongImmigrationDetentionCentretoBaxterImmigrationDetention Facility,KnowledgeConsultingLtd,2005.
122
HMIP(2004a):ExpectationsCriteriaforAssessingtheConditionsinPrisonsandthe TreatmentofPrisoners,SecondEdition,HMInspectorateofPrisons,London. HMIP(2004b):PrisonersUnderEscort:ThematicReportbyHMInspectorateof Prisons,December2004. Hooker,R(2004):InquiryintotheEscapeofPersonsHeldinCustodyattheSupreme CourtofWesternAustraliaon10June2004,GovernmentofWesternAustralia,Perth. (availablefromhttp://www.slp.wa.gov.au/publications) Hope,AN(2004),RecordofInvestigationintoDeath,Perth:CoronersCourtof WesternAustralia,2004. LRCWA(2005):AboriginalCustomaryLaw,ADiscussionPaper,ProjectNo.94,Law ReformCommissionofWA,(downloadedon12/06/2006from: http://www.lrc.justice.wa.gov.au/Aboriginal/ACLpublications.htm) LRCWA(2006):AboriginalCustomaryLaw,FinalReport,LawReformCommissionof WA. MacDonald,L(2006):InvestigationoftheCircumstancesSurroundingtheDeathat AucklandPublicHospitalofprisonerLiamJohnAshleyofAucklandCentralRemand Prisonon25August2006,ReporttoChiefExecutive,DepartmentofCorrections, Inspectorate,Wellington,2006(downloadedfrom http://www.corrections.govt.nz/public/news/on30/08/07). OfficeoftheInspectorofCustodialServices(OICS2001):ReportNo.3:Reportofan AnnouncedInspectionofAdultPrisonerTransportServices,Perth,WesternAustralia, October2001.
123
OfficeoftheInspectorofCustodialServices(OICSApril2007):CodeofInspection StandardsforAdultCustodial,VersionOne,Perth,WesternAustralia,19April2007 OfficeoftheInspectorofCustodialServices(OICSMay2007):ReportNo.43: ThematicReviewofCustodialTransportServices,Perth,WesternAustralia,May 2007. OfficeoftheInspectorofCustodialServices(OICS2008):InspectionStandardsfor AboriginalPrisoners,Version1,Perth,WesternAustralia,July2008. Shaw,AGL(1977):ConvictsandtheColonies:AStudyofPenalTransportationfrom GreatBritainandIrelandtoAustralia&otherpartsoftheBritishEmpire,Melbourne UniversityPress,1977. Sturgess,GL(2005):BoundforBotanyBay:ContractingforQualityinPublicServices, DiscussionPaperNo.1,TheSercoInstitute,London,2005.
124
UsingaFlashpointsmodelofPublicOrderPolicinginIndigenous communitiestoexplorethestructuresandpracticesofinternal colonialpowerrelationsinAustralia
ChristineJennett SchoolofSocialSciences CollegeoftheArts UniversityofWesternSydney cjennett@ozemail.com.au Introduction Throughoutthe1960smanyformercoloniesofmetropolitanpowers(suchas Britain&France)achievedindependence,frequentlyduetotheeffortsofanti colonialliberationmovements.Theybecametheperipherycountriesofthe internationalsystemofpowerwhilethemetropolitancountriesremainedatthe core.Indigenouspeopleswhoformedsmalldomesticminoritiesinindependent settlerstates,suchasAustralia,remainedinaninternalcolonialrelationshipwith therulingpowergroup,thewhites(MoretonRobinson2007),theylivedatthe peripheryandwhiterulersatthecore(Rowley1972a,b).Despiteattemptsby IndigenousactivistsandtheirsupporterstoalterthebalanceofpowerinAustralian societybymakingclaimsagainstthestate(Werther1992,Jennett1991;Lippmann 1981);andtheemergenceofanAboriginalmiddleclass(Howard1982);thereare stillmanyAboriginalpeoplewhoremainconcentratedinthestructuralperipheryof Australiansociety,experiencinglowincomes,highratesofunemployment,poor healthandhighratesofcrimeandintracommunityviolence(Memmotetal.2001; Jennett&Greer2001). Inthispaper,firstitisbeingarguedthatnow,nearlyhalfacenturylater,aninternal colonialmodelofpowerrelationsisstillrelevanttoexplainthesituationinwhich
125
manyAboriginalpeoplefindthemselves.Second,theFlashpointsmodelwillbe appliedtoapublicorderpolicingeventatWadeye,whichisaparticularly dysfunctionalperipheralcommunityinwhichN.T.Policearechargedwiththetask ofkeepingthepeace. InternalColonialism Throughoutthe1960sand1970stherewasmuchdiscussionabouttheconceptof internalcolonialism,i.e.thesortofcolonialrelationshipwhichcontinuedtoexist betweenthesettlersandtheIndigenousoraboriginal(Werther1992)peoples whenthesettlerstateachievedindependencefromthemetropolitancolonial power.Therewereseveralmodelsofinternalcolonialismofferedbyvarious authors. Blauner(1969:393),discussedtheconceptinrelationtoBlackAmericanswho,while theyarenotIndigenouspeoples,havebeenusedandabusedintheinterestsof whites(Lacey1972).Heanalysedtheghettorevoltswhichtookplaceinthe1960s intheUSAseeingthemascollectiveresponsestocolonizedstatus.Henotedthe useofthediscourseofcolonialismbyghettoprotestorsastheytriedtoarticulate theirexperienceofbeingcontrolledbyoutsidersandtheiridentificationwithanti colonialliberationmovementswhichwereoperatingatthattime(Blauner1969: 394).Blaunerdistinguishedbetweencolonisationasaprocessandcolonialismasa social,economic,andpoliticalsystem(Blauner1969:393). Blauner(1969:394)arguedthatcolonialismdescribesaprocessofsocial oppressioncommontobothclassicalcolonialandinternalcolonialsituations.He thereforeviewedthesituationintheUSAasaspecialformofcolonialismoutside thecontextofthecolonialsystem(Blauner1969:393)andidentifiedfourbasic componentsofthecolonisationcomplex. 1. Colonisationbeginswithaforced,involuntaryentry.
126
2. Thecolonisingpowercarriesoutapolicywhichconstrains, transforms,ordestroysindigenousvalues,orientations,andwaysof life. 3. colonisationinvolvesarelationshipbywhichmembersofthe colonisedgrouptendtobeadministeredbyrepresentativesofthe dominantpower. 4. Racismisthefinalfundamentofcolonisation.Blaunernotesthat racismgenerallyaccompaniedcolonialism.Notingthatracial prejudicecanexistwithoutcolonisation,hearguesthat, nevertheless,racismasasystemofdominationispartofthe complexofcolonisation(Blauner1969:396) Inamoredevelopedconceptualtreatmentofinternalcolonialism,Hechter (1975)arguedthatsuchasituationexistswhenthereisaculturallyallocated divisionoflabourwithinastate.AccordingtoHechter: Nationaldevelopmentisaprocesswhichmaybesaidtooccurwhenthe separateculturalidentitiesofregionsbegintolosesocialsignificance, andbecomeblurred.Intheprocess,theseverallocalandregional culturesaregraduallyreplacedbytheestablishmentofonenational culturewhichcutsacrossthepreviousdistinctions.Thecoreand peripheralculturesmustultimatelymergeintooneallencompassing culturalsystemtowhichallmembersofthesocietyhaveprimary identificationandloyalty.(Hechter1975:5;emphasisadded). NotingtheexistenceofseparatistpoliticalmovementsinsuchsocietiesasCanada, BelgiumandtheUnitedKingdom(allliberaldemocracies)Hechter(1975:5)argues thatthisethnicpersistencesuggeststhatsuccessfulincorporationofperipheral
127
groupsoccursonlyundercertainconditions.Hechterofferstwoalternativemodels ofnationaldevelopment,thediffusionmodelandtheinternalcolonialmodel. Thediffusionmodelofnationaldevelopmentpredictsthat,following industrialisation,thepeoplesoftheperipherywilleventuallybecomeacculturated tothecultureofthecore,thatis,thecultureoftheethnic/racialgroupwhich dominatestheState.Interactionsbetweenthecoreandtheperipherywill,inthe longrun,bringaboutacommonsetofeconomic,culturalandpoliticalinstitutions andpractices,andthefoundationsforaseparateethnicidentitywilldisappear (Hechter1975:68).Thisistheviewofnationaldevelopmentuponwhichthepolicy ofassimilationwasbased. Bycontrast,intheinternalcolonialmodelofnationaldevelopmentthecoreisseen todominatetheperipherypoliticallyandtoexploititmaterially(Hechter1975:9). Thefactthatracial/ethnicconflictpersistsisrelatedinhisviewtoaculturaldivision oflabourinwhicheconomicdisadvantageprevailsintheperiphery. Notingtheliteraturewhicharguesthattheperipheryremainsculturallyisolated fromthecoreindeveloping(ThirdWorld)countries,Hechter(1975:26)says[i]tis difficulttoarguethatperipheralgroupsinindustrialsocietiesareeconomically, politicallyandculturallyisolatedfromthecore.However,becausetheperipheral groupissuffusedwithexploitativeconnectionstothecoreitcanbedeemedan internalcolony(Hechter1975:32).Thiseconomicdependencewhichpromotes backwardnessinperipheralgroupsisreinforcedthroughjuridical,political,and militarymeasures. Thereisarelativelackofservices,lowerstandardoflivingandhighlevel offrustrationAmongmembersoftheperipheralgroup.Thereis nationaldiscriminationonthebasisoflanguage,religionorother culturalforms.Thustheaggregateeconomicdifferencesbetweenthe
128
coreandtheperipheryarecausallylinkedtotheirculturaldifferences. (Hechter1975:34) InHechtersstudy,thepenetrationoftheculturalinstitutionsofthecorenarrowed socialisationdifferencesbetweenthecoreandperipheralcollectivities.Infaceof thesepressuresforacculturationthepersistenceofadistinctiveculturein peripheralareascouldnotbeexplainedbytheperipherysisolationfromthecore culture.Instead,thepersistenceofperipheralculturesuggestedforHechter(1975: 27)avirilepatternofresistancetoassimilation. Ontheissueofsuffusionoftheperipheralgroupwithexploitativeconnectionswith thecore,Blauner(1969:404)notedthat,intheUSA,outsideofsomeareasofthe South,therewasnoBlackeconomyandthatmostBlackAmericanswereinevitably caughtupinthelargersocietysstructureofoccupations,education,andmass communication.Heobservedthat,asaresultofcontradictorypressures,similarto thosenotedbyHechter,BlackAmericanshadbothanethnicnationalistorientation whichreflectedtherealityofcolonisationandanintegrationistorientationwhich correspondedtotherealitythattheinstitutionsofthelargersocietyweremuch moredevelopedthanthoseoftheincipientnation(Blauner1969:404;emphasis added). OtherinfluentialmodelsofinternalcolonialismwereputforwardbyLatinAmerican writerssuchasCasanovaandStavenhagen.AccordingtoCasanova(1965:32)the newnationswhichemergedaftergainingindependencefromacolonialpower preservedthedichotomouscharacterandcontradictorytypesofrelationssimilarto thosefoundinthecolonialsociety.Stavenhagen(1965:64)maintainedthatthe citybecomesthecoreofthenewnationandtheruralareastheperiphery. InAustralia,withitsfederalsystemofgovernment,wecanseethenational governmentinCanberraasconstitutingapoliticalcore,whichhasdrivenpolicyin AboriginalAffairssincethe1967ReferendumenhancedtheCommonwealths
129
powersinthisarea.However,Stategovernments,withtheircontroloflandand policinginparticular,continuetooperateasasecondarylevelofthepoliticalcore whichalsogeneratespoliciesandinstitutionswhichaffectAboriginalpeoples. Capitalistbusinesses,especiallylargescaleones,tendtohavetheirheadquartersin themajorcities,andeveninmetropolitancountriesandtheUSA(theonesettler statewhichisaninternationalsuperpower),anddrivetheframeworkofeconomic structuresfromtheeconomiccore. Aboriginalpeopleslivetheirlivesinstructuresofpoliticalandeconomicpowerdictated fromthecore.Thesearetheexploitativeconnectionstothecoreidentifiedby Hechter(withreferencetotheCelticfringeintheUK).Nevertheless,itmustbe acknowledgedthattherealityofAboriginalsettlementin2008is(a)mostlyurban and(b)showscharacteristicsofintegrationintotheAustralianeconomyinways predictedbyBlauner,evenifthishasbeenlargelythroughthepublicsector,non governmentagenciesandtheAboriginalsectorratherthroughmainstream businesses. Police,asagentsofthecore,dothebesttheycantoadministerthelawsofthecore inlocalenvironments,someofwhicharesignificantlyatvariancewithassumptions uponwhichpolicymakersinthecoredevelopedthelaws.Economicandpolitical dominancedoesnotnecessarilytranslateintoculturalacceptanceintheperiphery ofcoredrivenlawsandpolicies. PublicOrderPolicing Disturbancestopublicordertakeplacealongacontinuumfromdisorderlystreet behaviourtolargescaleorganisedprotestsorriotsandterroristbombings.They maybestatic,suchasafootballmatch,ormobile,suchasmarchesandparades. HumanrightsinstrumentswhichCrawshaw,DevlinandWilliamson(1998)identify asrelevanttopolicingpublicordereventsaretheUNHDR,ICCPR,Hague Conventions,GenevaConventions,theUNCodeofConductforLawEnforcement
130
Officials,andtheUNBasicPrinciplesontheUseofForceandFirearmsbyLaw EnforcementOfficials. Thekeyhumanrightswhicharerelevantinpublicordersituationsare: 1)therighttolifewhichisguaranteedbyUNHDRArticle3;ICCPRArticle6.1.While nooneshouldbearbitrarilydeprivedoflife,therighttolifeisnotabsoluteinthe waytherightnottobesubjectedtotortureortoslaveryareprotectedabsolutely. Forexample,thedeathpenaltyisnotprohibitedbytheseinstrumentsbutitshould onlybeimposedforthemostseriouscrimesafteracompetentcourthasimposed thesentence(Crawshawetal.1998:91).Notonlymuststatespreventassaultson theircitizensrightsbutthey: mustadoptpositivemeasurestoprotecttherighttolife,to preventactsofmassviolence,topreventarbitrarykillingsbytheir ownsecurityforces.(Crawshawetal.1998:91) Crawshawetal.(1998)notethattheseobligationsonstateshavesignificant implicationsforpolicing.Theysaythatpolicingpolicy,strategyandtacticsfor dealingwithconflictanddisordermustbeinformedby:therequirementtoprotect therighttolife;andtheprohibitionofarbitrarydeprivationoflife[i.e.officersmust nottakealifeunnecessarily].Theymustalsobeinformedby:therequirementto takepositivestepstoprotectlife;topreventdisorderfromoccurring;andtoensure properinvestigationsintodeathscausedbystateofficials.(2)FreedomofAssembly isanotherkeyhumanrightwhichisrelevanttopublicordersituationsPrinciple12 oftheUNsBasicPrinciplesontheUseofForceandFirearmsbyLawEnforcement OfficialsLawfulandPeacefulAssemblies.(3)Peoplewhoaredetainedhavethe RighttoHumaneTreatment(Article10ICCPR);theprohibitionoftortureisabsolute (UNHDRArticle5;CAT;ICCPRArticle7.(4)RighttoaFairTrialhasimplicationsfor policebehaviourinrelationtoearlystagesofaninvestigation,gatheringevidence, treatmentofallegedoffender(s).(5)RighttoPresumptionofInnocencei.e.from
131
theearlieststagesoftheinvestigation.TheselattertwoRightsareembodiedin Articles10and11oftheUNHDRandinArticle14oftheICCPR. Animportantconsiderationinrespectingtheserightsistheuseofforcewhich,in ordertopreventthearbitrarydeprivationoflifemustbegovernedbytheprinciples ofproportionalityandnecessity.Theonlyacceptablereasonsforpoliceactionwhich resultsindeathare:personaldefence(i.e.theirownlifeorthatofanotherperson mustbeindanger);toeffectanarrestorpreventanescape.Quellingariotor insurrectionisincludedintheEuropeanConvention(Crawshawetal.1998) Here,policingofpublicordereventswhicharedescribedinthepressasriotswillbe thefocusofdiscussion.Ariotisadisorganisedpublicorderevent.Thespecificcase tobeexaminedistheremoteAboriginalcommunityofWadeye.Kingand Waddington(2005)provideaflashpointsmodelforanalysingpublicorder occurrences.ThemodelwasdevisedbyDavidWaddingtontoexplainwhysome potentiallydisorderlyincidents(flashpoints)failtoignite,whileotheroneswhich appeartobesimilar,triggeroffanexplosivereaction. TheFlashpointsmodelforanalysingpublicorderoccurrenceslooksatsix integratedlevelsofstructurationasfollows:structuralmaterialinequalitieswhich leadtocollectivegrievances;political/ideologicalthewaykeypoliticaland ideologicalinstitutionsreacttodemandsandactivitiesofprotestinggroups;cultural contrastingwaysoflifeandthought;contextualmacroouteredge;dynamic communicationprocessesinthebuilduptoanevent(eg.predictionofviolence leadstoviolencetakingplace);situationalactualsocialsettingoftherelevant socialinteraction,presenceoftargetsofderision;interactionalatthemicro/core level;qualityofsocialinteractionbetweenpoliceandprotestors;thewayeachparty readstheother(KingandWaddington2005:257). KingandWaddington(2005:256)arguethattoexplainriotousbehaviourweneed tolookattheprecipitatingincidentandwidercontextualfactorsasLordScarmandid
132
inhisreportontheBrixtonRiots(UK1981).Centraltothewidercontextualfactors istheinternalcolonialrelationshipthatcontinuesbetweenthestateandthese peripheralcommunities,suchasWadeye.1 PublicorderpolicingofariotatWadeye(NorthernTerritory) InOctober2002apoliceofficershotdeadayoungAboriginalmanandwounded anotherduringaviolentconfrontationbetweentworivalgangs,theJudasPriests andtheEvilWarriors.2Muchdestructionofhouses,carsandpublicproperty followed.Thepoliceofficer,SeniorConstableWhittington,wassubsequently chargedvariouslywithcommittingadangerousactcausingdeath,thenmurder, latermanslaughter,andeventuallyintheNTSupremeCourtin2006hewas chargedwithcommittingadangerousact(ABC2007:1).However,JusticeMildren ruledthatbecausethechargewasnotlaidwithintwomonths,asrequiredunderthe NTPoliceAdministrationAct,theindictmentwasquashed(NTSupremeCourt 2006:5). IfweapplyWaddingtonsFlashpointsmodeltotheoriginalriotandshootingwe findthattheprecipitatingincidentwasasituationwherealargegroupofpeople wereheadingfortheovalamidtalkthatweaponswerecirculating.Whittington, actingofficerincharge,andtwootherofficers,followedthegroupandbegan confiscatingweapons.Whittingtonspreadthewordthatnoweaponswereallowed andthatfightshadtobeevenlymatched.Thensomeonecalledgun,gunandthe shootingstookplace. SixdaysafterSeniorConstableRobertWhittingtonarrivedatWadeyehe experiencedsomeonewavingashotgunathimforthefirsttimeinhiscareer(NT
Wadeyeisgeographicallyperipheralaswellaseconomicallyandsociallyso,butevenacommunity suchasRedfern,whichislocatedatthecentreofAustraliasmostpopulouscity,isperipheralin manywaysaswasdemonstratedinthe2004riot(Ridgeway2004;Jennett2008). 2 InpartsofAustraliaitisthepractice,outofrespectfortherelevantAboriginalcommunitysbeliefs, nottousethepersonalnameofadeadpersonforsomeyearsaftertheirdeath.Thatisthesituation withthismemberoftheJongminfamily.
1
133
MagistratesCourt2007:24),judgedthatliveswereindanger,drewhispistoland accidentallykilleda18yearoldman,whohadbeenstrugglingwiththegunwielder, teenagerTobiasWorumbu,whoWhittingtonalsoshotandinjured.Worumbusaid thathehadbeenwavingashotgunintheairtoscarethegroupwhichwasbeating hisbrotherinwhat,inhisview,didnotconstituteafairgofight(NTMagistrates Court;Australian13/10/17).Thesefairgofights,organisedbyeldersandsupervised bypolice,wereasafetyvalveforlettingoffsteambeforefeelingsexplodedand theywereanindicatoroftheinteractionalstructurationoftheeventswhichledupto thisparticularriot. AtthestructurallevelofstructurationWadeyeisacolonised,deprivedcommunity, peoplehaveverylowincomes,andunemploymentisveryhigh.DuringtheHoward yearswhenthemassmediawantedscaryfootageofAboriginalcommunitiesout ofcontroltheyoftentrottedoutscenesfromWadeyeofyoungwildeyedmen, wavingverynastylookingweaponsaboutateachother.PrimeMinisterHoward andMinisterMalBroughusedimagesofsuchdysfunctionalitytoselltheirN.T. Intervention,throughwhichtheyliterallybroughtinthetroopsratherthan respondtoAboriginalserviceorganisationsrequeststohavetheirfundingrestored orincreasedsothattheycouldaddresstheproblemsaboutwhichtheGovernment wasexpressingconcernjustpriortoanelectionandaboutwhichthese organisationshadbeenvoicingconcernformanyyears(Altman&Hinkson2007). OnepoliceofficerwhohadworkedtheredescribedWadeyeasbeingcharacterised byaseeminglypermanentstateofhostilitybetweencertainfamilygroups.Often suchhostilityhasitsrootsindisplacementbywhitespatialmanagers(Hage1998; Jennett&HellerWagner2001)orinternalcolonialrulersofAboriginalfamiliesonto thelandofonegroup.UnderAboriginallawothergroupsdonothavearighttobe thereunlessasguestsofthelandownersandmanagers(Maddock1982)and certainlynotbecausewhiteadministratorshaddecidedthatitwouldbeagood idea.
134
Political/IdeologicallevelofStructuration Overlaidonandintertwinedwiththestructuralsituationarecolonialinstitutionsof selfdeterminationusuallyconsistingofalocallyruncouncilonwhichthosewho cancommunicatewithwhites,readtheirlettersetc.sitinanuneasyrelationship withtraditionalownersandelderswhohavestatusunderAboriginallaw(Maddock 1982).Whitesseewhattheycansee,Blacksseetheirsystem,unrespected.All theadministrativeandeconomicperformanceindicatorsarewhiteandthisleads tofrustration,whichisexhibitedaslackofrespectfortheelders,lackofrespectfor eitherthewhiteortheblacksystemsofstatusandpowerand,hence,spillsoverinto communalchaos(orriots)attimes. Structuralandculturalfactorsemphasisedifferenceandinequality ThemainrivalgangsatWadeyearetheEvilWarriorsandtheJudasPriestBoys(it wasformerlyPortKeatsMission).Therewere3Policeand2500Indigenous residentsatthetimeoftheshooting.PoliceintheN.Tareawarethatthe communitieswithwhichtheyaredealingdonotnecessarilyfitneatlywiththe communitieswhichthelawmakersofthepoliticalcorehadinmindwhenthelaw wasconceived.Thisisduetoculturaldifferencescoupledwithmultideficit communitycharacteristics,suchasveryhighlevelsofunemployment,andlow levelsofeducation.Intheearly2000seldersandthepolicehadtheirownwayof defusinghostility.Insteadofwaitinguntilitbuiltupandtherewasariot,withrocks, spearsandaxes,theywouldsanctiononeononefistfightsatthelocaloval,the interactionalstructurationpreviouslynoted. Whenaproblemaroseafairgofistfightwouldbearrangedtosettlethedispute andpolicewouldsupervise,i.e.theywouldprovidecrowdcontrol.Theywould ensurethefightingdidnotgetoutofhandandthatnoweaponswereused.They wererefereesofcommunityhostilities(Australian13/10/07;N.T.MagistratesCourt 2007).
135
SeniorConstableCarmenButcher,whohadbeeninthecommunityforsometime, saidthatsherarelycarriedhergunatWadeyebecauseitwouldhavebeenseenasa signofaggressionanddistrust.Whenpeoplegotoutofcontrolshetalkedthem down(Australian13/10/07).Thisishowpolicemanagedtheirsideofthe interactionalfactorsinordertoavoidbecomingtargetsofderisionand,hence, hostility.SeniorConstableWhittington,havingjustarrivedinthecommunityand withnosignificantexperienceofpolicinginbushcommunitieswasunlikelytohave appreciatedtheseinteractionalsubtleties.AstheCoronernoted[h]ehadnothad timetoestablishanycloserelationshipwiththeAboriginalcommunity(N.T. MagistratesCourt2007:6). WhittingtonsactionswerescrutinisedbytheCoronerwhoconcludedthatpolice mighthavebrokenthelawbysanctioningthefights.TheCoronersaidthatthey werecondoningviolencebytheirmerepresenceatthefights.Hewascriticalof Whittingtonsjudgementonthedayandthefactthathehadnotfollowedthe proceduresinwhichhehadbeentrained,i.e.toscantheareapriortodischarging hispistol(N.T.MagistratesCourt2007:23).TheCoronerconsideredthat Whittingtonhadpanickedwhileactingunderconsiderablestressandmadea seriouserrorofjudgement(N.T.MagistratesCourt2007:24).TheCoronerfound thatacrimemayhavebeencommittedwhereanordinarypersonsimilarly circumstancedwouldhaveclearlyforeseensuchdangerandnothavedonetheact (N.T.MagistratesCourt2007:29). Sincethen,disputeresolutionatWadeyehaschanged:eldersnolongerorganise fairgofights;policehaveofficiallyruledoutsanctioningthem;thedeadmans fatherisreportedlyfeelingdisillusionedwiththewhitelegalsystem;Senior ConstableWhittingtonrefusestoworkinAboriginalcommunitiesduetotheunder resourcedconditions.
136
ThisexampleofayoungmansdeathatWadeyein2002demonstratestheextentto whichstructural,culturalandideologicalfactorsareoftenoutsideofpolicecontrol, i.e.determinedlargelybytheexploitativeinternalcolonialconnectionspreviously described.TheseconnectionsinvolveadivisionoflabourinwhichIndigenous peopleatWadeyearelargelyexcludedfrommainstreamopportunitiesbutunable toliveaviablealternativelifestyle.Thepolitical,economicandculturalsystemsof whichtheyareontheperipheryareadministeredfromelsewhere. Ontheotherhand,itispossibleforpolicetoinfluencethecontextual,situational andinteractionalfactorsidentifiedbytheFlashpointsmodelbutthisisusuallyonly withsupportfromlocalauthorityfiguresandthecommunityleaders.However,if theseareoperatinginasystemcontrolledbyanotherculturalgroup (representativesoftheWhiteAustralianState)ontheonehand,anddividedover whatcommunityinterestsare,ontheother,thenpolicehavetoworkvery creativelyindeedandrequireadequateresourcestodoso.Thepeopledonotwant thekidsoutofcontrol(Jennett&Greer2001;Memmotetal.2001)buttheydonot wantthemtobeshoteither! DuringthecoronialhearingtheCoroner,GregCavanagh,toldtheJongminfamily (towhomthedeadmanbelonged)thathewantedthemtohavefaithinthe coronialprocessandtounderstandthatthiswasnotjustanycourtroomsceneof thewhiteman(TheDailyTelegraph2/10/07).TheDPPwrotetothefamilysaying: Myofficecarefullylookedatalltheevidenceandconcludedthatthere wasnoreliableevidencethatRobertWhittingtonhadmurderedyour son.Therewasevidencethatheshouldnothavefiredhispistolwhenhe did,thatheshouldhaveknownwhenhefiredthatthereweretwomen closetogetherandthathemighthavehiteitheroneofthem.(ABC 5/04/07)
137
AmbroseJongmin,fatherofthedeadman,said[t]thepoliceactuallyshotmyson, buthewasahero.whathedidtheresave[d]manylives(ABC5/04/07).Mr. JongminwasatfirstinclinedtosettlethematterusingtraditionalAboriginallaw saidbutIthoughtIdbestgiveittothewhitemanlawsotheycanhandlethat.But whatdidtheygiveme?Nothing.(ABC5/04/07).Wecanseefromthefathers reactionthattheculturalandpowerdifferencesbetweenthepoliceofficer,acting asanagentoftheN.T.State,andtheAboriginalfamily,caughtbetweentwo systemsoflawandpower,arevast. Conclusion AboriginalcommunitiesoftheperipheryofAustraliansocietyexperienceAustralian administrativesystemslargelyasthepowersystemofthecoloniserbutastheseare themostpowerfulinstitutionsinthesocietytheyhavenooptionbuttobe integratedintotheminmanyways.Policeoperateattheboundaryofthetwo systemsofpowerandunderstanding,tryingtoenforcethelawsofthecolonial powerinasacceptableawayastheycan.Itisinevitablethatsituationssuchasthe oneinwhichSeniorConstableWhittingtonfoundhimselfwillhappenfromtimeto timeunlessthefrustrationandalienationlevelsinsomeofthemoredysfunctional communitiesareaddressedconstructively.WaddingtonsFlashpointsModelof publicorderpolicingprovidesaframeworkthroughwhichtheinteractingfactors involvedineventssuchastheshootingatWadeyecanbeexaminedandthelimits topoliceeffectivenesscanbeidentified.
138
References Altman,J.&Hinkson,M.2007CoerciveReconciliation:stabilize,normalize,exit AboriginalAustralia,ArenaPublicationsAssociation,NorthCarlton,Australia. AustralianBroadcastingCommission(ABC)20075/04/07 Blauner,R.1969InternalColonialismandGhettoRevolt,SocialProblems,Vol.16, No.4,pp.393408. Carmichael,S.&Hamilton,C.V.1967BlackPowerthePoliticsofLiberationin America,VintageBooks,NewYork. Casanova,P.G.1965InternalColonialismandNationalDevelopment,Studiesin ComparativeInternationalDevelopment,Vol.12,No.4,pp.2737. CommonwealthSecretariat2006CommonwealthManualonHumanRightsTraining forPolice,http://www.the commonwealth.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=15274 Crawshaw,R,Devlin,B&Williamson,T.1998HumanRightsandPolicing:Standards forGoodBehaviourandaStrategyforChange,KluwerInternational,TheHague. Hage,G.1998WhiteNation:FantasiesofWhitesupremacyinamulticulturalsociety, PlutoPress,Annandale. Hartwig,M.1978CapitalismandAborigines:TheTheoryofInternalColonialism anditsRivals,inE.LWheelwright&K.Buckley(eds)EssaysinthePoliticalEconomy ofAustralianCapitalism,Vol.3,ANZBookCo.,Brookvale,
139
Hechter,M.1975InternalColonialism:TheCelticFringeinBritishnational Development15361966,Routledge&KeganPaul,London. Howard,M.C.1982AboriginalBrokerageandPoliticalDevelopmentinSouth WesternAustraliainM.C.Howard(ed.)AboriginalPowerinAustralianSociety, UniversityofQueenslandPress,St.Lucia. Jennett,C.1991AboriginalNationalism,paperpresentedatTASA91Conference, MurockUniversity,Perth,December1014. Jennett,C.&Greer,P.2001FearofCrimeinIndigenousCommunitiesinNewSouth Wales,ANZSOCConference,UniversityofMelbourne,Melbourne. King,M.&Waddington,D.2005FlashpointsRevisited:acriticalapplicationtothe policingofantiglobalizationprotest,Vol.15,No.3,pp.255282. Lacey,D.1972TheWhiteUseofBlacksinAmerica,McGrawHillBookCompany, NewYork. Lippmann,L.1981GenerationsofResistance,LongmanChesire,Melbourne. Maddock,K.1982TheAustralianAborigines,2nd.ed.,Penguin,Ringwood,Victoria. Memmot,P,Stacey,R,Chambers,C.&Keys,C.2001ViolenceinIndigenous Communities,AttorneyGeneralsDepartment,Canberra,http://www.ncp.gov.au MoretonRobinson,A.2007SovereignSubjects:IndigenousSovereigntyMatters, Allen&Unwin,CrowsNest. NTMagistratesCourt2007InquestintotheDeathofRobertJongmin, http://www.nt.gov//justice/ntmc/docs/judgements/2007/20071203ntmc080.html
140
NTSupremeCourt2006WhittingtonVTheQueen[2006]NTSC(1March2006), http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nt/NTSC/2006/16.html Rowley,C.D.1972aTheDestructionofAboriginalSociety,Penguin,Ringwood, Victoria. Rowley,C.D.1972bOutcastesinWhiteAustralia,Penguin,Ringwood,Victoria. Ridgeway,A.2004TheunderlyingcausesoftheRedfernriotsrunthroughout Australia,OnLineopinion,23February, http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/print.asp?article=1989 Stavenhagen,R.1965Classes,ColonialismandAcculturationinMezoamerica, StudiesinComparativeInternationalDevelopment,Vol.1,No.6,pp.5357. Werther,G.F.A.1992SelfDeterminationinWesternDemocracies:AboriginalPolitics inaComparativePerspective,GreenwoodPress,Westport,Connecticut. Newspaperarticles Australian13/10/07 TheDailyTelegraph2/10/07
141
VictimsasSurvivors
JanJordan InstituteofCriminology(TePouHaratutanga) SchoolofSocialandCulturalStudies(TeKuraMahingaTangata) VictoriaUniversityofWellington(TeWhareWanangaoteUpokooteIkaa Maui) jan.jordan@vuw.ac.nz Introduction Womanasvictimcontinuestobeaniconicimagewithinsociety,andwithin criminology.Thestereotypicalportrayalofapassivefemale,helplesstoresista maleattacker,dominatesmediaaccounts,suggestingthattobefemaleistobe afraid.Thisperspectivehasbeenvigorouslychallengedbysomefeministsand victimsthemselves(eg.Burton,1998;Kelly,1988;Lamb,1999),yetthedebatehas tendedtopresentwomenwhohavebeenrapedorbeatenwithtwooppositional positions:toseethemselves,andbeviewedbyothers,aseithervictimsorsurvivors. Implicitinthisconstructionistheassumptionthatavictimbecomesasurvivorover time,withthisoftenbeingreferredtoasajourneyfromvictimtosurvivor. InthispaperIwanttoexplorethenuancesofthisdebatebydrawingoninterview materialobtainedwith15women,allofwhomwereattackedbythesameserial rapistinNewZealand(seealsoJordan,2008).Iarguethatthesewomen'saccounts ofhowtheyweresimultaneouslyimpacteduponandprovokedtoactprovideamore complexlensthroughwhichtoexplorethesignificanceofashiftfromseeingvictims orsurvivorstoviewingvictimsassurvivors.Ialsocanvasssomeoftheimplications arisingfromthisshiftinperception.
142
Whatisavictim? Adictionarydefinitionofavictimincludesthefollowingdescriptions: 1. Onewhoisharmedorkilledbyanother:avictimofamugging. 2. Alivingcreatureslainandofferedasasacrificeduringareligiousrite. 3. Onewhoisharmedbyormadetosufferfromanact,circumstance,agency, orcondition:victimsofwar (TheAmericanHeritageDictionaryoftheEnglishLanguage,4thedition,published byHoughtonMifflinCompany.) Theemphasisisonwhatisdonetoanotherpersontheyaremadeavictimbythe actionsofanoffender.Criticismsofthevictimconstructhavethereforeemphasised thepassivityitdenotes,alongwithnotionsofsubmissionandsurrender(Bart,1985; Kelly,1988).Theimpressionconveyedisofhelplessness,ofpersonsunableto engageintheirownselfdefence. InthispaperIwanttousethewomen'snarrativestopresentanexpandedversionof whatselfdefencemeans,andarguethatthepositionsofvictimandsurvivorneedto beappliedinwaysthatfitmorecloselywiththecomplexitiesandcontradictions containedwithinvictimisationexperiences.Firstlytheresearchcontextand methodologyusedinthisstudyissummarised.Abriefsynopsisfollowsofthenature oftheattacksthesewomenhadtosurvive,beforeexaminingtworelatedquestions regardingthewaystheydefendedthemselvesagainstbothvictimisationand secondaryvictimisation. Researchcontext AsaresultofearlierraperesearchIhadconductedinNewZealand,Iwasintroduced byadetectiveinvolvedinalargeserialrapecasetooneofthevictims/survivorsand, followingdiscussionswithherandsomeoftheotherwomen,embarkedonamajor researchstudywiththem(seeJordan,2005andJordan,2008forfurtherdetails).
143
Thisresultedinmyinterviewing15womenintotal;thisnumberincluded14ofthe27 womenwhosecaseswereheardinthe1998trialofMalcolmRewa,plusawoman whomRewahadbeenconvictedofrapingin1975whowascalledtoappearasa witnessinthelatertrial.Keyconceptsarisingfrommypreviousearlierresearch (Jordan,1998,2001)wereusedtoinformtheinitialinterviewschedule,whichwas adaptedtoreflecttheissuesemergingfromdiscussionswiththewomen.I endeavoured,throughmyquestionsandtheinterviewenvironmentIestablished,to puteachwomanathereaseandminimisethepowerdifferencesinherentinthe interviewingdynamic.Theinterviewsweretypicallylong,lastingfromtwotwo fourhoursandsometimesovermorethanonesession. Withthewomenspermission,theinterviewswererecordedandlatertranscribedto facilitateanalysis.Aseparatefilewascreatedforeachofthewomencontainingmy interviewnotes,thetranscript,andnotesfromherpolicefile(obtainedwithher permission).ThismaterialIthenanalysedusingagroundedtheoryapproach (GlaserandStrauss,1967)toidentifythemesandissuesarisingfromthewomens narrativesandexperiences.Fromthese,ideaswereformulatedandexaminedfor theirabilitytodemonstratepatternsanduniformitiesinthewomensresponses, whilestrivingtoensureuniqueexperienceswerenotlostfromtheanalysis. Epistemologically,Iacceptedthewomensnarrativesoftheirexperiencesas legitimatesourcesofknowledgeintheirownright.Ininterpretingandpresenting theseaccounts,however,Iamawareofthepossibilitiesbothofmyinfluenceinhow thesewereframedandtold,aswellastheimpactoftimeonhoweachwoman articulatedherexperience.Itispossiblethattheaccountspresentedbythewomen reflectedthepositiveresponsesandinterventionstheyhadexperiencedfromearlier retellings,andthatthesemayhavecontributedtoanincreasedsenseofpersonal agency.These,afterall,werewomenwhosestorieswerebelieved,whoseoffender wasconvicted,andwhothemselveshadbeenpubliclycommended(forexample,by thejudgeatsentencing)fortheirstrengthandcourage.Ontheotherhand,many madecommentssuggestingthisinterviewwasthefirstoccasionwheretheyfelt
144
theyweregiventhespacetopresenttheirownversionofeventsandtostresswhat wasimportanttothem,assupposedtosatisfyingpolicerequirementsorreassuring familymembers. Thenextsectionprovidesabriefoverviewofthewomensattackerandwhatthey hadtosurvive. Backgroundtotheattacks MalcolmRewawasborninNorthland,NewZealand,andraisedbyrelatives followinghismother'sdeathinacaraccidentwhenhewasababy(Williams,1998). Hecommittedhisfirstknownsexualattackin1975when,afterdroppinghiswifeat thematernitywardofAucklandHospital,heheadedforthenurses'homeand sexuallyattackedayoungnurse.Hewassubsequentlyarrestedandpleadedguilty, receivingafourandahalfyearprisonsentenceforthisoffence.Theyearsfollowing hisreleaseindicateextensiveinvolvementinabikergang,aswellasagrowing recordofburglaryoffences.Bythenexttimehewastostandtrialforrapeoffences, itwas1998andhewasbeingtriedon45countsrelatingto27differentwomen attackedbetween1987and1996.Hewasconvictedonthemajorityofthese chargesandsentencedtopreventivedetentionwitha22yearminimumnonparole period. Rewawasidentifiedandconvictedinlargepartthroughthedistinctiveattack patternhedeveloped.Hetargetedwomenaloneintheirhomes,orthosewithonly youngchildrenpresent.Hewouldtypicallybreakinwhiletheywereasleepand overpowertheminablitzstyleattack,subduingthemquicklythroughtheuseof gagsandbinds.Oftenhepositionedtheirbodiessothattheydrapedovertheside ofthebed,andwouldremovetheirclothingfromthewaistdown.Hesometimes shoneatorchontheirgenitals,andengagedinvariousmasturbatoryactivitiesashe soughttomanagehiserectiledysfunctionproblems.Afterrapingorsexually assaultingthewoman,hewouldoftenleavethemboundandgaggedwhilehe searchedthehouseforvaluablestosteal,sometimesreturningtorapethemagain
145
beforeleaving. Profileofthewomen RewatendedtofavourmiddlehighersocioeconomicareasinAucklandcity.His victimswereaged1543years,withmostintheirthirties.Themajoritywere Caucasianwomen,mostofwhomwerewelleducatedandholdingprofessionaljobs. Formostthisattacksignalledtheirfirstexperiencewiththepolice/criminaljustice system.Thehighcourttrialranfor3monthsandwasoneofthelongestandmost publicisedinNewZealand,withthepoliceandprosecutorsmakingspecialeffortsto lookafterthesewomenandpreparethemforthecourtcase.Inparttheyreceived suchpositiveinputbecausetheyfittedthestereotypeofthe'perfectvictim',unable tobecriticisedfordoinganythingto'getthemselvesraped.' Iwanttousethenarrativesfromthewomentoexploretworelatedquestions associatedwithselfdefence: 1.Howtodefendtheselfagainstvictimisation? 2.Howtodefendtheselfagainstsecondary(re)victimisation? Howtodefendtheselfagainstvictimisation? Traditionalviewsofselfdefencehavestressedtheimportanceofacquiringthe physicalskillsrequiredtofightoffawouldbeassailant.Whilemanyendeavorto promoteattitudinalchangeaswell,andcanbeconfidencebuildingand empowering,theemphasisisoftenonacquiringthephysicalskillsandtactics.Such coursescanobviouslybeusefulinteachingsurvivaltechniquesandstrategies (Heydenetal,1999).Whencommentsaremadeaboutusingselfdefence knowledge,theexamplesgivenaretypicallyoftheeyegouging,nosebreaking, ballkickingvariety.Thusalthoughwomenaresocializedagainstbeingaggressive andexpectedtobesubmissiveintheirrelationshipswithmen,
146
Theironyisthatwhenconfrontedwitharapistwhoisphysicallystrongerandmaybe armed,awomanissuddenlyexpectedtostruggle,fight,andresisttoadegreenot otherwiseexpected.(Burgess,1999,8) Suchaviewreflectsinpartaperceptionthattheattackisphysicalandsothe resistanceanddefencemustalsobephysical.Accordingly,theemphasishasbeen onenhancingpotentialvictimsabilitiestodefendthemselvesphysically. Whileacceptingthatthephysicalcomponentcanbeanimportantpartofself defence,thewomen'scommentsreflectedamuchbroaderconceptionofwhat defendingtheselfmeans.InpartthiswasnecessitatedbyRewaveryquickly demonstratingthathewasnotthekindofattackerwhowouldbedeterredby attemptstoresisthimphysically.Hecommunicatedhisdeterminationtosucceed veryforcefullythroughsuchmeansashisphysicalaggression,throughthewayshe disabledhisvictims,andhowherespondedtoanyattemptsontheirparttoresist himphysically.Rewadisplayedwhatseveralofthewomenreferredtoasadont messwithmeattitude;ifthewomenscreamedoreventalkedtohim,hewouldhit theirfaces,gagthem,andshutthemup. Notsurprisingly,hisactionsinstilledhugeandoftendisablingfearinthewomen. Somesaidtheywerescaredhewasgoingtokillthemtheydidnotthinkthey wouldemergefromthisexperiencealive.Ifthewomenhadchildrensleepinginthe house,Rewawouldmakethreatsagainstthemtoobtainhisvictim'scooperation. Hedidallhecouldtosecurehisvictims'compliance. Someofthewomendescribedtheirhurtwhenthosearoundthemqueriedwhythey hadnotemployedselfdefencetechniquesagainstRewa.Suzanne13,forexample,
Allnamesusedarepseudonymsornameschosenbythewomen,asusedinthebookSerial Survivors:Women'sNarrativesofSurvivingRape(Jordan,2008).
13
147
feltothersblamedherlackofselfdefenceknowledgeinwaysthatimpliedshe shouldhaveavoidedbeingraped: [P]eopleafterwardsweresaying,Well,whydidntyoudothis,whydidntyouknee himbetweenthelegs?andthingslikethat.Icouldn'tkneehimbetweenthelegs becauseIwasinbedwhenhecamein.HewasexpectingmebutIwasn'texpecting him.(Suzanne,quotedinJordan,2008,p.27) Itwasalsoevidentfromthewomensaccountsthatphysicalselfdefencemaynot alwayshavebeenthebestoption.InRewascaseherespondedevenmore aggressivelytowardsanywomanwhotriedtophysicallyresisthim,promptingsome toquicklydeviseotherwaysofresponding.Raquel,forinstance,wasattackedwhile gettingintohercarlateonenight,andwasscathingaboutassumptionsthatself defencetechniqueswouldhavesavedher: Ifsomeonecomesupfrombehindyouandifyouvenotseenthem,notheardthem,the firstthingyoufeelisahit,awhacktothebackoftheheadnoamountofselfdefence isgoingtosaveyou.Ifyouturnaroundandtryandfightsomebodywhosabittaller thanyou,abitheavierthanyou,whoisstrongerthanyouandwhohasalsogota weapon,youreanidiot.(Raquel,quotedinJordan,2008,p.17) WhatRaquelsuggestedwasaquickappraisalofthesituationtodeterminewhatthe bestoptionmightbeforher,inthatspecificenvironment,andwiththatparticular attacker.Shesaid: Youreallyjusthavetoworkitoutatthetimeandthatsthehardpart,whethertofight ornot. Whatshedecidedtodowastopretendtheblowtotheheadhadknockedherout. ThewayIwasattackedwastocompletelyhavetotaldominationandtotalpowerover
148
mybody.Basically,Imanobject.ImnotapersonImanobject.Iwastiedup,itwas like,Donttryandfightback.'Theresnowaythathewouldhaveattackedwiththat levelofviolenceifhewasntabsolutely,totallyintentonrapingme.Ithought,thisis notaguythatyoumesswith,whathewantshewillget,talkingtohimisawasteof time. Ithought,heshitmereallyhardonthebackoftheheadIcouldquiteconceivablybe unconsciousorhalfunconscious.IfhethinksImunconscioushewonthurtme, becausetheresnoreasontobecauseImnotgoingtofightback,soselfpreservation Itworked.Hewasvery,verycarefulwithmeandthatswhatIfoundfascinating,the wayhewasreallyquitegentlewithme,thewayhereallytreatedmybody.Isuffered nofurtherinjuryafterthat,nofurtherphysicalinjury.(Raquel,quotedinJordan,2008, p.21) Raquelwasstillraped,andsufferedtheeffectsofrape,butwhatshedidwasforher ameansofselfdefence.Shefoundawaythatkeptapartofherselfdefended againstRewascontrol,beyondhisreach,andthisplayedakeyroleinhersurvival andrecovery.Theveryfactthatshesuccessfullyfooledhimintothinkingshewas actuallyunconsciouswashugelysatisfying: Ifooledhim,andthatcameoutincourttooitwaslike,Iwon!.ThefactthatId fooledhim,thefactthathereallybelievedthatandthatIgotthebetterofhim.He didntlikeitandthatmademefeelsogood,itslikemylittletriumph,itslike,You didnthavecompletecontroloverme.Ihadcontroloverhimmentallyinthesense thatIfooledhim,Idontknowhowtodescribethatitsreallyamazing.(Raquel, quotedinJordan,2008,p.22) Manyoftheotherwomenalsodescribedwaysinwhichtheytoocreatedand strategisedinthesituationwhenphysicalselfdefenceseemedimpossibleasan option.Somequicklyadoptedtheroleofobserverandrecorder,thinkingaheadto thelevelofdescriptiontheywouldpassontothepolicethesewomenfoundaway
149
tostaypresentbutwithapurpose.Otherschosetodissociate,toleaveRewatheir bodyandmentallyremovethemselvesonesaidthathersenseofhumoureven kickedinatthispointasshelookeddownonherboundandgaggedbodyandfound herselfasking:WhatwouldMacGyverdo?(Kathleen,quotedinJordan,2008,p.23) AnotherwomanGabrieldescribedclearlythesenseoffearandpowerlessnessthese womenexperienced.Shedescribedherinitialpanicandthenfindingherselflying thereinclassicvictimmode,waitingtobefurtherharmed: Thisguyhadmestrewnoverabedhalfnaked,boundwithblanketsovermyface,in position,justtotallyreadytorapemeandhe'sgoingthroughtheknifedrawer,coming backintotheroom.Ithought,WhatcanIdo,whatcanIdotoprotectmyself?SoI closedmyeyesreallyhardandIdecidedtojustfilluptheentireroomwithmyselfso thatasmuchofthatroomhadmeinit,sothattherewasnoroomforhiminthere,and itwasareallyhardprocessbecauseIdidn'thavemuchtime. IjustclosedmyeyestotryandthinkaboutmeandhowbigIcouldpossiblymake myselfinthisroomwithoutmoving.Biggerandbiggerandbiggerandbigger,andnot focusingonwhatheisdoingoutthere,andbiggerandbiggerandbiggerandbigger. Andhecomesbackinandhetriestorapemeandhecan't.(Gabriel,quotedinJordan, 2008,p.2526) Gabrielsexampleillustratesthepowerofmentalselfdefencewhenphysical defenceisimpossible,andalsohowvictimisationandsurvivalcancoexist.Thus evenatthesametimeasshewasbeingvictimised,Gabrielwas,likeRaquel,actively resistingRewa'scontrol,searchingforsomemeanstolimithispoweroverher. Althoughmuchfeministliteratureonrapehasdocumentedwomensvicitmisation, somewritershaveexploredtheconceptofsurvival(e.g.GregoryandLees,1999; Kelly,1988;Lamb,1999).Therehasbeenconsiderabledebateregardingthe'right' terminologytodescribethosewhohavebeenraped,arguingwhethertheyaremost
150
appropriatelydescribedas'victims'or'survivors.'Thepassivityoftheconcept, victim,wasrejectedinfavourofatermthatmoreappropriatelyrecognizedand affirmedwomensabilitiestomanage,surviveandintegratetheirexperienceof sexualassaultthroughtherecoveryprocess.Bothlabelshavebeencriticisedforthe wayinwhichtheymaydistortwomensperceptionsoftheirexperiences,forcing themtobeviewedthroughaparticular,andpossiblyalien,lens.ThusSpryobserves ofrape: Thepainandconfusionfollowingtheassaultisfurthercomplicatedbyhavingto structureandmakesenseofherexperiencewithintheassailantslanguage.Sheis alreadyandalwaysheldinrelationtothephallus;sheisvictimtoitorsurvivorofit. (Spry,1995,27) Whethertheysawthemselvesasvictimsorsurvivorswassomethingsomeofthe womenattackedbyRewaalsoconsciouslythoughtabout.Gabrielsaidshewrestled forsometimeastohowbesttodescribeherselfandfinallyapproachedthedebate thisway: Youknowwhat,thattransitionfromvictimtosurvivor,Ithinkthatthevictimandthe survivorcanbeparallel.Thatyouarenever,thatyoudon'tswitchfrombeingvictimto survivor.Youchoosetotakethepathofthesurvivor,whichisstillthepathofthe victim,butitisdifferent. Idon'tthinkthereisashiftinwhathappens,Ithinkthereisashiftinconsciousness.I dothink,IwasavictimofsexualabuseandIhavesurvivedit.(Gabriel,quotedin Jordan,2005,551552) WhatIseereflectedinherresolutiontothisquestionistheimportanceofnotlosing sightoftheeithersideoftheequation.Toonlystresstheharmofvictimisation ignorestheveryactofsurvivalandallthewaysavictimmaytrytoreduceormanage theeffectsofvictimisation;whiletoplacealltheemphasisonsurvivalcanshunt
151
victimsprematurelyintofeelingtheyhavetobeoverit,theyhavetobestrong,in waysthatcanignoretheveryrealharmstheyhaveexperiencedandtheneedsthese mayengender.Intermsofthepolarisedoptionsdrawnbetweenbeingavictimora survivor,thesewomendemonstratedhowtheycouldholdbothpositionstogether theyweresimultaneouslyvictimsandsurvivors.Atthesametimeastheywere beingphysically/sexuallyvictimised,theywerementallyandpsychologicallyacting intheirowndefence.Theirbodiesmayhavebeenpassive,throughfearorfrom beingphysicallyboundandrenderedimmobile,buttheystilldescribedwaysin whichtheyactivelysoughttolimitRewa'scontrolofthemevenattheverytimeof theattack.Itwasimportantforthemtoknowtherewasapartofthemhecouldnot reach,thattheycouldresisthimmentallyandkeepapartofthemselvesseparate fromhiscontrol. This,Iwouldargue,isalsoselfdefence.Itdemonstratesthatevenwhenphysical selfdefenceisimpossible,womencananddodefendthemselvespsychologically. Thisissignificantwhenviewedinthecontextofmuchoftheliteratureaddressing raperesistance.Traditionalpoliceadvicetowomenurgedthemnottoresistifthey wereattacked,implyingsubmissionwasasaferroutetotake.Suchaviewwas challengedonthebasisthat,firstly,itinterpretedphysicalcomplianceas submission,andequatedalackofphysicalresistancewiththeabsenceofmental resistance.LizKellyisoneofthefewwriterstohaveobserved: Womenresistbyrefusingtobecontrolled,althoughtheymaynotphysicallyresist duringanactualassault.Resistance,therefore,involvesactiveoppositiontoabusive mensbehaviourand/orthecontroltheyseektoexert.(Kelly,1988,161) Secondly,theadvicenottoresistreflectedaviewofrapeassimplyunwantedsex.It assuredwomenthatiftheygaveintheywouldbeokay.AsBetsyStankohasargued, theviolationofrapecannotbeavoidedbysubmission(Stanko,1990).Tosuggest thispossibilityreflectsalackofunderstandingofwhatrapemeans,forboththe victimandtherapist.Theveryessenceofrapemakesitimpossibletosubmitto
152
rapebydefinitionimpliesbeingtakenagainstoneswill,inacontextwherethewill andpoweroftherapistprevails.Heinvadesherbody,inanattemptedactof colonisation. Astheexamplesprovidedaboveshow,thewomenattackedbyRewaactively resistedhim.Althoughhemaystillhaverapedandviolatedtheirbodies,theywere engagedinactiveresistancenevertheless.Suchmeasuresplayedanintegralrolein theirabilitiestosurviveandmoveonfollowingtheattack.Thewomen'sneedto keeponsurvivingextendedfarbeyondtheinitialrapeattack.Theyhadtosurvive policeprocesses,themedicalexamination,andthetrial,aswellasmanagehow othersclosetothemreacted.Inallofthesesituationsitwasclearthatthepotential forrevictimisationexisted.Thisbringsmetothesecondquestion: Howtodefendtheselfagainstsecondary(re)victimisation? Secondaryorrevictimisationcanariseincontextswherethesystemsandagenciesa victim/survivorinteractswithtreatherinwaysthatrecallherinitialrapeexperience. Thishasbeenexpressedparticularlyinrelationtothepotentialforrapetrialstofeel likeasecondrape(Freckelton,1998;Lees,1997;Orth,2002;Scutt,1997).Asone raperesearcherconcludedafterfollowing150crapecasesthroughcourtsin Australia: Thisisstatesanctionedvictimisation.(vandeZandt,1998,125) Whilethereisaccuracyinsuchdepictions,Iwouldalsoarguethatitrisksportraying victimsaspassivepawnsinthehandsofthejusticesystem.Undoubtedlysomeof thewomenfeltlikethisattimes,butwhatwasevidentwasthewaysmanychoseto managecourtprocessesinordertolimitthepotentialnegativeimpacts.They activelyresistedbeingpawnsagain,theyfoundwaystodefendthemselvesand survive.
153
Onewaythiswasevidentwaswhensometookstepstoasserttheircontroloverthe physicalspaceofthecourtroom,ahardthingtodogivenhowrigidandunyielding courtstructurescanbe.Onewomanaskedforpermissiontosprinkleglitterbefore shetookthestand,andwasgrantedit. WiththisfriendofminetheboxwhereIwasgoingtobe,weglitup,withtheglitterof courage.Wealsoputitintohis[MR]box.Wewentoverthereandsoweshoweditmy strengththiswasmyroom,thiswasmyspace.Soalotofthatwasverymuch,Iam theGoddessofJustice,verymuchsettingitupformyself.Itsgreattoknowthathe [MR]probablywouldntknowwhatthehellallthisglitterwasonthefloororaroundhis box!(Helen,inJordan,2008,95) SowhileHelenstillfoundthecourtexperiencehorrificanddegrading,whileitstill revictimisedhertosomeextent,shealsofoundwaystohelphertakebacksome senseofcontrolinwhatisotherwisesuchadisempoweringenvironment. Othersrefusedtobetreatedlikepawnsinthesystemandactivelyurgedpoliceand prosecutorstoseethemasindividuals.Forexample,Gabriel,reactedangrilywhen shewentintocourtexpectinganinitialbriefingwiththeprosecutoronlytodiscover shemightberequiredtotakethestandthatsameday.Whensheobjected,he explained: Butwe'vefoundthatformostwomenitisbettertobebriefedinthemorningandthen gointheafternoon. Gabrielresponded: Isaid,WellI'mnotmostwomen,I'mmyself!Andmysupportpersonneedsnotification sothatshecangettimeoffworkandI'msonothappyaboutyoujustassumingthat everythingwillfitintoplaceandIwillgointhere.Thisisareallyimportanttimeforme andI'mreallypissedoffwithyou.
154
Hewasshocked.ThisisthesecondtimeI'vemethimandhejustkepttalking,kept talkingandputhisfootinhismouthandtalkedaboutprocedureandalltherestofit untilIsaid,I'mnotinterestedintheprocedurerightatthissecond,I'mmoreinterested inmymentalstateofwellbeingthenyourprocedureactually.Thenhesaid,OhGod, ofcourseyou'reupsetandwhocanblameyou.Andthenhewasveryunderstanding aboutit.Andheapologisedforthatandsaidthathenowknowstodothat differently.(Gabriel,inJordan,2008,82) Whattheseexamplesindicateiswhenthewomenassertedtheirownrightswithin thesystem,someindividualsatleastwerewillingtoacknowledgetheirneedsand adapttheirproceduresaccordingly.Thisenabledthewomentobenefitfromgreater supportandconsiderationandalsoprovidedcriminaljusticepractitionerswith valuablelearningopportunities.Severalofthepoliceofficersinvolvedlatertoldme thatthesewomentaughtthemalotabouthowtobemoreresponsivetovictims' needsandtoacknowledgethatthesemightdiffer,giventhatnotallvictimsarethe same. Conclusion Iwouldarguethatthesewomensaccountsareimportantonavarietyoflevels,but particularlyforthewaystheychallengeconventionalapproachesinarangeofareas. Firstly,theychallengetraditionalaccountsthatportrayvictimsaspassiveandonly impactedupon. Insteadweareconfrontedwithneedingtoattainabalancebetweenacknowledging theveryrealanddamagingimpactsofvictimisationwhilealsovalidatingthediverse andvariedwaysinwhichvictimsacttodefendthemselvesandensuretheirsurvival. Theiraccountsrevealtheimportanceofacknowledgingandrecognisingvictimsas survivors,andhowimportantresistinganattackerscontrolpsychologicallycanbein contextswherelittlepossibilityforphysicalresistanceexists.
155
Secondly,theyalertustothewaysinwhichsurvivingrapeisnotaoneoffeventbut anongoingprocess.Itwasphysicallylivingbeyondtheeventanditwasalsoso muchmorethanthat. Intheaftermathofrapetherearemultiplesituationsvictimsmustfacethatcan triggerfeelingsoffear,vulnerabilityanddisempowerment.Therearemanyways thatrevictimisationcanoccur,eachbringingwithitthechallengeofneedingtobe managedandsurvived.Thenarrativesprovidedbythesewomenshowhow survivingrapealsomeanssurvivingtellingothers,survivingeachanniversaryofthe rape,survivingthetrial,survivingallthemanylifeeventsthatcanpotentiallyplunge thembackintothefeelingsassociatedwiththerapeitself.Theirlivesafterrape suggestanongoingseriesofsurvivals. Thirdly,thewomen'snarrativeschallengethoseworkinginthecriminaljustice systemtorecognisethepotentialforcriminaljusticeprocessestocausesecondary victimisation,andtobewillingtolistentothevoicesofsurvivorsandhearwhatthey need.Fromtheiraccountsitisclearthatvictimsofrapearenotahomogeneous group,andthatwhilesomeneedsmaybeheldincommon,differentwomenwillbe impactedondifferently.Thisnecessitatesappreciationofindividuals'concernsand theirneedtobevalidatedasindividuals,ratherthantreatedaccordingtoa'onesize fitsallrapevictims'packagedeal. ThefinalpointIwishtomakeisthatawomanfacingamanintentonrapingherwill dowhatshecaninthemomentandmustalwaysbevalidatedforthatthereareno rightorwrongwaystosurvive.WhatIamwantingtoshowfromthesewomens accountsisthatalargerepertoireofpossibleresponsesexists,manyofwhichmay notbedirectlyobservablebyothersbecausetheyareoccurringonamentalor psychologicallevel.
156
Thesewomenmayhavebeenbetterplacedthanmanyintermsofbeingabletoask forwhattheyneededandobtainsupporttohelpthemsurvive.Thereweremanyof them,andthepolicewerewillingtolistenandlearnfromtheminpartbecausethey neededthesewomenonsidetogetRewafinallyputaway.Thismakesthisgroupof rapevictimsunusual,butIwouldarguetheyarenotunique.Rather,thedifferent circumstancesofthiscaseenableustoseemoreclearlyhowthejusticesystemcan stillrevictimiseevenwhentryingitshardesttosupportvictimsandwincases. Moreover,thewomen'sarticulatenessandcapacitiesforreflectionprovideuswith clearexamplesofallthevariedanddiversewaysthatsurvivalcanoccur.Whetherit wasfindingthemostappropriatepersontosupportthemorsprinklingglitteraround thebox,thewomenchosethesemeasurestoprovideatleastsomesenseof personalempowermentinthemidstofahighlycontrolledandcontrollingsystem. ALLsurvivorsofrapeneedtobevalidatedfordoingwhattheyknewtodoatthe timetosurvive.Atthesametime,weneedtocontinuetobreakthesilenceand shamearoundrapeandencouragegreaterdiscussionaroundraperesistance,rape preventionandwaysofsurvivingrape.Weneedtoresearchanddevelopmore sophisticatedunderstandingsofthecomplexconnectionsbetweenvictimisationand survivaland,mostimportantlyofall,doallwecantoreducethelevelsof victimisationsothatthereisnorapetosurvive.
157
References Bart,P.,&OBrien,P.H.(1985).StoppingRape,SuccessfulSurvivalStrategies. Oxford:PergamonPress. Burton,N.(1998).ResistancetoPrevention,ReconsideringFeministAntiviolence Rhetoric.InS.G.French,V.Teays,&L.M.Purdy(eds.),ViolenceAgainstWomen, PhilosophicalPerspectives.Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress. Freckelton,I.(1998).Sexualoffenceprosecutions:Abarristersperspective,in Easteal,P.(ed),BalancingtheScales:Rape,LawReformandAustralianCulture. Sydney:TheFederationPress. Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine. Gregory,J.,&Lees,S.(1999).PolicingSexualAssault.London:Routledge. Heyden,S.M.,Anger,B.F.,Jackson,T.,&Ellner,T.D.(1999).'Fightingbackworks: Thecaseforadvocatingandteachingselfdefenseagainstrape.'JournalofPhysical Education,RecreationandDance,70(5):3135. Jordan,J.(1998).ReportingRape:WomensExperienceswiththePolice,Doctorsand SupportAgencies.Wellington:InstituteofCriminology,VictoriaUniversityof Wellington. Jordan,J.(2001).WorldsApart?Women,RapeandtheReportingProcess.British JournalofCriminology,4(41):679706. Jordan,J.(2005).WhatwouldMacGyverdo?Themeaning(s)ofresistanceand survival,ViolenceAgainstWomen,11(4):531559.
158
Jordan,J.(2008).SerialSurvivors:WomensNarrativesofSurvivingRape.Sydney: TheFederationPress. Kelly,L.(1988).SurvivingSexualViolence.Cambridge:PolityPress. Lamb,S.(1999).'ConstructingtheVictim:PopularImagesandLastingLabels.'InS. Lamb (ed.) (1999). New Versions of Victims: Feminists Struggle with the Concept. NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress,1999. Lees, S. (1997). Ruling Passions: Sexual Violence, Reputation and the Law. Buckingham:OpenUniversityPress. Orth,U.(2002).'Secondaryvictimizationofcrimevictimsbycriminalproceedings'. SocialJusticeResearch,2002.15(4):313325. Scutt,J.(1997).TheIncredibleWoman:PowerandSexualPolitics.Vol.1. Melbourne:Artemis. Spry,T.(1995).Intheabsenceofwordandbody:Hegemonicimplicationsofvictim and survivor in womens narratives of sexual violence. Women and Language, 18 (2),2733. Stanko,E.A.(1990).'Whenprecautionisnormal.'InL.GelsthorpeandA.Morris (eds.),FeministPerspectivesinCriminology.MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversityPress. vandeZandt,Pia(1998).Heroinesoffortitude.InEasteal,Patricia(ed.), BalancingtheScales:Rape,LawReformandAustralianCulture.Sydney:The FederationPress. Williams,T.(1998).TheBad,theVeryBadandtheUgly:WhosWhoofNewZealand Crime.Auckland:HodderMoaBeckett.
159
TheGrowthofVictimAgencyinAustralianJurisprudence: LimitationsandChallenges
TyroneKirchengast DivisionofLaw MacquarieUniversity tyrone.kirchengast@law.mq.edu.au Victimrightshavebeeninsertedintothelawinthreedistinctways.Most jurisdictionsnowofferacharterordeclarationofvictimrightsdetailingtherights andobligationsofgovernmentagenciesintheirtreatmentofvictims;modesof criminalinjuriescompensationwhichprovidesstandardamountsofcompensation forprescribedinjuriesflowingfromanallegedcriminaloffence;andtheabilityto adduceintosentencingproceedingsavictimimpactstatementtodetailtheharms occasionedasaresultoftheoffence,afterconvictionbutbeforesentencing.While debateensuesastotheextenttowhichacharterofrightsandcompensation appropriatelyrestoresthevictimfollowinganoffence(Mawby,2007:209239),the tenureofvictimimpactstatementsinsentencingproceedingsremainsthemost contentious.Whiletheuseofsuchstatementsremainscontroversialthroughoutthe commonlawworld,itisinNSWwherethejudiciaryhasassumedgreatest resistancetotheiruseinsentencing.Theargumentsfororagainstsuchresistance willbecanvassedinlightofagrowingnationalandinternationalmovementtoward theencouragementofvictimparticipationinsentencing. SincetheirinceptionintoNSWlawundertheVictimRightsAct1996(NSW),victim impactstatementshaveprovidedvictimsofcrimeincreasedopportunityto participateinthesentencingprocess.1Prescribedunders28oftheCrimes (SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW),bothprimaryandfamilyvictimshavethe
160
abilitytotenderanimpactstatementfollowingconviction.2Familystatementsmay betenderedwheretheprimaryvictimdiesfollowinganoffence.Asentencingjudge willgenerallyconsidertheimpactsofanoffencethroughtheinformationtendered inevidence,usuallyattrial.Recognitionoftheimpactsofanoffenceuponthe victimisalongservingrationaleofpunishmentthatisspecificallyrelevanttothe formationofanappropriatesentence.Itisoutoftheneedtoconstitutesuch impactsobjectively,however,thatvictimimpactstatementshavetendedtobe poorlyreceivedbysentencingcourts.Thisisbecausesuchstatementsarenot alwaysseentobeconsistentwiththeestablisheddoctrinesofpunishmentthat requireasentencetobeobjectivelyproportionatetoallcircumstancesofthe offenceandoffender(Kirchengast,2007:127154). Giventhetendencytotakecrimepersonally,victimshavebeenidentifiedaspoor sourcesofinformationfromwhichtoconstitutetheobjectiveseriousnessofan offence.Rationalisingasentenceproportionatetothemultipleendsofpunishment, whichasRvVeen[No1](1979)143CLR458andRvVeen[No2](1988)164CLR465 suggests,involvesthetaskofbalancingvariousobjectivessuchastheneedto recogniseharmdonetothevictimandcommunity,theneedtoprotectsociety,the rehabilitationoftheoffender,andtheneedforgeneralandspecificdeterrence,is thusnotatasktobeexpectedofvictimsthemselves. Whereanimpactstatementisproducedbyaprimaryvictimfollowinganonfatal offence,acourtwillusuallyconsideritsolongastheevidencepresentedexplicates theharminquestion,inanobjectiveway.Wheretendered,impactstatementsmay informthesentencingcourtoftraumaandlossnototherwisebeforethecourtin evidence,orprovideafreshperspectiveonthoseharmsalreadyinevidence. Problemshavebeenidentified,nonetheless,wherefamilyimpactstatementsare tenderedfollowingthedeathoftheprimaryvictim.
Primaryvictimsincludepersonsorwitnessestoanoffencethathavesufferedpersonalinjuryasa resultofanoffence.Familyvictimsincludemembersoftheprimaryvictimsimmediatefamily.See Crimes(SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW)s26.
2
161
Duetotheprinciplethatpunishmentbeobjectivelyproportionatetothe assessmentoftheharmoccasioned,RvPrevitera(1997)94ACrimR76rulesthat sentencingcourtsmustexcludeanyconsiderationoffamilyimpactstatements wheretheprimaryvictimdies.Thisisbecause,asHuntCJatCLstates,deathisthe ultimateharm,suchthatasentencingcourtmustnot,byreferencetoafamily victimimpactstatement,valueonelifeasgreaterthananother(RvPrevitera (1997)94ACrimR76at86).This,asindicatedbelow,emphasisestheneedto considerthedeathoftheprimaryvictimintermsoftheimmediatecircumstancesof theoffence.Itisthusreasonedthatnoopiniononthevictim,fromfamilymembers orothers,beallowedtoinfluencetheassessmentofharmunlessthatopinionis specificallyrelevanttotheimmediatecircumstancesofanoffence.Considering suchperspectivesonthelossofthevictimwould,underPrevitera,allowthe possibilitythattheprimaryvictimwasmorevaluedthananother.Previterathus supportsthesentencingprinciplethatalllifeisofequalvalue.HuntCJatCL indicatesthisinthefollowingterms: Aproblemarises,however,inthosecasessuchasthepresent wherethecrimeinvolvesthedeathofthevictim.Theconsequencesof thecrimeuponthevictim(death)hasalreadybeenproved(or admitted)bythetimetheoffendercomestobesentenced Thelawalreadyrecognises,withoutspecificevidence,thevaluewhich thecommunityplacesuponhumanlife(RvPrevitera(1997)94A CrimR76at86) HuntCJatCLindicatesthatvictiminterestscanbemoresuitablyadministeredasa matterofvictimscompensationthaninthecontextofasentencinghearing,which requiresanobjectiveassessmentastooffenceseriousnessandoffender
162
culpability.3Intermsofthisobjectiveassessment,HuntCJatCLarguesagainstthe notionthattheviewsoffamilyvictimsnotdirectlyinjuredinthehomicidemaybe abletocontributetotheassessmentoftheoffencewithoutdiminishingthe principleoftheuniversalityofthevalueofhumanlife.4Harm,arguably,needstobe limitedtotheimmediatecircumstancesofthedeathofthevictimoutofrespectfor thisprinciple. HuntCJatCLalsorecognisestheassociatedissueofestablishingfamilyimpact evidenceonthepersuasiveburden,beyondreasonabledoubt,givenitstendencyto introducefactsinaggravationoftheoffence(Kirchengast,2007:143159;alsoseeR vSlack[2004]NSWCCA128).Previterahasnowbeensupportedbyanumberof leadingdecisions,whichconsequentlyaffirmtheviewthatharmbespecifically assessedthroughthefactualcircumstancesofthecase,particularlyintermsofthe immediatecircumstancesoftheoffence,andnotthesubjectiveexperiencesof victimstraumatisedbythelossofthedeceased.5 Unders28(3)oftheCrimes(SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW)acourtmust receiveafamilyimpactstatement,makinganycommentonitthatthecourtthinks appropriate.Previterarulesthatdespitetherequirementthatfamilyimpact statementsbetendered,courtsnotconsiderthemwhensentencinganoffender. Thishasledtoproblemswhereimpactstatementsarecitedinasentencingreport, wherethejudgefailstodistinguishthereferenceasnotimpactingonsentence. Sentencesareappealablewhereasentencingcourtacknowledgesreceiptofan impactstatementinthisway.Outofitsdirectrelevancetotheexplorationofthe consequencesofanoffence,theNewSouthWalesCourtofCriminalAppeal
163
(NSWCCA)willquashasentencewhereanimpactstatementisnotsufficiently distinguishedasirrelevant,deemingthisnottobeanappropriatematterforthe applicationoftheproviso.6Theusualresultwhereastatementisnotclearly delineatedistheresentencingoftheoffendertosomelesserterm. Issuesofsentenceconstructionnotwithstanding,theNSWCCAhasindicatedthat thePreviterarulemaynowneedtoberevisitedinthecontextofs3AoftheCrimes (SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW).Section3A(g)prescribesthatacourtmay imposeasentenceonanoffendertorecognisetheharmdonetothevictimandthe community.Consideringthisnewsection,SpigelmanCJindicatesinRvBerg[2004] NSWCCA300at[4344],thatfamilyimpactstatementsmaybeabletoinfluence sentencewherethecontentofthestatementmayappropriatelyinformthecourtas totheharmdonetothecommunity. ThisargumentforreformwasagainaddressedinRvTzanis[2005]NSWCCA274.In thisinstance,theNSWCCAwasconvenedasapaneloffivejudgestodeterminethe issueoftheadmissibilityoffamilystatements.Thoughdecliningtoconsideriton thisoccasion,thecourtdidindicatethegravityofthisissuebysuggestingthatno suitablevehiclehasemergedforthepurposesofthegrantofspecialleavebythe HighCourt(RvTzanis[2005]NSWCCA274at[16]). Theissueofthestatusoffamilyimpactstatementsinhomicidecaseshasevidently emergedasoneofconsequence,especiallyintermsoftheweightofsentencing principlerequiringthatpunishmentsbeobjectivelyproportionatetoallfactorsthat presentasrelevanttothedeterminationofanappropriatesentence. IntegratingFamilyVictims:TheStatesandTerritoriesofAustralia
Foranexampleofsucherrors,seeRvDawes[2004]NSWCCA363,[30];RvDang[1999]NSWCCA 42,[15].
164
Variousjurisdictionshaveresolvedtheproblemoftheconsiderationoffamily impactstatementsbyrecognisingthatfamilyvictimsmaypresentinformation relevanttosentencesolongasthatinformationaccordswithanobjective assessmentoftheseriousnessoftheharmoccasionedtothevictim.7Theuseof familystatementsasasourceofobjectiveevidencerelevanttosentenceemergesin theVictoriancaseofRvWillis[2000]VSC297.Inthisinstance,theVictorian SupremeCourtsuggeststhatvictimimpactstatementsmayinformthesentencing processwhereevidenceispresentedthatphrasestheimpactsoftheoffenceon familymembersinthebroadercontextoftheoffence.Thisbroadercontextis significanttoanysentencingcourtwhenconsideringtheseriousnessoftheoffence inanobjectiveway.Willisindicatesthatthisprovidesthemeansbywhichvictim impactstatementsgivenbyfamilymembersmaybeofsomerelevancetothe sentencingcourt: Whattheydoistointroduceinamorespecificway,factorstowhicha courtwouldordinarilyhaveregardinabroadercontext.They constituteareminderofwhatmightbedescribedasthehumanaspect ofcrimeanddrawtotheattentionofthejudgewhowouldofnecessity havetoconsiderthepossibleandprobableconsequencesofcriminal behaviour,notonlyitssignificancetosocietyingeneralbuttheactual effectofaspecificcrimeuponthosewhohavebeenintimately affectedbyit.Victimimpactstatementsprovideanopportunityfor thosewhoselivesareoftentragicallyalteredbycriminalbehaviourto drawtotheCourt'sattentionthedamageandsenselessanguishwhich hasbeencreatedandwhichcanoftenbeofverylongduration.(Rv Willis[2000]VSC297at[16])
EachstateandTerritoryallowsfortheconsiderationoffamilyimpactstatements.OnlyNSW providesadifferentpowerfortheconsiderationofprimaryandfamilystatements.SeeSentencing Act1991(Vic)s95A;ChildrenandYoungPersonsAct1989(Vic)s136A;SentencingAct1995(WA)s24; Crimes(Sentencing)Act2005(ACT)s53;SentencingAct(NT)s106B;CriminalLaw(Sentencing)Act 1988(SA)s7A;SentencingAct1997(Tas)s81A;Crimes(SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW)s28; CriminalOffencesVictimsAct1995(Qld)s14.
7
165
WillisdealswithquestionsastotheutilityofvictimimpactsstatementsraisedinRv Penn[1994]19MVR367.Penn,acaseinvolvingculpabledrivingcausingdeath,held thattheextentthatasentencingcourtmayconsiderevidenceoftheimpactofthe offenceuponfamilymembersinthecontextofcommunitysentimentmaybe limited.Duetotheneedinterpretharmobjectively,intermsofthecommunitys reactionagainsttheneedlesswasteoflifecausedbymotoraccidents,theVictorian CourtofCriminalAppeal(VCCA)suggeststhatthespecificconsiderationofthe impactofanoffenceonfamilymembersmaygobeyondwhatmaybeconsidered anobjectiveassessment. RvMiller[1995]2VR348wentontorejectPennoutofchangesintroducedbythe Sentencing(VictimImpactStatement)Act1994(Vic).ThisActmodifiedVictorian sentencinglawtoallowasentencingcourttoconsidertheinjury,lossordamage thatoccursasaresultofanoffence.ThisActalsoamendedtheSentencingAct1991 (Vic)s5(2),directingasentencingcourttoconsidertheimpactoftheoffence togetherwithchangesinthepersonalcircumstancesofanyvictim,asaresultofan offence.Thisincludesfamilyaswellasprimaryvictims.TheVCCAinMilleralso explainedhowthe1994Actenvisagestheuseofimpactstatementsasameansby whichevidenceofharmmaybeestablishedasrelevanttosentence,whilealso emphasisinghowevidenceofvictimtrauma,injuryandlossnotprovidedbyimpact statementmayalsocontinuetobematerial. Millerrulesthatwhereimpactevidenceisconsistentwithcommunitysentiment thenitshouldbeconsideredasreflectingthatsentiment.Familystatementsmay thusbeparticularlyusefulwheretheypresentinformationrelevanttosentencing principlesthatrequirethecourttospecificallyconsiderthecommunitysattitude towardtheoffence.Familyimpactevidencewouldthereforeberelevantwhere thereisagenuineneedforgeneraldeterrenceanddenunciation.Despitethese principlesnotbeingspecificallyatissueinMiller,theVCCArulesthatfamily perspectiveswillcontinuetobegenerallyrelevanttothetaskofsentencing offenders:
166
Wearenotpersuadedthatthejudgemisdirectedhimselfbyreferring to,andtakingintoaccountof,theeffectontheBendigocommunityof thiscrime,ortheanguishofherfamily.Commonsensewouldallow inferencestobedrawninrespectofthesematters,intheabsenceof directevidence.(RvMiller[1995]2VR348at354) Millerisauthorityforthepropositionthatoffenceseriousnessandoffender culpabilitymaycontinuetobeconstruedobjectivelydespitetheviewsoffamily victims.Itwouldonlybewhereafamilystatementisinconsistentwithcommunity sentimentthatexclusioniswarranted.Suchstatementsmayincludethoseseeking asentencebasedonvengeanceorrevenge,wheretheharmspokenofisunrelated totheoffence,orwheretheforgivenessofthevictimisentirelyunjustified.Miller reiteratesthepointthatfamilyimpactstatementsshouldnotbeseenasinherently prejudicedagainsttheendsofsentencingbutseenaspotentiallyuseful,especially wheretheyareconsistentwiththecommunitysattitudetowardanoffence. IntegratingFamilyVictims:InternationalDecisions TheCanadianexperiencealsoindicatesthatfamilyimpactstatementsmaybe relevanttothedeterminationofoffenceseriousness.Victimimpactstatementsare admissibleinsentencingproceedingsunders722oftheCanadianCriminalCode. Interpretingthisprovision,theOntarioSuperiorCourtofJusticeruledinRvGabriel (1999)137CCC(3d)1that,irrespectiveofthenotionthatnoonelifebevaluedabove another,thatcourtsincludetheviewsoffamilyvictimstoshowrespectfortheir significancetoandconnectionwiththeprimaryvictim.Courtsalsoneedtoshow respectforthefactthatfamilyvictimsmayalsoappropriatelyreflectcommunity viewsandperspectives.Itwasnotedthatsentencingtendstofocusontheoffence andtheoffender,totheexclusionofthevictim.Inthisway,mostvictimswouldbe reducedtoobscurityinlegalproceedingsdealingwiththeiroffence.FortheOntario
167
SuperiorCourtofJustice,victimimpactstatementsthusprovideauniquetoolfor thebalancingofinterestsinthesentencingprocess: Thevictimwasaspecialanduniquepersonaswellinformation revealingtheindividualityofthevictimandtheimpactofthecrimeon thevictimssurvivorsachievesameasureofbalanceinunderstanding theconsequencesofthecrimeinthecontextofthevictimspersonal circumstances,orthoseofsurvivors.(RvGabriel(1999)137CCC(3d)1 at1112) SimilartoHuntCJatCLinPrevitera,theOntarioSuperiorCourtofJusticealso indicatesthatvictiminterestscanbeaccommodatedelsewhere,throughvictims compensationandalternativeassistanceschemes.However,thecourtalso emphasisesthatinclusiontheoffamilystatementsmayallowforthebalancingof theinterestsofjustice,specificallyincludingthevictimwheretheywouldotherwise beexcluded,tobetterinformthesentencingcourtofcommunityattitudesand expectationsfollowinganoffence. AgainstthetenorofGabriel,however,theCriminalDivisionoftheProvincialCourt ofBritishColumbiahastakenamorerestrictiveviewoftheutilityofs722inRv Readhead(2001)BCPC208.Thiscourtruledthatprivateperspectivesoughtnot informthesentencingprocess,whichmustbemanifestlyconcernedwiththepublic interest.Itisforthesentencingjudgetothusconsidertheharmoccasionedtothe victim,whomustinsteadturntocivilforprivateredress.Despitetakingthisview, thesentencingjudgedoesacknowledgetheutilityofvictimimpactstatements tenderedinhomicideproceedings.HisHonourrecognisedthat: What,then,isthepurposeofavictimimpactstatement?First,the wordsofthevictimofacrimemightwellservetoeducatetheoffender astotheeffectsofhisorhercriminalbehavior,withsomepotential rehabilitativeeffect.Second,victimimpactstatementsmayprovide
168
somesenseofcatharsisforvictims,particularlythosewhochoosenot topursueanyformofredressintheparallelstreamofthecivillaw. Third,theinclusionofvictimimpactstatementsinthematerials presentedduringasentencinghearingmayservetoassurethepublic thatsentencingjudges,whileboundtosentenceinaccordancewith theprinciplesdiscussedearlier,arealwayskeenlyawareoftheunique andintenselypersonalresponseofeachvictimharmedbythecriminal conductofanother.(RvReadhead(2001)BCPC208at[14]). Theprinciplesdiscussedearlierarethosethatseektophrasethesentencing processasanindependentone;anobjectiveassessmentofoffenceseriousnessand offenderculpabilitythroughtheremoved,independentassessmentofthecourt. This,however,isentirelyconsistentwiththeprinciplesoutlinedinGabriel,which doesnotseektointroduceaprivateperspectiveintosentencingproceedings. Despitetheimpactstatementbeingdraftedbythevictimpersonally,itisforthe sentencingcourttoinferfromthematerialpresentedthefactsrelevanttothe determinationofanobjectivelyproportionatesentence.ThelaterdecisionofRv McDonoughandMcClatchey(2006)CanLii18369intheOntarioSuperiorCourtof Justice,despitealsoacknowledgingthelimitedbasisuponwhichacourtmayuse impactstatementstenderedinhomicideproceedings,nonethelessreiteratesthis point: Inexplainingtheharmdonebyandlosssufferedasaresultofthe commissionofanoffence,itisoftennecessarytogiveabriefoutlineof thecharacterofthevictimordeceased,toexplaintheimpactofthe crime.AsHillJ.expressedit,thejudgelearnsoftheindividualityof thevictim:Gabrielatpara19.(RvMcDonoughandMcClatchey(2006) CanLii18369at[29])8
8
Astoacaseinpointregardingtherelevanceofvictimimpactstatementsinthesentencingof homicideoffenders,seeRvHayden(2001)CanLII13694at[814].
169
Thisisentirelyconsistentwiththenotionthatitisforthecourtitselftoconstrue sentencebyinteraliareflectingoftheharmoccasionedtoallvictimsrelevanttothe offence.ThispointwasfirstemphasizedinRvDMP[1999]AJNo1085.Inthiscase theAlbertaCourtofAppealexplained: Parliamentmakesitclearthatavictimimpactstatementis somethingwhichasentencingjudgemayandshouldconsider,and(if appropriateandconvincing)givesignificantweight.Thistrialjudge quotedalmostallofthisvictimimpactstatement,andreferredto Parliamentsdirective.Inourview,hedidasParliamenttoldhimto. Whatismore,hecitedauthorityallowinghimtotakejudicialnoticeof thelikelihoodofthesamething.(RvDMP[1999]AJNo1085at[15]) (emphasisadded) ThereasoningsupportingtheCanadiandecisionsissimilarinthisrespecttothe ultimatefindingoftheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtinPaynevTennessee(1991) 115LEd2d720.TheissuesraisedinPaynevTennesseewerefirstaddressedacross twoearlierdecisionsoftheUnitedStatesSupremeCourt,namelyBoothvMaryland (1987)96LEd2d440andSouthCarolinavGathers(1989)104LEd2d876.InBooth vMarylandthecourtheldthattheEighthAmendmenttotheUnitedStates Constitutionstoppedasentencingjuryinacapitaltrialfromhearingvictimimpact evidenceregardingthepersonalcharacteristicsofthevictim,whichalsoincluded theextenttowhichfamilymemberswerealsotraumatisedbythedeathofthe victim.BoothvMarylandwasreasonedontheassumptionthatimpactevidence limitedthedefendantsrighttoafairtrial,inthatanimpactstatementwaslikelyto inflameajuryagainstthedefendantgiventheemotivenatureofthecontentofa statement.SouthCarolinavGathersextendedthisprohibitionbylimitinghowthe useofimpactstatementbytheprosecutor.Againonthebasisofthecapacityfor impactevidencetorousethejuryagainstadefendant,SouthCarolinavGathers limitedtheprosecutorsabilitytorefertothecontentofimpactevidencewhen addressingthejury,particularlyintermsofpersonalattributesofthevictimthat
170
maynotbematerialtoliability.PaynevTennessee,however,overruledtheseearlier decisions,holdingthattheEighthAmendmentdoesnotpreventajuryfromtaking accountofthepersonalcharacteristicsofthevictimincapitaltrialsnorfroma prosecutorarguingsimilarevidenceduringsentencing. PaynevTennesseemadethischangeonthebasisoftheneedforanexpanded assessmentoftheharmoftheoffence,inclusiveofthevictimsperspectiveonthe impactsoccasionedbytheoriginaloffence.Themajoritytooktheviewthatthe harmcausedtothevictimhaslongbeenaconcernofthecriminallaw.Thecourt alsonotedthefactthattrialjudgesexperiencedgreatdifficultyexcludingreference totheharmtothevictimduringsentencinginaccordancewiththetwoearlier decisions.Prosecutorswouldoftenrefertotheimpactsoftheoffenceonthevictim, ortheirfamily,andinsodoingriskthesentencebeingoverturnedonappeal.Victim impactstatementsare,intheviewofthemajorityinPaynevTennessee,another meansbywhichacourtmaybeinformedoftherelevantharmoccasionedtothe victim.Thecourtruledimpactstatementstenderinformationlongconsideredbya courtwhenmakingasentencingdecision.Assuch,theUnitedStatesSupreme Courtadvocatesaninclusiveviewtowardsthevictim. InEnglandandWales,allpersonsinjuredortraumatisedbyacriminalincidenthave theabilitytomakeavictimpersonalstatement,equivalenttoavictimimpact statementtenderedinotherjurisdictions.Avictimpersonalstatementformspartof thecasefiletobedistributedtoallpartiesinamatter,includingtheprosecution, defenceandthecourt,andcanbemadeinadditiontoanystatementgiventothe police.Personalstatementsmaybeusedbythecourtduringsentencing.Under theseconditions,courtsareabletousevictimpersonalstatementswhen consideringtheobjectiveseriousnessoftheharmresultingfromanincident. Significantly,suchstatementsmaybeusedbythecourtwithregardtothoseharms occasionedbybothprimaryandfamilyvictims.Concernovertheuseofvictim perspectivesinthesentencingprocessinEnglandandWalesdevelopedasaresult ofsomevictimsproposingparticularsentencingtermsintheirstatements.With
171
limitedexceptions,9thecommonlyagreedroleofanimpactstatementenables victimstoindicate,intheirownwords,theimpactsoftheoffenceuponthem.The determinationoftheappropriatesentenceoughttobeleftforthejudge.Itistaken tobegenerallyunacceptableforavictimtospecifyaparticularsentence,suchas lengthofatermofimprisonment,orcustodialornoncustodialterm.Intheeventof sucharecommendation,theentirestatement,orpartofit,maybedisregarded. However,againstthetrendofdismissingparticularsentencingrecommendations, somegroundhasbeengainedallowingforamoreinclusiveperspectivewhere, undercertainlimitedconditions,theconsequencesofasentenceontheactual victimwillbeconsideredrelevanttothecourt.Asindicatedbycasesthathave comesforreviewbeforetheCourtofAppealofEnglandandWales,thisistrueeven forfamilyvictims. InRvPerks[2001]1CrAppR(S)19thedefendantwasconvictedofrobberyand sentencedtofouryearsimprisonment.Duringthetrial,thehusbandofthevictim, addressedalettertotheCrownProsecutionServiceindicatedthedevastating physicalandmentalimpactoftheattackonhiswife.Intheletter,heexpressedhis angertowardtheoffender,indicatingthattheoffendershouldbeimprisonedso thatanexamplecouldbemadeofhim.Theletterwasplacedinthecasefilethus makingitavailabletobereadbyanyparty,aswellasthejudge.Thegroundof appealwasthatthesentencewasmanifestlyexcessiveonthebasisthatthejudge tookthisletterintoaccountinsentence.Allowingtheappeal,GarlandJoftheCourt ofAppealstates: Theopinionsofthevictimandthevictimscloserelativesonthe appropriatelevelofsentenceshouldnotbetakenintoaccount.The courtmustpasswhatitjudgestobetheappropriatesentencehaving regardtothecircumstancesoftheoffenceandoftheoffendersubject totwoexceptions:i)Wherethesentencepassedontheoffenderis aggravatingthevictimsdistress,thesentencemaybemoderatedto
9
SeeSentencingAct(NT)s106B(5A).
172
somedegree.ii)Wherethevictimsforgivenessorunwillingnessto presschargesprovideevidencethathisorherpsychologicalormental sufferingmustbeverymuchlessthanwouldnormallybethecase. ThesignificanceofPerksgoestowardwhetheraparticularsentencewillaggravate theharmoccasionedtoavictim.Wheretheoffenderandvictimareinapreexisting relationship,acourtmayreducethetermofthesentencetodiminishtheimpactof thesentenceonthevictim.Thisconsiderationwillgenerallyarisewherethe defendantandvictimaresomehowdependantoneachother,eitherfinanciallyor emotionallyorboth.Thisconsiderationwillmostlikelycometobearonthejudge wherethecourtisconsideringalengthytermofimprisonment,orimprisonmentfor anoffenceforwhichasuspendedornoncustodialsentencemaysuffice.Perkshas setthepaceforfurtherdecisionswhereminimaltermshavebeenrequestedonthe basisofsomenegativeeffectbeingreportedbythevictim.InRvNunn[1996]2Cr AppR(S)136,theappellantwaschargedwithcausingdeathbydangerousdriving, followingthelossofcontrolofhiscar,resultinginthedeathofoneofhis passengers.Followingaguiltyplea,thefamilyofthedeceasedpresentedtheCourt ofAppealwithvictimstatementsindicatingthattheoriginaltermimposedonthe defendantmadeitdifficultforthemtorecoverfromthetraumatheyhad experienced.Thefamilysuggestedthatthedefendant,bywayofhisconvictionand thelossofhispassenger,hadsufferedenough.Insentencingthedefendant,JudgeJ heldthatthevictimsopinionswereirrelevant.Hishonourthenindicatedthatinthe presentmatter,thattheimpactofthesentenceonthevictimswasindeedrelevant, albeitinlimitedcircumstances: theCourtisconcernednotwiththejudgmentofthedeceaseds motherandsisteraboutthelevelofsentenceimposedontheapplicant, butwiththeclearevidence,whichweaccept,thatbyitsverylengththe sentenceon[thevictims]friendisaddingtothegriefandanxietywhich theyaresuffering...Whenthemotherandsisterofthedeceasedandthe restofthefamilyhavealreadysufferedsomuch,wedonotthinkthat
173
theseadverseconsequencesofthisparticularsentenceshouldbe disregarded.Inmercytothemweshallreducethesentenceasfaraswe can,consistentwithourcontinuingpublicdutytoimposeappropriate sentencesforthosewhocausedeathbydrivingdangerouslyunderthe influenceofdrink...(RvNunn[1996]2CrAppR(S)136at140141) PerksandNunnstandasauthorityforthepassingofalessertermofimprisonment wherefamilyvictimpresentevidencethattheactualsentenceimposedis aggravatingthetraumatheyareexperiencingasaresultoftheoriginaloffence. Nunn,however,proposesthatanyreductionofsentencebeconstruedobjectively. Importantly,thecourtemphasisesthatanyreductionnotbeinformedbythe victimsthemselves.Rather,itisforthesentencingjudgetoconstruetheaggravated harmcausedtofamilymembers,asconnectedtotheoriginaloffence,byexamining evidenceoftheimpactsofthesentenceoneachofthevictims.However,RvMills [1998]2CrAppR(S)252,thecourtviewedevidenceofaggravatedharmas presentedbythevictimwithgreaterenthusiasm.Inthismatter,thecourtlooked favourablyuponevidenceofanimprovingrelationshipbetweenthedefendantand victimfollowingthecomplaintofanattemptedrapebyaformerpartnerofthe victim.JudgeLJheld,reducingtheoriginalsentencefromsixtothreeyears imprisonment,that: Wehaveconsideredtheevidenceofthevictimwithgreatcare.Wehave reflectedonallthecircumstancesofthissomewhatunusualcase.Asa matterofprinciple,thevictimofacrimecannottellthecourtthat becauseheorshehasforgiventheperpetratorthecourtshouldtreatthe crime,ineffect,asifithadnothappened.Thiswasaseriousoffence. Attemptedrapeisalwaysamatterofgeneralpublicconcern,inaddition toitsmoreimmediateconcerntothevictim.Itisclearthatthevictimin thiscasehaschosentoforgivetheperpetratorofthecrime,andhassaid sointerms,perfectlygenuinely.Thatcannotdecidetheappropriatelevel ofsentence,butwetakeherevidenceintoaccountasindicatingthe
174
currentextentoftheimpactofthisparticularcrimeonthevictim.Having consideredthematterinthelightoftheinformationbeforeus,wehave cometotheconclusionthatthesentence...wastoolong.(RvMills [1998]2CrAppR(S)252at254) MillscanbedistinguishedfromNunnonthebasisofthewayinwhichthecourt comestoreduceeachsentence,takingintoaccounttheimpactsalengthier sentencewouldhaveoneachofthevictims.ComparedtoNunn,Millsindicatesthat acourtmaybemoreinclinedtotakethevictimsperspectiveintoaccount,through evidencepresentedbythevictimthemselves.InMills,thecourtisclearly consideringtestimonyfromthevictimpersonally.Thisevidence,however,isstill scrutinisedbythecourtinordertodetermineitsobjectivity,anditisheldthatsuch evidencecannotdeterminesentencealone.However,indoingso,thecourtmoves towardamoreinclusive,restorativeapproach,thatmakesroomfortheperspective ofthevictimbyallowingfortheimpactsofthesentenceonthevictim,aspresented bythevictimthemselves. VictimsAdvocates:AReformAgendaforEnglandandWales ReviewingthedecisionsofPerks,NunnandMills,Edwards(2002)arguesthatthe CourtofAppealofEnglandandWaleshasgravitatedtowardarestorative frameworkwhichseekstoaddressvariousinterestsintermsofabroader understandingofthepublicinterest.Thecourthasshownthatitwillconsiderthe interestsofthevictim,theoffenderandthegeneralpublicindeterminingan appropriatesentence.Thesignificantofthisisthatthecourtsunderstandingofthe victimisnotsolelyconstitutedbythecourtitself.Moreover,thecourtisinvitinga perspectiveonthevictimfromthevictimthemselves,whichstandsthechanceof actuallyimpactingonthesentencetobedetermined.Inthecontextofhomicide cases,thisisentirelyinconsistentwiththeNSWapproach.Despitethisinnovation, however,issuesremainastotheexactwayinwhichvictimperspectivesmaybe includedasaroutineaspectofsentencing.Indeed,reviewsofvictimpersonal
175
statementsrevealthatvictimsarenotalwaysaffordedtheopportunitytodraftone bythepoliceinvestigatinganoffence.Judicialofficerswouldalsovaryintheiruseof suchstatementsinanyevent(SecretaryofStateforConstitutionalAffairsandLord Chancellor,2005:14).Theneedtobalancethecompetingviewsofvictimsandthe publicinterest,againsttherightsofdefendants,featuresasasignificantconcern. However,asEdwardsindicates,therestorativeframeworkseekstogarner perspectivesnormallyseentobeincompatible.Thisisasignificantmovement towardamoreproportionateapproachtowardsentencing: Underrestorativeconceptionsofthesentencingprocesshoweversuch preferencescanbeaccommodatedmorereadily.Byaccordingsome weighttothefeelingsofvictims,restorativeaimscanbeachieved: catharsisforvictims,takingvictimsinterestsintoaccount,andachieving reintegrationofoffenders.(Edwards,2002:694) Tothisend,theSecretaryofStateforConstitutionalAffairsandLordChancellor, LordFalconer,issuedaconsultationpaperin2005,phrasingthisrestorative approachinpolicybyprovidingfamilyvictimsanopportunitytobeheardbefore sentenceispronouncedinhomicidematters.Followingtherestorativeframework setinmotioninPerksandNunn,the2005proposalestablishedaprocesswhereby victimswereprovidedadirectvoiceinproceedingsforhomicideoffenders.This policyhasnowmovedthroughapilotprograminwhichfamilyvictimsweregiven theoptiontoinstructprivatecounsel,knownasVictimsAdvocates,oftheharms theyhavesuffered.TheVictimsAdvocateapubliclyfundedlawyer,couldbe retainedbythefamilyvictimstopresstheirinterestsinanyproceedinginwhichthe offencewasmentioned.Intermsofthevictimpersonalstatement,theVictims Advocatewouldhelpdraftandadvocateitscontenttothebench,particularly duringsentencinghearings.Suchsubmissionswouldordinarilyconcerntherelevant impactsandinjuriesoccasionedtoeachfamilyvictimasaresultofthelossofthe deceased.Thevictimsthemselveswouldalsobeabletoaddressthecourt.The VictimsAdvocatepresentsindependentlyoftheprosecutionandonlyrepresents
176
thevictimsinterests.Assuch,theypresentalongsidetheprosecutor,who continuestorepresentthepublicinterest.TheVictimsAdvocateislimitedtothe pretrialandsentencinghearings,andwouldnotplayapartinthetrialofthe offender.Itwasenvisagedthattheirrolewouldalsobeextendedtopleadealsor thedowngradingofcharges,withdrawalofchargesbytheprosecution,and discontinuanceofproceedings. Newsofthe2005reformsindicatedthatmostwereinfavouroftheproposed VictimsAdvocatespilot,withvictimsgroupsshowingstrongsupport.Concerns wereraisedthattheproposalswoulddolittleotherthanraisevictimsexpectations thattheirpersonalstatementswouldimpactsentence.Therhetoricwasthatmany sentencingjudgesdeterminedsentencepriortoanysubmissionmadebythe VictimsAdvocate.Otherconcernsincludedthedeemingofsuchsubmissionsas lessrelevantorirrelevanttothefinalsentencetobehandeddown(Secretaryof StateforConstitutionalAffairsandLordChancellor,2006:6).10Formalisingthe proceduretotheadoptedduringthepilot,thePresidentoftheQueensBench DivisionestablishedaprotocolindicatingthefunctionsoftheVictimsAdvocate, particularlyinthesentencingprocess(PresidentoftheQueensBenchDivision, 2006).11ThisdirectionappearedtolimittheformalroleoftheVictimsAdvocateto thesentencingphasealone,excludingbailapplicationsandotherpretrial proceedings,despitethepolicyrecommendingtheybeavailabletoadvisefamily victimsfollowingchargebythepolice.ContactbetweentheCrownProsecution Servicewasemphasised,however,consistentwithnewdutiesofprosecutors requiringthemtoconsultwithvictimsfollowinginthefirstinstance(Crown ProsecutionService,2005).
10
177
TheVictimsAdvocatesschemewaspilotedfrom24April2006intheOldBaileyin LondonandtheCrownCourtsinBirmingham,Cardiff,Manchester(CrownSquare) andWinchester.InJune2007theAttorneyGeneralLordGoldsmithannouncedthat avariationofthepilotschemewillbemadeavailabletoallEnglandandWales (OfficeforCriminalJusticeReform,2007:42).12Thenewprogram,VictimFocus, doesnotprovideforprivatecounselandisrestrictedtothesentencingphase followingconviction.Thisnarrowstheschemetoprosecutorswhotenderthe victimspersonalstatementduringthesentencinghearing.14Thisvariationofthe VictimAdvocatesschemewillneedtobeevaluatedinduecourse,especiallyin termsofwhetheritprovidesanenhancedexperienceforfamilyvictimsthroughthe inclusionoftheirperspectivesastotheharmsoccasionedasaresultoftheoffence. IncludingtheVictim:TimeforReforminNSW? TheinnovativeprogramsbeingpilotedinEnglandandWales,combinedwiththe acceptanceoffamilyperspectivesinternationallyaswellasacrossthestatesand territoriesofAustralia,onlyhighlightsthepaucityofrightsaffordedtovictimsin NSWhomicideproceedings.However,theinsertionofs3A(g)intotheCrimes (SentencingProcedure)Act1999(NSW)givesnewcontexttosentencinginNSW. IdentifiedbySpigelmanCJinAttorneyGeneral'sApplicationUnders37oftheCrimes (SentencingProcedure)Act1999(No2of2002)[2002]NSWCCA515at[57][59], severalsentencingprinciplesmayneedtoberevisedinthecontextofs3A(g), prescribingthatacourtconsiderinteraliatheharmdonetothecommunity. Demonstratedthroughtheintegrationoffamilyvictimperspectivesasthoseofthe communityinVictorianandCanadiansentencinglawinparticular,afocuson communityunders3A(g)mayprovideameansthroughwhichfamily perspectivesmaybeincorporatedintoNSWhomicidecases.
InFebruary2007theVictimsAdvocatespilotwasextendedforafurther12months. TheVictimFocusschemeisavailabletofamilyvictimswheretheoffenderhasbeenchargedwith murder;manslaughter;corporatemanslaughter;familialhomicide;causingdeathbydangerous driving;causingdeathbycarelessdrivingwhileunfitthroughdrinkordrugs;aggravatedvehicle takingwheredeathiscaused.
14 12
178
Theneedtofocusoncommunitysentimentindeterminationofaproportionate sentenceprovidesthebasisfortheinclusion,ratherthantheexclusion,offamily perspectives.Familystatementsontheimpactoftheoffencewouldbesignificantly usefulwhendeterminingthebasisandextenttowhichthevictimandcommunity condemntheoffence,inanobjective,fairway.Thestatementwouldthusneedto bereadinthebroadercontextoftheevidenceadducedattrial,materialputforward inmitigationoraggravationofsentence,andthesentencingjudgesownreflection onthecommunitysresponsetotheoffenceinageneralway.Familyimpact statementswouldthereforenotprovidethesinglebasisfortheobjective assessmentoftheoffence,butwouldsupport,wheredeemedrelevant,the determinationthattheoffencewasofrealconsequence,asevidencedbythe trauma,injuryandlossindicatedinafamilystatement. ShouldtheprospectofsuchreformappealinNSW,homicidesentencingmatters willbeabletoopenlyincludefamilystatementswithoutthecurrentrequirement thatthecourtacknowledgereceiptoftheimpactstatementthenexcludeitas irrelevanttosentence.Itwouldonlybeincircumstanceswhereacourtcitesa statementagainsttheweightofcommunitysentiment,orwherecommunity sentimentisinformedexclusivelythroughtheimpactstatement,thatappellate interferencewouldbeexpectedandwarranted.Arelaxingoftherulesagainstthe considerationoffamilystatementsinNSWwouldthereforepotentiallyreducethe numberofgroundsofappealcurrentlyraisedinmanyhomicidesentencingappeals. Argumentsfortheliberaluseoffamilystatementsinhomicidesentencingmatters needstoberead,however,inthecontextofthecaseagainstvictimimpact statementsgenerally.TherecentcaseofRvFD;RvFD;RvJD(2006)106ACrimR 392emphasisesseveralcriticismsoftheuseofvictimimpactstatementswhich, whenreadinconnectionwithcurrentlimitationsunderPrevitera,spellspotential doomfortheprospectsofpositivereform.InRvFD;RvFD;RvJD,SullyJraises fourcriticismsindicativeofthecontroversialwaysinwhichvictimimpact
179
statementstrytobalanceintereststhatarenoteasilybalanced(RvFD;RvFD;Rv JD(2006)160ACrimR392at414.).Inthecontextofsentencingpracticeswhere harmisprimarilyidentifiedintermsoftheimmediatecircumstancesofthedeathof thevictim,SullyJvitiatestheusefulnessofimpactsstatementsonthebasisoftheir conceivedinconsistencywithanorthodoxandarguablyconservativeviewtowards theinterpretationofsentencingprinciple. SullyJraisesfourpointsinRvFD;RvFD;RvJDthatdiminishthepotentialbenefit victimimpactstatementshaveinsentencingoffenders.Therestricted interpretationofimpactstatementsinthuswarrantedduetotheneedtoprevent offendersbeingsentencedunderalynchmentality;thatitisimperativetonot allowtheoffendertobesentencedinamannerthatisdictatedbythevictim;that thevictimstilldeservesameansbywhichtheyareabletoprovideapublic statementfacilitatinganemotionalcatharsisinwhichtheimpactsoftheoffence maybeexpressed;andtoprovideforthemetingoutofapoliticalimperative seekingtorespondtotheperceivedlackoftrustvotershaveinthesentencing process,particularlyregardingmattersofseriouspersonalviolence.AsSullyJpoints out,itisthislastpointonthepoliticalimperativeoftheintegrationofvictimrights insentencingwhichmayconflictwiththeaccumulatedwisdomofthecommonlaw ofcrimeandpunishment(RvFD;RvFD;RvJD(2006)160ACrimR392at414). ThesignificanceofSullyJsfourpointsistherecognitionofthevictiminalimited andnonjusticiableform.Therecognitionofvictimimpactstatementsasan importantvehicleoftherapeuticjurisprudenceemergesforSullyJthroughthefact thattheyallowfortheexpressionofgriefandlossonthepartofthevictimwho wouldotherwisebelargelyexcludedfromproceedings.Consideringtheweightof authorityforthefurtherinclusionofvictimsonasubstantivebasis,SullyJs assessmentoftherelevanceofimpactstatementsasbeingagainstthe accumulatedwisdomofthecommonlawmustbereadcritically.Afterall,victims arepersonsintimatelyconnectedtotheconsequencesoftheoffence,apointwell recognisedinotherjurisdictions.Asfarasfamilyvictimsareconcerned,various
180
jurisdictionshavedeterminedthatnotonlyisfurtherintegrationdesirableasa matterofopenparticipationinthejusticesystem,butsignificantintermsofthe substantivecontributionfamilyvictimscanmaketoadeterminationofoffence seriousnessbyprofferingevidencethatmaybeconstitutiveofcommunity sentimenttowardtheoffence.Byenablingcloserconnectionsbetweenfamily victims,thejusticesystemandthecommunityallsignificanttotherequisiteneed topassasentenceproportionatetoallcircumstancesoftheoffenceandoffender variousjurisdictionsotherthanNSWhaveorientatedthemselvestowardaposition ofrespectandappreciationforvictimsofcrime. Theprospectsoffamilyimpactstatementsbearinggreatersignificanceinhomicide casesisofappealtovariousstakeholdersintheNSWjusticesystem.Forthecurrent restrictionagainstfamilyvictimsinPreviteratobeovercome,theNSWCCAwill needtofindvalueinsuchstatementsbeyondthemereparticipationoffamily victimsinanonjusticiableway.TheNSWCCAwillneedtodeterminethatsuch statementsareofsubstantivevalueinsentencingbyrevisingthenotionthatsuch statementsdolittlemorethanvalueonelifeasgreaterthananother.Todothis,the courtwillneedtoovercomethecriticismsofimpactstatementsmoregenerallyas beingagainstsentencingorthodoxyasraisedbySullyJ.SuggestedinBergand Tzanis,wheretheissueisraisedinanappeal,theNSWCCAmustassesstheneedto recognisefamilystatementsaspresentingsomethingmorethansubjective conjecture,offensivetotheprinciplesofsentencingrequiringobjectively,andstart recognisinghowvaluablevictiminputmaybetothedeterminationofanobjectively proportionatesentenceinclusiveofavarietyofperspectives.
181
References CrownProsecutionService,TheProsecutorsPledge(2005). Edwards,I,ThePlaceofVictimsPreferencesintheSentencingofTheir Offenders(2002)CriminalLawReview,September,689702. Kirchengast,T.VictimImpactStatementsandthePreviteraRule:Delimitingthe VoiceandRepresentationofFamilyVictimsinNSWHomicideCases(2005)24 UniversityofTasmaniaLawReview2,127154. Kirchengast,T.VictimInfluence,TherapeuticJurisprudenceandSentencingLawin theNewSouthWalesCourtofCriminalAppeal,(2007)10FlindersJournalofLaw Reform1,143159. OfficeforCriminalJusticeReform,WorkingTogethertoCutCrimeandDeliverJustice: AStrategicPlanfor20082011(2007). PresidentoftheQueensBenchDivision,AProtocolIssuedByThePresidentOfThe QueensBenchDivisionSettingOutTheProcedureToBeFollowedInTheVictims AdvocatePilotAreas(2006). RobMawby,PublicSectorServicesandtheVictimofCrime,inSandraWalklate (ed.)HandbookofVictimsandVictimology(2007). SecretaryofStateforConstitutionalAffairsandLordChancellor,Hearingthe RelativesofMurderandManslaughterVictims:TheGovernmentsPlanstoGivethe BereavedRelativesofMurderandManslaughterVictimsaSayinCriminalProceedings (2005).
182
SecretaryofStateforConstitutionalAffairsandLordChancellor,Hearingthe RelativesofMurderandManslaughterVictims:TheGovernmentsPlanstoGivethe BereavedRelativesofMurderandManslaughterVictimsaSayinCriminalProceeding SummaryofResponsestotheConsultationPaper(2006). Cases AttorneyGeneral'sApplicationUnders37oftheCrimes(SentencingProcedure)Act 1999(No2of2002)[2002]NSWCCA515 BoothvMaryland(1987)96LEd2d440andSouthCarolinavGathers(1989)104L Ed2d876 PaynevTennessee(1991)115LEd2d720 RvSlack[2004]NSWCCA128 RvBerg[2004]NSWCCA300 RvDMP[1999]AJNo1085 RvFD;RvFD;RvJD(2006)160ACrimR392 RvGabriel(1999)137CCC(3d)1 RvMcDonoughandMcClatchey(2006)CanLii18369 RvMiller[1995]2VR348 RvMills[1998]2CrAppR(S)252 RvNunn[1996]2CrAppR(S)136 RvPenn[1994]19MVR367 RvPerks[2001]1CrAppR(S)19 RvPrevitera(1997)94ACrimR76 RvReadhead(2001)BCPC208 RvTzanis[2005]NSWCCA274 RvVeen[No1](1979)143CLR458 RvVeen[No2](1988)164CLR465 RvWillis[2000]VSC297
183
TheRiseofaGlobalCarceralComplex:FromGarrisonStateto GarrisonPlanet
JudeMcCulloch CriminologyDepartment MonashUniversity jude.mcculloch@arts.monash.edu.au Introduction Throughthemilitaryandthepolice,stateshaveenormouscapacitytocoerce citizensandinflictviolence.Itisnotsurprisingthenthatstateterrorism,lookedatin termsofnumberskilledandharmed,isfarmoreprevalentandsignificantthanthat ofnonstateactors.15Andyet,terror,terrorismandterroristareconceptsthat areconsideredalmostexclusivelyintermsoftheindividualandsubstategroups.As aconsequenceofthismyopiacounterterrorismhasfrequentlybecomethe justificationforstateterrorandviolencethatfaroutweightheharmandviolence theywerepurportingtocounter.16Whenstateterrorandterrorismareconsideredit tendstobeinthecontextoffailedstatesratherthanthedemocraciesofthe West.17Thischapterfocusesontheviolenceandharminflictedonprisonersand detaineesinUnitedStatesprisonsinthewaronterrorandlinksthistotheregular, routineandnormalisedstateterrorpractiseddailyonmillionsofprisonersheld withinUSdomesticprisons.Thisstateterror,experiencedvastlydisproportionately amongcriminalisedandracialisedcommunities,amountstostateterrorismasit sendsawarningtowholecommunitiesabouttheirplaceinthesocialandeconomic hierarchyandthepriceoftransgression.
PennyGreenandTonyWard,StateCrime:Governments,ViolenceandCorruption(London:Pluto Press,2004) 16 RichardJackson,TheGhostsofStateTerror:Knowledge,PoliticsandTerrorismStudiesPaper PreparedfortheInternationalStudiesAssociation(ISA)AnnualConference,2629March2008,San Francisco,USA 17 William,Blum,RogueState:AGuidetotheWorldsOnlySuperpower(London:ZedBooks,2000)
15
184
RevelationsoftortureandabuseofprisonersintheUSledwaronterrorhaveled toagrowingbodyofcriticalresearchontherelationshipbetweenUSdomestic prisonsandwaronterrorprisons.Theresponsesfromthemainstreamwithinthe UShaveincludedoutrightdenialalongsidedeclarationsthatthehorrendouscruelty inflictedonprisonersisunrepresentativeofthevaluesforwhichAmericastands.18 Criticalscholars,ontheotherhand,havepointedtoparallelsandconnections betweentortureandabuseinUSoffshoreprisonsandtheroutineandnormalised stateterrorinflicteduponprisonersanddetaineeswithintheUS.19Thereisalsoan emergingbodyofcriticalcommentary,researchandscholarshipthatfocusesonthe roleofprivatecorporations,profitandcorruptioninthewaronterror.20This chapterextendsthesecritiquesbyelaboratingonthesignificanceoftheroleofthe USasselfappointedjailertotheworldandbybuildinganunderstandingofthe driversbehindthisdevelopment,includingtheroleofprivatecorporationsand privateprofit.Itarguesthatthewaronterrorreflects,extendsandreinforcesthe penalpunitivenessandstateterrorthathavetakenrootattheheartofthecriminal justicesystemintheUSandmanyotherWesterncountries.Morespecifically,it arguesthattheUSroleasglobaljailerandthewayitexecutesthisroleneedtobe understoodaslogicalextensionsofthemassincarcerationinwhichtheUSisglobal leaderandexemplar.Understandingmassincarcerationanditsglobalspreadunder thebannerofthewaronterrorwarrantsaconsiderationofprivateprisonsalong withtheprocesses,dynamicsandconsequencesofneoliberalglobalisation.While critiquesofthewaronterroroftensetouttodocumentitsmanyandmanifest failures,thepurposehereistoconsiderandanalysewhoandwhatbenefits, particularlythewaysthatthewaronterrorandthestateterrorwhichaccompanies
See,forexample,LilaRajiva,TheLanguageofEmpire:AbuGhraibandtheAmericanMedia(New York:MonthlyReviewPress,2005) 19 AngelaDavis,AbolitionDemocracy:BeyondEmpire,PrisonsandTorture(NewYork:FreePress, 2005);JudithGreene,FromAbuGhraibtoAmerica:ExaminingOurHarshPrisonCulture,Ideasfor anOpenSociety:OccasionalPapersfromOSIUSPrograms4(2004):24;AveryGordon,Abu Ghraib:imprisonmentandthewaronterror,RaceandClass48,no.1(2006):4259 20 DaveWhyteTheCrimesofNeoLiberalRuleinOccupiedIraqBritishJournalofCriminology,2007, 47no.2(2007):177195;DaveWhyteHireanAmerican!EconomicTyrannyandCorruptioninIraq SocialJustice,2007,34no.2(2007):153168;JeremyScahillBlackwater:TheRiseoftheWorldsMost PowerfulMercenaryArmy(SerpentsTail:London,2007);PeterSinger,CorporateWarriors;Naomi Klein,TheShockDoctrine:TheRiseofDisasterCapitalism(AllenLane:Camberwell,Victoria,2007). 20 TheAge,2March2006
18
185
itsucceedinopeningupnewmarketsforprivatecapitalandprofit,thereby maintainingafertileclimatefortheadvanceofneoliberalglobalisationmore generally. TheUSasGlobalJailer InNovember2001,shortlyaftertheSeptember2001attacksontheUS(hereafter knownas9/11),PresidentGeorgeW.BushissuedaPresidentialMilitaryOrderfor theDetention,Treatment,andTrialofCertainNonCitizensintheWarAgainst Terrorism.TheOrderallowsforthearrest,detentionandpossiblemilitarytrialof nonUScitizens,regardlessoftheirlocation,bytheUSDefenseDepartment.The categoryofnoncitizenssubjecttothisorderisextraordinarilybroad,including thosebelievedtohavecaused,threatentocause,orhaveastheiraimtocause injurytooradverseeffectsontheUS,itscitizens,nationalsecurity,foreignpolicy, oreconomy,orsimplyanybodywhotheUSbelievesitisintheirinteresttodetain.21 PriortotheissueoftheOrdertheUSwasattheforefrontinternationallyof punitive,longtermimprisonment.22TheUSwasalsowellestablishedastheworlds laboratoryforpenaltechnologiesofcoercionandcontrolandatrailblazerofprison privatisation.23ThePresidentialOrder,byovercomingtheterritoriallimitsof sovereignty,transformedtheUSfromglobaltrendsettertoselfappointedworld jailer. ThenumberofpeoplebeingheldinUSoffshoreprisonsanddetentioncentresis difficulttoaccuratelycalculate.Ithasbeenestimated,however,thatsince2001
21
GeorgeW.Bush,FederalRegister:November16,200166,no.222MilitaryOrderofNovember13, 2001Detention,Treatment,andTrialofCertainNonCitizensintheWarAgainstTerrorism PresidentialDocuments:5783157836http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/mo111301.htm 22 NilsChristieCrimeControlAsIndustry:TowardsGulags,WesternStyle(LondonandNewYork: Routledge,2003),91109;DavidGarland,Themeaningofmassimprisonment,inMass Imprisonment:SocialCausesandConsequences,ed.DavidGarland(London:Sage,2001),13. ChristianParenti,LockdownAmerica(London:NewYork,1999),163169. 23 ChristieCrimeControlAsIndustry;D.Shichor,PunishmentforProfitPrivatePrisons/Public Concerns(London,NewDelhi:Sage,1995);Andrew,Coyle,AllisonCampbellandRodneyNeufeld, IntroductioninCapitalistPunishment:PrisonPrivatizationandHumanRights,eds.Andrew,Coyle, AllisonCampbellandRodneyNeufeld(Atkanta,London:ClarityPress/ZedBooks,2003),915.
186
therehavebeenapproximately60,000peopleincarceratedbytheUSoutsideofthe USinplacessuchasGuantanamoBayinCubaandinIraqandAfghanistan.Between them,theUSmilitaryandtheCentralIntelligenceAgency(CIA)runapproximately twentyfiveprisonsinAfghanistanandseventeeninIraq.24Thevolumeofprisoners inoffshoreUSprisonsissignificantandincreasing.ThenumberofprisonersinIraq, forexample,iscontinuallyexpanding.AftertheclosureofAbuGhraibfollowingthe 2004releaseofphotographsandvideosrevealingtortureandabuseofprisoners there,thefirstpermanentUSprisona$60millionsupermaximumsecurity prisonwasopenedatCampCropper,nearBaghdadairport.Additionally,despite thereleaseofmanyprisoners,anew$38millionfacilityisbeingbuiltat GuantanamoBay.25 PrisonerTortureRUS The2004publicationofphotographsdepictingtorture,abuse,degradationand humiliationofprisonersatAbuGhraibprisoninIraqfocusedworldattentiononthe issueofterrorinflicteduponprisonersintheUSledwaronterror.Mainstream opinionandofficialcommentaryintheUSwerequicktodismisstherevelationsas unrepresentativeofUSpracticesinthewaronterrorandmoreprofoundly unrepresentativeofthevaluesattheheartofthenation.ThePresidentdismissed thepracticesasnotAmericanwhileothers,weddedtotheideaoftheUSasan internationalparagonofvirtueandamodelofdemocracy,framedtherevelationsin thecontextoftheideaoftheUSaslongstandingglobalmoralexemplar.26Forthese commentators,thedamagedonetotheprisonerswassecondaryandinsignificant comparedtothatdonetothenationsreputation.TypicalwasthelamentbyoneUS senatorthat:
24
187
Worstofall,ournation,anationthat,toadegreeunprecedentedinhuman history,hassacrificeditsbloodandtreasuretosecurelibertyandhumanrights aroundtheworldnowmusttrytoconvincetheworldthatthehorrificimageson theirTVscreensandfrontpagesarenottherealAmerica,thatwhattheyseeis notwhoweare.27
USpatriotswereanxioustopresenttheabuseasatypical:notrepresentativeeither ofthetreatmentofprisonersinthewaronterrororofthevaluesofliberty, democracyandhumanrightsthattheybelievetheUSholdsdear.Despitethese protestations,itisabundantlyclearthatthedocumentedabuse,humiliation,sexual degradation,brutality,andtorturebyUSpersonnelinIraqandatotherlocationsis notaberrantbutsystematicandinstitutionalisedintheUSledwaronterror.28 Beyondthis,thetortureandgrossmistreatmentpractisedinUSoffshoreprisons mirrortheexperiencesofmillionsofUSprisonersincarceratedindomesticprisons andimmigrationdetentioncentres.Thesepracticesamounttoandareexperienced asformsofstateperpetratedterror.Furthermore,becausesuchpracticesare experiencedsodisproportionatelybyparticulargroupsArabsandMuslimsinthe waronterrorandAfricanAmericansindomesticprisonstheysendamessageto thesecommunitiesbeyondtheprisonwallsabouttheircollectivevulnerabilityto stateviolence,thustraumatisingandterrorisingentirecommunities.WhiletheAbu Ghraibphotographsandotherrevelationsanddocumentationoftortureandabuse inUSoffshoreprisonsarerightlythefocusofmoraloutragethereisnobasisfor beingsurprisedorshocked.29 MillionsofUScitizenshavefirsthandexperienceofsimilartreatmentand conditionsindomesticprisonsandthousandsofnoncitizenshavebeensubjectto suchinimmigrationdetentionfacilitiesinsidetheUS.In2000,JoyJameswroteof
27
188
theinstitutionalisationoftorture,abuseandrepressionintheUSpenalsystem.30In short,USprisonsconstituteanapparatusofstateterror.Thetensofthousandsof UScitizenswhoworkinprisonshaveauthorised,supervised,witnessedordirectly participatedinthisstateterror.JudithGreenpointsoutthat[e]xperienced observers...arequicktorecognizethattheAbuGhraibphotosreekofthecruelbut usualmethodsofcontrolusedbymanyUSprisonpersonnel.31Thedehumanisation exposedbythephotographsisthemodusoperandiofthelawful,modern,stateof theartprison.32AngelaDavisarguesthatthepermissive,barbaricpractices revealedinUSdetentioninthewaronterrorareareflectionandextensionofthe normalizationoftorturewithindomesticprisons.33Shemaintainsthatthetorture ofprisonersinoffshoreprisonshasfoundationslaiddeepintheroutine,quotidian violencethatisjustifiedastheeverydaymeansofcontrollingprisonpopulationsin theUS.34 OneaspectofthephotographsandvideosfromAbuGhraibthatarousedparticular outrageanddisgustwasthedepictionofthesexualcoercionandhumiliation inflictedonprisoners.ThePhysiciansforHumanRightsreportintothesystematic useofpsychologicaltorturebyUSforcesinthewaronterrorstatesthat[t]heuse ofhumiliationasameansofbreakingdowntheresistanceofdetainees,including forcednudity...beganwhenthewaronterrorbegan.35Thisstatement,andthe outragedsurpriseaccompanyingthepublicrevelationsofsexualabuseand humiliation,beliestherealitythatsexualcoercion,mostparticularlyintheformof routinestripsearches,isalongstandingandnormalisedaspectofstateterrorwithin USdomesticprisons,aswellasinprisonsinotheradvancedliberaldemocracies.36
30
JoyJamesTheDysfunctionalandDisappearing:Democracy,RaceandImprisonmentSocial Identities6no.4(2000):483493atp.483 31 Greene,FromAbuGhraibtoAmerica:ExaminingOurHarshPrisonCulture,atp.4 32 GordonAbuGhraib:imprisonmentandthewaronterror,49 33 Davis,AbolitionDemocracyp.114 34 Davis,AbolitionDemocracyp.115 35 PhysiciansforHumanRightsBreakThemDown:SystematicUseofPsychologicalTorturebyUS Forces(Washington:PhysiciansforHumanRights,2005):5. 36 See,McCulloch,JandGeorge,ANakedPower:StripSearchinginWomensPrisonsinThe ViolenceofIncarcerationeds.PhilScratonandJudeMcCulloch(NewYork:Routledge,2008, forthcoming).
189
Therearedeepconnectionsbetweensexualviolenceandthegenderedprocesses ofdisciplineandpowerembeddedinsystemsofimprisonment.37 Therearealsosimilaritiesinthedesignofthenewlybuiltwaronterrorprisonsand domesticprisons.ThemaximumsecurityprisonatGuantanamoBay,forexample, whichimposescruel,dehumanisingsensorydeprivationconditionsthatbreakdown anddestroyhumanbeings,physicallyandpsychologically,isbasedonthedesignof aMiamiprison.38Additionally,GuantanamoBaymirrorsandextendsthetrend withintheUStowarehouseprisonersinsupermaximumsecurityfacilities.39Another indicationoftheconnectionandcontinuitybetweenUSglobalprisonsanddomestic prisonsistheoverlapinpersonnel.ManyofthoserevealedtobetorturersatAbu GhraibgainedtheirinitialexperienceinprisonsinsidetheUS.One,whotookona leadershiproleatAbuGhraib,infamouslyremarkedinacommentthatreflectsa pervertedtakeonjobsatisfaction:TheChristianinmesaysitswrong,butthe correctionsofficerinmesaysIlovetomakeagrownmanpisshimself40.AsUS prisonactivistJudithGreeneputsit,thevengefulpenalphilosophyandharshprison culturehaveledtoadreadfullevelofbrutalityandhumanrightsabusesinourown prisons,andnowthismaliciouslypunitivementalityhasbeenexportedtoIraqby U.S.prisonpersonnel.41Since2003morethan5,000civilianprisonguardshave beencalleduptomilitaryservice.42 Conditions,trends,technologyandotherinnovationscirculatebetweenthevarious spacesofincarcerationsothatthebordersbetweentheUScriminaljusticesystem andtheexpandingUSglobalcarceralcomplexareintertwinedandincreasingly indistinct.Theconnectionsbetweentheinstitutionalisedstateterrorinthewaron
37
190
terrorandstateterrorinUSdomesticprisonsaredemonstratedonanumberof levels,includingtheexchangeofpersonnelbetweendomesticprisonsandwaron terrorprisons,andtheroutinestateterrorinflicteduponprisonersanddetaineesin boththeglobalanddomesticprisons.Inaddition,theroutinedenialofthe systematicandinstitutionalisednatureofstateterrorisafeatureofbothdomestic andwaronterrorprisons.Increasingly,thestatescoercivecapacitiesare paralleledormirroredinsideandoutsidenationalborders.43Theevidenceofstate terroragainstprisonersinthewaronterrorisbothforetoldandprescientin relationtostateterrorindomesticprisons. CirculatingStateTerror:FromCriminalInjusticetoMilitaryInjustice Thebordersbetweenforeignanddomesticpolicies,andbetweenmilitaryaction andcriminaljustice,havebeenincrementallybutextensivelyerodedoverthepast threedecades.SincetheendoftheColdWar,thetraditionalboundariesbetween aninternallyorienteddomesticpolicesphereandanexternallyorientedmilitary spherehavebecomeincreasinglyblurred.44Thisprocesshasacceleratedmarkedly inthepost9/11era.Thewaronterrorextendsthetrendestablishedwiththe continuingUSledwarsondrugs,organisedcrimeandearlyiterationsofthewaron terror,whichwasfirstdeclaredusingsimilarrhetoricduringthepresidencyof GeorgeBushseniorinthe1980s.45Theblurringoftraditionalboundariesismanifest inhybridmilitaryandcriminaljusticeconfigurationsandoperationsatboththe nationalandgloballevels.46Nationaldefence,internalsecurityandlaw
MichaelHardtSovereignty(2002) <muse.jhu.edu/journals/theory_and_event/v005/5.4hardt.html>,(accessed15July2005) 44 P,AndreasandR,PriceFromwarfightingtocrimefighting:TransformingtheAmericannational securitystateInternationalStudiesReview3no.3(2001):3152p.32 45 NoamChomsky,PiratesandEmperors,OldandNew:InternationalTerrorismintheRealWorld (London:PlutoPress,2002)p.2 46 JudeMcCullochBluearmies,KhakipoliceandthecavalryonthenewAmericanfrontier:Critical Criminologyforthe21stCenturyCriticalCriminology,200412pp.309326;P,AndreasandR,Price Fromwarfightingtocrimefighting:TransformingtheAmericannationalsecuritystate;E,Alliez andA,NegriPeaceandWarTheoryCultureandSociety,20,no.2:109118.
43
191
enforcementhaveincreasinglymerged.47PresidentGeorgeW.Bush,settingoutthe USnationalsecuritystrategyin2002,observed,[t]oday,thedistinctionbetween domesticandforeignaffairsisdiminishing.48Thewaronterrorhasconsolidated andextendedtheblendingofcrimeandwarsothatsecuritisationathome parallelscloselywarabroad.49 Thewaronterrorandtheaccompanyingstateofemergencyisinfinitebecauseitis nottemporarilyorgeographicallybounded,being,asPresidentGeorgeW.Bush termsit,aglobalenterpriseofuncertainduration.50Inthesecircumstancesthestate ofemergencyandtheexceptionalmeasuresthatfollowbecomethepermanent norm.51Theopeningupofaglobalmilitarisedpolitysubjecttocontinuous peacekeepingbyanarmyofglobocops,thathasemergedandintensifiedpost 9/11,hascombinedthecoercivepowersofwarwiththepunitivenessofthecriminal justicesystemtocreateaframeworkthatseekstodenythebasichumanrightsof individuals,caughtwithinthenetofwhataredeemedcounterterroristmilitary interventions.Itdeniesthemtheprotectionofinternationallawsembodiedin instrumentssuchastheGenevaConventionsandtheprotectionstraditionally affordedcriminalsuspects.52Theconflationoftherulesofwarandcriminaljustice haveprecedenceinthecolonialpast.53
JonathanWhiteTerrorisminTransitioninHandbookofTransnationalCrimeandJusticeed.Philip Reichel(ThousandOakes:SagePublications):26578;PeterKraskaandVictorKappelerMilitarizing Americanpolice:theriseandnormalizationofparamilitaryunitsSocialProblems,44,no.1(1997):1 18;MichaelHardtandAntonioNegriEmpire(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,2000),189. 48 GeorgeBush,TheNationalSecurityStrategyoftheUSofAmericaWashington:TheWhiteHouse (2002) 49 A.KaplanHomelandInsecurities:TransformationsofLanguageandSpaceinSeptember11in History:AWatershedMoment?Ed.M,Dudziak(DurnhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress,2003); JudeMcCullochBluearmies,KhakipoliceandthecavalryonthenewAmericanfrontier:Critical Criminologyforthe21stCentury 50 GeorgeBush,TheNationalSecurityStrategyoftheUSofAmericap.i 51 GeorgioAgamben,StateofException(Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,2005):3 52 Seeforexample,JudithButler,PrecariousLife:ThePowersofMourningandViolence(London: Verso,2004),Chapter3;JudeMcCullochandBreeCarlton,Preemptingjustice:thesuppressionof financingofterrorismandthewaronterror,CurrentIssuesInCriminalJustice17:397412.
53
47
Emmanuelle Saada, The History Lessons: Power and Rule in Imperial Formations, Items and Issues,SocialScienceResearchCouncil,4,no.4,Fall/Winter,(2003):1017.
192
Priorto9/11,theUShadalreadytakensomeinitialstepsalongtheroadto becomingjailertotheworld.In1989itinvadedPanamainlinewithitswaron drugs,purportedlyinpursuitofnarcoterrorists.Inthewakeoftheinvasion,5,000 PanamanianswereheldindetentioninsidePanamawithoutchargeformanyyears bytheUS.54TheUSbehaviourtowardsandwithinPanamaprovidesanearly exampleoftheextensionofthelongarmofUScriminaljusticeintoextraterritorial contexts.The2001PresidentialOrder(referredtoabove)representsaformalisation andextensionofUSdomesticpolicingandpunishmentintoglobalspaces.To understandthenatureandsignificanceofthegrowthofaUSglobalcarceral complexandtheimpetusthatunderpinsit,itisnecessarytofirstappreciatethe nature,extentandfunctionofmassincarcerationwithintheUS. MassincarcerationandstateterrorintheUS Priorto9/11,prisonpopulationsinmostWesterncountriesexpandedrapidly.The forerunnerofthistrendistheUSwheretherehasbeenanunprecedentedincrease inprisonerssincethe1980s.55Inthetwodecadesbetween1980andtheturnofthe millenniumtheUSprisonpopulationroseby319%.56The1990swerethegolden ageofprisonexpansioninAmerica,withadoublingofthenumberofincarcerated menandwomen,from1.1millionin1990tonearly2millionin2000,whilespending onincarcerationapproached$40billion.57Theextentofmassincarcerationinthe USisunprecedentedinthehistoryofliberaldemocracyandhasnoparallelinthe Westernworld.58Thephenomenonisnotconfinedsimplytonumbersandratesof imprisonment.Anothersignificantdimensionconcernsthesocialconcentrationof
54
JoyJames,HuntingPrey:TheUSInvasionofPanamainResistingStateViolence:Radicalism, Gender,andRaceintheUSCultureed.JoyJames(Minneapolis:London,1996),6383. 55 RichardSparks,StatePunishmentinAdvancedCapitalistCountriesinPunishmentandSocial Controleds.T.BlombergandS.Cohen(NewYork:mAldineDeGruyer,2003),30 56 JamesAustin,JohnIrwin,andCharisKurbinItsAboutTime:AmericasImprisonmentBingein PunishmentandSocialControleds.T.BlombergandS.Cohen(NewYork:mAldineDeGruyer,2003), 433 57 K,Pranis,CampusActivismDefeatsMultinationalsPrisonProfiteeringinPrisonNationThe WarehousingofAmericasPoorineds.T.Herviel&P.Wright(NewYorkandLondon:Routledge, 2003),156. 58 Sparks,StatePunishmentinAdvancedCapitalistCountriesp.30
193
imprisonmentseffects.59In2001,66%ofinmatesinprivateprisonswereracial minorities,withAfricanAmericansconstitutingthesinglelargestgroup(43.9%).60In 2003,forevery100,000blackmalesintheUSagedbetween20and44,36,932men wereinprisons.Thenumberforwhitemaleswas4,954.61Theupwardspiralof incarceration,combinedwiththeoverrepresentationofparticularcommunities andgroupsofpeopleasprisonersanddetainees,meanthatincarcerationistoo frequentlyadefiningexperienceforthesegroupsandcommunities.Beyond reflectingbroadersocialinequalitiesandstructuralviolence,imprisonmentalso playsadefiningroleinamplifyingthesephenomena.Imprisonmentisracialisedand gendered,mirroringandextendingthepainfulandburdensomelegaciesofslavery andcolonisation,alongwiththemyriadandintersectingoppressionsof patriarchy.62PrisonhasalsobeenusedtopunishpoliticaldissidentsthroughoutUS history.63Theprisonanddetentioncentrealsoprovidekeyexperiencesforthe increasingnumberofpeoplewhoworkinsidetheseinstitutions,particularlyasother employmentopportunitiesandtheabilitytoescapesuchemploymenthave contractedmarkedly.64
Garland,Themeaningofmassimprisonment,p.1 MichaelHallett,PrivatePrisonsinAmerica:ACriticalRacePerspective(UrbanaandChicago: UniversityofIllinoisPress,2006),p.4 61 MichaelHallett,PrivatePrisonsinAmerica:ACriticalRacePerspective(UrbanaandChicago: UniversityofIllinoisPress,2006),p78. 62 AngelaDavis,ArePrisonsObsolete(NewYork:SevenStoriesPress,2003);Davis,Abolition Democracy 63 WardChurchillandVanderWall,eds.CagesofSteel:ThePoliticsofImprisonmentintheUS (Washington,DC:MaisonneuvePress,1992). 64 RuthGilmoreWilson,GoldenGulag:Prisons,Surplus,Crisis,andOppositioninGlobalizing (California,Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2007).
60
59
194
PrivatePrisons Theterm,prisonindustrialcomplex,wascoinedbyactivistsandscholarstocontest prevailingbeliefsthatincreasedlevelsofcrimeweretherootcauseofmounting prisonpopulationandtounderlinetheconnectionsbetweencorporateinterests andincarceration.65Prisonindustrialcomplexdrawsandbuildsfromtheterm, militaryindustrialcomplex,firstusedintheearly1960sbyUSPresidentEisenhower inhisfarewellspeechtowarnaboutthedangersoftheconjunctionofanimmense militaryestablishmentandalargearmsindustry.66Eisenhowersearlywarning provedprescient.In2003,RobertHiggssummarizedthemilitaryindustrialcomplex as:
[a]vastcesspoolofmismanagement,waste,andtransgressionnotonlybordering onbutoftenenteringintocriminalconductThegreatarmsfirmshavemanaged tosloughoffmuchofthenormalrisksofdoingbusinessinagenuinemarket, passingonmanyoftheirexcessivecoststothetaxpayerswhilestillrealizing extraordinaryratesofreturnoninvestment.67
195
TheunprecedentednatureofmassincarcerationintheUSprovokedspeculationon thelimitstowhichitcouldbetaken.70In1995,aseniorexecutiveofCorrection CorporationofAmericaarguedthattheUSAmarketwouldexpandalmost indefinitely.71Priortotheadventofthe2001waronterror,commentators assumed,however,thatnationalbordersprovidedatleastaterritoriallimitonmass incarcerationfacilitatedthroughUSpenalpolicy.JamesAustinandhiscoauthors publishedachapterin2003,butclearlywrittenpriorto2001,observingthat:
Americahashadtoconstructitslocationsofbanishmentwithinitsborder.This hasbeendoneatfeverishpace.AswasdoneineighteenthcenturyEngland,we eventriedusingbargesinNewYorkCity.AlthoughwelackanAustraliawherewe cansetupprisoncolonies,weareincreasinglybuildinghugemegaprison settlementsinisolatedruralcommunitieswherelandischeap...72
TheNovember2001PresidentialOrder,however,substantiallydemolishedthe limitsofterritory.The1989invasionofPanama(seeabove)providesoneearly exampleoftheextraterritorialimpositionofimprisonmentbytheUS.The involvementoftransnationalcorporationsinprisonsandimmigrationdetention centresprovidedanothermeansbywhichthelimitsofterritoryonmass incarcerationwerebreachedpriortothePresidentialOrder. Shortlyaftertheyemergedinthe1980sintheUS,privateprisoncompaniesactively pursuedexpandingmarketsandprofitsbeyondtheirhomebase.73USprivateprison corporationsarerunningprisonsinorhaverunprisonsincountriesincluding Australia,Canada,NewZealand,theUnitedKingdomandSouthAfrica.74Despite
Garland,Themeaningofmassimprisonment,p.3 Richard Harding, Private Prisons and Public Accountability, (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1997),4 72 JamesAustin,JohnIrwin,andCharisKurbinItsAboutTime:AmericasImprisonmentBingein PunishmentandSocialControleds.T.BlombergandS.Cohen(NewYork:mAldineDeGruyer,2003), 441 73 StephenNathan,PrisonPrivatizationintheUnitedKingdominCapitalistPunishment:Prison PrivatizationandHumanRights,190 74 Andrew,Coyle,AllisonCampbellandRodneyNeufeld,IntroductioninCapitalistPunishment: PrisonPrivatizationandHumanRights,1
71
70
196
thesesuccessesinmarketexpansion,transnationalprivateprisonscorporations have,however,encounteredsomesignificantbarriersinenteringtheinternational market.Governmentsincountriesthatareideologicallywelldisposedtoneoliberal principleshavebeenwillingtoembraceprivateprisonsaspartofthetrendaway frompublicownershipandstatecontroltowardsprivatisation.Nevertheless,ithas oftentakencompaniesseveralyearsoflobbyingtopersuadegovernmentsoutside oftheUS,particularlyinthefaceoflabourunionopposition,thatprivatisationisa goodoptionforprisons.75EvenincountrieslikeAustralia,wherestategovernments haveenthusiasticallyembracedprisonprivatisation,76privateprisonshaveruninto sustainedandsometimespassionatepublicopposition.Alongrunningcampaignby prisonactivistsinVictoria(astateinAustralia),forexample,forcedthegovernment touseitsemergencypowerstostepinandtakeoverthemanagementofawomens prisonfromtheUSprivatecorporationthathadbeenrunningitforfouryears.The campaignsucceededindocumentingandpublicisingescalatingviolence, mismanagement,coverup,andmultipleandseriousbreachesofcontractwhich endangeredbothprisonstaffandprisoners.Thecampaign,linkedtosimilaractivist groupswithintheUS,wascriticalnotonlyoftheparticularcircumstancesofthe specificprisonandtheprivateprisoncompanythatranit,butofthewholeconcept ofprisonsforprofit.77 PrivateprisonshavealsohadsomesuccessinpenetratingmarketsintheGlobal South.TheWorldBankandtheInternationalMonetaryFund,globalcrusadersfor neoliberalism,haveattemptedtoimposeprivateprisonsondevelopingcountriesas partofstructuraladjustmentprograms,butsucheffortshavemetresistance.78Even intheUS,wherethecompanieswieldconsiderablepoliticalinfluence,thebehaviour ofthecompaniescombinedwithphilosophicalobjectionstopunishmentforprofit
StephenNathan,PrisonPrivatizationintheUnitedKingdominCapitalistPunishment:Prison PrivatizationandHumanRights,164 76 PaulMoyle,ProfitingfromPunishment:PrivatePrisonsinAustralia:ReformorRegression? (Annandale:PlutoPress,2000),1 77 AmandaGeorge,WomenPrisonersasCustomers:CountingtheCostsofthePrivatelyManaged MetropolitanWomensCorrectionalCentre:AustraliainCapitalistPunishment:PrisonPrivatization andHumanRights. 78 Nathan,PrisonPrivatizationintheUnitedKingdompp.198201
75
197
haveresultedincommunitycampaignsthathavesucceededinrevealingthemas cheats,liarsandliabilities.Theserevelationshaveledtoadeclineinprofitsanda slowdowninprivateprisongrowth.Themassiveexpansionofprivateprisonswithin theUSinthe1980sand1990shasnotcontinuedintothenewmillennium.79 ThedecelerationintheexpansionofprivateprisonswithintheUShascoincided withanexpandinginternationalmarketforprofitfromprisons.Invasionand occupationovercomethelimitationsofnationalterritoryandprovidespacesand humanbeingsthatcanbecapturedandimprisoned,thusexpandingtheUSproject ofmassincarceration.Despitethemassivelydisproportionateincarcerationof peopleofcolourwithintheUSandtheracismmanifestateverylevelofthecriminal justicesystem,longtermincarcerationtherestillrequirestheapplicationofsome formalprocessanddeterminationofguilt,althoughsince9/11domesticlegislation hassubstantiallyerodeddueprocessprotections.Thedeclarationofthewaron terror,thePresidentialOrder,andinvasionsofandsubsequentoccupationsof AfghanistanandIraq,however,havedisposedwitheventhepretextofdueprocess. PeopleinAfghanistanandIraqandindeedanywhereintheworldcanbecaptured, abductedandincarceratedindefinitelybytheUS.Thiscaptureanddetentionisnot basedonwhatpeoplehavedone,orevenonwhattheyaresuspectedtohavedone oraresuspectedofplanningtodo,butonwhattheymightdoatsomeunspecified timeinthefuturetoharmtheinterestshoweverthesemightbedefinedofthe US.80TherearetensofthousandsofpeopleinoffshoreUSprisons,heldwithout chargeorevidence,sometimesforyears.Thesepeople,manyofwhomhavehad nothingtodowithinsurgencyorviolentoppositionatall,includingchildren,women andtheelderly,makeupthenextwaveofUSmassincarceration. DisasterCapitalism:StateTerror,theWaronTerrorandPrivateProfit
79
198
Thereislittleempiricalevidenceavailabledetailingtheprofitsmadebyprivate prisoncorporationsinthewaronterror.Whatwedoknow,however,isthatprivate corporationsaremakinghugeprofitsinthewaronterrorandthatprisonsarean importantandsignificantaspectofthewaronterror.PeterMcLarenandGregory Martin,commentingontheprofitsflowingtomajorUScompaniesfromthe invasionsofAfghanistanandIraq,observedthat[t]hebestbusinessintheglobal marketplacethesedaysappearstobethebusinessofbombingtheinfrastructureof acountrytotheStoneAgeandthenreceivingmillionsofdollarstorebuildit.81 Postinvasionreconstructionandtheprovisionofservicesduringoccupationhave createdhugeopportunitiesforprivatefirms.Theenthusiasticexploitationofthese opportunitieshasbeendubbeddisastercapitalismandhailed,astheriseofthe disastercapitalismcomplex.82Duringthefirstfourteenmonthsoftheoccupationof Iraq,theUSledregimespentaround$20billioninIraqioilrevenue,mostofwhich wasdistributedtoUScorporations.83Theprivatecontractorsandmercenaryarmies aremakinghugeprofitsinIraq.84Sincethefirstyearofoccupationreconstruction fundshavebeenredirectedtopayforthemilitaryandsecuritycostsofthe occupation.85WhilemoneyforreconstructioninIraqhassloweddown,moneyfor buildingprisonscontinuestoflow.TheUSStateDepartmentsonlyrequestfor rebuildingfundsfromCongressin2006was$100millionforprisons.86Atthetimeof writing,therewerecallsouttoprivatefirmsforupto$5millionofservicesforthe newlyconstructedCampCropperprisoninIraq.87Bymid2004,multinational HalliburtonsincomefromGuantanamoBaywasapproximatelyUS$155million.88
PeterMcLarenandGregoryMartin,TheLegendoftheBushGang:Imperialism,Warand PropagandaCulturalStudies:CriticalMethodologies4no.3(2004):281303atp.296;seealso,Dave WhyteTheCrimesofNeoLiberalRuleinOccupiedIraqBritishJournalofCriminology,2007,47no.2 (2007):177195. 82 NaomiKleinTheriseofdisasterCapitalismTheNation,May2,2005;NaomiKlein,TheShock Doctrine:TheRiseofDisasterCapitalism(AllenLane:Camberwell,Victoria,2007),281. 83 WhyteTheCrimesofNeoLiberalRuleinOccupiedIraq 84 Klein,TheShockDoctrine,p.9;1314;JeremyScahill,Blackwater:TheRiseoftheWorldsMost PowerfulMercenaryArmy(SerpentsTail:London,2007);PeterSinger,CorporateWarriors 85 DaveWhyteHireanAmerican!EconomicTyrannyandCorruptioninIraqSocialJustice,2007,34 no.2(2007):159 86 TheAge,2March2006 87 YMultipleAwardTaskOrderContract(MATOC)forConstructionprojectsatCampCropperwithin CampVictoryinstallation,Baghdad,Iraq
81
199
Iamnotawareofanyspecificresearchontheroleofprivateprisoncorporationsin thewaronterror.Howeverjoiningthedotsbetweenthebehaviourofthese corporationswithintheUSandothermarketstheyhavepenetratedpreviously, suchasAustralia,andthebehaviourofprivatecorporationswithinIraqgenerally, wheresystematicandinstitutionalizedcorruptionhasbeendocumented,onecan speculatethatthedistinctionbetweenprivateprofitandpublicinterestisnon existentandthatprofitisseenasanendinitself,regardlessofhumancosts. Inabookpublishedin1995,DavidShichor,consideringtheargumentsforand againstprivateprisons,claimedthat:
nobodyseriouslyrecommendsthatthemilitarybeprivatized,thatwarsbefought bysoldiersandsailorsemployedbyIBM,orsay,FightingForcesofAmerica,Inc.If deathanddisasteronaconsiderablescaleareinevitableproductstheruleseems tobethattheresponsibilityisthebusinessofgovernment.Thegovernmentisat leastresponsivetothewilloftheelectorate,anditpresumablywillnotdeclareor wagewarwithprofitasitsmajorgoal.89
200
examinethecapitalistsystemasawholeandthebroaderpoliticsthatdriveglobal massincarceration,alongwiththestateterrorandterrorismthataccompanyit.91 CriminologistDaveWhyteconcludes,basedonfieldresearchinIraq,that[v]irulent andinstitutionalizedcorruptioninIraqhasextendedtheneocolonialreachoftheUS sustainingamuchbroaderstrategyofdomination.92 PrisonsfortheFreeWorld Violenceandincarcerationincludingtorture,abuse,sexualviolenceand supermaximumsecurityconditions,domesticallyandinthewakeofmilitary aggression,amounttostateterrorbecausetheyareinevitablyexperiencedasa formofterrorbyincarceratedpeople.Beyondthisviolenceandincarceration,both domesticallyandinthewaronterror,areaformofstateterrorism.Theimpactsof violenceandincarcerationareconcentratedinracialisedandcriminalisedgroups. Violenceandincarcerationarepartofapoliticalstrategydesignedtosenda messageaboutthesocial,politicalandeconomicsystemasawholeandstrikefear intothosecommunitiesthataredisproportionatelythevictimsofviolenceand incarceration. Beyondthepurelyeconomicrationaleoftheprison,massincarcerationintheUS servesanimportantideologicalfunction:[t]heprisonindustrialcomplexisnotonly asetofinterestgroupsandinstitutions.Itisalsoastateofmind.93Neoliberalism andrepressivesocialcontrolareapackagedealthroughwhichtherhetoricof criminalizationandpunishmentlegitimizesstatesthathaverenegedontheir commitmenttothesocialwage.94AsAngelaDavisargues,prison:
91
201
...functionsideologicallyasanabstractsiteintowhichundesirablesaredeposited, relievingusofthinkingaboutrealissuesafflictingthosecommunitiesfromwhich prisonersaredrawninsuchdisproportionatenumbersItrelievesusofthe responsibilityofseriouslyengagingwiththeproblemsofoursociety,especially thoseproducedbyracism,andincreasinglyglobalcapitalismTheprisonhas becomeablackholeintowhichthedetritusofcontemporarycapitalismis deposited.95
WithintheUS,criminalisationofAfricanandIndigenousAmericansresonateswith theslaveryandgenocidesofformertimesandassistsinmaintainingAfrican AmericansandIndigenouspeopleasmarginalisedandvilifiedminorities,thus workingtoobscurethecontinuinghistoryofstateterrorandterrorism.Mass incarcerationofthepoor,acategorywhichsubstantiallyoverlapswithrace, blamesthevictimsforthemyriadandintensifyingfailuresofcapitalismunder conditionsofneoliberalglobalisation.Thosethatactivelyopposeandresist neoliberalismarealsoexiledandisolated,ifnotsilenced,throughincarceration. Massincarcerationisdrivenasmuchbythepoliticalprofitasthematerialprofitthat goeshandinhandwiththepromotionoffearandthepunishmentofcriminalised andracialisedgroups.Statesnolongerwillingorabletorespondtodemandsfor socialjusticeunderthetenetsofneoliberalismarequicktorespondto,exacerbate andcreatethefearsthatunderliethedemandsforsecurityinitsmostrepressive andcoerciveforms.AsGirouxobserves:Whathasemergedisnotanimpotent state,butagarrisonstatethatincreasinglyprotectscorporateinterestswhile steppingupthelevelofrepressionandmilitarizationonthedomesticfront96a shiftfromwelfaretowarfarestate.TheUSastheexemplarofneoliberalismisalso theexemplarofthisprocess.Thefearandanxietymaintainedandeven manufacturedaroundcrime,andmorerecentlyandintenselyaroundnational security,servetodetractattentionawayfromproblematicdomesticpolitics.Law, orderandsecuritypoliticsmaskarangeofinsecuritiesthatarisefromgovernment
95
202
policiesbyassociatingnotionsofsecurityexclusivelywiththestateornationrather thanwithindividualsorcommunities. Inthesamewaythatdomesticmassincarcerationandstateterrorreflectand amplifysocialandracialhierarchieswithintheUS,theemergingglobalpracticeof incarcerationassiststomaintainhierarchiesbetweendifferentstates,primarilythe USandtherest,butalsotheWestandtherest,andbetweenpeopleswithinstates. Thelabelingofabroadrangeofsocialmovements,armedstrugglesand protagonistsinconflictshostiletotheinterestsoftheUSasterroristsworksto obscuretherealityoftheUSpursuitofselfinterestthroughstateterrorintheform ofmilitaryaggressionandincarceration. Inthesamewaythatneoliberalismandpunitivepenalpolicyhavemarchedhandin handdomesticallythespreadofneoliberalglobalisationhasextendedand intensifiedthisprocessthroughouttheworld.AsNaomiKleinpointsout,thereisa directconnectionbetweenmilitaryshockandawe,theeconomicshocktreatment ofcoercedneoliberalrestructuringandthephysicalandpsychologicalshock deliveredthroughmassincarcerationandendemictortureinthewaronterror.97 Internationally,theUnitesStatessuffersfromasuperioritycomplexwhich providesitwiththejustificationforconquest,invasionandcolonialrule,andserves toreducequalmsoverthemoralrightnessofdomination.98Eventhoughtful critiquesofpunitivepenalregimesassumethatsuchpracticesdonotimpactonthe fundamentalnatureofWesternsocietiesasthehomeofcivilizedpeople.James Austinandothers,forexample,reflectingonmassincarcerationintheUS, commentthat:[a]sacivilizedpeoplewemustnottoleratethis.99Theideathat massincarcerationmaybeuncivilbutneverthelessundertakenbycivilisedpeople
97
203
suggeststhatsuchpractices,whencarriedoutinputativeliberaldemocracies,may beproblematicbutnotdefining. Thefailuretoconsideruncivilpracticesofstateterrorthroughmassincarcerationto bedefiningisrelatedtothelongheldandfirmlyestablishednotionofWestern democracyastheoriginalandnaturalhomeofideasoffreedom,equalityand justice.Thedevelopmentofpostcolonialstudiesandcriticalracescholarshiphas revealedliberaldemocracieshistoricaltendencytowardsviolenceagainstand incarcerationofidentifiablegroups,whoaresocially,politicallyandculturally constructedasuncivilised.Democraticstateshaveroutinelydeniedaccesstorights andcitizenshiponthegroundsofrace,bothathomeandintheircolonies. Exclusionfromrightsviarenewednotionsofdangerousness,relatedparticularlyto classandrace,wasestablishedattheinceptionofmodernpenalsystems.100 Imperialistnarrativeshavealsoincorporatedtheideaofwesternliberalmarketsas fair,openandtransparentasopposedtocorruptionandbackwardnessassociated withprimitivelessdevelopedstates.101AsWilliamPfaffargues,theclaimtovirtue underliesnotionsofManifestDestinyasaclaimtopower.102Inpreviouserasthe ideaofManifestDestinyinvolvedspreadingwhitecivilisation,whereastodaysuch claimsarelikelytobemadeintermsofdemocracy,humanrightsandfree markets.103Ironically,theclaimstomoralvirtuetranslatedintoManifestDestiny laidthefoundationsfortheviolationoftherightsandprocessesunderpinningthose claims,coupledwithendemiccorruptionintheformoftheactivepromotionofwar, painandwholesaledisasterforprofit.Themythofmoralvirtueworkstohide, silence,minimiseanddenythecontinuingbrutalhistoryofmassincarcerationand
B. Hudson, B Justice in the Risk Society: challenging and reaffirming justice in late modernity, (London:Sage,2003),3536. 101 DaveWhyteHireanAmerican!EconomicTyrannyandCorruptioninIraqSocialJustice,2007,34 no.2(2007):153168 102 WilliamPfaff,ManifestDestiny:ANewDirectionforAmerica,TheNewYorkReviewofBooks,vol. LIV,no.2,2007:5458. 103 S,PereraOurPatch:DomainsofWhiteness,GeographiesofLackandAustraliasRacialHorizonin the war on terror in Our Patch: Enacting Australian Sovereignty Post 2001, 2007, S, Perera ed. pp.119146at.128129)
100
204
thesystemiccorruptionofprivateprofitlinkedtopunishmentandprisonswithin Westerncountries,theUSinparticular.Themythofmoralvirtue,exemplifiedby thehypocriticalresponsetotherevelationsoftortureandabuseinUSglobal prisons,fuelsthemoralbasisforthepursuitofthewaronterrorandtheexpansion ofmassincarcerationinternationally.TheinvasionofIraqwas,amongotherthings, toutedasawayofendingthecorruptionoftheSaddamHusseinregime.Such statementsarenowviewed,inlightofrevelationsofpostinvasioncorruption,as breathtakinglyhypocritical.104 Conclusion
Thewaronterror,andspecificallytheexpansionofUSmassincarcerationto encompasstheentireplanet,provideanemblematicexampleofstates strategicdeploymentofcounterterrorismtoengageinthewidespreaduse ofterroragainstpeopleandcommunitiesstereotypedasterrorists.Despite protestationstothecontrarythedocumentedstateterrorandtortureof prisonersanddetaineesinthewaronterrorarenotoutsidethemoral frameworkoftheUSbutinsteadrevealthevaluesputintopracticedailyupon thebodiesofmillionsofprisonersbythousandsofAmericancitizens,bothin thecountryitselfandincreasinglyinitsglobalprisonsoffshore.Increasingly theboundariesbetweenhomelandandglobalsecurity,domesticand offshoreprisons,arerenderedporousasstateterrorandterrorismcirculate betweenspacesofviolenceandincarceration.Theinternaldriversofmass incarcerationintheUSinequality,racism,prisonsforprofitand neoliberalismmoregenerallyareembracingnewfrontiersandcapturingnew markets.ThepeopleoftheworldrepresentthebodiesuponwhichUSstate terror,intheformofmassincarcerationandtorture,willbepractised.Thewar onterror,includingthePresidentialOrderthatallowsforthecaptureand detentionofnoncitizensoftheUSanywhereintheworld,theinvasionsof
DaveWhyteHireanAmerican!EconomicTyrannyandCorruptioninIraqSocialJustice,2007,34 no.2(2007):160
104
205
IraqandAfghanistan,andtheestablishmentofaglobalcarceralcomplex,have extendedandtransformedmassincarcerationfromaUSbasedphenomena toaprocessthatencompassestheentireglobe:amovefromgarrisonstateto garrisonplanet.
206
FromCaretoCrimeChildreninStatecareandthedevelopmentof criminality
KatherineMcFarlane NewSouthWalesSentencingCouncil katherine_mcFarlane@agd.nsw.gov.au In1979,notoriousNSWprisoner,BernieMatthews,publishedanarticleinagaol housemagazine,celebratingtheYearoftheChild. Formostofusbehindthesewalls,theroadtoprisonhasbeenasteady progressionofBoy'sHomesandReformatories.Tosomewearecrime statistics.Toothers,weareacombinationofanimals,brutes,deviates, psychopaths,productsofbrokenhomes,orjustplainpsychologically unbalancedindividuals..... Duringthepast9yearsinprisonthereisonethingthathasoccurredwith monotonousregularity:theguysIknewinMt.PenangandAlbionStreetand Yasmarwereinthoseplacesfortruancy,runningawayfromhome,stealing andinsomecaseshousebreaking. TodayIseethoseguysIknew14and15yearsagowalkingtheyard.Now theyaredoingtimeformurder,rapearmedrobberyandkidnapping. Somemaylookatthisexampleinacynicalveinandremarkthatitisabig stepfromrobbingabicycletorobbingbanks.Itisn'tabigstepatall.ITISA PROGRESSIVEEXTENSIONOFTHEJUVENILE/JUSTICESYSTEM.1
Matthews,BernieContact,ParramattaCorrectionalCentre,1979
207
Theprogressionfromjuvenileoffendingtoadultoffendinghasbeenclearly established.2However,Matthewsilluminatedanissuewhichmostotherstudiesor commentaryhaveoverlookedordownplayed.MtPenang,YasmarandAlbionStmay havebeenjuveniledetentioncentresthatcateredtoyoungoffenders,buttheyalso housedchildwelfarecases,thoseyoungpeoplewhowerecommittedtoaninstitution forbeingabandoned,neglectedorabused.InMatthewswords,theBoysHomesand reformatoriesdetainedchildrenwhohadtruantedorrunawayfromhome.Of significanceinthisobservationisnotmerelytheprogressionofyoungoffendersfrom juveniledetentiontoadultinstitutions,butanother,moredisturbingpathwaythat oftheoffendingtrajectoryofchildrenplacedinStatecareforpurelywelfarereasons. Academicresearchhaslargelyignoredthisvitalconnection.TheNSWBureauof CrimeStatisticsandResearch1974studyAThousandPrisoners3typifiesthewaythe overrepresentationofthosewithahistoryofcarearelostintheliterature.4BOCSAR reportedthatasubstantialnumberoftheprisoners(inNSW)hadlivedinan orphanageorsomeformofchildrenshome,butratherthanhighlightingthe staggeringfactthat41.2%hadbeeninstitutionalisedaschildren(54intheirfirst5 yearsoflife,andanother358betweentheagesof6to18),theopportunitytounravel therelationshipbetweentimeincareandsubsequentoffendingwasoverlooked. BOCSARsimplyattributedthemassiveoverrepresentationofprisonersfromacare backgroundtotheirstatusasproductsofabrokenhome,andassumedthattheyhad beenplacedincarebecauseofabuse.Thispropositionwasnotexploredfurtherinthe study,andthesignificanceofacarehistoryasapredictorofdelinquencywasnot revisitedfordecades.5
208
Snapshotsofprisonpopulationstheworldoverrevealthatpeoplewhohavebeenin Statecareareoverrepresentedinprisonsandjuveniledetentionfacilities.The significanceofthedatahowever,hasnotbeenpickedup,andwhilethefindingstend tobereproducedyearafteryeartherehavebeenfewattemptstoprobemoreclosely, tountanglewhysohighaproportionoftheprisonpopulationsharesthiscommon background.6Likewise,littleattentionhasbeenpaidtowhatleadstooffending amongstchildrenincare.Heavyqualificationsandassumptionshavebeenplacedon findingsthathaveindicatedthatwardsareoverrepresentedinoffending populations.7Coupledwithapparentgeneraldisinterest,thishasmeantthatresearch intooffendingbywardsisaneglectedarea.Inthisrespectthecarepopulationhas beenregardedinverymuchthesamewayasAboriginaloverrepresentationinthe criminaljusticesystemwasvieweduntilonly30orsoyearsagoassomethingtobe notedoccasionallyinprisonstatistics,butwithlittleattempttounravelthesocial, culturalandinstitutionalfactorsthatmayprovidesomeexplanation. Theprisonstudieshavehowever,servedauseful,iflimitedpurpose.Itisbecauseof thesesnapshotsthatweknowthatapproximately21%oftheCanadiangaol population,823%oftheUKadultgaolpopulationand38%ofjuveniledetaineeshave beenincare.9Almostunbelievably,UnitedStatesresearchhasplacedthenumberof prisonerswithacarehistoryashighas80%ofthecustodialpopulation.10Thefew Australianstudiesthathavebeenundertakenalsorevealanalarmingpicture.Studies ofadultfemaleprisonershavereportedthatbetween3050%wereremovedfrom
Taylor,ClaireYoungPeopleinCareandCriminalBehaviour,JessicaKingsleyPublishers,2006at13. Forexample,McDonaldetalcautionedagainstthepotentialforspuriousassociationsinthisarea, andwarnedthattheresultsmustbeinterpretedwithcaution,McDonald,Allen,Westerfeltand Piliavin,AssessingtheLongTermEffectsofFosterCare:AResearchSynthesis,InstituteforResearchon Poverty,Kansas,1993at77. 8 Mason,BrianImplementingtheYoungOffendersActAnAlbertaPerspectiveinHudson,Hornick andBurrows(Eds)JusticeandtheYoungOffenderinCanada,(pp5163)Wal&ThompsonInc1988p62 9 UKSelectCommitteeonHealth,SecondReport,InquiryintoChildrenLookedAfterByLocal Authorities,HouseofCommonsHMSOU.K.1998 10 Forexample,USDepartmentofJustice,BureauofJusticeStatisticsSpecialReport:Womeninprison, USDJ,OfficeofJusticePrograms1991:6;USDepartmentofJustice,OfficeofJusticePrograms,Bureau ofJusticesStatisticsSpecialReport,MentalHealthandTreatmentofInmatesandProbationers,1999:6; Golden,R.DisposableChildren:America'sChildWelfareSystem,Belmont,Ca;WadsworthPublishing Company,1997p171
7 6
209
theirfamiliesaschildrenandplacedincare11whilethe2001NSWInmateHealth Surveyfoundthat1in3Aboriginalprisonersand1in5nonAboriginalprisonershad spenttimeincare.12 Anexaminationofjuveniledetaineesrevealsasimilarpicture.In1999theNSW CommunityServicesCommissionreportedthat3%ofthechildreninjuvenile detentioncentreswerestatewards.TheCommissionconcededthatithad substantiallyunderstatedthenumberbyrelyingonofficialnotificationsasto wardshipstatusifthefilesdidnotlabeladetaineeasawardthentheywerenot countedassuch.Nonetheless,theCommissionfoundthatevenat3%ofthedetainee population,wardsweresignificantlydisproportionatelyoverrepresentedin detention,comparedtotheirnumbersinthebroaderjuvenilepopulation.13 Essentially,theCommissionfoundthatmalewardswere13timesandfemalewards wereastaggering35timesmorelikelytogotoajuveniledetentionfacilitythantheir nonwardpeers.14Afewyearslater,asurveyoftheReibyjuveniledetentioncentre15 foundthat42%ofthejuveniledetaineeshadbeeninsubstitutecareforatleastone episode;19%werepresentlyincare;and13%werestatewards.Justlastyearthe YoungPeopleinCustodyHealthSurveythejuvenileversionoftheadultprisonsurvey reportedthat28%ofyoungoffendershadspenttimeincare.16
Hastings,F,ACensusofWomeninCustodyinNSW1998:InterimResultsfromtheWomeninCustody Survey,WomensServicesUnit,NSWDepartmentofCorrectiveServices,SydneyAustralia1997 NSWDepartmentofCorrectiveServices,WomensServicesUnit,1997;SistersInside,KilroyDWhen willyouseetherealus?WomeninCorrections:StaffandClientsConference,AustralianInstituteof CriminologyAdelaide2000pg3;Denton,Barbara,Voicesfrombelow:Womeninprisonanddrugs,1995 p37TheNationalDrugandAlcoholResearchCouncil 12 ButlerTandMilneThe2001InmateHealthSurvey,CorrectionsHealthService,SydneyAustralia, 2003 13 CommunityServicesCommission,JustSolutions,1999pg17 14 Whenyouthoncommunityorderswereexamined,theCommissionfoundthatwardswere6.5times overrepresentedonsupervisionorders,comparedtothegeneraljuvenilepopulation. 15 TheHonBradHazzardMP,GovernorsSpeech:AddressinReply,Hansard,LegislativeAssembly, NSWParliament15March2002at583 16 Allerton,M.,Champion,U.,Kenny,D.T.,Butler,T.etal(2003).2003YoungPeopleinCustodyHealth Survey.NSWDepartmentofJuvenileJustice,SydneyAustralia
11
210
USstudiesshowthatyouthwithpreviousfostercareexperiencearefourtimesmore likelytobeearlystartjuveniledelinquentsthanyouthwithnofostercare experience.17Lookedafterchildren(theBritishtermforbeinginStatecare)ofthe ageofcriminalresponsibilityarethreetimesmorelikelytoreceiveacautionor convictionthantheirpeers.18Australianstudieshavefoundthatthereisahigherrate ofdetentionforStatewardscomparedtootheryoungpeople.While7%ofcharges levelledagainstjuvenileoffendersresultedincommitmentinajuveniledetention facility,21%ofchargesbroughtagainstwardsledtoacustodialsentence.19 StatewardshavehigherrecidivismratesthanthegeneralpopulationtheCSCfound 70%ofwardsreoffendedcomparedto59%ofthegeneraljuveniledetainee populationaccordingtoareportreleasedthisyearbytheCreateFoundation,one yearafterleavingcare,almosthalfoftheyoungpeoplewillhavecommitteda crime.20 ThereisalsoevidencethatStatewardsreoffendatvastlydisproportionaterates. Burdekinfoundthat"childrenincarewere160%morelikelytoreoffendthannon wards"21whiletheAustralianLawReformCommissionwarnedthatthecaresystem isproducinglongtermcriminaloffenders."22Youngpeopleincaremayalsobe committingdisproportionatelyviolentorseriousoffences.Astheformerheadofthe ChildProtectionUnitattheChildrensHospitalWestmead,DrSuzanneBooth,citing
AlltuckerK(2004)FactorsInfluencingtheDevelopmentofJuvenileDelinquency:DifferencesBetween EarlyandLateStarters,Thesis,UniversityofOregon. 18 Sinclair,WilsonPitthouse&Sellick(2004)FosteringSuccess:Anexplorationoftheresearchliterature infostercare,London:SocialCareInstituteforExcellence,NottinghamUniversity 19 CommunityServicesCommission,JustSolutions,1999pg17.Thequestionarisesisthisdisparity duetopoorlegalrepresentationofwards,judicialbias,ordoesitarisebecausewardsoffendearlier, morefrequentlyandathigherlevelsofseverity,thuswarrantingmoreseveresentencingsanctions? Thisisaclearindicationofthefailureofresearchinthisareatodatethattheseissueshavenotbeen unravelled. 20 CreateFoundation,ReportCard2008 21 TheHumanRightsandEqualOpportunityCommission,OurHomelessChildren:Reportofthe NationalInquiryintoHomelessChildren,AustralianGovernmentPublishingService,Canberra Australia1989 22 AustralianLawReformCommission/HumanRightsandEqualOpportunityCommissionSeenand heard:priorityforchildreninthelegalprocess:ReportoftheNationalInquiryintoChildrenandtheLegal Process,SydneyAustralia,1997
17
211
thekillersofAnitaCobbyandJanineBaldingwarned,Statewardsareatriskof becomingperpetratorsofviolentcrime.23 Thosewhogrewupincarehavesignificantmentalhealth,andsocialneeds.Studies havetouchedonthefactthatoffenderswithahistoryofoutofhomecarehave differentphysicalandmentalhealthoutcomescomparedtothegeneraldetainee population.Forexample,the2008YoungPeopleonCommunityOrdersfoundthat theyweresignificantlymorelikelytohaverelativeswhohadbeeninprison;tohave experiencedaphysicalinjuryrequiringmedicaltreatment;tohaveexperienced unwantedsex;reporthavingnoclosefriends;receivedspecialeducationand treatmentforsubstanceabuse;belivinginunsettledaccommodation;be unemployed;andtobeinreceiptofgovernmentbenefits.24Aboriginalprisoners removedfromtheirfamiliesaschildrenwerefoundtoexperiencesignificantlyworse outcomeswithregardstomentalhealththantheirnonremovedAboriginalpeers: andweresignificantlymorelikelytobejailedmorethan5times;tohaveexperienced childsexualassault;andtohaveattemptedsuicide.25AstheRoyalCommissioninto AboriginalDeathsinCustodysexaminationofninetynineindigenouspeoplewho haddiedinStatecustodyfound,nearlyhalfofthedeceasedhadbeentakenas childrenfromtheirfamiliesbyStateauthorities,andplacedintoStatecare.26 Thesefindingshavewiderpolicyandpracticeimplications.Ifyoungpeopleincare (andthoseadultswhohavenowleftcare)haveparticularcharacteristicsthatarenot sharedbytherestoftheprisonpopulationalreadyanextremelyvulnerablegroupin termsofhealth,mentalhealthandarangeofotherindicatorsshouldnt policymakersbedirectedtowardsthis?Forexample,ifpeopleonceincareare engaginginsexualactivityearlier,whatdoesthatmeanforthedeliveryofsex
Sandham,SonyaUnderfundedwelfaresystemharmsyoung,SydneyMorningHerald,29/03/96p4 Kenny&Nelson,YoungPeopleonCommunityOrders:Health,WelfareandCriminogenicNeeds, Sydney,2008at2.8 25 Egger&Butler,ThelongtermfactorsassociatedwithremovalfromparentsamongstIndigenous prisonersinNSW,AustralianandNewZealandJournalofPublicHealth,2000vol24,no4 26 ReportoftheInquiryintotheDeathofGlennAllanClarkRoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsin Custody1991,TheReconciliationandSocialJusticeLibrary,www.austli.ed.au
24 23
212
educationprograms,orthetransmissionofinfectiousdiseases?Ifoverhalfthecare populationhasattemptedsuicide,whatimplicationsdoesthisholdforsuiciderisk andpreventionprogramsbothinthecommunityandinsideourprisons? Whatdoesitmeanforcrimepreventionthatcareleaversreoffendatgreaterrates, moreoften,andperhapsathigherlevelsofseriousness?Andwhatdoesthepresence ofthisgroupwithintheprisonmeanforrecidivismprograms,currentlyfocusedon familyreunification,andmaintainingfamilyandsocialconnectionsasameansof reducingthestressesthatcanleadtothecommissionofcrime? Theimportanceofpreservingfamilycontactswhensomeoneisincarceratedhasonly recentlybeenunderstood.Itiscurrentlyamajorplatforminthecorrections philosophy,bothinNSWandinternationally.Yetironically,thisemphasisonfamily preservation,communityinvolvementandasenseofbelonging,leavesthosewho havebeenincare,outinthecoldoncemore.27 Diversionaryprograms,suchasYouthConferencingandCircleSentencing,are premisedontheideathatbecauseanoffenderwillfeelshameatanoffenceheorshe willcometoappreciatetheimpactoftheiractuponthevictimandthewider community.Buttofeelshame,youhavetofeelpartofthecommunitysetuptojudge you.Thosewhohavegrownupincare,oftenareexcludedfromparticipationevenin thisstyleofprogram,becausetheydonothaveacommunityoftheirpeers,ora familyoftheirown,towhomtheybelongandthus,onewhichcanjudgeand influencetheirbehaviour. Whyhassolittlebeendonetoacknowledge,letalonetoaddress,thedisadvantage experiencedbysomany?
McFarlane,K.&Murray,J.FallingthroughtheCracks,RightsNow,JournaloftheNationalChildren andYouthLawCentre,pg16(2000)
27
213
AremarkableoutburstfromaVictorianjudgeshedssomelight.Onthreeoccasionsin asmanymonthsJudgeGebhardtcriticizedtheVictorianGovernmentssloppyand disgracefulhandlingofchildreninStatecare.28Helamentedthepatternofneglect andindifference,apatternwhichweseefartooofteninthisCourtexhibitedtowards youngwards,andcriticisedtheincompetencethatledtosomanyformerchildrenin careendingupbeforecriminalcourts.TheDepartment,HisHonourdeclared,should bemadeawareoftheconsequencesoftheirincompetence.29Repeatingconcerns airedinpreviousdecisions,HisHonourcommentedinthelastsixmonthsIvehada numberofyoungoffendersbeforemewhohavebeenvictimsofsloppyand disgracefulbehaviourbytheDepartmentofHumanServices.Whatcanonesayofa departmentwhosebehaviourandactivitiesmakeslivesworse.30FormerChief FamilyCourtJusticeAlastairNicholsonwasquicktoagreewithhisVictorian counterpart.WritinginTheAge,theformerjudgedeclaredthatthestatebears responsibilityforturningoutabadpennywhenithasbeenneglectfulofits responsibilities.It,too,isinthedock.31 SuccessiveStateandTerritoryGovernmentshavefollowedtheleadoftheSenate CommunityAffairsReferencesCommitteeandapologizedfortheharmdoneto generationsofAustralianchildrenwhogrewupininstitutionalcare.32Thelatest
RvH[2005]VictorianCountyCourt,GebhardtJ02/05/05at[12] RvH[2005]VictorianCountyCourt,GebhardtJ02/05/05at[14] 30 RvRLB[2005]VictorianCountyCourt,GebhardtJ10/02/05at[16] 31 Nicholson,AlastairFailingabusedandneglectedyouthhurtsusallTheAgeMay10,2005 32 TheHonRMeagher,SenateInquiryintoChildreninInstitutionalCare,Hansard,ParliamentofNew SouthWales,23June2005;TheHonSteveBracks,Hansard,ParliamentofVictoria,9August2006; OBrienAmanda,Millionsforabusedwardsofstate,TheAustralian,13June2008citingPremierAlan Carpenter.TheCommonwealthGovernmentrecognisedthatthepoliciesthatallowedtheseoutrages tobeperpetratedoninnocentchildrenwerenotonlymisplaced;theywereinexcusableinanyeraand statedthatwhileitwouldnotbeappropriatefortheAustralianGovernmenttoissueanapologyfora matterforwhichitdoesnothaveresponsibility,theGovernmentexpressesitssincereregretthatthere childrenwereplacedinsituationswheretheydidnotreceivethecaretheydeservedTheAustralian GovernmentResponsetotheCommitteesReportsForgottenAustralians:AreportonAustralianswho experiencedinstitutionaloroutofhomecareaschildrenandProtectingVulnerableChildren:Anational challenge,CommonwealthofAustralia2005at2.
29
28
214
apologybytheSouthAustralianPremieronbehalfoftheGovernmentandChurch agencieswasdeliveredjusttwodaysbeforethispaperwasdelivered.33 Yettheissueofoffendingbychildrenincare,andGovernmentresponsestoit, remainsaneglectedarea.Muchmoreneedstobedonetodeviseprogramsthat speaktothosewhohavegrownupincaresothatwemayhaveachancetobreakthe welfarejusticenexus.Historically,peoplewhogrewupincaremakeupbetween 1.35%0.2%oftheNSWpopulation.However,thenumbershaveincreasedto0.6%34 withover12,700childrennowincareinNSWanditisthoughtthatthiswilltop20,000 inthenextfiveyears.35Iftheratesofoffendingdescribedinstudiescontinues, juvenilecrimemustbesettosignificantlyincrease. Concernabouttheinevitabilityofthepathwayfromcaretocrimehasbeenechoedby theVictorianAuditoryGeneral,36successiveStateandFederalParliamentary Inquiries37andtheMinisterialCouncilontheAdministrationofJustice.38Yetcontrary
TheHonMDRann,ChildreninStateCareApology,Hansard,ParliamentofSouthAustralia,17June 2008 34 McFarlaneK,JusticeHealthPrisonerHealthResearchSymposium.SydneyNSW(2005);HumanRights andEqualOpportunityCommission/AustralianLawReformCommission,Seenandheard:priorityfor childreninthelegalprocess:ReportoftheNationalInquiryintoChildrenandtheLegalProcess,Sydney Australia,1997.Indigenouschildrenaremoreoverrepresentedinoutofhomecare,at19%of substitutecareplacements,althoughtheymakeuponly3.5%ofthechildpopulation,inSteering CommitteefortheReviewofCommonwealth/StateServiceProvision,ReportonGovernmentService Provision1997,IndustryCommission,Melbourne1997at547. 35 NSWDepartmentofCommunityServices,SubmissiontotheSpecialCommissionofInquiryintoChild ProtectioninNSW,citingtheDepartmentsAnnualReport2006/07p5 36 VictorianAuditorGeneral,ProtectingVictoriasChildren,TheRoleoftheDepartmentofHuman Services,VicGovtPrinterMelbourne1996,at266:Thehighincidenceofcriminalbehaviourandthe likelihoodofitcontinuingbeyonddischargefromwardshipisofseriouscommunityconcernand warrantsresearchastocausesandpreventionstrategies. 37 StandingCommitteeonSocialIssues,AReportintoChildrenofImprisonedParents,Legislative Council,ParliamentofNewSouthWales,No121997at57:ClearlyfromtheevidencetothisInquiry, childrenwhoaremadewardsoftheStatebecausetheirprimarycarerisinprisonpresentaseriousrisk ofinvolvementinantisocialbehaviourandentryintothejuvenilejusticesystem;SelectCommitteeon theIncreaseinthePrisonPopulation,FinalReport,NSWParliament,2001atRec1:Researchfocusing ontheneedsofformerStatewardsandcareleaversintheprisonsystemshouldensurethenumberof formerStatewardsandcareleaversintheprisonsystembecomprehensivelyidentified;Standing CommitteeonLawandJustice,CrimePreventionThroughSocialSupport,SecondReportNo142000at 86:citingMurrayJ,astrongcomponentofanycrimepreventionstrategyorservicesthattheState initiatesmustaddressthosewhohavealreadygonethroughthechildwelfaresystem,andwhohave foundthemselvesfasttrackedintothecriminaljusticesystem,homelessness,socialexclusionand
33
215
totheNSWParliamentsassertion8yearsagothat,theDepartmentsofJuvenile JusticeandCommunityServicesdonothavetobeconvincedoftheimportanceof preventingcyclesofintergenerationaloffendingbyStatewards,39littlehaschanged toaddresstheissue. MyresearchwillprovidemoreinformationabouthowandwhyStatewardsoffend andwhatcanbedonetoaddressit.Iamhopingthatthistime,policymakersand programdeveloperswilltakeheedbecause,astheHon.JusticeJamesWood,former PoliceRoyalCommissionerandcurrentlytheSpecialCommissionerexaminingthe NSWDepartmentofCommunityServices,declaredoveradecadeagoNo communitywithanyrealconcernforthesafetyandwellbeingofitschildrencan tolerateasystemunderwhichthereisaninevitable,orevensubstantial,driftofState wardstojuvenilejustice,withitsincreasedriskofprogressiontoadult imprisonment.40
prostitution;CommunityAffairsReferencesCommittee,ProtectingVulnerableChildren:Anational challenge,SecondReportontheinquiryintochildrenininstitutionaloroutofhomecare,TheSenate, 2005at16.43Rec16:recognitionofStatewardandcareleaverinvolvementinthecriminal/penal systemcanleadtoanimprovedunderstandingofthefactorsinfluencingcrimeandsocialdisorder,and thatresearch,shouldbematchedbyappropriateresources,policiesandadministrativeeffort. 38 MinisterialCouncilontheAdministrationofJustice(MCATSIA)ReviewoftheStandingCommitteeof AttorneysGeneral(SCAG)ReconciliationActionPlan,2003:recommendedexaminationofthelegal issuesandincarcerationratesamongpreviouslyseparatedchildren. 39 NSWParliament,StandingCommitteeonLawandJustice,CrimePreventionintoSocialSupport, Report14,August2000 40 WoodJRT,RoyalCommissionintotheNewSouthWalesPoliceService,Vol5PaedophileInquiry, Sydney1997p1046
216
References Allerton,M,Champion,U.,Kenny,D.T.,Butler,T.etal2003YoungPeopleinCustody HealthSurvey.NSWDepartmentofJuvenileJustice,SydneyAustralia,2003 AlltuckerK(2004)FactorsInfluencingtheDevelopmentofJuvenileDelinquency: DifferencesBetweenEarlyandLateStarters,Thesis,UniversityofOregon. AustralianLawReformCommission/HumanRightsandEqualOpportunity Commission,Report84Seenandheard:priorityforchildreninthelegalprocess:Report oftheNationalInquiryintoChildrenandtheLegalProcess,SydneyAustralia,1997 Baker,Joanne,JuvenilesinCrimePart1:ParticipationRatesandRiskFactors,Bureau ofCrimeStatisticsandResearch,SydneyAustralia1998 TheHonSteveBracks,Hansard,ParliamentofVictoria,9August2006 ButlerTandMilneThe2001InmateHealthSurvey,CorrectionsHealthService, SydneyAustralia,2003 TheCommonwealthofAustralia,TheAustralianGovernmentResponsetothe CommitteesReportsForgottenAustralians:AreportonAustralianswhoexperienced institutionaloroutofhomecareaschildrenandProtectingVulnerableChildren:A nationalchallenge,Canberra,Australia2005 TheCommunityServicesCommission,Thedriftofchildrenincareintothejuvenile justicesystem:Turningvictimsintocriminals,SydneyAustralia1996 TheCommunityServicesCommission,JustSolutions,SydneyAustralia1999
217
CommunityAffairsReferencesCommittee,ProtectingVulnerableChildren:Anational challenge,SecondReportontheinquiryintochildrenininstitutionaloroutofhome care,TheSenate,2005 CommunityServicesCommission,JustSolutions,1999pg17 CreateFoundation,ReportCard2008 Denton,Barbara,Voicesfrombelow:Womeninprisonanddrugs,TheNationalDrug andAlcoholResearchCouncil,1995 Egger&Butler,Thelongtermfactorsassociatedwithremovalfromparentsamongst IndigenousprisonersinNSW,AustralianandNewZealandJournalofPublicHealth, 2000vol24,no4 Golden,R.DisposableChildren:America'sChildWelfareSystem,Belmont,Ca; WadsworthPublishingCompany,1997 Hastings,F,ACensusofWomeninCustodyinNSW1998:InterimResultsfromthe WomeninCustodySurvey,WomensServicesUnit,NSWDepartmentofCorrective Services,SydneyAustralia1997 TheHonBradHazzardMP,GovernorsSpeech:AddressinReply,Hansard,Legislative AssemblyNSWParliament,SydneyAustralia15March2002at583 TheHumanRightsandEqualOpportunityCommission,OurHomelessChildren: ReportoftheNationalInquiryintoHomelessChildren,AustralianGovernment PublishingService,CanberraAustralia1989 Kenny&Nelson,YoungPeopleonCommunityOrders:Health,Welfareand CriminogenicNeeds,Sydney,2008at2.8
218
KilroyDWhenwillyouseetherealus?SistersInside,WomeninCorrections:Staffand ClientsConference,AustralianInstituteofCriminology,Adelaide2000 McDonald,Allen,WesterfeltandPiliavin,AssessingtheLongTermEffectsofFoster Care:AResearchSynthesis,InstituteforResearchonPoverty,Kansas,1993 McFarlane,KInstituteofCriminology/NSWDepartmentofJusticeSeminar,Families ofPrisoners:ImpactsandConsequences,SydneyAustralia,June2005 McFarlaneK,JusticeHealthPrisonerHealthResearchSymposium.SydneyAustralia, 2005 Mason,BrianImplementingtheYoungOffendersActAnAlbertaPerspectivein Hudson,HornickandBurrows(Eds)JusticeandtheYoungOffenderinCanada,(pp51 63)Wal&ThompsonInc1988 Matthews,BernieContact,ParramattaCorrectionalCentre,SydneyAustralia1979 TheHonRMeagher,SenateInquiryintoChildreninInstitutionalCare,Hansard, ParliamentofNewSouthWales,23June2005 MinisterialCouncilontheAdministrationofJustice(MCATSIA),Reviewofthe StandingCommitteeofAttorneysGeneral(SCAG)ReconciliationActionPlan,2003 TheNewSouthWalesBureauofCrimeStatistics,StatisticalReport16:AThousand Prisoners,SydneyAustralia,1974
219
TheNSWDepartmentofCommunityServices,SubmissiontotheSpecialCommission ofInquiryintoChildProtectioninNSW,citingtheDepartmentsAnnualReport2006/07 p5 Nicholson,AlastairFailingabusedandneglectedyouthhurtsusallTheAgeMay10, 2005 OBrienAmanda,Millionsforabusedwardsofstate,TheAustralian,13June2008 RvH[2005]VictorianCountyCourt,GebhardtJ02/05/05at[12] RvRLB[2005]VictorianCountyCourt,GebhardtJ10/02/05at[16] TheHonMDRann,ChildreninStateCareApology,Hansard,ParliamentofSouth Australia,17June2008 RoyalCommissionintoAboriginalDeathsinCustody,ReportoftheInquiryintothe DeathofGlennAllanClark,TheReconciliationandSocialJusticeLibrary, www.austli.ed.au1991 Sandham,SonyaUnderfundedwelfaresystemharmsyoung,SydneyMorning Herald,29/03/96p4 TheSelectCommitteeontheIncreaseinthePrisonPopulation,FinalReport,NSW Parliament,2001 Sinclair,WilsonPitthouse&Sellick(2004)FosteringSuccess:Anexplorationofthe researchliteratureinfostercare,London:SocialCareInstituteforExcellence, NottinghamUniversity
220
StandingCommitteeonSocialIssues,AReportintoChildrenofImprisonedParents, LegislativeCouncil,ParliamentofNewSouthWales,No121997at57 StandingCommitteeonLawandJustice,CrimePreventionThroughSocialSupport, SecondReportNo142000 TheSteeringCommitteefortheReviewofCommonwealth/StateServiceProvision, ReportonGovernmentServiceProvision1997,IndustryCommission,Melbourne1997 at547. Taylor,ClaireYoungPeopleinCareandCriminalBehaviour,JessicaKingsley Publishers,2006at13 UKSelectCommitteeonHealth,SecondReport,InquiryintoChildrenLookedAfterBy LocalAuthorities,HouseofCommonsHMSOU.K.1998 USDepartmentofJustice,BureauofJusticeStatisticsSpecialReport:Womeninprison, USDJ,OfficeofJusticePrograms1991:6 USDepartmentofJustice,OfficeofJusticePrograms,BureauofJusticesStatistics SpecialReport,MentalHealthandTreatmentofInmatesandProbationers,1999:6 VictorianAuditorGeneral,ProtectingVictoriasChildren,TheRoleoftheDepartmentof HumanServices,VicGovtPrinterMelbourne1996,at266 Weatherburn,CushandSaunders,Screeningjuvenileoffendersforfurtherassessment andintervention,Report109NSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearch,Sydney NSW20007 WoodJRT,RoyalCommissionintotheNewSouthWalesPoliceService,Vol5 PaedophileInquiry,Sydney1997p1046
221
222
Womensbodies,moralpanicandtheworldgame: Sextrafficking,the2006FootballWorldCupandbeyond1
SanjaMilivojevic CriminologyDepartment MonashUniversity smilivojevic@gmail.com Traffickinginpeopleandparticularlytraffickinginwomenforthepurposeofsexual exploitation(sextrafficking)reemergedintheinternationalarenaintheearly 1990s.Frequentlyreferredtoasmoderndayslavery(Bales1999,Bertone2000, Hughes2001,Jeffreys2002,King2004,vandenAnker2004,Roby2005,US DepartmentofState2008),estimatesaboutitsscopevarytotheextent2thatfigures areconsideredarbitrary(Doezema2000,Agustin2005:40,Kempadoo2005), promptingmanycriticstoarguethatdespiteincreasedinterestwhatweknowabout thisphenomenonisstillexceptionallylimited(Kempadoo1998,Kelly2002).Although suchdiscrepanciesinestimatesasKempadoo(1998:15)notedshouldbeacausefor extremesuspicionofthereliabilityoftheresearch,theyhavebeenwidelycirculated andtheagreementhasbeenreachedthatsextraffickingisgrowing(Apapetal.2002, Carrington&Hearn2003). Womenandchildrenareidentifiedasparticularlyvulnerable:a2008USDepartment ofStateTraffickinginPersons(TIP)reportestimatedthat80percentofallvictimsof traffickingarewomenandgirls(USDepartmentofState2008:7),whilesome scholarsestimatethatevenmillionsofwomenworldwidehavebeentraffickedinto thesexindustry(Raymondetal.2002).However,notallwomenwereperceivedto
ThisproceedingpaperisanupdatedversionofthepaperpublishedwithSharonPickering.Available athttp://www.vds.org.yu/File/Tem0802.pdf 2 Forexample,in2002theUSDepartmentofState(2002:1)estimatedthatbetween700,000andfour millionpeoplearetraffickedworldwideannually,whileinthe2006TraffickinginPersons(TIP)report figuresarereducedto600,000to800,000(USDepartmentofState2006).
1
223
beindangerofbeingtrafficked:thepredominantdiscoursewithinantitrafficking frameworkportraysvictimsasyoung,pooranddisadvantagedwomenfrom developingcountrieswho,inthesearchforbetterlife,havebeentrickedorluredinto sexwork(Bertone2000,Clark2003,USDepartmentofState2006),andthenseverely abusedandexploited.IntheEuropeancontextvictimsarecommonlyportrayedas poorandnavewomenfromCentralandEasternEurope(IOM1995,Hughes2001, Miko2003,NikolicRistanovicetal.2004). Arangeofactorsjoinedforcesinwhathasbeencoinedthe21stcenturyabolitionist movement(USAmbassadorJohnMiller,USHouseofRepresentatives SubcommitteeonAfrica,GlobalHumanRightsandInternationalOperations2006: 27)inthemissiontorescuewomenfromsuchgloomyfate.Althoughsuch representationofsextraffickingisnotentirelyincorrect,itisjustapartofamore complicatedpicture.Yetthesesimplifiedimagesoftraffickingresultsininitiatives thatareultimatelyharmfulforwomenwhotheysupposedtoprotect.Thestagingof the2006FIFAWorldCupisthelatestexampleofhowawiderangingcoalitionof interestsfuelledamoralpanicaroundsextraffickinginEuropethataimedtoprevent disastroushumanrightsabuses(Crouse2006),butimpactednegativelyon womenslives,particularlyinrelationtotheirrepresentation,migrationandmobility, bothwithincountriesofdestinationandorigin. Thispaperisbasedonaqualitativeanalysisofmediacoverageofsextrafficking aroundthe2006WorldCupinGermany.Ianalyzed46articlesinEnglishlanguageon thistopicinthesixmonthspriorandduringtheevent3thatreviewthewaysthisevent broughtintofocussomeofthekeydebatesonsextraffickinginEurope.InthispaperI amconcernedwithhowtheWorldCupisarguablyanotherillustrationofmerging
ThisincludedEnglishlanguagenewspapersandmediaoutletsReuters,WorldNetDaily,Associated Press,AgenceFrancePresse,InternationalHeraldTribune,TheNewYorkTimes,WashingtonPost, IndependentOnline,TheGuardian,BBCNewsService,TheSundayHerald,DeutcheWelle,Spiegel Online,Expatica,andreligiouswebsitesChristianScienceMonitor,ChirstianNewsWire,Christian Post,ChristianityToday,CatholicNews,LifeSiteNews,Ekklesia,TheWhitehavenNews,andBaptist PressNews.Ithenusedtextualanalysistoidentifythekeyargumentsandspeakerswithinthemedia studied.
3
224
punitiveborderprotection,thecriminalizationofwomen,andtheunderminingof womenshumanrights,underthecoverofprotectionofwomen.Finally,thispaper willhighlightthatmeasuresintroducedaroundthiseventdidnotendwithareferees finalwhistle. Themoralpanicunfolds:Football,SexSlaveryandMediaFrenzy Thestorm,itseemed,camefromnowhere:severalmonthsbeforethefootball carnivalacrossGermanykickedoff,variousorganizationsandgroupsreleased estimatesthatthe2006WorldCupislikelytoacceleratesextrafficking.Thefigures fluctuatedfrom30.000to60.000potentialvictimsexpectedtobetraffickedduring thecompetition(CouncilofEurope2006,CAREforEurope2006,IOM2006,Neuwirth 2006,SalvationArmy2006,Sparre2006).Itisunclearhowestimateswere establishedasnoneoftheorganizationsthatquotedthesefiguresstatedthesource. InitsreportpublishedaftertheWorldCup,theInternationalOrganizationfor Migrations(IOM)revealedthatestimateswerefirstcitedbytheGermanAssociation ofCitiesandTowns(DeutscherStdtetag),andwerequicklypickedupbythemedia (Hennigetal.2006).Althoughsomegrassrootsgroupsandorganisationsdismissed suchclaimsasexaggerated(DailyTimes,10March2006),andwhilethepoliceinthe hostcityofMunichsuggestedfigureswerepluckedfromtheair(Haape2006),the mediacontinuedtorefertothousandsofwomenindangerofbeingtraffickedforthe WorldCup.Meanwhile,theGermanAssociationofCitiesandTownsdisclaimedthe figure(Hennigetal.2006). TheanalysisofmediareportspriortotheWorldCupsuggeststhatestimates originatedfromtheestimatednumberofmigrantsexworkersexpectedtotravelto GermanyfortheWorldCup(DeutscheWelle,10June2005,Paterson2005,Iglesias 2006).Withinthedemandsupplyequation,thenumberofsexworkersperceivedto migratetofulfilthedemandforcommercialsexduringtheWorldCupalteredtothe numberofwomenwhomightbetrafficked,byestablishingatfirstpotentialand
225
subsequentlyanexplicitconnectionbetweensportingeventsandtheincreasein demandforcommercialsex: Theeventsorganizersareexpectingatleast40.000prostitutesto descendonGermanyfromthroughoutEuropetomeetdemand. TonyPaterson(TheIndependentOnline,9December2005) Traffickersconstantlymonitorthedemandpattern,lookingfor opportunitiestomaximizetheirprofitsobtainedthroughtheillicit saleofhumanbeings.The2006WorldCuppresentssuchan opportunityItiscriticalthattheGermangovernment,civilsociety andtheinternationalcommunitylookseriouslyatthepotentiallinks betweenthismajorsportingeventandthepotentialincreaseinthe demandforsexualexploitationofwomenandchildren. AshleyGarrett(IOM,2006:301,emphasisadded) Experiencesshowthatateverybigsportingeventwherealarge numberofmengather,thereisaspectacularriseinthedemandfor sexualservices. UlrikeHelwerth,spokeswomanfortheNGOGermanWomen's Council(Iglesias2006,emphasisadded) Inthereportsthatfollowed,thisclaimthatsomewomenamongthoseexpectedto migratemightbetrafficked,thatisforcedtosexindustry,ordeceivedaboutthe conditionsofwork,alteredtoanallegationthatmajorityifnotallwomenwillbeen trafficked: TheGermanWomensCouncilhasestimatedthatanadditional 40.000womenwillbebroughtintoGermanytoprovidecommercial
226
sexactsforhundredsofthousandsofmalesoccerfans.Manyof thesewomenarelikelytobevictimsoftrafficking. JaniceShawCrouse,ConcernedWomenforAmerica(Jalsevac 2006,emphasisadded) DuringtheWorldCuparound40.000youngwomenareexpectedto beimportedtoGermanyforsexualtrafficking. SalvationArmy(2006,emphasisadded) Asananalysisofmediareportsindicate,themoralpanicaroundsexslavesandthe WorldCupinGermanywasfuelledbysensationalisticreporting,inwhichtrafficking wasreducedtosexwork,andwomentraffickedforsexportrayedasinnocentand navegirlsforcedintothesexindustry(Neuwirth2006,Bindel2006).Mediaoutlets referredexclusivelytoresearchandestimatesbyabolitionistgroups,sometimes explicitlydenyingthepossibilitythatsomewomenmayfreelyconsenttosexwork.4 Afterseveralmonthsofheatedmediadebate,SpiegelOnline(26May2006)reported that, Withallthenegativecoverage,onecouldbeforgivenforthinking thatGermanyisacountryofhumantraffickingpimpsandshackled prostitutes...Youcouldbeforgivenforthinkingthatvisitorslooking towatchabitofsoccerwillbegreetedbyanarmyofskimpilyclad, underagedUkrainiansexslavesForcedprostitution,ofcourse,isa veryrealandseriousprobleminGermany.Butmuchoftheforeign coverageseemstodeliberatelyconflatethetwoissues. Thismediafrenzywassustainedbyavarietyofactors,rangingfromlocalnon governmentalorganizations(NGO),internationalhumanrightsgroups,feminist
Forexample,ChonandEllerman(TheWashingtonPost,10June2006)reportedthattraffickersand thosewhobenefitfromsextraffickingpromoteanimageofwomenfreelychoosingtobeinvolvedin prostitution...ItisthePrettyWomanmyth,whichmanyapparentlyliketobelieveinordertojustify theirinactionorignoranceontheissue.
4
227
abolitioniststoreligiousRight.Soonafterthenewsaboutsexhutshousesbuilt specificallytosatisfythedemandforcommercialsexduringtheWorldCuphitthe headlines,thiscoalitionopenlytargetedGermanysliberalpolicyinrelationtosex work,arguingthatprostitutionistosextraffickingwhatcoalistosteamengines (ChristianityToday,2July2006).InthespecialHearingfortheHouseof RepresentativesdedicatedtotheWorldCupandpossiblemassivehumanright abusesrelatedtoit,theRepublicanCongressmenChristopherH.Smitharguedthat, [s]incethematchesarebeingheldinGermany,whichlegalized pimpingandprostitutionin2001,theWorldCupfanswouldbe legallyfreetorapewomeninbrothels...Oftheapproximately 400.000prostitutesinGermany,itisestimatedthat75percentof thosewhoareabusedinthesehousesofprostitutionareforeigners, manyfromCentralandEasternEurope.Weknowbeyondreasonable doubtthatsomanyofthesewomenarecoercedandtheyarethere becauseofforce,fraudor,likeIsay,coercion ChristopherH.Smith(USHouseofRepresentativesSubcommittee onAfrica,GlobalHumanRightsandInternationalOperations2006a: 7,emphasisadded)5 TheUSSecretaryofStatesadvisoronhumantraffickingJohnMillerhasbeen especiallyvocalinlinkingwomensmigrations,sexworkandsextrafficking,arguing that, Alltheresearchandevidenceavailableshowsthatwhenyouhave largeflowsofwomenforsexualpurposes,thereisgoingtobe trafficking.Thereisalinkbetweenprostitutionandsextrafficking JohnMiller(AssociationFransePresse,10June2006)
ItisinterestingtonotethatthissectionofCongressmenSmithsspeechwaslaterdeletedfromthe Report.
5
228
Itwas,indeed,arareslaptoatacloseAmericanally(Cooper2006).Germanlaw enforcementofficialsarguedinvainthattherewasnomajorupsurgeinprostitution relatedcriminalityduringthesportingeventsthiscountryhostedinthepast(Haape 2006).Afewdaysbeforetheopeningceremony,Germanpolicestatedthereareno signsofanyexplosionofforcedprostitutionthathadbeenwarnedofinthemonths leadingtotheopeningday(ChristianPost,11June2006),yetitwastoolate.The newmoralpanicwaswellunderitsway. Abolitionistfeministorganizations,ledbytheCoalitionagainstTraffickinginWomen (CATW),joinedtheantisexworkcoalitionbylaunchingthecampaignBuyingSexIs NotaSport(CATW2006).WomensgroupswithsimilaragendaacrossEurope followedthesuit.InIreland,theNationalWomensCouncilofIrelandlaunchedtheir versionofBuyingSexisnotaSportcampaign(Crouse2006),whileinGermany campaignsFinalWhistleStopForcedProstitution,RedCardforForced Prostitution,andResponsibleJohnshavebeenlaunched(DeutscheWelle,23 February2006;SpiegelOnline,26May2006).Religiouscommunitiesandfaithbased organizationsalsodirectlytargetedGermanyspolicytowardsexwork.TheCatholic FamilyandHumanRightsInstitutestartedthecampaignStopWorldCup Prostitution,whileCaritas,oneofthelargestcharitiesoftheCatholicChurch, concludedthatitisimportanttorecognizethatsexualexploitation,prostitutionand traffickingofhumanbeingsareallactsofviolenceagainstwomen(CatholicNews, 25May2006).Initiativeswereequallydistributedinbothperceivedcountriesoforigin (EasternandSouthEasternEurope)anddestinationforvictimsoftrafficking (Germany):theGermanLutheranChurchdistributedleafletsaimedtoreducethe demandforsexworkinGermany(Ohmynews,27May2006),whilenunsinPoland issuedantiprostitutionleafletsineasternEuropeanlanguages(Luxmore2006)aimed towarnyoungwomeninperceivedcountriesoforiginaboutthedangerofsexwork andtrafficking.
229
Thesnowballkeptrolling:AmnestyInternational(2006)calledonEuropean governmentstolaunchpreventioncampaignsincountriesoforigin,andaskedthe Germangovernmenttotakeresponsibilityandensuremeasurestocombat traffickingduringthe2006WorldCup.Italsocalledonallstateswithfootballfans travellingtoGermanytoraiseawarenessofthefactthatmanysexworkerspresentin GermanyduringtheWorldCupmayhavebeentrafficked(AmnestyInternational 2006).VolunteersfromSalvationArmyandCAREtravelledtoGermanywithleaflets designedtostopmenfromgoingtobrothels(SalvationArmy2006,CAREforEurope 2006),whileIOM,theSwedishAgencyforInternationalDevelopment(SIDA)andthe MTVEuropeproducedaTVannouncementaddressingthedemandsideofsex traffickingdirectedatbothpotentialclientsofprostitutesaswellasthosemost vulnerabletobecomingtrafficked(IOM2006). AstheWorldCupwasgettingcloser,thepressurewashighonfootballersand footballassociations.AmnestyInternationalandParliamentaryAssemblyofthe CouncilofEuropeurgedFIFAtotakeresponsibilityforeffectivelycombatingsex traffickingduringtheWorldCup(AmnestyInternational2006,CouncilofEurope 2006).FIFA,however,disclaimedthisrequestarguingthatithasnopowertotake legalactionagainsthumantraffickingandforcedprostitutionandthatitcannotbe responsibleforsuchmatters(FIFA2006).Nationalfootballteamswerenext:CARE (2006)urgedallfootballteamsplayingattheWorldCupthisyeartopublicly condemnGermanysacceptanceoftheexploitation,traffickingandpimpingof womenforsexandcalleduponhighprofileplayerstomaketheiroppositiontothe MegaBrothel.Swedenwasthefirstcountrytoreacttosuchrequests.The presidentofSwedishFootballAssociationpromisedthatSwedishplayerswillnotuse brothelsduringtheCup(Bindel2006),whileSwedishEqualOpportunityOmbudsman calledonhisteamtowithdrawfromtheCupasaprotestagainstprostitutionandthe humantraffickingassociatedwithit(SpiegelOnline,12April2006).Thecoachofthe Frenchteamwasoutraged:
230
Itistrulyscandalous.Peoplearetalkingaboutwomen,importing themtosatisfythebaseinstinctsofpeopleassociatedwithfootball. Itishumiliatingenoughformethatfootballislinkedwithalcohol andviolence.Butthisisworse.Itisslavesthatwillcomeandbeput intohouses.Humanbeingsarebeingtalkedaboutlikecattle,and footballislinkedwiththat. RaymondDomenech(Chon&Ellerman2006) TheGermannationalteamwasparticularlyunderscrutiny.Aspokeswomanfor DeutscherFrauenrattheGermannationalwomenscouncilstatedthatafter seekingrolemodelsandsupportforourcampaignamongtheentireGermanfootball team,sofarwehavemanagedtogetsupportonlyfromJensLehmann(German nationalteamsgoalkeeper),atwhichexpressedtheirreactionasnotonly disappointedbutreallyangry"(Haape2006).AsaresultofthispressurethePresident oftheGermanFootballFederationTheoZwanzigersaidtheFederationneedsto changeitspositiononsexwork(SpiegelOnline,8March2006). InspiteofnoconclusiveevidencethatGermanysliberalapproachtoprostitution madeitmoreattractivetohumantraffickers(MicheleClark,theHeadofanti traffickingassistanceunitattheOrganizationforSecurityandCooperationinEurope (OSCE),citedinTzortzis2006),thepressureonGermanytoaddressitspolicy towardssexworkpromptedtheGermandelegationtotheOSCEtoissueastatement thatwemustassumeeveniftherearenoreliablefiguresthatwomenwillbe forcedintoprostitutionandwillperhapsbebroughttoGermanysolelyforthis purpose(DelegationofGermanytotheOSCE2006).Althoughsupposedlynota campaignagainstnormalprostitution(Expatica,8March2006),themoralpanic aroundWorldCupbecameexactlythat.AstheEUemploymentcommissioner VladimirSpidladeclared,veryfewpeoplebecomeprostitutesoutoftheirfreewill anddeclaredprostitutiontobeincompatiblewithhumandignity(Expatica,8March 2008).Womensagencyhasbeenundermined,andtheirpossiblechoicetoengagein
231
sexworkeffectivelydenied.Suchanapproachtosexworkandsextrafficking affectedlivesofwomenengagedinGermansexindustry,andthosewho,for whateverreasonwantedtomigrateduringtheWorldCup. TheOutcome Asaconsequenceofconflatingtraffickingandsexworkthecrackdownonillegal prostitutionandsextraffickingresultedinlargescaleraidsthroughoutGermany, withnearlyonehundredpeople,seventyfourofthemsexworkers,arrestedbythe Germanpolice(AssociatedPress,1June2006).TheinteriorministeroftheHesse provincedirectlylinkedtheseraidswithconcernsexpressedbyhumanrights organizationsandothergroupsthatthousandsofwomen,mostlyfromEastern Europe,couldbesmuggledintoGermanyandforcedtoworkasprostitutesduring theWorldCup.InneighbouringprovinceofRhinelandPalatinate22peoplewere arrestedand34wereissuedcitationsmostlyforimmigrationviolationsandfailureto complywithbusinessregulations(AssociatedPress,1June2006). AntitraffickingmeasuresaffectednotonlyGermansexworkers,butalsowomen fromthesupposedcountriesoforiginwho,forwhateverreason,wantedtovisit GermanyduringtheWorldCup.Aswomenindangerofbeingtraffickedforsex duringtheWorldCupwereconstructedasyoung,navewomenfromEasternand CentralEurope(Ekklesia2006,Haape2006,Tzortzis2006),whoseekalifefreeof povertyorabuse(Neuwirth2006)butinsteadendupbeingseverelyvictimized,their bodieshavebeenyetagainconstructedasweakandvulnerable. WeareveryanxiousaboutwhatwillhappeninGermanynext month.Thestoriesofthesegirlslockedinhousesareabsolutely horrendous.Theseyoungwomenareeithersoldbytheirfamilies, kidnappedorbelievetheyaregoingtodecentjobstoearnmoneyto sendhome.Theyendupwithoutanyrightsandwithruinedlives
232
GwynethSmith,CumbriaDistrictMethodistWomen'sNetwork (Morgan2006) Inordertohelpthem,asEUChiefJusticeFrancoFrattiniexplains, [v]isarequirementsshouldbeslappedonallnonEUcitizens travellingtoGermany...asapartofadrivetopreventanexpected increaseinthetraffickingWeneedtointroduceandreintroduce temporaryvisasforallthirdcountrieseventhosenotrequiring visassofarbutwhicharepossibleorigincountriesfortrafficked womenandchildrentheauthorities(needto)ensurethatpeople potentiallycompromisingpublicorder,oneofthegroundsfor refusalofentryintotheSchengenarea,areindeedrefusedsuch entry EUChiefJusticeFrancoFrattini(EUObserver,9March2006) Coincidentallyornot,thislatestrestrictionofwomensrightshasbeenlaunchedon theInternationalWomen'sDay. Conclusion Thisresearchindicatesthatthebodiesthatenforcebordersarenotonlythoseagents thatpatrolthephysicalborderbutthose(maleandfemale)agentsthatpatrolmoral bordersaroundtheacceptabilityandotherwiseofsexwork.Thosemoral enforcementagentsnotonlyperformagenderedsecuritizationoftheborderbutalso asocialandracialpatrolofparticulargroups.Consequentlythemoralpanic surroundingtheWorldCupevidencedapeakinthesubjectionofsomeracialand socialgroupstodifferentialborder,immigrationandlabourregimes.Thecurtailment of(some)womensmobilityandworkrightsinthenameofsecuringtheirprotection (fromthemselvesaswellasfromtraffickers)reliedonanslipperynumbers,the
233
securitizationoftheEuropeanunionandagendasofkeyplayersidentifiedinthis paper. TheWorldCupisover,andalthoughIOM(Hennigetal.2006)indicatedthatan increaseinhumantraffickingdidnotoccur(asitdidnotoccurforpreviousmajor sportingeventssuchas1998FIFAWorldCupinFrance,2004UEFAChampionshipin Portugal,or2004OlympicGamesinAthensHennigetal.2006),someorganizations havealreadybeenpointingouttoupcomingsportingevents,suchasthe2010 OlympicGamesandtheWorldCupinSouthAfricaasthepotentialriskfortrafficking (Delaney2007,Graham2007,TheFutureGroup2007,Heckler2008).Duringthe recentEuropeanfootballChampionshipinAustriaandSwitzerlandtheSBSreported (27May2008)thatfansareconfrontedwithshockingimagesofhumantraffickingin betweenmoretraditionaladvertsforbeer,foodandconsumergoods. Whatwehavenotseenafterthe2006WorldCuparecriticalassessmentsofthe effectsofthislatestmoralpanictowomentheysupposedtoprotect.Instead,there arerandomevaluationsthat,surprisinglyornot,claimthatpreventioncampaigns andincreasedlawenforcementeffortsduringtheWorldCupmayhavereducedthe riskoftraffickingandthatcharacteristicsofthefanbaseatthe2006WorldCuphad adirectimpactonthedemandforsexualservicesasmanyofthefanswerefamilies withchildren(Hennigetal.2006:2;similarinTavella2007,Delaney2007).Campaigns were,thus,praisedasasuccess.Whatisevenworse,someauthorsassessedthat internationalcommunityslateresponseandsensationalismofinaccuratefactsdid nothaveasignificantimpactonthesituation(Tavella2007:217). Whatneedstobeacknowledgedisthatprotectivemeasuresaroundsextrafficking preventwomentoexercisetheiragencyandfurthernarrowwomensoptions. Targetingsexworkinsteadofsextraffickingisoneofsuchmeasures.Atthesame time,whileacknowledgingriskstheincreasingnumberofmigrantwomenface, particularlyiftheirjourneysareundocumented,itisessentialtopinpointthatmaking
234
235
References Agustin,L(2005)MigrantsintheMistresssHouse:OtherVoicesintheTrafficking Debate,SocialPolitics,vol12,no1:96117. AmnestyInternational(2006)RedcardtotraffickingduringWorldCup,Amnesty InternationalUSA,26April2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGACT770082006 Apap,J,Culleen,P&Medved,F(2002)CounteractingHumanTrafficking:Protecting theVictimsofTrafficking,paperpresentedtotheEuropeanConferenceon PreventingandCombatingTraffickinginHumanBeingsGlobalChallengeforthe 21stCentury,Brussels,1820September2002,viewed20June2007, http://www.belgium.iom.int/StopConference/Conference%20Papers/01.%20Apap,% 20J.%20IOM%20final%20paper.pdf Bales,K(1999)DisposablePeopleNewSlaveryintheGlobalEconomy,Berkeley,Los Angeles,London:UniversityofCaliforniaPress. Bertone,A.M(2000)SexualTraffickinginWomen:InternationalPoliticalEconomy andthePoliticsofSex,GenderIssues,vol18,no1:422. Bindel,J(2006)FoulPlay,TheGuardian,30May2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1785532,00.html CAREforEurope(2006)HumanTrafficking,CARE,viewed20June2007, http://www.careforeurope.org/en/trafficking_en.htm
236
Carrington,K&Hearn,J(2003)TraffickingandtheSexIndustry:FromImpunityto Protection,CurrentIssuesBrief,no28,Canberra:DepartmentofParliamentary Library:124. Chon,K&Ellerman,D(2006)SoccerWithaSideofSlavery,TheWashingtonPost,10 June2006,viewed20June2007,http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp dyn/content/article/2006/06/09/AR2006060901477.html CoalitionAgainstTraffickinginWomen(2006)BuyingSexIsNotASportSayNoTo GermanysProstitutionofWomenDuringtheWorldCupGamesin2006,CATW,25 January2006,viewed20June2007,http://catwepetition.ouvaton.org/php/index.php Clark,M(2003)TraffickinginPersons:anissueofhumansecurity,JournalofHuman Development,vol4,no2:247263. Cooper,H(2006)AheadofWorldCup,U.S.WarnsGermanyAboutSexTrafficking, TheNewYorkTimes,6June2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/06/world/europe/06slavery.html?ex=1307246400& en=a4a00ddb0cd98c6b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss CouncilofEurope(2006)2006WorldCup:PACEasksFIFAtojointhefightagainst traffickinginwomen,CouncilofEuropeParliamentaryAssembly,Strasbourg,viewed 20June2007,http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Press/StopPressView.asp?ID=1759 Crouse,J(2006)GermanysSexShacksTarnishtheWorldCup,ConcernedWomenfor America,WashingtonD.C,viewed20June2007, http://www.beverlylahayeinstitute.org/articledisplay.asp?id=10649&department=BLI &categoryid=commentary&subcategoryid=blitraf
237
Delaney,J(2007)2010OlympicsCouldBoastSexTrafficking,TheEpochTimes,12 December,http://en.epochtimes.com/news/71212/62850.html,viewed16August 2008. DelegationofGermanytotheOSCE(2006)StatementbytheDelegationofGermany attheMeetingoftheOSCEPermanentCouncilregardingeffortstocombat traffickinginhumanbeingsduringtheFIFAWorldCupinGermany,OSCE,11May 2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.osce.org/documents/pc/2006/05/19042_en.pdf Doezema,J(2000)LooseWomenorLostWomen?Thereemergenceofthemythof whiteslaveryincontemporarydiscoursesoftraffickinginwomen,GenderIssues, vol18,no1:2350. Ekklesia(2006)HumanrightsandchurchgroupsprotestagainstWorldCupsexslavery, Ekklesia,2April2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/content/news_syndication/article_06059sex.shtml FIFA(2006)FIFAhasnopowertotakelegalactionagainsthumantraffickingandforced prostitution,FIFAMediaService,13April2006,viewed02July2006, http://www.fifa.com/en/media/index/0,1369,116822,00.html Graham,T(2007)SouthernAfrica:HumanTraffickingConcernfor2010, AllAfrica.com,http://allafrica.com/stories/200711300860.html,viewed16August 2008. Haape,M(2006)ProstitutionduringWorldCupisawholenewballgame,Sunday Herald,26February2006.
238
Heckler,C(2008)Africanstotargethumantraffickingbefore2010FIFAWorldCup, EcumenicalAdvocacyAlliance,http://iac.ealliance.ch/2008/08/humantrafficking worldcup/,viewed16August2008. Hennig,J,Craggs,S,Larsson,F&Laczko,F(2006)TraffickinginHumanBeingsand the2006WorldCupinGermany,SIDAandIOM,availableat http://www.iom.int/jahia/Jahia/pid/1737 Hughes,D(2001)TheNatashaTrade:TransnationalSexTrafficking,National InstituteofJusticeJournal,no246:915. Iglesias,A(2006)Germany:WorldCupaMagnetforForcedProstitution?,IPSNews, 4January2006,viewed20June2007,http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=31663 IOM(1995)TraffickingandProstitution:TheGrowingExploitationofMigrantWomen fromCentralandEasternEurope,Geneva:IOM. IOM(2006)GermanysWorldCupBrothels:40,000WomenandChildrenatRiskof ExploitationthroughTrafficking,StatementofAshleyGarrett,IOM,Hearingbefore theHouseCommitteeonInternationalRelationsSubcommitteeonAfrica,Global HumanRightsandInternationalOperations,4May2006. Jalsevac,J(2006)U.S.ReportSoftPedallingonGermany,CanadaSexTraffickingsay AntiTraffickingExperts,LifeSiteNews,6June2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06060606.html Jeffreys,S(2002)WomentraffickingandtheAustralianconnection:dolegalisedsex industriesencouragethetraffickingofwomenandchildren?Aretheypartlytoblame fortheexplosioninthistradeoverthelastdecade?Whoseneedsarebeingservedby thelegitimationofsexwork?,ArenaMagazine,AprilMay,no58:4448.
239
Kelly,L(2002)JourneysofJeopardy:AReviewofResearchonTraffickinginWomenand ChildreninEurope,Geneva:IOM. Kempadoo,K(1998)Introduction:GlobalizingSexWorkersRights,inKempadoo,K& Doezema,J(eds)GlobalSexWorkers:Rights,ResistanceandRedefinition,NewYork andLondon:Routledge. Kempadoo,K(2005)FromMoralPanictoGlobalJustice:ChangingPerspectiveson Trafficking,inKempadoo,K,Sanghera,J&Pattanaik,B(eds)Traffickingand ProstitutionReconsidered:NewPerspectivesonMigration,SexWork,andHuman Rights,Boulder,London:ParadigmPublishers. King,G.(2004)Woman,ChildforSaleTheNewSlaveTradeinthe21stCentury, ChamberlainBros,NewYork. Luxmore,J(2006)PolishnunsissueantiprostitutionleafletsforWorldCup,Catholic NewsService,10May2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0602705.htm Miko,F(2003)TraffickinginWomenandChildren:TheUSandInternational Response,inTroubnikoff,A(ed)TraffickinginWomenandChildrenCurrentIssues andDevelopments,NewYork:NovaSciencePublishers. Morgan,J(2006)MethodistFearsOverWorldCupBrothels,TheWhitehavenNews, 25May2006,viewed20June2007,http://www.whitehaven news.co.uk/unknown/viewarticle.aspx?c=397&id=370395
240
Neuwirth,J(2006)TheWorldCupandthejohns,InternationalHeraldTribune,11April 2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/10/opinion/edneuwirth.php NikolicRistanovic,V,Copic,S,Milivojevic,S,SimeunovicPatic,B&Mihic,B(2004) TraffickinginPeopleinSerbia,Belgrade:OSCE. Paterson,T(2005)GermanybacksbiggerbrothelstofightWorldCupsexexplosion, IndependentOnline,9December2005,viewed20June2007, http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article331954.ece Raymond,J,DCunha,J,Dzuhayatin,SR,Hynes,P,Rodriguez,Z&Santos,A(2002)A ComparativeStudyofWomenTraffickedinMigrationProcess,CoalitionAgainst TraffickinginWomen,viewed20June2007, http://action.web.ca/home/catw/attach/CATW%20Comparative%20Study%202002.p df Roby,J(2005)Womenandchildrenintheglobalsextrade:Towardmoreeffective policy,InternationalSocialWork,vol.48,no.2,pp.136147. SalvationArmy(2006)EnjoytheGame.CelebratetheWin.DontbeaLoserSalvation ArmyLaunchesHumanTraffickingAwarenessCampaignforFansTravellingtoWorld Cup,SalvationArmyMetablogging,viewed20June2007, http://tsa.ismckenzie.com/2006/05/world_cup_human_trafficking.html Segrave,M&Milivojevi,S(2005)SexTrafficking:ANewAgenda,Social Alternatives,vol24,no2:1116 SIDA(2006)MTVandSidainantitraffickingcampaign,SIDA,Stockholm,viewed20 June2007,http://www.sida.se/sida/jsp/sida.jsp?d=137&a=23732&language=en_US
241
Sparre,K(2006)Swedishombudsman:BoycottWorldCupinprotestagainst prostitution,Playthegame,7April2006,viewed20June2007, http://www.playthegame.org/News/Up_To_Date/Swedish_Ombudsman_Boycott_W orld_Cup_because_of_%20prostitution.aspx Tavella,A(2007)SexTraffickingandtheWorldCupinGermany:Concerns,Actions andImplicationsforFutureInternationalSportingEvents,NorthwesternJournalof InternationalHumanRights,vol.6,no.11:196217. TheFutureGroup(2007)Faster,Higher,Stronger:PreventingHumanTraffickingatthe 2010Olympics,Calgary:TheFutureGroup. Tzortzis,A(2006)WorldCupgoal:stemprostitution,ChristianScienceMonitor,5May 2006,viewed20June2007,http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0505/p06s02 woeu.html USDepartmentofState(2002)TraffickinginPersonsReport,USDepartmentofState, WashingtonD.C.,viewed20June2007,http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2002/ USDepartmentofState(2006)TraffickinginPersonsReport,USDepartmentofState, WashingtonD.C.,viewed20June2007,http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2006/ USDepartmentofState(2008)TraffickinginPersonsReport,USDepartmentofState, WashingtonD.C.,viewed16August2008,http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2008/ USHouseofRepresentativesSubcommitteeonAfrica,GlobalHumanRightsand InternationalOperations(2006)ModernDaySlavery:Spotlightonthe2006Trafficking inPersonsReport,ForcedLabor,andSexTraffickingattheWorldCup,USHouseof
242
Representatives,WashingtonD.C.,viewed20June2007, http://www.internationalrelations.house.gov/archives/109/28104.PDF USHouseofRepresentativesSubcommitteeonAfrica,GlobalHumanRightsand InternationalOperations(2006a)GermanysWorldCupBrothels:40.000Womenand ChildrenatRiskofExploitationThroughTrafficking,USHouseofRepresentatives, WashingtonD.C.,viewed20June2007, http://www.internationalrelations.house.gov/archives/109/27330.PDF vandenAnker,C(2004)ContemporarySlavery,GlobalJusticeandGlobalisation,in vandenAnker,C(ed)ThePoliticalEconomyofNewSlavery,PalgraveMacmillan, Houndmills,Basingstoke,Hampshire,NewYork.
243
Organisedabuseandthepoliticsofdisbelief
MichaelSalter FacultyofLaw FacultyofMedicine UniversityofNewSouthWales m.salter@unsw.edu.au Organisedabusereferstoanyincidentofchildsexualabuseinwhichmultipleadults actinacoordinatedorpremeditatedwaytosexuallyabusemultiplechildren.1 Althoughitisarelativelyinfrequentformofsexualabuse,organisedabusehasbeen amongstthemostincendiaryissuesindebatesonchildsexualabuseoverthelast thirtyyears(seeBrown,Scheflinetal.1998;Kitzinger2004).Thispaperwillexplore howorganisedabusecametoplayacentralroleinconflictsoverthesignificationof childsexualabuse.Asnarrativesofsexualviolencehavegainedincreasingly legitimacyinthepubliceye,itseemsthatorganisedabusehascometorepresenta newfrontierofdisbelief. Sincethe1980s,disclosuresoforganisedabusehavebeendisparagedbyarangeof activists,journalistsandresearcherswhohavefocused,inparticular,oncasesin whichsexuallyabusivegroupswereallegedtohavebehavedinritualisticor ceremonialways(e.g.EberleandEberle1986;LoftusandKetcham1994;Wakefield andUnderwager1994;Guilliatt1996;NathanandSnedeker1996;OfsheandWatters 1996).Whilsttheseauthorsclaimedtobewritingintheinterestsofscienceandsocial justice,whathasemergedfromtheirwritingareafamiliarsetofargumentsaboutthe credibilityofwomenandchildrenstestimonyofsexualviolence;inshort,that
244
womenandchildrenarepronetoarangeofmemoryandcognitiveerrorsthatlead themtomakefalseallegationsofrape. Thispaperarguesthatthisbodyofliteraturehassystematicallymisconstrued allegationsoforganisedabuse,andusedorganisedabuseasalensthroughwhichthe debateonchildabusecouldbereenvisionedalongverytraditionallines,attributing victimstatustoaccusedmenandconstructingliarsoutofwomenandchildren complainingofsexualabuse.Theambiguities,theuncertainties,andthecomplexities ofcasesoforganisedabusehavemadeitanimportantdiscursivesiteforanumberof actorswithideologicalobjectionstothechangeswroughtbyfeminismandchild protection.Inparticular,byframingallegationsoforganisedabuseasbizarreand beyondbelief,theysoughttoreassertanolderpoliticsofdisbeliefthatconteststhe notionthatwomenandchildrenarereliablewitnesses. Thebacklashagainstchildprotection Formuchofthe20thcentury,womenandchildrensdisclosuresofsexualviolence haveoftenbeencontestedbydrawingonentrenchedculturalbeliefsaboutwomen andchildren;namely,thattheylackafirmsenseofidentityandmemory,andare thuspronetoconfabulationandwilfulfalsehood(Campbell2003).Acrossarangeof professionsanddisciplines,indicatorsofdistressinsexuallyassaultedwomenand childrenhavebeensystematicallyreinterpretedinsuchawayastocamouflagethe prevalenceofsexualviolence,minimiseitsharms,anddirectblameawayfrom offenders(Olafson,Corwinetal.1993).Fromthe1960s,theeffortsofthewomens movement,incoalitionwitharangeofprofessionalsandresearchers,catalyseda reconfigurationofsexualviolenceasafrontierofdisbelief.Feminismbrokerednew formsofcareandsupportforabusedwomenandchildren,includingrapecrisis servicesanddomesticviolenceshelters(DriverandDroison1989;Farr1991).A growingnumberofmedicalandpsychologicalprofessionalsbegantoconsiderthe familyhome,andintimaterelationships,aspotentialsitesofseriousandlife
245
threateningharm(Kempe,Silvermanetal.1962;Kempe1978).Bytheearly1980s, significantgainshadbeenmadeinrelationtothepublicawarenessofincest,sexual abuse,sexualassaultanddomesticviolence(Herman1981;Russell1984;Finkelhor andYllo1985).Disclosuresofsexualviolenceweregivenincreasingrecognitionas authenticrepresentationsoflivedexperience,andthisopenedupanewrangeof testimonialpositionsforwomenandchildren.InAustralia,andaroundtheworld, childprotectionservicesbeganreceiving,andactingon,anunprecedentednumberof childabusenotifications,andhealthandwelfareservicesbeganscalinguptotreat sexuallyabusedclients(BreckenridgeandCarmody1992).Crucially,themedia provedarelativelyconducivevehicleforarangeofnewnarrativesaboutsexual violenceandsexualabuse. Dramaticsocialchangeoftenpromptsaresponsefromthosethreatenedbythe emergenceofnewmeanings,understandingsandpractices.Intheearly1980s,a nascentpoliticalmovementdevelopedintheUnitedStates,constitutedofpeople whoobjectedtotheriseinstatesponsoredinterventionsinfamilylifeandparent childrelationships.Thismovementwaslargelyapiecemealandineffectualeffort untilthefirstprosecutionsfororganisedabuseprovidedthemwithakeyopportunity tocentraliseandpoliticallymobilise(Faller2004).In1984,thecommunitygroup VictimsofChildAbuseLaws(orVOCAL)wasformedintheaftermathofacollapsed investigationintoallegationsoforganisedabuseinJordan,Minnesota.VOCALwas formedbytwoparentsacquittedinthecase,andDrRalphUnderwager,aLutheran ministerandpsychologistwhoactedasanexpertwitnessintheirdefence.Incourt, Underwagerhadclaimedthatthechildrensdisclosuresoforganisedabusewerethe productofbrainwashingbysocialworkers,who,hetestified,usedCommunist thoughtreformtechniquestoforcethechildwitnessestoinventallegationsagainst theirparents(Summit1994b:14).Thesedarkintimationsofaconspiracyoffemale professionalsstrongarmingchildrenintodestroyingtheirfamilieswouldbeafeature
246
ofUnderwagersactivismoverthenextfewdecades.2Ostensibly,VOCALwasformed toadvocatefortherightsofparentswithcomplaintsagainstthechildprotection system,butitattractedarangeofotherpeople,includingantifeminists,fathers rightsactivists,convictedsexualoffendersandpropaedophileadvocates(Hechler 1988).Withinayearofitsestablishment,VOCALclaimedthreethousandmembers inonehundredchaptersacrossfortystates(Meinert1985),providinganexpansive platformforthepromulgationofapositiononchildsexualabusethatharkedbackto viewsmoreprevalentintheearlytomidtwentiethcentury:childsexualabuseis infrequentandnotnecessarilyharmful,childrencannottellthedifferencebetween factandfantasy,andsocialworkersandotherswhoinvestigatechildabuseare obsessiveandhysterical. Mediacoverageofsexualabuseintheearly1980swasfocused,primarily,onthe mannerinwhichchildsexualabusehadbeenhistoricallydeniedandsilenced(Beckett 1996).OrganisedabusefeaturedpowerfullyinVOCALsefforttogivesaliencetoa messageaboutchildabusethatwasotherwiserunningcountertodominantmedia themes.Inasmallnumberofchildprotectioninvestigationsinthe1980s,children reportedritualisticformsofsexualabuse,involvingsexualassaultandtortureby groupsofpeoplewithinreligiousorcultlikesatanicceremonies(Scott2001).A numberofcommunityconcernsaboutchildsexualabusecoalescedaroundthese cases,particularlythereliabilityofchildrenstestimony,thevalidityofchild protectioninvestigationprocesses,andthevulnerabilityofadultstofalseallegations ofabuse.TheseconcernsprovedtobeaneffectiveframeforVOCALincontestingthe authorityofchildprotectionservices.VOCALhighlightedchildrensallegationsof ritualabuseasevidencethatchildrenhadanaturalpropensityforconfabulationand fantasy(Marron1987)andthatsocialworkersandpsychologistswerecaughtupina
247
moralpanicaboutchildabuse(WakefieldandUnderwager1994).Theseviewswere promotedbyRalphUnderwagerinaprolificcampaignindefenceofpeopleaccused ofsexualabuseandorganisedabuse.Bythelate1980s,Underwagerhadtestifiedfor thedefenceinmorethen200sexualabusecasesintheUS,Canada,Australia,New ZealandandBritain(Grant1994),and28oftheminvolvedallegationsoforganised andritualabuse(Marron1987).TheviewsespousedbyUnderwagerandVOCAL receivedwidespreadcoverageinthemainstreampress,althoughtheywere temperedbyreportsofsubstantiatedinvestigationsandprosecutionsofcasesof organisedandritualabuse(e.g.Hollingsworth1986;Marron1989). OneofthelongestrunningandmostexpensiveAmericanchildmolestationcasesof the1980s,theMcMartinpreschoolcase,provedtobethetippingpointforthe credibilityofritualabuseallegations.Thelegalproceedingsinthecasewereso protractedandtheallegationssoextremethatthefailuretosecureconvictionsinthe casebecame,inthepubliceye,emblematicofallegationsofritualabuseasawhole. TheMcMartincasebeganin1983withasmallnumberofcomplaintsofsexualabuse atalocalpreschoolinCalifornia.Theinvestigationquicklysnowballed,andover360 formerandcurrentstudents,rangingfromtoddlerstoteenagers,disclosedsexual andritualabusebytheoperatorsandteachersofthepreschooloverfifteenyears (Gorney1988).Somechildrenspokeofasetofstrangeandbafflingexperiencesin whichtheyweretaken,underground,fromthepreschoolthroughasetoftunnelstoa waitingcar,anddriventootherlocationsinthearea.There,theyspokeofbeing subjectedtosexuallyexploitativeactsbygroupsofpeople,includingritualistic practices.Theinvestigationresultedinnumerouschargesagainsttheownersand teachersofthepreschoolandsevenyearsoflegalproceedings,includingaprolonged preliminaryhearing,andtwocriminaltrials,bothofwhichresultedinhungjuries. Therewasahighrateofattritionamongstthechildwitnesses,whounderwent extensiveandhostilecrossexaminationforuptothreeweeks(Schindehette1990). Astheproceedingsdrewout,journalistsbegantodriftawayfromtheseemingly interminabledaytodayordealofthecourtprocess.Thetoneofnewsreportingon
248
McMartinbecameincreasinglygeneralandthematic,asjournalistsusedthecaseto illustratebroaderconcernsaboutchildrenstestimonyandthelaw. Whenamistrialwasdeclaredinthesecondtrial,amediafurorensued.Oneopinion pieceintheWallStreetJournalcalledforthechildwitnessesintheMcMartincaseto bechargedwithperjuryandjailed(Cockburn1990).Commentatorsarguedthatthe McMartincasewasevidencethatsocietywashystericalaboutsexualabuse(Nathan 1990)andthatchildprotectionworkerswereengagedinaconspiracytoforce childrenintofabricatingabuseclaimsaspartofachildabuseindustry(Eberleand Eberle1993).Intheaftermathofthecase,mediacoverageoforganisedabuse specifically,andchildsexualabusemoregenerally,begantofeaturetermssuchas moralpanicandwitchhuntwithincreasingfrequency.Thisinflammatoryrhetoric wouldbeadoptedbyacademiccommentatorsonorganisedandritualabuse throughoutthe1990s.Forinstance,Sebald(1995;1997)describedchildren complainingoforganisedabuseaswitchchildren,andhelinkedthemtothe defamingchildrenofthewitchtrialsandtheInquisition.Thesechildrenboughtto thestakeuncountedthousandsofinnocentpeople,however,heobserves ominously,theywereneverpunishedfortheirlethalrole.(Sebald1997:44)The metaphorofthewitchhuntwouldfeatureprominentlyinthewritingsof researchersandacademicsonritualabuse(e.g.Loftus1995;Henningsen1996;Victor 1998),castingmenasthevictimisedinnocents,andwomenandchildrenastheirlying persecutors.Ultimately,ritualabuseandtheMcMartincasebecamethecausecelebre ofthereneweddiscourseofdisbeliefregardingchildrenstestimonyofchildsexual assaultthathadbeenbuildingthroughoutthe1980s.Thefindingsofan archaeologicaldigattheMcMartinpreschoolsite,whichuncoveredrecently backfilledtunnelsandritualarticlesinaccordancewiththechildrensdisclosures, cametoolatetocounterthemomentumofthebacklash(Summit1994a). Intheearly1990s,thesedebatesweresomethingofapassingcuriosityinAustralia. UnliketheUnitedStates,therewasnoorganisedcountermovementinAustralia
249
againstchildprotectionservices.Whilstsomejournalistsquestionedthebasisof chargesinorganisedabusecases,theydidnotframeorganisedabuseasevidenceof amoralpanicaboutchildsexualabuse.Somejournalistsgavesympathetic coveragetochildrenandadultsdisclosingorganisedandritualabuse(Preston1990a; Preston1990b;Juan1991;Editorial1993),whilstcasesemergedtogiveweightto theirclaims.Inthelate1980sandearly1990s,substantiatedcasesoforganisedand ritualabusearoseinVictoria,NewSouthWalesandWesternAustralia(Hole1989; Humphries1991;Milburn1992;Wilson1992;Ogg1996).Inresponsetotheneedsof clientswithahistoryofextremeabuse,psychotherapistsformedtheAustralian AssociationofMultiplePersonalityandDissociation.Aselfhelpnetworkofadult survivorsoforganisedandritualabuse,calledRitualAbuseSurvivorsandtheir Supporters,alsoformedduringthisperiod.Sincetheearly1990s,sexualassaultand domesticviolenceworkershavebeendevelopingtrainingandinformationpackages onorganisedandritualabuse(NSWSexualAssaultCommittee1994),whilstlobbying stategovernmentsforaresponsetotheissue(SydneyRapeCrisisCentre1995; StandingCommitteeonSocialIssues1996;ACTCommunityLawReformCommittee 1997;StandingCommitteeonCommunityServicesandSocialEquity2002).In1993, theUnitedNationsSpecialRapporteurontheRightsoftheChild,reportingonhis missiontoAustralia,notedtheemergenceofreportsoforganisedandritualabuse, andrecommendedthattheAustraliangovernmentremainonguard(Muntarbhorn 1993:14). TheriseoffalsememorydiscourseinAustralia Bythemid1990s,apublicbacklashagainstallegationsoforganisedandritualabuse wasunderwayintheAustralianmedia.Thisbacklashdrewextensivelyonfalse memoryliteraturearisingfromaninfluentialAmericanlobbygroup,theFalse MemorySyndromeFoundation.TheFoundationwassponsoredbyRalph Underwager,anditwasformedtorepresenttheinterestsofparentsaccusedof sexualabusebytheiradultchildren.WhilstVOCALsmessageofpanicandillnesshad
250
beenprimarilymetaphorical,theFoundationtookthisonestepfurther,inventinga psychiatricdiagnosiscalledFalseMemorySyndrome.TheFoundationproffered thissyndromeasanalternativeexplanationfortheclaimthatsomeadultswere recallingincidentsofchildsexualabuseafteraperiodofprolongedamnesia.Despite extensiveevidenceoftraumaticforgetting,theFoundationclaimedthatitwas impossibletoforgetsexualabuse,andthatthereforesuchclaimsweretheproductof aFalseMemorySyndrome(Calof1993).Theycharacterisedthesyndromeasan epidemic,inwhichmemoriesofsexualabuseactasviralobjectsthatcouldbe transmittedtosuggestiblewomenandchildrenbydirectcontactwithsocialworkers orpsychotherapists,orelsethroughexposuretobooks,televisionprograms,or moviesaboutchildsexualabuse.Muchofthelogicunderlyingthisframeworkwas similartothemoralpanicpositionpreviouslyadvocatedbyVOCAL.The Foundationsrhetoricofinfectionandtransmission,however,enrichedtheir courtroomandmediastrategieswithauthoritativesoundingmedicalterminology thatappealedtojournalistsandacademics.Casesoforganisedandritualabusehada centralroleinthisnarrativeofinfection,confabulationandpathology.Survivorsof organisedabuse,andtheprofessionalswhocaredforthem,werefrequently stigmatisedinthisliteratureasthediseasedcarriersofadangeroussociogenicillness (e.g.LoftusandKetcham1994;WakefieldandUnderwager1994;Pendergrast1995; OfsheandWatters1996). VOCAL,theFoundationandaffiliateddefenseexpertsdrewonattitudestowomen andchildrenthathavealonghistoryinmedicolegaldiscourse(seeHerman1992; Scutt1997;Campbell2003),however,organisedabuseservedasafocalpoint throughwhichtheseattitudescouldbereassertedwithaparticularintensity. Underwager,claimedthat,whenaskedquestionsaboutsexualabuse,childrenwould inevitablyinventanaccountoforganisedandritualisticabusebecausethefantasy worldofchildrenisfilledwithmayhem,murder,cannibalism,bloodandgore(Struck 1986).InUnderwagersaccount,allforensicinterviewswithchildrenprovokedtheir sadisticsexualfantasylife,creatingpsychoticandsexualisedchildrenwhowere
251
ruinedforlife(Duncan1987;Smith1992).In1988,asanexpertdefensewitnessin theMrBubblescommittalhearinginSydney,Underwagerarguedthatthechild witnessesinthecasehadbeenturnedintomonstersbytheinvestigationprocess (HoyleandGlover1989;Munro1990).Thus,thehistoricalarchetypeoftheknowing child,foreverruinedbytheirassociationwithsex,tookonstrangeanddemonic proportions.Asimilarargumentwasadvancedbyaprominentmemberofthe Foundation,Prof.RichardOfshe,whosuggestedthat,whenwomenarein environmentsoffreeassociation,theywillnaturallyfantasisescenariosofbrutalrape andritualsadism(OfsheandWatters1993;OfsheandWatters1996).Like Underwagerandchildren,Ofshereferredtopsychotherapyasmakingmonstersout ofwomen.Nolongerwasawomanorchildanemptyvesselwhocouldeasily imagine,orbeconvincedtobelieve,thattheywereabused.Inpublicdiscourse,there weredarkinferencesthattherewassomethingmalevolentwithinwomenand childrendrivingcasesoforganisedabusespecificallyandallegationsofsexualabuse moregenerally. IntheAustraliancontext,falsememorydiscoursehadaresonancethatVOCALs messagesaboutmoralpanichadlacked.Ina1993SydneyMorningHeraldarticle entitledParentsthelatestvictimsofwidespreadsexabuse,philosopherDenis DuttonclaimedthatFalseMemorySyndromerepresentsathreattoeveryloving, normalparentwhosechildmightsomeday,encounteringaroughpatch,fallintothe handsofatherapistwhoacceptsthemythsofmemoryrepressionandhypnotic enhancement.Hecharacterisedatypicalwomanintherapyasgullibleandeasilyled, andcomparedhermemoriesofsexualabusetoaccountsofalienabduction(Dutton 1993).Bythemid1990s,arangeofAustralianjournalistswereusingfalsememory syndrometodescribefalseallegationsofsexualabuse,underheadlinessuchas: ThisManLostEverythingWhenHisDaughterAccusedHimOfSexualAbuse (Wyndham1994)
252
Casesoforganisedandritualisticabusefeaturedfrequentlyinthesearticlesasprima facieexamplesoffalseallegationsofsexualabuse.Bythemid1990s,stereotypesof womenandchildrenassuggestibleandpotentiallymaliciousfantasistswerefirmly backontheagendaoftheAustralianmedia.Thesestereotypes,however,werenow rebadgedasrighteousoutrageovercasesoforganisedabuse,andrepackagedinthe pseudoscientificrhetoricofsuggestibilityandfalsememoriesfirstbrokeredby lobbygroupsofpeopleaccusedofsexualabuse.Underthedisparaginglabelsatanic abuseorsatanicritualabuse,anumberofAustraliancommentatorsinvokedcases oforganisedandritualabusetojustifycharacterizingwomenandchildrensmemory asfallible,andtheirtestimonyaslackingcredibility. From1994to1996,FairfaxjournalistRichardGuilliattpublishedaseriesofarticleson allegationsofritualabuse,culminatinginhisbook,SpeakoftheDevil:Repressed memoryandtheritualabusewitchhunt(Guilliatt1996b).Inthiswork,Guilliattinvited hisreaderstoconsiderritualabuseasaforeignviralobject,introducedinto AustraliafromtheUnitedStates,thathassinceoverruntheAustralianchild protectionsector.HedescribedtheMrBubblesinvestigationasawelterofbizarre claimsandcommunitypanicoriginatingatachildabuseconferenceinSydneyin 1986.Guilliattdevelopedatheorythat,duringthisconference,Australianchild protectionworkerswereundulyinfluencedbyfourAmericanclinicianswhohad workedwiththechildwitnessesintheMcMartincase.Althoughheprovidesno evidencethatritualabusewasdiscussedattheconference,orthattheattendeesin questionmetoneanother,GuilliattsurmisedthatAustralianchildprotectionworkers aresosusceptibletoawitchhuntmentalitythattheirmereproximityto
253
professionalsinvolvedintheMcMartincaseledthemtwoyearslatertocoerce childrenintofabricatingscurrilousritualabuseallegations. PaddyMcGuinnessexpoundedonamoreconspiratorialvariantofthisargument, linkingsatanicritualabusewithaninternationalmovementofhealthcareand legalprofessionalswithpolitical,ideologicalorfinancialmotivesforcoercingclients intomakingfalseallegationsofsexualabuse(McGuinness1994a).Inanumberof articles,McGuinnesslikenedallegationsofritualabusetoarashofharassment, gender,raceandotherdiscrimination,childhoodsexualabuseandsimilarly fashionablecomplaintssonumerousthat,hesuggests,mostofthemcannotbe consideredcredible.Hedescribestheseallegationsasaformofterrorismenactedby womenagainstmen,andheencouragesthoseaccusedtofightbackandlaunch legalproceedingsagainstthementalhealthprofessionalssupportingcomplainants (McGuinness1994b;McGuinness1995b;McGuinness1995a).Otherjournalists comparedallegationsofritualabusetostoriesofalienabduction(Wynhausen1994) andsuggestedthatcasesofritualabuseprovedthatfalsememorysyndromeand falseallegationswereagrowingprobleminAustralia(Waterstreet1996).This hyperbolictreatmentofritualabusewasrepeatedinAustralianacademiccircles, primarilybypsychiatristsassociatedwiththeAustralianFalseMemoryAssociation (e.g.Gelb1993). Asmediacontroversyescalated,thenascentpolicyresponsetoorganisedandritual abuseceased.Duringthisperiod,theWoodRoyalCommissiontookevidencefrom representativesoftheAustralianFalseMemoryAssociation,andtheirreport suggestedthattheyfoundtheargumentoftheAssociationfarmorecompellingthen thenumeroussubmissionsmadetotheCommissionrelatingtoorganisedandritual abuse.TheCommissionsuggestedthatthecasesoforganisedandritualabuse boughttotheirattentioncouldbetheproductofsuggestionbytherapistsactingout areligiousfervorandparanoiaaboutsexualabuse(RoyalCommissionintothe NewSouthWalesPoliceService1997:104).Itisnotablethat,duringthisperiod,both
254
theNationalCrimeAuthorityandtheWoodRoyalCommissionchosetofocustheir investigationsoforganisedabuseontheextrafamilialabuseofboys,oftentargeting homosexualmenasperpetrators(seeMiller1997;RoyalCommissionintotheNew SouthWalesPoliceService1997).Incontrast,disclosuresofritualabuseprimarily implicatesexuallyabusivefathers,andotherrelatives,whoprovidechildrenforsexual abusetoothersoutsidethehome(CleaverandFreeman1996;Scott2001).More recently,disclosuresoforganisedandritualabuseinIndigenouscommunities(e.g. ABCNews2006;Overington2006)havebeenaffordedthecredibilitythatisdenied tosimilardisclosuresofabuseinAngloAustraliancommunities. Elsewhere,Ihavesuggestedthatthispatternofdenialisanexpressionofthe reluctanceofpolicymakersandlawenforcementtoacknowledgethescaleofsexual violenceagainstwomenandchildreninfirstworldnations(Salter2008).Organised andritualabusebringsexoticformsofviolenceintothenormativespacesofthe everydayintohomes,churchesandschoolschallengingsocialidealisationsof familylife,anddisruptingracialiseddistinctionsbetweencivilisationand barbarity.InAustralia,organisedabuseisdisplacedontodevelopingnations,black communities,orsexualminorities,butitsoccurrenceisrarelyacknowledgedinurban, AngloAustraliancommunitiesandhomes.Disclosuresoforganisedabusehave, instead,beensubjecttoquarantinebydiscourse;encircledandexpelledbythe rhetoricoffalsememoriesandmoralpanic.Centraltothesediscursivemaneuvers havebeenthereassertionandintensificationofthetraditionalpoliticsofdisbelief regardingthesuggestibilityofwomenandchildrenandtheirsupposedpropensityto accuseinnocentmenofrapeandviolence.
255
Thesocialdynamicsofmemory,credibilityanddisbelief Theconflictoverthecredibilityoftestimonyofsexualabusehassometimesbeen calledthememorywars,sincepsychologicalresearchfindingsonmemoryand recallhavefeaturedprominentlythroughout(Campbell2003).Manyoftheeffortsto contesttheriseoffalsememorydiscoursehavereliedonscientificevidenceof traumaticamnesiaandtheaccuracyofmemoryrecall(e.g.Brown,Scheflinetal. 1998).Whilstthisliteratureconstitutesasignificantevidencebaseforthecredibility ofsexualabusetestimony,ithasoftenfailedtoidentifyandaddressthereactionary genderpoliticsattheheartofthefalsememoryandmoralpanichypotheses.In spiteoftheirpseudoscientificrhetoric,theseargumentsarenotbasedupon empiricalevidence,butratheruponappealstopejorativestereotypesandcommon senseknowledgeaboutwomenandchildren.Furthermore,rememberingisnot simplyamatterofcognitivestructuresandindividualcapacity.Rememberingisalsoa socialact,boundupinthepractices,andskills,associatedwithconstructinga narrative,speakingorwritingthatnarrative,andtheiterativerelationshipbetween narratorandaudience(Plummer1995).Thecredibilityofanarrativeofsexualabuse rests,innosmallway,onthenarratorsmasteryofkeycommunicationand attachmentskills,andthesocialresourcestheycandrawonforcareandsupport. Abusedandneglectedchildrenfrequentlyhavelimitedopportunitiestogainsuch skillsandrelationships,and,asadults,thesedeficitscontributeto,andarecompound by,factorssuchasmentalillness,disabilityandpoverty. Scepticalcommentatorshavehighlightedtheincrediblemannerinwhichadults andchildrendisclosehistoriesoforganisedandritualabusetogreateffect.Assertions andretractions,gapsorcontradictions,exaggerationsandconspiratorialbeliefshave allbeenusedasevidencethatindividualswhodiscloseorganisedandritualabuseare unreliablewitnesses.Oppositionalliteraturehaspaidscantattentiontotherealityof thelivesofadultsorchildrenwithahistoryoforganisedabuse,ortheobstaclesthey faceindevelopingaclearautobiographicalnarrative.Peoplewithahistoryof
256
violenceandtraumacanexperiencediscontinuitiesinmemoryandidentitythat adverselyimpactontheclarityoftheirautobiographicalmemory(VanderKolkand Fisher1995).Whilsttheseissuescanbeaddressedinpsychotherapy,manyadults withhistoriesoforganisedabusearechronicallydisabledandimpoverished,and unabletoaccessaffordableandeffectivementalhealthcare.Theirattemptsto articulatetheirhistoriesmaythereforebehalting,fearful,paranoidorcontradictory. Theincredibilityofsuchnarrativesdoesnotspeaktothefallacyofmemoryper se,nordoesitindicatethatthenarratorisnotapersonofseriousintent.Instead, thesefragmentarydisclosuresareindicativeofthescarceresourcesthatmanyadults withhistoriesofviolenceandabusehaveavailabletomakesenseoftheirlives. Itiscommonforadultswithhistoriesoforganisedabuse,cogentofthedistortionsof traumaticamnesiaandthedegradationofmemoryovertime,toprevaricateoverthe accuracyoftheirmemories(e.g.Corwin2002:1415).Inmyexperienceasa researcher,adultswithhistoriesoforganisedabuseoftenundertakerigorousreality testingandfactcheckingovermanyyearsinordertocometoanunderstandingof theirrecollectionsofabuse.Itisalsotruethatsomeadultswithhistoriesoforganised abusehavedevelopedconspiratorialexplanationsfortheirabuse.Online,conspiracy theoriesaboundwhichattributetremendouspolitical,andsometimessupernatural, powertosexuallyabusivegroups.Oppositionalliteraturehasmadegreatsportof theseconspiracytheories,however,asHacking(1995)pointsout,thecountercryof witchhuntisaninadequatealternativetotheseconspiratorialbeliefs,since [c]onspiracyandwitchhuntaremirrorimages,asfarasexplanationsgo.(p114) Thepropositionthatpsychotherapists,socialworkers,radicalfeministsandChristian fundamentalistshavejoinedforcesandengagedincollusiononaninternationalscale tocoercechildrenandwomenintofabricatingclaimsofritualabuseagainstinnocent menisnomorereasonablethenconspiracytheoriesaboutSatanistsandpaedophiles. Therearealsoconcerningpoliticaldimensionstothesecriesofwitchhuntand moralpanicsincetheyeffacetheagencyandlivedexperienceofadultsandchildren
257
whodiscloseorganisedandritualabuse.Thetypicalsurvivorofoppositional literatureisdescribedasananxiousolderwomanwithvaguecomplaintsor emotionalproblems,whofabricateswildstoriesofabuseatthebiddingofa therapist,orsimplyasanexpressionofherpostmodernmalaise(Loftusand Ketcham1994;WakefieldandUnderwager1994;OfsheandWatters1996).The imageofawomanwithoutawilloridentityofherown,atthewhimofsocialforces andprofessionalmalpractice,iscentraltooppositionalliteratureonritualabuse,and amainstayofscepticalliteratureonsexualabuseingeneral.Itisacharacterisationin starkcontrasttothestrugglesforselfdetermination,wellbeingandjusticethat dominateautobiographicalnarrativesoforganisedandritualabuse.Inherlifehistory researchwithadultsurvivorsofritualabuse,Scott(1998b)notedthatsheinterviewed adisproportionatenumberofyoungwomenwhohadescapedtheirabusivefamilies asteenagers,soughthelpandsupport,anddisclosedtheirabusewhileitwasstill ongoing. Examplesaboundinwhichchildrenandadultswithhistoriesoforganisedandritual abuseareactiveagentsintheirownlives,ratherthenthepassivevictimsof recoveredmemorytherapydescribedbyoppositionalliterature.In1982,aGerman national,PhoenixVanDyke,fledtoAustraliatoescapeongoingritualabusebyher familyandanabusivegroupbasedinherhometown.Shebecameanoutspoken activistwhofoundedthesupportnetworkRitualAbuseSurvivorsandtheir SupportersfollowingaconferenceforincestsurvivorsinSydneyin1992.VanDyke distributedamonthlymagazineBeyondSurvivalonritualabuseformuchofthe 1990s,andshelobbiedsexualassaultservicesandpoliticiansforaresponsetothe needsofritualabusesurvivors.InhisscepticalcoverageofritualabusefortheSydney MorningHerald,RichardGuillliattdismissedVanDykeasa36yearoldseparatist lesbianwhohadbeenlockedinamentalinstitutionasanadolescent(Guilliatt 1996a).GuillliattsincredulitywasnotsharedbytheAustralianRefugeeReview Tribunal,which,in1998,foundVanDykeacrediblewitness.Intheirdecision,the Tribunalstated:Itisaccepted[that]suchgroupsexistinGermanyandthe
258
authoritieshavebeenlargelyineffectiveinstoppingtheirillegalactivities..."The TribunalfoundthatVanDykewasatriskofbeingharmedand/orkilledifshereturned tohercountryofbirth"astheGermangovernmentiseitherunwillingorunableto protectvictimsofritualabuse."(TheAustralianRefugeeReviewTribunalquotedin BeckerandColeman1999)AlthoughtheTribunalacceptedthatVanDykewasa survivoroforganisedandritualabuse,andwasthereforevulnerabletorevictimisation inGermany,itfoundthatshedidnotfallwithintheacceptedcategoriesof persecution,andthereforetherewasnolegalbasistograntVanDykeaprotection visa.Afewmonthslater,thethenMinisterforImmigration,PhillipRuddock, overturnedtheTribunalsdecision,andgrantedVanDykeaprotectionvisa(Van Dyke,personalcommunication,2008).Itisinterestingtonotethedifferentialin mediacoveragegiventotheintimatedetailsofVanDykeslifein1996,wheneven hersexualitywasconsideredarelevantvariableinmediaassessmentsofher credibility,incomparisontothefailureofanymediaoutlettoreportonthedecision tograntherrefugeestatustwoyearslater.ItseemsthatVanDykeonlygarnered presscoveragewhenshecouldbecharacterisedasacrazedfeministextremist.When theMinisterforImmigrationdecidedshewasabonafiderefugeeandsurvivorof torture,shebecameinvisiblewithinthepoliticsofdisbelief. Thisdifferentialcanbeexplained,atleastinpart,bywhatMcLeodandGoddard (2005)havedescribedastheradicaldenialofscepticalcommentatorsonritual abuse.Overthelastfifteenyears,thepropositionthatritualabusedoesnotexisthas becomesodeeplyembeddedwithinthepoliticsofdisbeliefregardingwomenand childrenstestimonyofsexualassaultthattheentireedificeisdestabilisedwhen substantiatedcasesofritualabusecometothefore.Accordingly,sceptical commentatorshavechosentoignoretheemergenceofsubstantiatedcasesofritual abuse.Kelly(1998)notedthewidespreadfailureofthemediatorespondtothe evidenceofritualabuseunearthedintheinvestigationofMarcDutrouxscrimesin Belgium:
259
OneofthefascinatingsilencessurroundingtheDutrouxcasewasthe refusalamongstjournalistsandcommentatorstonoticehowmanyofthe factsechoelementsofaccountsbychildrenandadultsofritualabuse.These accountshavebeendefinedasincredibleandimpossiblecountless academicandjournalisticscepticshaveinsistedadnauseamthattheywould onlybelieveifmaterialorforensicevidencewasforthcoming,and,according tothem,noneeverhasbeen.Herewehadthatevidence,butnoonemadethe connection,noonechosetorememberwhatthey(ortheirpublication)had saidpreviously,noonetookthebravestandofrevisingtheiropinioninpublic. Wherescepticalcommentatorsareconfrontedwithinvestigationsandprosecutions oforganisedandritualabuse,theimperviousnessoftheirpositiontochangeisstark. In2005,sevenpeoplewereindictedintheAmericanstateofLouisianafollowingan investigationintoorganisedandritualabuseatalocalchurch.Twomenhavesince beensentencedtolifeinprison,withfivemoreawaitingtrial.Theconfessionsof someoftheaccused,oneofwhomkeptadetaileddiaryoftheabuse,corroborates thestatementsofchildwitnessesthattheyweresexuallyabusedbygroupsofpeople whilstbeingsubjecttosatanicritualsinvolvingthekillingofanimalsandtheforced ingestionofblood(Ellzey2007).Attrial,anFBIagenttestifiedthatthedefendantled theinvestigatingteamtoapitchblackroominthechurchwhere,heclaimed,he hadengagedwiththeotherdefendantsinsexuallyabusivedevilworship.Aswitch onthewallturnedonablacklightwhichilluminatedinvertedBiblicalscriptures drawnonthewallsiniridescentink(Ellzey2007).Inamediainterview,Prof.Richard Ofshe,foundingmemberoftheFalseMemorySyndromeFoundation,claimedthat theprobityoftheconfessionsofthedefendant,andthestatementsofchild witnesses,wereinquestionbecausetheyincludeddetailsofritualabuse.Suchabuse, accordingtoOfshe,hasneverandwillneveroccur,andanyreferencetoritualabuse shouldcallintoquestiontheprobityofallchargesinasexualabusetrial(Lemoine 2008).
260
Beyondthepoliticsofdisbelief Thesubjectoforganisedabuse,asawhole,hasbeendominatedbythecontroversies overritualabuse.Ritualisticabuseisassociatedwiththeextremesofchild maltreatment,341however,itisnotaubiquitousfeatureofcasesoforganisedabuse (Gallagher,Hughesetal.1996).Lobbygroupsandactivistsforpeopleaccusedof sexualabusehavefoundgreatrhetoricalutilityinemphasisingallegationsof ritualisticabuse,attimesclaimingthataparticularsexualabuseinvestigationisa ritualabusecasewhennosuchallegationwasmade(Cheit2001)orwhereno evidenceofritualisticabusewasadducedattrial(Summit1994b).Whenconflated withritualabuse,sexualabusechargesarethenattributedtofantasyonbehalfofthe childwitnessoradultcomplainant,andmalpracticeonbehalfofinvestigating professionals.Whereritualisticabusehasbeenafeatureofsexualabuseallegations, scepticalcommentatorshaveclaimedthatsuchallegationscanbetracedbacktothe influenceofasmallgroupofzealots,usuallycharacterisedasChristian fundamentalistsand/orradicalfeminists(JenkinsandMaierKatkin1992;La Fontaine1998;Pratt2005).Inthisliterature,organisedabuseandsadisticabuseare frequentlyconflatedwithritualabuse,andthereaderisencouragedtoconclude thatclaimsmakersinthefieldofritualabuseareanarrowgroupofideologically motivatedextremists. Infact,adiverserangeofprofessionalshavedocumentedtheirencounterswith adultsandchildrenwithhistoriesoforganisedandritualisticabuse,including: academicsandresearchers(Cuomo1994;Pepinksy2002;Raschke2008) childprotectionworkers(Doran1994;Goddard1994)
341
261
domesticviolenceworkers(RowdenJohnson2003;Cooper2004;Cooper, Anafetal.2006) generalpractitioners(JonkerBakkerandJonker1991;JonkerandJonker Bakker1997) investigativejournalists(Boyd1991;Tate1991;WoodandChulov1999) nurses(SarsonandMacDonald2008) paediatricians(HobbsandWynne1994;Buck2008) policeofficers(Anon.1994;Mallard2008) psychiatrists(Ehrensaft1992;Goodwin1994;Rockwell1994) psychoanalysts(Casement1994;Perlman1995;Stack2002) psychotherapists(Gould1987;Summit1988;Hudson1991) schoolteachers(Haydne1992) sexualassaultworkers(Scott1998a;SchmuttermaierandVeno1999; Campbell2002) andsocialworkers(DawsonandJohnston1989;Wood1990;Lunn1991).
Nonoffendingparents(StoneandStone1992),fosterparents(Kelsall1994;Cairns 2000;Scott2001)grandparents(COTA2003),andreligiousministers(Cotton2000) havereportedtheirexperiencesofcaringforchildrensubjecttoritualabuse.Ihave documentedmyexperiencesasacarerforanadultsurvivorofritualabuse(Salter 2004).Asclaimsmakersinthefieldoforganiseandritualabuse,wearenotthe ideologicallyhomogenousrumourmongersormoralpanickerssupposedbythe oppositionalliterature.Wehavelittleincommonintermsofourprofession background,education,training,andreligiousorpoliticalorientation,andwe articulateverydifferent(andfrequentlyconflicting)opinionsaboutthenatureof ritualisticabuse.Thebreadthofthisliteratureindicatesthatcasesoforganisedand ritualabusearecomingtolightinarangeofcontexts,andfirstrespondersareusually peoplewithnopriorknowledgeoforganisedabuse,andlimitedcapacitytoidentify andtreatvictims.
262
InAustralia,researchprovidesapictureofthediversecircumstancesinwhichworkers areencounteringsurvivorsoforganisedabuse,andtheburdenofthisabuseonhealth andwelfareservices.Muchofthisresearchhasbeenfocusedonworkerscontactwith clientswithahistoryofritualabuse.In1992,asurveyof92attendeesataconference onritualabuseinMelbournefoundthat65hadworkedwithatotalof424clientswith ahistoryofritualabuse(AAMPD1992).In1994,eightwomenshealthservicesinthe ACTreported,inoneweek,beingcontactedby43newclientsreportingahistoryof ritualabuse(CourtneyandWilliams1995),whilstasurveyof79workersat communityhealthcentresandwomensservicesinNSWreported123casesofritual abusefortheyear(NSWSexualAssaultCommittee1994).In1995,theSydneyRape Crisisservicereportedreceiving584callsfromwomenwhoidentifiedthemselvesas survivorsofritualabuseinthe12monthspriortoJune1995(SydneyRapeCrisis Centre1995).SteppingOut,asupportedaccommodationserviceforadultsurvivors ofchildsexualassaultinSydney,hasalsoreportedahighrateofcontactwithwomen withahistoryofritualabuse(VanDyke1995).In1999,atenyearcasereviewofa CentreAgainstSexualAssaultinMelbourneidentified153casesofritualabusefrom 19851996(SchmuttermaierandVeno1999).In2000,SistersInside,aBrisbane basedcommunitygroupforwomeninjail,publishedthefindingsofasurveyof100of theirmembers,whichfoundthat16%reportingahistoryoforganisedandritual abuse(Kilroy2000).In2004,acasereviewofadomesticviolenceserviceinAdelaide foundthat15%ofclientswereseekingprotectionfromorganisedgroupsof offenders,includingbikiegangsandritualisticcults.Ininterviews,thesewomen spokeofspousesand/orfamilymemberswhohadtraffickedthem(and,sometimes, theirchildren)intolargernetworksofperpetratorswhosubjectedthemtotorture andsexualexploitation(Cooper,Anafetal.2006).Interviewswithworkersfoundthat theywereoftenoverwhelmedbythecomplexitiesofthesecases,includingthehealth andsecurityneedsofadultsvictimisedinorganisedcontexts(Cooper2004). InAustralia,casesoforganisedandritualabusehavebeenemergingsincethelate 1980s,however,investigationsoftheseclaimshavebeencharacterisedbyallegations
263
ofpoliceincompetenceandconflictsofinterest.In1992,aseniormemberof Victoriansexualcrimesunit,RoyCarroll,statedthattherewasalackofmaterial corroborationforaccountsoforganisedandritualabuse,andthereforesuchaccounts wereunlikelytobetrue(Carroll1992).Paradoxically,inthethreeyearspriortohis 1992presentation,Carrollsunithadbeeninvolvedintheinvestigationofanalleged caseoforganisedandritualabuseatapreschoolintheMorningtonPeninsula. Althoughnocriminalchargeswerelaid,theallegationsofabuseatthepreschool weresubstantiatedbyagovernmentinquiry,andthepreschoolwasclosedin1992 (Milburn1992).In2004,theVictorianOmbudsmanrecommendedthatfoursexual abusecasesbereopened,includingtheMorningtonPeninsulacase.Commentingon hisreviewoftheinvestigations,theOmbudsmanexpressed"seriousconcernsasto thetruthfulnessofevidenceprovidedunderoathtohisinvestigatorsbytwoofthe state'smostseniorsexualcrimesinvestigators.(Hughes2004a)TheOmbudsman complainedthataseniormemberofthesexualcrimessquaddisplayed "unprofessionalconduct"whilstbeinginterviewed,tothepointthathisbehaviour andattitude"raisesdoubtsabouthiscontinuingsuitabilitytohiscurrentposition" (Hughes2004a).DespitetheOmbudsmansconcerns,neitherofficerwasremoved fromtheirpositionafterthePoliceAssociationthreatenedstatewideindustrial action(Hughes2004b).TheMorningtonPeninsulacaseremainsclosed,withasenior investigatorstatingthatthenewlyformedOfficeofPoliceIntegrity,overseenbythe Ombudsman,doesnothavetheresourcestoinvestigateallegationsofpolice protectionoforganisedabuse(Hughes2005). SimilarcriticismshavebeenmaderegardinginvestigationsoforganisedabuseinNew SouthWalesandWesternAustralia.Ina1992governmentreviewofaninvestigation intoanallegedcaseoforganisedabuseataSydneykindergarten,theNewSouth Walespolicewerecriticisedfortheirlackofspecialisedchildsexualassault investigators,ineffectiveintelligenceandsurveillance,ineffectiveattempttoobtain corroborationandtheabsenceofaprofessionalcovertoperation(Sands1999). Subsequently,theWoodRoyalCommissionfoundthattheinvestigationintothecase
264
hadbeenseriouslydeficient.AttheCommission,itemergedthattheofficerin chargeoftheinvestigationwasanassociateofacorruptpoliceofficerandtwoknown childsexualoffenders.Furthermore,theofficerhadbeenpreviouslybeenaccusedby policeinformersoftakingmoneyfromchildsexualabusersinexchangefordropping chargesorignoringtheircrimes(Brown1996;Kennedy1999).DuringtheWestern AustraliaRoyalCommissionintoPoliceCorruption,theformerheadoftheWestern Australianpaedophileunit,AndrewPatterson,statedthathehadbeenorderedbyhis superiorstorepeatedlymisleadstateandfederalparliamentovertheextentof organisedabuseandchildpornographyinthestate(ShineandEgan2002).Patterson claimedthathewasinstructedtotestifytoa1995Commonwealthinquirythat paedophileringsdidnotexistinWesternAustralia,althoughanumberofnetworks hadbeendocumentedbyhisunit.Healsoclaimedhewasinstructedbyhissuperiors in1997tomisleadstateparliamentandwithholdinformationonanycurrentchild pornographycharges."Therewerecoverupsindenyingthefactthatwehada problemwithpedophilianetworksandorganisedpedophilia,"hesaid."Therewas alsoacoverupintermsofhidingchildpornographyfigures."(Taylor2002)Hisunit wassubsequentlydisbandedin1998,andPattersonstatedthathebelievedthat seniorpolicewereuncomfortablewiththeunitsinvestigationsintocasesof organisedabuse,includingoneinvestigationinvolvingaseniormemberofthe judiciary.FollowingtheclosureoftheRoyalCommission,Pattersonstatedthathe believedthatpaedophileringsarestillactiveinWesternAustralia(Egan2004).
265
Conclusion Duringaperiodinwhichwomenandchildrenstestimonyofincestandsexualabuse weregaininganincreasinglysympathetichearing,lobbygroupsofpeopleaccusedof childabuseconstruedandpositionedritualabuseasthenewfrontierofdisbelief. Thetermritualabusearosefromchildprotectionandpsychotherapypracticewith adultsandchildrendisclosingorganisedabuse,onlytobediscursivelyencircledby backlashgroupswiththerhetoricofrecoveredmemories,falseallegationsand moralpanic.Seekingtorecastthedebateonchildabuseaccordingtoanolder politicsofdisbelief,thesegroupsandactivistsattemptedtocharacterisesexualabuse testimony,asawhole,throughthelensofritualabuse: Itmustbeobvioustorationalpeoplethataccusationsbasedonmemoriesthat includesatanicritualaredelusionsofsomesort.Forthoseofuswhoareonly accusedof'runofthemillincest,'thisshouldturnouttobesomehelp.If 'memories'ofsatanicabusecanbeinducedintherapythensocanmemories' ofincestoranythingelse.(PamelaFreyd,cofounderoftheFalseMemory SyndromeFoundation,quotedinCalof1993) Itdoesnottakemuchefforttounderstandwhypeopleaccusedofchildsexualabuse mayengageinavigorousdefenceoftheirinnocence,norwhytheymightbejoined byprofessionaldefenceexpertsthatmakehundredsofthousandsofdollarsayear defendingthem.Whatdoesbearexplainingisthepurchasethattheirrhetoricfound inthemedia,academiaandthebroadercommunity.ItseemsthatmanyAustralian journalistsandacademicshelddeepseatedconcernsaboutthecredibilityofwomen andchildrenasreliablewitnessestotheirownlives.Afteraperiodofrelatively sympatheticmediacoverageonsexualviolence,organisedabusewasusedasaframe throughwhichconcernsaboutwomenandchildrenstestimonycouldbemade legitimateagain.Theimpactofthisrhetoricalstrategyonthelivesofadultsand childrenwithahistoryoforganisedabusehasyettobemeasured,however,the
266
267
References
Anon.(1994).Questionssurvivorsandprofessionalsaskthepolice.InV.Sinason,Ed. TreatingSurvivorsofSatanistAbuse(pp.195199).London:Routledge.
Beckett,K.(1996).CultureandthePoliticsofSignification:TheCaseofChildSexual Abuse.SocialProblems,43(1),5776.
Bibby,P.(1996).Definitionsandrecenthistory.InP.Bibby,Ed.OrganisedAbuse:The CurrentDebate(pp.18).Aldershot,UK;Brookfield,USA:Arena.
Boyd,A.(1991).BlasphemousRumours:IsSatanicRitualAbuseFactorFantasy?An Investigation.Glasgow,FountPaperbacks.
268
Breckenridge,J.andM.Carmody,Eds.(1992).Crimesofviolence:Australian responsestorapeandchildsexualassault.NorthSydney:Allen&Unwin.
Brown,M.(1996).'ShakeDown'ofPedophileDenied.SydneyMorningHerald,31July, 2.
Burgess,A.W.andM.LendeqvistClark,Eds.(1984).ChildPornographyandSexRings. Lexington,Massachusetts;Toronto:LexingtonBooks.
Cairns,K.(2000).SurvivingPaedophilia:TraumaticStressAfterOrganizedandNetwork ChildSexualAbuseTrenthamBooks.
269
Campbell,S.(2003).RelationalRemembering:RethinkingtheMemoryWars.Oxford, RowmanandLittlefieldPublishers,Inc.
Casement,P.(1994).Thewishnottoknow.InV.Sinason,Ed.TreatingSurvivorsof SatanistAbuse(pp.2225).LondonandNewYork:Routledge.
Cheit,R.E.(2001).TheLegendofRobertHalsey.JournalofChildSexualAbuse,9(3/4), 3752.
Cleaver,H.andP.Freeman(1996).Childabusewhichinvolveswiderkinandfamily friends.InP.Bibby,Ed.OrganisedAbuse:TheCurrentDebate(pp.London:Arena.
Cockburn,A.(1990).TheMcMartinCase:IndicttheChildren,JailtheParents.The WallStreetJournal,8February,A17.
Cooper,L.(2004).Dilemmasinworkingwithwomenwithcomplexneeds,Canberra: AustralianGovernment,DepartmentofFamilyandCommunityServices.
Cooper,L.,J.AnafandM.Bowden(2006).ContestedConceptsinViolenceAgainst Women:'Intimate','Domestic'or'Torture'.AustralianSocialWork,59(3),314327.
270
Cotton,M.(2000).Soshallthesechildrenbe:atheologicalperspectiveoforganised sadisticabuseHomebush,NSW:M.Cotton.
Cuomo,C.(1994).RitualAbuse:MakingConnections.InC.Card,Ed.Adventuresin LesbianPhilosophy(pp.135143).IndianaUniversityPress.
Dawson,J.andC.Johnston(1989).WhenTheTruthHurts.CommunityCare,1113.
Doran,C.(1994).AServiceManager'sPerspective.InV.Sinason,Ed.Treating SurvivorsofSatanistAbuse(pp.210213).LondonandNewYork:Routledge.
Driver,E.andA.Droison,Eds.(1989).ChildSexualAbuse:FeministPerspectives. Basingstoke:MacMillan.
271
Duncan,D.(1987).Children'stestimonyinsexualabusecasesremainscontroversial. TheSeattleTimes,3May,9.
Dutton,D.(1993).ParentsTheLatestVictimsOfWidespreadSexAbuse.Sydney MorningHerald,26November,11.
Eberle,P.andS.Eberle(1993).TheAbuseofInnocence:TheMcMartinPreschoolTrial PrometheusBooks
Editorial(1993).SatanicRituals.TheAge,6July,13.
Egan,C.(2004).Sufferthelittlechildren.SundayTimes,3October,1.
Ehrensaft,D.(1992).PreschoolChildSexAbuse:TheAftermathofthePresidioCase. AmericanJournalofOrthopsychiatry,62(2),235244.
Ellzey,D.(2007).AgentsGraphicallyDescribeAbuse.HammondStar,November20.
Faller,K.C.(2004).SexualAbuseofChildren:ContestedIssuesandCompeting Interests.CriminalJusticeReview,29(2),358376.
Faller,K.C.andC.Plummer(1996).MultiOffender/MultiVictimCasesofSexual Abuse:TheImpactofAcquittal.Children'sLegalRightsJournal(16),2330.
Finkelhor,D.andK.Yllo(1985).LicenseToRape:SexualAbuseofWives,TheFree Press.
272
Gelb,J.L.(1993).Multiplepersonalitydisorderandsatanicritualabuse.Australian andNewZealandJournalofPsychiatry,28(1),154156.
Geraci,J.(1993).Interview:HollidaWakefieldandRalphUnderwager.Paidika,the JournalofPedophilia,3.
Goddard,C.R.(1994).'TheorganisedabuseofchildreninruralEngland:theresponse ofsocialservices:partone'.ChildrenAustralia,19(3),3740.
Gorney,C.(1988).TheTerriblePuzzleofMcMartinPreschool2/2.WashingtonPost, 18May,1.
Gould,C.(1987).Satanicritualabuse:Childvictims,adultsurvivors,systemresponse. CaliforniaPsychologist,22,1.
Grant,L.(1994).TricksoftheMemory.TheGuardian,25April,8.
Guilliatt,R.(1995).AbuseCases:DoubtsGrowOn'Recovered'Memories.Sydney MorningHerald,1February,1.
Guilliatt,R.(1996a).TheDevil'sAdvocates.SydneyMorningHerald,31August.
273
Guilliatt,R.(1996b).Talkofthedevil:Repressedmemory&theritualabusewitchhunt. Melbourne,TextPublishingCompany.
Hacking,I.(1995).RewritingtheSoul:MultiplePersonalityandtheSciencesofMemory. Princeton,PrincetonUniversityPress.
Haydne,T.(1992).GhostGirl:TheTrueStoryofaChildinPerilandtheTeacherWho SavedHer,Avon.
Hechler,D.(1988).TheBattleandtheBacklash:TheChildSexualAbuseWar. Lexington,Massachusetts;Toronto,LexingtonBooks.
Herman,J.(1992).TraumaandRecovery.NewYork,BasicBooks.
Herman,J.L.(1981).Fatherdaughterincest.Cambridge,MAandLondon,Harvard UniversityPress.
Hole,J.(1989).Evidenceofoccultinkindergartensexcase,sayscrown.Sydney MorningHerald,5July,3.
Hollingsworth,J.(1986).UnspeakableActs.NewYork,CongdonandWeed.
274
Hoyle,J.andR.Glover(1989).SixWeeksandManyShatteredLivesLater,Kindy ChargesAreDropped.SydneyMorningHerald,12August,1.
Hudson,P.(1991).RitualAbuse:Discovery,DiagnosisandTreatment.In(pp. Saratoga,CA:R&EPublishers.
Hughes,G.(2004a).Inquiryfindsfaultwithsexcrimesquad.TheAge,July8,2.
Hughes,G.(2004b).Policeofficersstillunderscrutinyonabusecases.TheAge,30 August,5.
Hughes,G.(2005).NewdoubtsonBracks'policecorruptionwatchdog.TheAge,2 March,3.
Hughes,S.(1995).RecoveredMemoryCreates'HonestLiar'.TheAge,3January,11.
Humphries,D.(1991).ChildSexAbuseLinkedwithSatanism:Police.SydneyMorning Herald,13March.
Jenkins,P.andD.MaierKatkin(1992).Satanism:Mythandrealityinacontemporary moralpanicCrime,LawandSocialChange,17(1),5375.
JonkerBakker,P.andJonker(1991).Experienceswithritualisticchildsexualabuse:A casestudyfromtheNetherlands.ChildAbuseandNeglect,15(3),191196.
275
JonkerandP.JonkerBakker(1997).EffectsofRitualAbuse:Theresultsofthree surveysintheNetherlands.ChildAbuse&Neglect,21(6),541556.
Juan,S.(1991).ChillingCrimesinSatan'sname.SydneyMorningHerald,21March,20.
Kelly,L.(1998).ConfrontinganAtrocity:TheDutrouxCase.TroubleandStrife(36),16 22.
Kelly,L.andL.Regan(2000).RhetoricandRealities:SexualExploitationofChildrenin Europe,London:ChildandWomanAbuseStudiesUnit,UniversityofNorthLondon.
Kelsall,M.(1994).Fosteringarituallyabusedchild.InV.Sinason,Ed.Treating SurvivorsofSatanistAbuse(pp.9499).LondonandNewYork:Routledge.
Kempe,C.H.(1978).SexualAbuse:AnotherHiddenPediatricProblem.Pediatrics,62, 382389.
Kempe,C.H.,F.N.Silverman,B.F.Steele,W.DroegmuellerandH.K.Silver(1962). Thebatteredchildsyndrome.JournaloftheAmericanMedicalAssociation,181,1724.
Kennedy,L.(1999).PoliceUnderSuspicioninPhilipBell'sChildSexCrimes.Sydney MorningHerald,12May,5.
Kilroy,D.(2000).WhenWillYouSeeTheRealUs?WomeninPrison.Womenin Corrections:StaffandClientsConference,Adelaide,31October1November.
Kitzinger,J.(2004).FramingAbuse:MediaInfluenceandPubicUnderstandingofSexual ViolenceAgainstChildren.London;AnnArbor,MI,PlutoPress.
276
Kristof,N.D.(2008).TheEvilBehindTheSmiles.NewYorkTimes,December31.
LaFontaine,J.S.(1998).Speakofthedevil:talesofsatanicabuseincontemporary England.Cambridge,NewYork,CambridgeUniversityPress.
Lemoine,D.(2008).CultsandiftheyexisttoremainsexcasetrialissueTheBaton RougeAdvocate,29September,1.
Lightfoot,L.(1993).Childabuseexpertsayspaedophiliapartof"God'swill";DrRalph Underwager.LondonTimes,December19,2.
Loftus,E.F.(1995).RememberingDangerously;RecoveredMemory.SkepticalInquirer. 19:20.
Loftus,E.F.andK.Ketcham(1994).TheMythofRepressedMemory:FalseMemories andAllegationsofSexualAbuse.NewYork,StMartin'sGriffin.
Lunn,T.(1991).ConfrontingDisbelief.SocialWorkToday,22(3),1819.
Marron,K.(1989).RitualAbuse:Canada'sMostInfamousTrialonChildAbuse.Canada, Seal.
Marron,R.(1987).Ritualchildabusecasespuzzle,alarmexperts.TheGlobeandMail, 31March,A12.
277
McGuinness,P.(1994a).InjusticeInTheRealmOfUnreliableRecessesOfTheMind TheAge,29November,12.
McGuinness,P.(1994b).ATrialByJury.SydneyMorningHerald,13December,16.
McGuinness,P.(1995a).GoodNewsForMaleVictimsOfHarassmentBlackmailThe Age,23February,16.
McGuinness,P.(1995b).NotAllConfabulatedLivesAreHoaxesDarvilleMayHave BelievedHerFantasySydneyMorningHerald,29August,14.
McLeod,K.andC.Goddard(2005).Theritualabuseofchildren:Acriticalperspective. ChildrenAustralia,30(1),2734.
Meinert,D.(1985).Twothirdsofallchildabusereportsgroundless,saysstudy.The SanDiegoUnionTribune,18December,16.
Milburn,C.(1992).ChildcareCentreShut.InquiryFindsSexualAbuseOfChildren. TheAge,3March1992.
Molitorisz,S.(1995).AbuseAllAroundWhenAFalseMemoryLingers.Sydney MorningHerald,2January,3.
Munro,M.(1990).WitnessforMr.Bubbles.60Minutes.
278
Nathan,D.(1990).NeverForgettheMcMartinCase.TheSanFranciscoChronicle,12 August,20/Z1.
Ofshe,R.andE.Watters(1996).MakingMonsters:FalseMemories,Psychotherapy, andSexualHysteria.California,UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Ofshe,R.J.andE.Watters(1993).MakingMonsters.Society,30(3),413.
Ogg,M.(1996).MrBubbles'nottheonlyabusecase'.DailyTelegraph,9August,3.
Overington,C.(2006).Boysmolestedinbogusinitiations.TheAustralian,September 7.
Pendergrast,M.(1995).VictimsofMemory:IncestAccusationsandShatteredLives, UpperAccessBooks.
Pepinksy,H.(2002).AStruggleToInquireWithoutBecominganUnCriticalNon Criminologist.CriticalCriminology,11,6173.
279
Plummer,K.(1995).TellingSexualStories:Power,ChangeandSocialWorlds.London andNewYork,Routledge.
Pratt,J.(2005).Childsexualabuse:Purityanddangerinanageofanxiety.Crime,Law andSocialChange,43(45),263287.
Preston,Y.(1990a).Annie'sAgony.SydneyMorningHerald,8December,41.
Preston,Y.(1990b).RitualAbuse,ButBidForJusticeFails.SydneyMorningHerald,29 December,6.
Rockwell,R.(1994).OnePsychiatrist'sViewofSatanicRitualAbuse.Journalof Psychohistory,21(4),443459.
280
Russell,D.H.(1984).Sexualexploitation:Rape,childsexualabuse,andworkplace harassment.ThousandOaks,CA,Sage.
Salter,M.(2004).BearingWitnesstoRitualAbuse.Survivorship,13(4).
Sands,N.(1999).Bellcouldhavebeencaughtearlier,saysreport..Australian AssociatedPress,13May.
Sarson,J.andL.MacDonald(2008).RitualAbuseTorturewithinFamilies/Groups. JournalofAggression,MaltreatmentandTrauma,16(4),419438.
Schindehette,S.(1990).TheMcMartinNightmare.People.33.
Schmuttermaier,J.andA.Veno(1999).Counselors'beliefsaboutritualabuse:An AustralianStudy.JournalofChildSexualAbuse,8(3),4563.
Scott,S.(1998a).CounsellingSurvivorsofRitualAbuse.InZ.Bear,Ed.Goodpractice incounsellingpeoplewhohavebeenabused(pp.7992).London:JessicaKingsley.
281
Scott,S.(2001).BeyondDisbelief:Thepoliticsandexperienceofritualabuse. Buckingham,OpenUniversityPress.
Scutt,J.(1997).TheIncredibleWoman:PowerandSexualPolitics(Vol1).Melbourne, ArtemisPublishing.
Sebald,H.(1995).WitchChildren:FromSalemWitchHuntstoModernCourtrooms, PrometheusBooks.
Sebald,H.(1997).Witchchildrenthenandnow:themythoftheinnocentchild.(On Witchcraft)FreeInquiry,17(2).
Shine,K.andC.Egan(2002).Pedophileunit'forcedtoclose'.TheAustralian9 September,4.
Smith,L.(1992).TruthCanBeVictimInChildSexAbuse.ChicagoSunTimes,13 September,30.
282
StandingCommitteeonSocialIssues(1996).SexualViolence:AddressingTheCrime: LegislativeCouncil,ParliamentofNewSouthWales,April.
Struck,D.(1986).LittleFoundtoSubstantiateAccountsofBizarre,SatanicChild Abuse.TheBaltimoreSun,29December.
Summit,R.C.(1988).Symposiaandinvitedpapers:Adultsurvivorsofritualistic abuse.(pp.InCasetteRecordingNo.4d43688,AudioTranscripts:Alexandria:VA.
Summit,R.C.(1994a).TheDarkTunnelsofMcMartin.JournalofPsychohistory,21(4), 397416.
SydneyRapeCrisisCentre(1995).SydneyRapeCrisisCentreInterview.Beyond Survival(14),28.
Tate,T.(1991).Childrenforthedevil:Ritualabuseandsataniccrime.London, Metheun.
Taylor,N.(2002).Policechildsex'coverup'.SundayTimes,1September,7.
283
Wakefield,H.andR.Underwager(1994).ReturnoftheFuries:AnInvestigationinto RecoveredMemoryTherapy.ChicagoandLaSalle,Illinois,OpenCourt.
Waterstreet,C.(1996).InnerChildIsAtTheMercyOfTheMemory'therapists'Sydney MorningHerald,2November,12.
Wilson,C.(1992).ThisCoupleHadALicenseToRunAChildCareCentre.AndSome OfTheseChildrenBecameVictims.SundayAge,8March,1.
Wood,H.(1990).ExposingtheSecret.SocialWorkToday(22),1819.
Wood,M.andM.Chulov(1999).EvilInTheWoods.TheSunHerald,8August,7.
Wyndham,B.(1994).ThisManLostEverythingWhenHisDaughterAccusedHimof SexualAbuse.SundayAge,12June,3.
Wynhausen,E.(1994).AboutThoseLittleGreenMen...SunHerald,11September, 39.
284
285
ExploringtheGroupIdentityFunctionofCriminalLaw
MollyTownesOBrien ANUCollegeofLaw AustralianNationalUniversity obrienm@law.anu.edu.au
Scienceadvanced,knowledgegrew,naturewasmastered,but Reasondidnotconquerandtribalismdidnotgoaway(Isaacs 1975). Introduction Fromtheavailabledataontheraceorethnicityoftheworldsprisoners,42itis possibletodiscernaglobaltendencyofeachpopulationtoimprisona disproportionatepercentageofsomeminoritygroups.43AfricanAmericansand HispanicsaredisproportionatelyrepresentedinAmericanprisons(Sampsonand Lauritsen1997;USBureauofJusticeStatistics2007).Aboriginalsare disproportionatelyrepresentedinAustralianprisons(SedlakandBroadhurst1996; SnowballandWeatherburn2006).InNewZealand,whereMaorimakeup15percent ofthepopulation,44percentofmenand42percentofwomeninprisonsidentify themselvesasMaori(Bull2004).Unequalimprisonmentofminoritygroupshasbeen documentedinSpain,Japan,Britain,France,Israel,Sweden,Canada,andGermany (Martens1997;Costelloe,Chiricosetal.2002;Korn2003;Zimmerman,Yunetal.
286
2003;RuddellandUrbina2004).AsMichaelTonrypointsout, Whatismoststrikingabout[thedatademonstrating overrepresentationofminoritiesinprison]isthattheycomefrom somanycountries.Theyapplytomanygroupsandmany countries,suggestingthatbias,disparities,anddisparateimpact policydilemmasarenotuniquelythecharacteristicsandproblems ofanyparticularminoritygroupsorcountriesbutareendemicto heterogeneousdevelopedcountriesinwhichsomegroupsare substantiallylesssuccessfuleconomicallyandsociallythanthe majoritypopulation(Tonry1997). Further,incarcerationratesaroundtheglobearerising,makingthedisproportionate impactofcriminalpunishmentonminoritygroupsamatterofgrowingimportance (Walmsley2003). Datademonstratingthedisproportionateimprisonmentofoppressedminority populationsaboundsasdoesempiricalresearchthatseekstoexplainthedata.Much ofthisresearchfocusesontheissueofwhathasbeendescribedastheelevatedrates ofoffending(accordingtoofficialstatistics)amongoppressedracialminorities (PhillipsandBowling2003).Inotherwords,formanyresearchersthequestionis:Why dominoritygroupmemberscommitmorecrimes?Pursuingtheanswertothis questionhasledresearcherstoexplorethecriminogenicinfluenceofsocioeconomic deprivationandsocialdisorganisation(ShawandMcKay1929;Currie1998;Pratt 2005).Othershaveconsideredwhethercrimemayhavegeneticorbiologicalfactors (WilsonandHerrnstein1985;Regulus1995). Attheotherendofthespectrumareresearcherswhoquestionwhethertheofficial crimerateandimprisonmentstatisticsarereflectiveofactualratesofcriminal behaviour.Thesescholarshaveconsideredwhetherdiscriminatorylawenforcement,
287
criminaljusticeprocessingorsentencingpatternsaccountforelevatedlevelsof minorityimprisonment(Stuntz1998;Rudovsky2001;Zimmerman,Yunetal.2003; Waddington,Stensonetal.2004).Similarly,researchershavealsoconsidered whetherthelawitselfcontributestothedisproportionateimprisonmentofminority groupsthroughtheestablishmentofbehaviouralnormsthatdonotreflectthevalues oftheminorityculture(Sellin1938;Hawkins1995a). Thedebate,whichhassometimesbeencharacterisedaspolemicaland sterile(PhillipsandBowling2003),hasnotignoredthepossibilitythatthecausesof disproportionateincarcerationarenotmutuallyexclusivethatis,thatavarietyof factorsmayallcontributetotheoverrepresentationofsomeminoritiesinprison (ChiricosandCrawford1995).Muchoftheresearch,however,hasfocused predominantlyononenationoronecriminaljusticesystem.44Studiestherefore presentfindingsthatmayappeartobelimitedtotheparticularracialgroupsorethnic minoritiesstudied.Eachstudy,takenalone,maycreateafalseperceptionthatthe problemofdisproportionateincarcerationisacharacteristicofoneminoritygroup, onehistoricalorpoliticalsituation,oronekindofcultureclash.Theproblemmay thereforebefalselyperceivedasoneofAboriginalcriminalityorracisminthe UnitedStates.Thus,apotentialriskoflookingatasinglenationorcriminaljustice systemisthattheresearchitselfmaycontributetoexistingstereotypes, misconceptionsandbiasesagainsttheoppressedminority(Hawkins1995b).Thisrisk isnot,ofcourse,asufficientreasonnottodotheresearch;asignificantbodyofwork addressestheissuesofracialisedpunishmentwithoutfallingintothetrapof stereotyping,(e.g.(Davis1998;Cunneen2001)Suchworkmaybeextremelyuseful notonlytoimproveunderstandingoftheproblemofoverincarcerationofcertain minoritygroups,butalsotoassistinformulatingstrategiesforreducingminority imprisonmentrateswithinonecultureorcountry.Itislimited,however,inscopeand implicationtothecultureorculturesstudied.
3.Therearesomenotableexceptions.See,e.g.,(Costelloe,Chiricosetal.2002;InternationalSociety fortheStudyofDissociation,Chuetal.2005;Pratt2005)
288
Somescholarsadvocatetakingacomparativeorcrossnationalapproachto consideringtheproblemofoverrepresentationofcertainethnicminoritiesinprison, butdosoonlywithgreatcaution(SampsonandLauritsen1997;Tonry1997).There aregoodreasonstoproceedwithcautionintotherealmofmakingcrossnational generalisationsorundertakingstudiesofethnicminorityincarceration.Differencesin thehistoryofvariousminoritygroupsandtheirrelationshipswithmajoritycultures, differencesintheeconomicandpoliticalstructureofvarioussocieties,and differencesinthecriminaljusticesystemsofeachcountry,allundoubtedlyplayan importantroleinproducingoutcomesthatareidiosyncraticandnotsusceptibletoa singleexplanatorytheory.Further,empiricalresearchfacesenormousdifficultyin collectingandcomparingdatafromsourcesthatusedifferingdefinitionsofminority orethnicgroupstatus,andofcriminalbehaviour,etc.(Tonry1997). Itisneverthelessimportanttoexploretheimplicationofwhathasbeen demonstratedinnumeroussinglenationstudies:Ineverycountrywherethe questionhasbeenstudied,thecrimeandincarcerationratesformembersofsome minoritygroupsgreatlyexceedthoseforthemajoritypopulation(Tonry1997).If disproportionateincarceration(orpunishment)ofsomedisfavouredminoritiesis foundeverywhere,theobviousimplicationisthattheproblemisnotparticulartoone ethnicgroup.Norisitfundamentallyaproblemofoneraceoronehistoricalracial conflict.Itisnotaproblemthatfacesonlyimmigrantgroups.Neitherisitsolelya problemofcapitalismorpostcolonialism.Thedisproportionateimprisonmentof somedisfavouredminoritiesappearstobeaglobalphenomenon.Whiletheoriesof disparateincarcerationthatfocusonracism,immigration,capitalismandcolonialism mayhavestrongexplanatorypoweratthelevelofasinglelegalsystem,theycannot explaintheglobalphenomenon. Onemayarguethatanyattempttounderstanddisparatepunishmentataglobal levelmustfounderontherocksofparticularisedhistories,individualculturalandlegal
289
differences,andvaryingeconomicandpoliticalcircumstances.Itwouldnotbe possibletogatherappropriatedataortestaglobaltheoryofdisproportionate incarceration.Suchaglobaltheorywouldbevulnerabletothesamecritiquethathas beenlevelledatconflicttheory:Itwouldexplaineverythingandpredictnothing. (Kubrin,Stuckyetal.2009). Ontheotherhand,itmaybethatcriminologyhasalreadygraspedtheglobalnature ofdisproportionatepunishment,buthasnotmadeitapointofemphasisbecauseof thedifficultiesofstudyingglobalphenomena.Thisessaydoesnotattempttocreate agrandtheoryforunderstandingdisparateimprisonmentinallofitsvarioushistorical andculturalmanifestations.Rathersuggeststhatashiftinemphasisorfocusfrom theparticulartotheglobal,fromtheculturalorracialtothehuman,isappropriate andmayyieldnewinsights.Itturnstosomeofthetraditionalandbasicbuilding blocksofcriminologyanthropologyandpsychologytodrawattentiontothefact that,althoughcertainethnic,racialandmigrantgroupsareatthereceivingendofthe globalphenomenonofdisparatepunishment,theissuemaybeendemictohuman society.Addressingtheissuemayrequirestrategiesthatareglobalorhumanin theirperspective. Humanuniversalsandgroupidentification Anthropologiststellusthatsomethingsareuniversaltoallhumans.Forexample,all humansocietieshavelanguage,dance,music,jokes.Inallhumansocieties,people sucktheirwounds.Weshowsurprise,fearandhappinessthroughfacialexpressions. Morefundamentallyforthisdiscussion,humanbeingsarenotsolitarydwellers.We liveingroups,developgroupidentity,andmaintaingroupunity(Brown1991at57). InGeorgeVoldsdescriptionofhumannature,peoplearefundamentallygroup involvedbeingswhoselivesarebothapartofandaproductoftheirgroup associations.(Vold,1986:271).
290
Althoughhumangroupsmaybestructuredinawidevarietyofways,animportant consequenceofgroupstructuringisthedelineationofingroupfromoutgroups (Worchel1998).AccordingtoIsaacs,[t]hisfragmentationofhumansocietyisa pervasivefactinhumanaffairsandalwayshasbeen(Isaacs1989).Sumner,who contributedtheconceptofethnocentrismtosocialscience,conceivedofitfirstinthe contextofaprimitivesociety(Sumner1906/1979). Theconceptionoftheprimitivesocietywhichweoughttoformis thatofsmallgroupsscatteredoveraterritory...Agroupofgroups mayhavesomerelationtoeachother(kin,neighbourhood, alliance,connubiumandcommercium)whichdrawsthem togetheranddifferentiatesthemfromothers.Thusa differentiationarisesbetweenourselves,thewegroup,orin group,andeverybodyelse,ortheothersgroups,outgroups.The insidersinawegroupareinarelationofpeaceorder,law, government,andindustry,toeachother... Eachgroupnourishesitsownprideandvanity,boastsitself superior,exaltsitsowndivinities,andlookswithcontempton outsiders.Eachgroupthinksitsownfolkwaysaretherightones, andifitobservesthatothershaveotherfolkways,theseexciteits scorn.Opprobriousepithetsarederivedfromthesedifferences. Pigeater,coweater,uncircumcised,jabberers,areepithetsof contemptandabomination.(Sumner1906/1979). Since1906,Sumnersdescriptionofprimitivesocietyhasattractedthecriticismof anthropologists,whopointoutthatgroupalliancesandethnicidentitiesareunstable insomesocieties,andsociologists,whonotethatindividualsmaybelongtomore thanonegroupandmayadmiresomeoutgroups(Levine2002).Theboundary, influenceandmeaningofSumnersethnocentrismiscontestedinthesocial sciences.Nevertheless,thephenomenonofselfcategorisationandestablishmentof
291
ingroupandoutgroupidentitieshasbeendemonstratedindozensofpsychological studiesinavarietyofcultures(Brown1986;Taylor,Peplauetal.2006).Ingroupself categorisationcanbethoughtofasprosocial,providingforgroupcohesionand cooperationandpoliticalagency(Turner,Hoggetal.1987;Bedolla2005).Itisalso presentatthecoreofintergroupconflict,stigmatizationofminoritygroupmembers, andsocialalienation(LevineandCampbell1972;Bedolla2005). Asalientaspectofgroupidentificationisthat,onceweidentifyasagroupmember, weimmediatelyformaningrouppreference.Wederivepartofourselfesteemfrom groupmembershipandtendtoascribepositivecharacteristicstoourowngroupand negativecharacteristicstoothers(Tajfel1982).Asweidentifywithagrouporganised aroundanyvalue,activityorstatus,wenotonlyautomaticallyattributepositive qualitiestoourowngroupandnegativequalitiestotheoutgroup,butalsoactin waysthatfavourourowngroup(WorchelandSimpson1993).Surprisingly, experimentsinsocialpsychologydemonstratethatevenwhenpeopleareassigned randomlytoagroupinotherwords,thesubjecthasnobasisonwhichto differentiatebetweenherowngroupandanothergroupingrouppreferenceisstill shown(Brown1986)p.544545.AccordingtoRogerBrown,individualsshowa consistentpreferenceformaximalingroupadvantageovertheoutgroup(Brown 1986).Ingroupmemberswill,forexample,foregoreceivingarewardiftheirgroup willtherebygaingreatercomparativeadvantageovertheoutgroup(1986).45 Moreover,subjectswhodemonstratedingrouppreferencewerenotawareoftheir biasandbelievedthattheyhadbehavedfairly.Mostsubjectstrytointroducesome leveloffairnessbyrewardingbothingroupandoutgroupmembersbutnonetheless favourtheirowngroup(Taylor,Peplauetal.2006).Inspiteofsystematicbiastoward greaterrewardsfortheirowngroup,subjectswereunawarethattheyhad,for example,assignedmorepointstomembersoftheirowngroup(Brown1986;Taylor, Peplauetal.2006).
4.Groupprocessesarealsosusceptibletoahostofcognitiveerrors,includingovergeneralisation,over confidence,grouppolarisation,miscalculationofrisk,andothers.(Beale1997)
292
Similarly,cognitiveprocesseslinkedtostereotypinganddiscriminationmaybe unconscious.Whilesomeracismordiscriminationisintentional,recentsocialscience revealsthatunconsciousbiasismuchmoreprevalentthanintentionaldiscrimination (Lenhardt2004).Althoughpeoplenoticedifferencesandnaturallyseparatepeople andthingsbycategory,somedifferencesformpartoftheperceptualforeground whileothersarepartoftheperceptualbackgroundwhichdonotnecessarilybecome partofconsciousthought(AinlayandCrosby1986).Splitseconddecisionsareoften madeonthebasisofperceptualbackgroundcategorisations.Thus,weare susceptibletowhathasbeentermedimplicitbiasthetendencytounconsciously associateourowngroupwithpleasanttraitsandothergroupswithunpleasantones, especiallyinsplitseconddecisionmakingprocesses(Sunstein2006).The phenomenonofimplicitbiashasbeenshowntobeextremelywidespreadin psychologicaltests(Sunstein2006). Ofcourse,mostingroupsarenotcreatedatrandombysocialscientistresearchers. Thephenomenonofgroupidentitycreationtakesplaceinsociety,inthecontextof historyandculture.Realworldingroupsandoutgroupsmayderivefromawide varietyorcombinationoffactors:birthplace,name,language,physical characteristics,historyandorigins,religion,andnationality(Isaacs1975).More importantly,realworldmanifestationsofgroupidentityhaverealworldeffects, contributingtonationalism,patriotism,groupcohesiveness,homogeneity,group solidarity,andsocialcooperationwithintheingroup;andstereotyping,prejudice, dehumanization,stigmatisationanddiscriminationagainsttheoutgroup(Levineand Campbell1972). Aspsychosocialprocessesofgroupidentificationandethnocentrismcombinewith historicalcircumstance,economicsandpolitics,dynamicsocialgroupsandinter grouprelationshipstakeform.Kotkin(1993)hasusedthetermglobaltribetorefer togroupsliketheBritish,Japanese,Chinese,Indians,andJewswhohavedispersed
293
aroundtheglobe,butmaintainasenseofgroupidentity.Thesemetaphoricaltribes haveasenseofcommonoriginandvalues,eventhoughtheyaregeneticallydiverse andliveinmanydifferentclimates,contextsandnations(Kotkin1993).Similarly,the metaphoroftribalismhasbeenusedtoconnotetheprocessofgroupformationor deindividualisation(MaffesoliandFoulkes1988).Tribalism,racism, ethnocentrism,nationalism,patriotismallrefertovarioustypesofgroupidentity formation.Groupidentityformationandingrouppreferenceisnotatraitofany particularethnic,racialeconomicorpoliticalgroup.Rather,themotivesaredeeply rooted;theyaremotivesthatareprimitiveanduniversal(Brown1986). Althoughthemotivationforforminggroupidentityisdeeplyrooted,theboundaries ofthegroupmaybefluid(Bedolla2005).Moreover,anindividualislikelytobea memberofnumerousgroupssimultaneously(e.g.,gender,family,clan,clubs, neighbourhood,nation)andintheinteractionbetweentheindividualandsocial contexts,asenseofgroupidentitymaychangeovertime(Pospisil1971;Bedolla 2005).Groupidentityisthusneitherfixednorunitary,butflexibleandlayered. Theroleofgroupidentityinthecriminallaw Byidentifyingthedisproportionateincarcerationofsomeminoritygroupsasa phenomenon,weimplicitlyacceptandcallattentiontoaminoritygroupidentity. Whatmaybelessobvious,butnolessimportant,isthatwealsoimplyamajorityor dominantgroupidentity.Althoughcriminologistshavelongbeenawareoftherole thatgroupconflictmayplayintheoperationofthecriminallaw,comparativelylittle workhasbeendonetoexaminetherolethatcriminallawmayhaveindefiningor reinforcinggroupidentity.In1958GeorgeVoldpresentedhisgroupconflicttheoryof crime,whichconceivedofthewholesocialprocessoflawmaking,lawbreakingand lawenforcementasadirectreflectionofdeepseatedandfundamentalconflicts betweeninterestgroupsandtheirmoregeneralstrugglesforcontrolofpolicepower andthestate(Kubrin,Stuckyetal.2009),quotingVold,1958:339).Insucceeding
294
years,conflicttheoristshavearguedthatcrimeisarealitythatexistsprimarilyasitis createdbythoseinsocietywhoseinterestsarebestservedbyitspresence(Kubrin, Stuckyetal.2009):228)Ifoneconsiderscriminallawfromagroupidentity perspective,however,crimeorcriminallawisnotonlytheproductofdominant interests,butalsoaforcethatfostersgroupidentityformationitself.Asdiscussed below,criminallawplaysaroleindefiningandreinforcingtheidentitiesofboththe ingroupandtheoutgroup(s). A.Criminallawisingroupselfdefining. Criminallawcanbeseenasatoolfordeindividualization.IntheUnitedStates,itis commonlysaid,Thisisanationoflaws,notofmen.46Alllawrepresentsaneffort nottobemenwhoaresubjectonlytotheirindividualpassions,buttobecome somethinggreater,agroupthatisregulatedbyidealsandaspirations.Thecriminal lawis,amongotherthings,anexpression,albeitacompromisedandincomplete expression,ofthesharedmeanings,moralityandaspirationsofthetribe(Garland 1990). Thereisanother,moreconcretesenseinwhichcriminallawisgroupselfdefining. Everygrouphaslaworrules(whetherwrittenorunwritten)formembershipinthe groupandrulesthatdescribetherightsandobligationsofgroupmembers.The criminallaw,inparticular,placesbehaviouralprerequisitesoninclusioninthegroup: Ifyouaretobeamemberofthistribe,youmustnotdoX(e.g.murder,rape,steal,etc.) Ifyouviolatethisrule,youwillnolongerbeamemberofthistribe.Inotherwords, criminallawinsettingtheboundariesofacceptablebehaviourwithinthegroupdraws ademarcationlinearoundthegroup.Violationsofthoseboundariesresultin symbolicoractualexclusionfromthetribewhetherbyexpulsion,incarceration, ostracismorexecution(Brown1991).
5.JohnAdamswrotethephrasetotheenditmaybeagovernmentoflawsandnotofmeninthe 1780ConstitutionoftheCommonwealthofMassachusettstoexplainthereasonforseparationof powersintothreebranchesofgovernment.
295
Banishment,deportation,imprisonment,andexecutionallrequireliteralexclusionof therulebreakerfromthegroup.Otherpunishmentsmayremoveonlysomeaspect orprivilegeofgroupmembership,e.g.,alicencetodrive,therighttovote,orthe righttochildcustody(Ahrens2000).Brandingandshamingpunishments symbolicallystriptheoffenderoftheirhumanity.Thedehumanizationofthosewho violateourgroupscriminallawiswellillustratedinthemetaphorsofslimeandfilth appliedtoconvictsandprisonersincasesthatspanmorethanonehundredyears fromavarietyofsources(Weyrauch1999).Eventheattachmentofthelabel criminaltothepersonwhohascommittedtheprohibitedactconstitutessymbolic exclusionfromthetribe.Thecriminalisanoutcast.Thecriminalisapublicenemy. Thecriminalissubhuman.Usingthelabelcriminal(orthief,junkieetc.)to describethewrongdoersymbolicallydeprivestheindividualofhisorherhumanity andgroupmembership(Becker1963). Thisisimportantbecauseitnotonlyidentifieshimorherasapersonworthyof punishmentandorostracism,butalsoidentifieshimorherassomeonewhoisnot worthyoftheconcernorcareoftheingroupmembers.Noticethattheconditionsof imprisonmentcold,remorselessdeprivationgenerallydonotworrythegeneral publicwhenthepersonbeingtreatedinthiswayhasbeenlabelledacriminal(Pratt 2002).Groupmembersarefreedfromguiltorremorseaboutthetreatmentofthe convictedpersonbythethoughtthatthecriminaldeservespunishmentandisnot human,notmytribe,notlikeme. Itiseasiertopunishmembersoftheoutgroup.Arecentcrossnationalanalysisof imprisonmentratesin140nationsconcludedthatsocialheterogeneity(basedon race,ethnicity,religionandlanguage)waspositivelyassociatedwithimprisonment rates(RuddellandUrbina2004).Similarly,lesserdiversitywasassociatedwiththe abolitionofcapitalpunishment(RuddellandUrbina2004).Anotherstudyofthirteen progressivedemocraciesconcludedthatexpansionsinminoritypresenceandthe
296
resultingthreatstomajoritygroupdominancecombinetoproduceincreasingly punitiveoutcomes(InternationalSocietyfortheStudyofDissociation,Chuetal. 2005).Similarly,arecentcomparativestudyofcommunityattitudestoward punishmentintheCzechRepublicandFloridafoundthatantipathytowardminority othersisastrongpredictorofpunitiveattitude(Costelloe,Chiricosetal.2002)210. ThestudyconsideredattitudestowardAfricanAmericansinFloridaandGypsiesand refugeesintheCzechRepublic.Inspiteofthevastculturalandhistoricaldifferences betweentheminoritygroupsinthesecommunities,membersofbothmajoritytribes exhibitedamorepunitiveattitudetowardtheminorityother(Costelloe,Chiricoset al.2002). Punishmentitselfworkstoestablishandmaintaingroupidentityandtoreinforce groupvalues.Denunciationofthecriminalact(andthecriminal)reinforcesgroup identityandgroupvalues.AccordingtoGarfinkel,themoralindignationofthetribeis expressedthroughadegradationceremony(Garfinkel1965).Theattributesofa successfuldegradationceremony,requirethedenouncertomakethedignityofthe suprapersonalvaluesofthetribesalientandaccessibletoview,andhisdenunciation mustbedeliveredintheirname(Garfinkel1965).Punishmentseparatesthegroup fromthepunishedpersonandhelpstomaintainpositivegroupidentity.Amongthe beneficialsideeffectsofcriminalpunishmentistherestorationofsocialcohesion whichmaybethreatenedordisturbedbycertainsortsofoffending(Lacey 1988):183).Althoughsocialcohesionmaybeconstruedasasocialgood,Garland pointsoutthatpunishmentproducesadistinctiveformofsolidarity:theemotional solidarityofaggression(Garland1990).Thisparticularsolidarityhasbeentermeda formoftribalgrouphostility(Weisberg1985). Further,criminalprosecutioncreatesasenseofgroupwellbeingbyplacingthe blameforharmfulorpainfuleventsonanindividual.Thisallowstheingrouptobea victimratherthanaperpetratorofevil(Thebadthingthathappenedisnotourfault. Itisthefaultofthecriminal.).Placingtheblameontheindividualexoneratesthein
297
groupfromresponsibilityforcriminogenicsocialconditions.AsGarfinkelnotes,in thecriminalprocessthecharacteristicsofthecrimeandthecriminalaremadeto standoutasindividual,uniqueandneverrecurring(Garfinkel1965).Inthiswaythe featuresofthemaddogmurdererreversethefeaturesofthepeacefulcitizen (Garfinkel1965)andtheingroupmembersarepermittedtomaintainapositive groupidentity.Byplacingtheblameforharmfulorpainfuleventsonanindividual,by identifyinganddenouncingaperpetratorandvictim,thegroupisdistancedfrom theharm,absolvedofanypotentialblame,andmadetofeelsafeagain. B.Criminallawreinforcesminoritygroupidentity. Becausethecriminallawrepresentsthestatedideologyandmoralsofthemajority group,thelawitselfmayevokeoppositionalideologywithintheminority. Whenagroupperceives(correctlyornot)thatitistheobject ofrepression,itrespondsbyopposingthemoralcategories andsocialmeaningsoftherepressivegroup.Groups,defined byclassorotherstatuscategories,engageinstrugglesto vinciateideologicalsystemsandsotovindicatethemselves (SampsellJones2003). Minoritygroupsaretheirowningroup.Fortheminority,majorityistheoutgroup, whoserulesmaynotbeconsideredlegitimateorrequiringofobedience.Whenthe minoritygroupperceivesthelawasatoolofoppression,mistrustnotonlymakes individualslesslikelytoassistlawenforcement,butalsomorelikelytodisobeylegal commands(Luna2005).Ratherthanproducethedesireddeterrenteffectforthe minoritygroup,thelawbackfires.Butlerargues,forexample,thatthehigh incarcerationrateofAfricanAmericanshasledsomeAfricanAmericans,particularly thehiphopcommunitytointerrogatethesocialmeaningofpunishment(2004: 997).
298
Tosaythathiphopdestigmatizesincarcerationunderstates thepoint:Prison,accordingtotheartists,actuallystigmatizes thegovernment.Inaculturethatcelebratesrebelliousness, prisonistheplaceforunrulyniggaswhootherwisewould upsetthepoliticaloreconomicstatusquo.Inthissense, inmatesareheroicfigures(Butler1978). Intergroupconflict,competition,antagonismorlackofunderstandingcanmakeit easierforeithergrouptodisrespectthenormsandlibertyofmembersoftheother group. C.CriminalLawdrawsitsprotectiveboundariesaroundthegroup. Criminallawenforcementprotectsmembersofthetribe.Traditionally,criminallaw enforcementhasoperatedprimarilywithintheboardersandnormsofonejurisdiction andtribe.47Inthissense,ithasbeenassertedthatlawisanintragroup phenomenon(Pospisil1971)at343.Whenonejurisdictionhasmultipleresident groups,theprotectionofcriminallawenforcementisnotalwaysguaranteedto minorityresidentgroups.Asillustratedintherecentreportdealingwithsexualabuse ofAboriginalchildrenintheNorthernTerritoryofAustralia,crimesmaygo unreported;reportedcrimesmaygounprosecuted;problemsofcommunication, culture,andmutualsuspicionmaymakeitdifficultforcitizenstoreportandforpolice andprosecutorstodotheirjobs(Australia2007). Further,whentheminoritygroupisviewedaslessthanhuman,theprotectionofthe minoritygroupmembersisnotapriorityforthemajority.Anthropologistshave repeatedlyobservedadoublestandardintraditionalmoralitywithonesetof ethicsforingroupmembers,alowersetornorestraintsforoutgroupmembers
6.Withtheadventoftransnationalandinternationalcriminallawenforcement,thetraditionappears tobeonthewane.
299
(LevineandCampbell1972).Crimesagainstoutgroupmembersdonotcarrythe samemoralweightascrimescommittedagainstingroupmembers.Failureto recognisethehumanityoftheminoritytribemayalsocontributetothewillingnessof themajoritytribetoignorecrimesagainstoutgroupmembers.Thepointis illustratedinaneditorialbyanAmericanjournalist: Therewasatimeinthiscountry[theUS]whenweaccepteda separatestandardofjusticeforwhitesandblacks,andatime whenwerarelybotheredtoprosecuteanimmigrantsolongas hiscrimewascommittedagainstoneofhisownkind. WhatevertheydidinChinatownorLittleItalyonaSaturday nightwhatevertheydidtotheirwivesanddaughters,in particularwastheirbusiness.Asasociety,wegradually turnedagainstthatapproach,accepting,inthenameof fundamentalfairnessandourcommonhumanity,thenotion thatablackAmerican,oraGreek,oranIrishoraChinese immigrantwhofallsvictimtoacrimeisentitledtothesame safeguardsasanativebornwhite.(MainichiDailyNews) Noticethat,forthiswriter,theconcessionthattheminoritygroupmembersdeserved theprotectionofthecriminallawrequiredanaffirmationoftheircommon humanity.Extendingtheprotectionofthelawtothemrequiredbringingthese immigrantswithintheboundariesofthegroup. Inpractice,extendingtheprotectionofthedominanttribescriminallawtominority groupshasraisedtroublingissues.Theextensionofpoliceprotectiontominority neighbourhoodsmayrequirethepolicetoincreasepatrolsand,consequently, increasetheprobabilityofabrasiveencounterswiththepolice(Hahn19711972). Someoftheconflictshavebeennotorious.Forexample,inChicagoduringtheearly 1990spolicemadeapracticeofpickingupAfricanAmericanyouth,whomthey
300
suspectedofcriminalactivity,anddroppingthemoffinwhiteneighbourhoodswhere theywerelikelytobebeatenupbylocalresidents(SampsellJones2003). Understandingthecommonhumanityofminoritygroupmembersisnosmalltaskin thecontextofahumansocietythatorganisesitselfingroups.Buildingagroup identitythatappliestoallofthemembersofalegalsocietymaybeautopiandream. Thepublicmedia,politicaldiscourseandsocialdiscourseofthedominantgroupoften conflatesminoritystatuswithcriminality.InAustralia,forexample,arecentanalysis ofmediaandpoliticalsourcesopinedthatthesocialimaginingsofthecriminalin contemporaryAustraliaincreasinglyinvolvestheinvocationoftheArabOtherasa primaryfolkdevil(Brown2006).Nevertheless,buildingaconceptofcommon humanitymightbeseentobethecoretaskoftheinternationalistlegalagenda.
301
Conclusion Anumberofstudieshavelookedforandfailedtofindempiricalevidenceto demonstratethatdisproportionateincarcerationratesarecausedbybiaseddecision makingonthepartofpolice,prosecutors,andjudges(Tonry1997;Waddington, Stensonetal.2004).Ontheotherhand,researchhasdocumentedthatincreased minoritypresenceorminoritythreattogroupdominanceisstronglycorrelatedwith imprisonmentrates(RuddellandUrbina2004).Basedoncurrentsociologicaldata,it isnotpossibletoquantifyhowdiscriminatoryprocessingaffectsminority imprisonment.Ontheotherhand,giventheapparentdisproportionate imprisonmentofminoritygroupsaroundtheworld,itseemsfairtosaythatthe criminaljusticesystemoperatesinaway(orperhapsinacontext)thatfavoursthein groupovertheoutgroup.Further,psychologicalstudiesshowthatthebiased decisionmakingisunconsciousandanydecisionmayberationalisedorjustifiedpost hoc(Sunstein2006). Institutionalstructuresthatconsistentlyimpactdisproportionatelyonoutgroup membersshouldbeexaminedtodiscoverwhereorhowtheyprovideopportunities forbiaseddecisionmaking.Inthecriminaljusticeprocess,itappearsnotonlythat therearethatopportunitiesforingroupfavouritismexistatvirtuallyeverylevel,48 butthatpartofthetraditionalroleandfunctionofthelawitselfistodefineand reinforceingroupidentity.Theinteractionbetweengroupidentityandcriminallaw isbothreciprocalanddynamic.
48
302
Writersonethnocentrismaredividedonthequestionofwhetheringrouppreference producesprimarilypositiveornegativeeffects.Ingroupfavouritismandoutgroup antagonismmayhavehelpedourancestorsprotectlimitedresourcesandincrease thesurvivalrateofonesownfamily(Taylor,Peplauetal.2006).Inamulticulturalor polyethniccommunity,however,itbecomesapparentthatthereisaneedtofinda detribalisedwayofformulatingcriminaljusticenormsandenforcementpolicies.The problemofdevelopingmulticulturalormultitribalnormsisbothdifficultand important.AsMcNamarapointsout,theconceptisoftengreetedasacallforthe minoritygrouptoreceivespecialtreatment(McNamara2004).Theideaofusing differentnormstoapplytodifferentculturalgroupswithinonesocietyrunsafoulof theconceptoftheruleoflawandprinciplesofequalitybeforethelaw(Ibidat21). Withregardtotheemotional,moralissuesinvolvedincriminallaw,isitpossibleto findnormsthatcanbenondiscriminatorilyappliedatasupertriballevel?Perhaps partofthesolutionmightbetodecriminalisethosebehavioursforwhichthereisno supertribaldisapprobation.Lunafavoursthedepoliticizationofsubstantive criminallaw(Luna2005).Hewouldshifttheauthorityfromlawmakerstonon politicalexpertsincriminaljusticetoinsulatethecriminaljusticesystemfromthe kindofingroupdecisionmakingIdescribeabove(Ibid). Consideringthelawinlightofgroupbehaviouralscienceopensthedoortofurther thinkingabouttheimpactofpsychologyongroupdecisionmakingprocesses.Can criminallegalprocessesbeinsulatedfromimplicitbias?Inthecontextofcivillaw, Sunsteinfavoursproceduresthatintroducemoredeliberationinlegaldecision makingandtoinsulatetheprocessfromimplicitbiasorflawedgroupdecision making(Sunstein1999;Sunstein2006).Inthecontextofcriminallawlegislation,that mightmeandelayingtheenactmentofnewcriminallegislationuntilaminority impactreportcanbedebatedanddrafted.Inthecontextofcriminalprocedures,it maybepossibletodeviseotherwaystoinsulatedecisionmakingfromingroupbias. Atleastonestudyofintergrouprelationshasfoundthatthedevelopmentofa
303
commongroupidentitydiffusestheeffectsofstigmatizationandimproves intergroupattitudes.(Dovidio2001) Thefirststeptowardbeingabletodealwithanyproblemistorecognizeand understandit.Ifwereenvisionthecriminallawinthecontextofahumanspecies thatexistedformorethanahundredthousandyearsinsemiisolated,small,roving bands;thathaslivedtogetherinconcentratedandsemipermanentgroupsforonly tensofthousandsofyears(Wilson1988);andthatnowfindsitselfcrowdedintoan increasinglysmallplanet,thediminishingvalueofingrouployaltyandoutgroup antagonismbecomesapparent.Astheworldbecomesasmallerneighbourhood, thosesocietiesthatdevelopwaystodiffuseintergroupconflictandforgeinclusive groupidentitiesaremorelikelytoachievegreaterjustice.
304
References Ahrens,D.2000'NotinFrontoftheChildren:ProhibitiononChildCustodyas BrandingforCriminalActivity',NewYorkUniversityLawReview75:737. Ainlay,S.C.andCrosby,F.1986'Stigma,JusticeandtheDilemmaofDifference',inS. C.Ainlay,somebody,somebody,somebodyandsomebody(eds)TheDilemmaof Difference. Albrecht,H.J.1997'EthnicMinorities,CrimeandCriminalJusticeinGermany',Crime andJustice21:3199. NorthernTerritoryGovernment.2007'ChildrenAreSacred:ReportoftheNorthern TerritoryBoardofInquiryintotheProtectionofAboriginalChildrenfromSexual Abuse', Beale,S.S.1997'What'sLawGottoDoWithIt?ThePolitical,Social,Psychological andOtherNonLegalFactorsInfluencingtheDevelopmentof(Federal)CriminalLaw', BuffaloCriminalLawReview1:2366. Becker,H.S.1963Outsiders:StudiesintheSociologyofDeviance,NewYork: Macmillan. Bedolla,L.G.2005FluidBorders:UniversityofCaliforniaPress. Broadhurst,R.1997'AboriginesandCrimeinAustralia',CrimeandJustice21:407468. Brown,D.,Farrier,D.,Egger,S.,McNamara,L.andSteel,A.2006CriminalLaws: MaterialsandCommentaronCriminalLawandProcessofNewSouthWales,Sydney: TheFederationPress.
305
Brown,D.E.1991HumanUniversals,Philadelphia:TempleUniversityPress. Brown,R.1986SocialPsychology,SecondEdition,NewYork:Macmillan,Inc. Bull,S.2004'TheLandofMurder,Cannibalism,andAllKindsofAtrociousCrimes? MaoriandCrimeinNewZealand,18531919',BritishJournalofCriminology44:496 519. Butler,P.2004'MuchRespect:TowardaHipHopTheoryofPunishment',Stanford LawReview(Symposium:PunishmentandItsPurposes:9831015. Chiricos,T.G.andCrawford,C.1995'RaceandImprisonment:AContextual AssessmentoftheEvidence',inD.F.Hawkins(ed)Ethnicity,RaceandCrime: PerspectivesAcrossTimeandPlace,Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress. Costelloe,M.T.,Chiricos,T.,Burianek,J.,Gertz,M.andMaierKatkin,D.2002'The SocialCorrelatesofPunitivenessTowardCriminals:AComparisonoftheCzech RepublicandFlorida',JusticeSystemJournal23:191218. Cunneen,C.2001Conflict,PoliticsandCrime:Aboriginalcommunitiesandthepolice CrowsNest,N.S.W.:Allen&Unwin. Currie,E.1998CrimeandPunishmentinAmerica,NewYork:HenryHoltand Company,Inc. Davis,A.Y.1998'RaceandCriminalization:BlackAmericansandthePunishment Industry',inJ.James(ed)TheAngelaY.DavisReader BlackwellPublishing.
306
Dovidio,J.F.2001'Racial,Ethnic,andCulturalDifferencesinRespondingto DistinctivenessandDiscriminationonCampus:StigmaandCommonGroupIdentity.' JournalofSocialIssues57:1. Garfinkel,H.1965'ConditionsofSuccessfulDegradationCeremonies',American JournalofSociology61:420431. Garland,D.1990Punishmentandmodernsociety:astudyinsocialtheory,Chicago: UniversityofChicagoPress. Hahn,H.19711972'GhettoAssessmentsofPoliceProtectionandAuthority',Lawand SocietyReview6(2):183. Hawkins,D.F.1995aEthnicity,RaceandCrime,Albany:StateUniversityofNewYork Press. Hawkins,D.F.(ed)1995bEthnicity,race,andcrime:perspectivesacrosstimeandplace, Albany,N.Y.:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress. Isaacs,H.1975IdolsoftheTribe,NewYork:HarperandRow. Isaacs,H.1989IdolsoftheTribe:GroupIdentityandPoliticalChange:HarperColophon Books. Jacobs,D.andKleban,R.2003'PoliticalInstitutions,Minorities,andPunishment:A PooledCrossNationalAnalysisofImprisonmentRates',SocialForces82(2):725755. Korn,A.2003'RatesofincarcerationandmaintrendsinIsraeliprisons',Criminal Justice3(1):2955.
307
Kotkin,J.1993Tribes:howrace,religion,andidentitydeterminesuccessinthenew globaleconomy,1stEdition,NewYork:RandomHouse. Kubrin,C.E.,Stucky,T.D.andKrohn,M.D.2009ResearchingTheoriesofCrimeand Deviance:OxfordUniversityPress. Lacey,N.1988StatePunishment:PoliticalPrinciplesandCommunityValues,New York:Routledge. Lenhardt,R.A.2004'UnderstandingtheMark:Race,Stigma,andEqualityin Context',NewYorkUniversityLawReview79:803930. Levine,R.A.2002'Ethnocentrism',inN.J.S.a.P.B.Baltes(ed)International EncyclopediaoftheSocial&BehavioralSciencesUnitedKingdom:Pergamon. Levine,R.A.andCampbell,D.T.1972Ethnocentrism:TheoriesofConflict,Ethnic Attitudes,andGroupBehavior,NewYork,NewYork:JohnWileyandSons,Inc. Luna,E.2005'TheOvercriminalizationPhenomenon',AmericanUniversityLaw Review54:703746. Maffesoli,M.andFoulkes,C.R.1988'JuesdesMasques:PostmodernTribalism', DesignIssues4(1/2):141151. Martens,P.L.1997'Immigrants,CrimeandCriminalJusticeinSweden',Crimeand Justice21:183255. McNamara,L.2004''EqualityBeforetheLaw'inPolyethnicSocieties:The ConstructionofNormativeCriminalLawStandards',MurdochUniversityElectronic JournalofLaw11(2):119.
308
Phillips,C.andBowling,B.2003'Racism,EthnicityandCriminology:Developing MinorityPerspectives',BritishJournalofCriminology43(2):269290. Pospisil,L.1971AnthropologyofLaw:AComparativeTheory:Harper&Row Publishers. Pratt,J.2002Punishmentandcivilization:penaltoleranceandintoleranceinmodern society,London:Sage. Pratt,T.C.andCullen,F.T.2005'AssessingMacroLevelPredictorsandTheoriesof Crime:AMetaAnalysis',CrimeandJustice32:373450. Regulus,T.A.1995'Race,ClassandSociobiologicalPerspectivesonCrime',inD.F. Hawkins(ed)Ethnicity,RaceandCrime:PerspectivesAcrossTimeandPlace,Albany: StateUniversityofNewYorkPress. Ruddell,R.andUrbina,M.G.2004'MinorityThreatandPunishment:ACross NationalAnalysis',JusticeQuarterly21:903931. Rudovsky,D.2001'LawEnforcementbyStereotypesandSerendipity:RacialProfiling andStopsandSearchesWithoutCause',UniversityofPennsylvaniaJournalof ConstitutionalLaw3:296306. SampsellJones,T.2003'CultureandContempt:TheLimitationsofExpressive CriminalLaw',SeattleUniversityLawReview27:133190. Sampson,R.J.andLauritsen,J.L.1997'RacialandEthnicDisparitiesinCrimeand CriminalJusticeintheUnitedStates',CrimeandJustice21:311374. Sellin,J.T.1938CultureConflictandCrime:AReportoftheSubcommitteeon DelinquencyoftheCommitteeonPersonalityandCulture
309
SocialScienceResearchCouncil. Shaw,C.R.andMcKay,H.D.1929DelinquencyAreas,Chicago:UniversityofChicago Press. Snowball,L.andWeatherburn,D.2006'Indigenousoverrepresentationinprison: Theroleofoffendercharacteristics'CrimeandJusticeBulletin,Vol.99. Stuntz,W.J.1998'Race,Class,andDrugs',ColumbiaLawReview98:17951833. Sumner,W.G.1906/1979Folkways,NewYork:ArnoPress. Sunstein,C.R.1999'TheLawofGroupPolarization',JohnM.OlinLaw&Economics WorkingPaper2dSeries(No.91). Sunstein,C.R.2006'TheLawofImplicitBias',CaliforniaLawReview94:969996. Tajfel,H.(ed)1982SocialIdentityandIntergroupRelations,Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress. Taylor,S.E.,Peplau,L.A.andSears,D.O.2006SocialPsychology,12thEdition, UpperSaddleRiver,NewJersey:PrenticeHall. Tonry,M.1997'Ethnicity,CrimeandImmigration',CrimeandJustice21:129. Turner,J.C.,Hogg,M.A.,Oakes,P.J.,Reicher,S.D.andWetherell,M.S.1987 RediscoveringtheSocialGroup:ASelfCategorizationTheory Oxford:BasilBlackwell,Ltd. USBureauofJusticeStatistics2007,Vol.2008. Vold,G.1958TheoreticalCriminology,NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.
310
Waddington,P.A.J.,Stenson,K.andDon,D.2004'InProportion:Race,andPolice StopandSearch',BritishJournalofCriminology44:889914. Walmsley,R.2003'GlobalIncarcerationandPrisonTrends',ForumonCrimeand Society3(1and2):6578. Weisberg,R.2003'NormsandCriminalLaw,andtheNormsofCriminalLaw Scholarship',JournalofCriminalLawandCriminology93:467591. Weyrauch,W.O.1999'UnconsciousMeaningsofCrimeandPunishment',Buffalo CriminalLawReview2:945959. Wilson,J.Q.andHerrnstein,R.J.1985CrimeandHumanNature,NewYork:Simon andSchuster. Wilson,P.J.1988TheDomesticationoftheHumanSpecies,NewHavenandLondon: YaleUniversityPress. Worchel,S.1998Socialidentity:internationalperspectives,London;ThousandOaks, Calif.:Sage. Worchel,S.andSimpson,J.A.1993Conflictbetweenpeopleandgroups:causes, processes,andresolutions,Chicago:NelsonHallPub.
311
LosingtheWaronDrugs:ProhibitionandProliferation
MargaretPereira SchoolofBehavioural,CognitiveandSocialSciences UniversityofNewEngland mpereir2@une.edu.au Introduction Contemporarypatternsofdrugusehaveevolvedfromchangingpolices,whichhave beenshapedbypolitical,economic,demographicandsocialchanges.Beforethe EuropeancolonisationofAsia,opiumproductionwaslimitedandthedrugwasused almostsolelyformedicinalpurposes(McCoy,1972:59).Thischangedduringthe eighteenthcenturywhenlargescaleopiumsmugglingbycolonialpowerscreated addictedpopulationsandfinancedthebuildingofthecolonies(McCoy,1972;Nakoe, 1993).Prohibition,drivenbymoralcrusadesinthelatenineteenthcentury,triggered restrictionsondruguseandtrafficking(McCoy,2000).Massiveexpansionsindrug marketsanddrugabusefollowedprohibition,promptingcallsfortoughermeasures tocontaintheproblem;ironically,thesestrategieshaveexacerbatedthesituation. Despiteampleevidenceofthefailureofpunitivedruglawenforcementstrategies, therearefeweffortsbeingmadeinAustraliaorinternationally,towardsnonpunitive drugpolicyreform. Creatingdrugmarkets DrugsmugglinginAsiabeganinthe1500swhenthePortuguesebeganimporting opiumintoChinafromIndia.ThislucrativetradewastakenoverbytheBritishEast IndiaCompanyin1773,makingBritaintheworldslargestopiummerchantand consequentlythemostpowerfulcolonialpower(McCoy,1972:5960).Eventhough Chinaprohibitedopiumsmokingin1729andthenbannedopiumimportsin1800,
312
BritishopiumimportationcontinuedandopiumsmokinginChinaincreased(Wright, 1924).Thisresultedintwoopiumwarsin1839and1856,whichforcedChinato legalizetheimportationofopium.Bythistime,therewasanestimated15million Chineseopiumaddicts(McCoy,1972:63;Wright,1924). Moralsandburgeoningdrugmarkets Campaigningforopiumprohibitionbeganinthe1870s,followingmoralcrusadesby theantiopiummovement,theChristianTemperancemovementandtheProtestant churchesofEnglandandAmerica.SuccesswasachievedaftertheBritishParliament passedamotiontostopIndiasopiumtradein1906(McCoy,2000).Althoughthere werenomandatoryinternationalcontrolsthatcouldinterferewithcolonialopium trade,allcolonialgovernmentsagreedtoreducetheiropiumsalesoveranumberof years,reducingproductionconsiderablyby1934(McCoy,2000:Nakoe,1993). Eventhoughthenewrestrictionsinitiallyproducedadeclineinthelegalopiumtrade, theylateropenedupmarketopportunitiesforanillicittradeinEuropeandAsia (McCoy,2000:2002).Thispromptedtighterprohibitionsandasubsequent expansionofillicitdrugmarkets,whichprosperedasdrugsmugglerscapitalizedon higherdrugpricescausedbytheprohibitions.Themarketproliferationtriggereda massdemandforopiumandlater,aworlddemandforheroin.Furtherattemptsat prohibitionandsuppressioncontinuedtofailasdrugproduction,marketsanduse multiplied(McCoy,2000:202). Colonisationandthegrowthofdrugmarkets Throughoutthenineteenthcentury,colonialexpansioninSoutheastAsiacreateda highdemandforlabour.Intheearlytwentiethcentury,impoverished,opium addictedChinesepeasantpopulations,escapingwarandfamineinChina,flockedto SoutheastAsiaforwork(McCoy,1972:63).Inordertomaintainopiumsuppliesfor
313
thenewimmigrants,colonialgovernmentsimportedcheapopiumfromIndiaand ChinaandsetuplicensedopiumdensthroughoutSoutheastAsia;thisresultedin hugeexpansionsinopiumconsumermarkets(McCoy,1972:Nakoe,1993).State regulatedopiumsalessoonprovided4050percentofcolonialrevenues,financing colonialinfrastructureandconstructionacrossSoutheastAsia(McCoy,1972:63). Opiumtoheroin Whenpricesoflicensedgovernmentopiumbegantoclimbrapidly,migratingChinese hilltribesbeganillicitlocalproductioninthemountainsoftheGoldenTriangle.The numberofopiumaddictsswelledandtheirincreasingdemandfacilitatedmassive expansionsinopiumproductionthroughouttheregionandintoBurma(Lintner, 2000:McCoy,1972).Afterindependenceinthe1940s,illicitproductioninBurma soaredandboomingopiummarketsmovedintoThailand(Lintner,1994).Bythelate 1950stheregionwasproducingaround50percentoftheworldsillicitopium(McCoy, 1972:Lyttleton,2004). Thrivingdrugmarketssupplyingaddictedpopulations,pavedthewayfordrug syndicatestostartupprofitableheroinrefinerylaboratoriesintheGoldenTriangle. Fromthe1960s70s,heroinbecameacommercialglobalcommodityandtheGolden Triangleamajorsupplier(McCoy,1972;2000;Lintner,1994;2000). TheWaronDrugs By1961,theUnitedNationsandtheUSinitiatedprogramstoeradicateillegalpoppy cultivationandprosecutedrugtraffickers(McCoy,2000:203).Bythelate1960s, PresidentNixonhadlaunchedtheWaronDrugs,whichwasanattempttoaddress theproblemofAmericansoldiersbecomingaddictedtoheroininVietnamthen returninghometotheirUSsuburbswithdrughabits(Lintner,2000:12).TheUS subsequentlystrengtheneditsDrugEnforcementAdministration(DEA)and
314
collaboratedwiththeUnitedNationstoincreaseglobalnarcoticscontrol(Lintner, 2000:13). Proliferation TheWaronDrugswasinitiallysuccessfulandopiumcultivationandheroinexports werereducedsubstantially.However,successwasshortlivedasvictoriesironically facilitatedmarketexpansion.Withglobaldrugdemandstillintactandashortageof drugsuppliesthereweremassiveincreasesintheworldpriceofheroin.Traffickersin SoutheastAsiahadnotroublefillingtheunmetglobaldemandthroughoutmostof the1970s,inAmerica,EuropeandAustralia(McCoy,2000:Lintner,2000).As surveillanceandseizureincreased,marketsshiftedandopiumproductionincreased. Bytheendofthe1980s,worldopiumsupplyhadexplodedwithanincreaseof400 percentsincetheearly1970s.Bythe1990sSoutheastAsiawasoneoftheworlds largestsuppliersofheroin(McCoy,2000). Afghanistan SimilartothesituationinSoutheastAsia,prohibitionanderadicationprogramsin Afghanistanhavenotreducedsupplybuthavemerelyexpandedillicitmarkets (McCoy,2000:14).AftertheAfghanSovietwarendedin1992,Afghanistanhad threemillionwarrefugeesandgrosspoverty.Opiumwasanidealcashcropto addressAfghanistanssocialandeconomicproblems.Withnoforeignaidandthe outbreakofcivilwar,opiumcropsprovidedoneofthefewsourcesoffinance(McCoy, 2000:21214).ItisnotsurprisingthatdespiteUN/USopiumeradicationprogramsin Afghanistan,opiumproductionhassoared.In2005,theUNestimatedthatthe countrywasprovidingaround89percentofworldillicitproduction(UnitedNations, 2006).
315
FromHerointoAmphetamineTypeStimulants Since2001,globaldrugtrendshaveshownadramaticdeclineintheavailabilityand useofheroinandsubstantialgrowthintheuseofamphetaminetypestimulants (ATS)(UnitedNations,2006).Duringthistime,Australiahasexperiencedashiftin patternsofdrugusefromherointoATS,suggestingthatashortageinthesupplyof heroinhasstimulatedtheconsumptionofATS(Drabsch,2006;NationalDrugand AlcoholResearchCentre,2006;McKetin,McLarenandKelly,2005;Maher,2007).This viewisreinforcedbystudies,whichfindthattheshortageofheroinhasledto increaseduseofATSbecauseheroinusersarechangingtoATSduetoalackofthe availabilityofgoodheroin(Maher,2007).Eventhoughthereissomedisputeasto whetherthereisadirectcausalrelationshipbetweenheroinshortageandincreasesin ATSusage(Snowballetal,2008),therehasnevertheless,beensubstantialincreases intheproductionanduseofATS,withmorepotentformsemergingdespitelarge seizuresofthedrugatAustralianborderpoints.ATScanbeproducedlocallyincrude laboratoriesbutismostlyimportedfromSoutheastAsia,China,HongKong,Japan, SouthKoreaandTaiwan(Drabsch,2006),indicatingthattherehasbeenwide geographicalexpansionsininternationaldrugmarketsandproduction. InAustralia,therearecurrentlymorethan70,000habitualATSusers,comparedwith around40,000habitualheroinusers(Drabsch,2006).ThetrendtowardsATShas presentedanumberofchallenges,especiallyforhealthprofessionals.Prolongeduse ofATShasbeenassociatedwithpsychosis,violentbehaviour,hostilityand aggression,promptingmedicaldrugspecialiststocommentthatATSmakesheroin looklikethegoodolddays(McKentin,McLarenandKelly,2005;Drabsch,2006; Wodak,2007).
316
Criminalisationofdrugusers Increasesinprisonpopulations Anestimated2millionpeople,oraquarterofthetotalglobalprisonpopulationis incarceratedfordrugoffences(Rulles,Kushlik,andJay2006).InAustraliabetween 1996and2006,thenationalprisonpopulationincreasedbyasubstantial42%(ABS, 2006).IncarcerationratesforwomeninAustralianprisonsincreasedbyastaggering 90%comparedwith39%formaleprisonersduringthesameperiod(AIC,2006). Womenprisonershavehigherlevelsofsubstanceabuseanditisestimatedthatupto 70%ofwomensoffencesinAustraliaaredirectlyrelatedtotheirdruguse(Kevin, 1995).IntheUKoverthepastdecade,thenumberofincarcerateddrugoffendershas increasedfivefoldforwomenandthreefoldformenanditisestimatedthat between50%80%ofallprisonersarenowservingtimefordrugrelatedoffences (Rulles,KushlikandJay,2006). IntheUS,thewarondrugshasresultedinhugesurgesinprisonpopulations.Those whoaremostdisadvantagedbythewarareblackpeopleandpoorerpopulationswho aremorevulnerabletobeingcriminalisedbygettoughdrugpolicies(Boboand Thompson,2006;Tonry,1994).TheblackincarcerationrateintheUnitedStatesis8 timeshigherthanfornonHispanicwhitesandhasrisenby900percentsincethe 1950s(BoboandThompson,2006:4513). TheWaronDrugsjustifyinghumanrightsabuses ChinacelebratesUNworldantidrugsdaywithmassexecutionsofdrugoffenders,in 2002therewere64executedandasimilarnumbertheyearbefore(Rulles,Kushlik, andJay2006).ThailandsWaronDrugs,initiatedin2003,justifiedgrossandhorrific violationsofhumanrights.Afteronlythreemonthsofthewaralmost2,500alleged drugdealershadbeenmurdered(HumanRightsWatch,2004).TheThaigovernment
317
promotedtheuseofviolence,intimidationandrandomextrajudicialexecutions againstdrugsuspects.Thepolice,whowereplacedunderpressureandofferedcash incentivestoshowresults,stoppedatnothingtofollowordersandmeetexpectations (HumanRightsWatch,2004). Findingsolutions Harmreduction Thereisanawarenessoffaileddrugprohibitionpoliciesnationallyand internationally,withingovernmentandNGOs(seeRulles,KushlikandJay,2006). Despitethis,effortstoreduceharmforthedruguserandthecommunity,continueto workwithinaprohibitionistframework,withfeweffortsbeingmadetoexplore alternatives(seeRulles,KushlikandJay,2006).Harmreductionpoliciessuchas treatmentprograms,prisonalternatives,heroinandmethadoneprescription programs,andneedlesyringeprogramshavereducedhealthproblemsandhave helpedsomedruguserstorebuildtheirlives.Someprogramshaveevenhelpedto lowerthecrimeratesofdrugusers(seeVumbaca,1999).However,thesereforms focusonharmminimizationfortheindividualdruguserwithoutaddressingthe greaterharmcausedbylawenforcementpolicies.Attemptingtominimiseharm withinalegalframeworkthatitselfmaximisesharmwillonlyhaveamarginalimpact; forthebiggerfundamentalproblemsofcrimecreation,healthissues,thefinancial costoflawenforcement,andtheconsequentcriminalisationofdrugusers,remain intact. Longtermeffectivechange Toachieveeffectivelongtermchange,thereneedstobeongoingdiscussionand debateaboutdrugpolicyandreformatlocalandgloballevels.Keystakeholders, academics,governmentandNGOsneedtocollaborativelydeterminehowresponsible
318
policycanbecombinedwithharmreductiontoreducedamagetoindividualsand communitiesinAustraliaandinternationally.Meanwhile,rhetoricalantidrugs campaignsandcriesforharsherpenaltiestendtobeunderpinnedbyneoliberal, moralisticideologyofprotectingcommunitiesandindividuals.Forexample,while governmentsaroundtheglobecallforharsherpenaltiesfordrugoffenders,theUNs 2008sloganforitstenyeardrugstrategyisAdrugfreeworldwecandoit!(Rulles, KushlikandJay,2006).Thismisleadingandunachievableclaimislittlemorethana righteousandcounterproductivecrusade,whichdoesnothingtoprotectindividualor communityrights,orsafety.Rather,itjustifiesthepunishmentandhumanrights abusesofthoseidentifiedasbeingahindrancetotheachievementofautopiandrug freesociety.Effectivechangecanonlyoccurwhenthereisharmreductioncombined withmajorpolicyreform,notbasedonrhetoric,moralsorideology,butonrealistic strategiestoreduceharmandpreventthecriminalisationofdrugusers. In1924,theAmericanpoliticalcommentatorQuincyWrightreferredtothedebateon theprohibitionofopiumasmankindsfightagainsthisowndesirefornarcotics (Wright,1924).Thereislittledoubtthatmostpeopleenjoyusingvarioustypesof drugs,notleastofallalcohol,eventhoughwedonotknowallthereasonswhy.What wedoknowisthataslongasthereisademandforillicitdrugstherewillalwaysbe supplyandregularuserswillneedtobreakthelawtomaintaintheiruse.Wealso knowthataslongasthereisdrugprohibition,prisonpopulationswillcontinueto multiply.AlsoknownisthatdruglawenforcementpoliciessuchastheWaronDrugs arenoteliminatingdrugproduction,endingillicitdrugmarkets,orpreventingdrug use.Noneofthisisespeciallyneworsurprising.Whatissurprisingisthat,despiteso muchevidencetothecontrary,thereremainsapersistentassumptioninlawandorder discoursethatthecriminaljusticesystemholdsthesolutiontoillicitdruguse.
319
References AustralianBureauofStatistics,2006,PrisonersinAustralia,2006,Catalogue No.4517.0 http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/21A1C193CFD3E93CCA257 243001B6036/$File/45170_2006.pdf Bobo,L.,andThompson,V.,2006,UnfairbyDesign:theWaronDrugs,Raceandthe LegitimacyoftheCriminalJusticeSystemSocialResearch,vol.73,no.2.pp.44572). Drabsch,T.,2006,CrystalMethamphetamineUseinNewSouthWales,BriefingPaper No.19/06,NSWParliamentaryLibraryResearchService. HumanRightsWatch,2004,Notenoughgraves:TheWaronDrugs,HIV/AIDS,and violationsofHumanRights,HumanRightsWatch,vol.16,no.8. Kevin,M.,1995,WomeninPrisonwithdrugrelatedproblems.Part1:Background characteristics.ResearchPublicationno.32,NewSouthWalesDepartmentof CorrectiveServices. Lintner,B,1994,BurmainRevolt:OpiumandInsurgencysince1948,Colorado: WestviewPress. Lintner,B.,2000,TheGoldenTriangleOpiumTrade:AnOverview,AsiaPacificMedia Services:ChiangMai. Lyttleton,C.,2004,Relativepleasures:Drugs,developmentandmodern dependenciesinAsiasGoldenTriangleDevelopmentandChange,vol.35,no.5,pp. 90935.
320
Maher,L.,Li,J.,Jalaludin,B.,Wand,H.,Jayasuriya,R.,Dixon,D.,Kaldor,J.,2007, Impactofareductioninheroinavailabilityonpatternsofdruguse,riskbehaviourand incidenceofhepatitisCvirusinfectionininjectingdrugusersinNewSouthWales, Australia,DrugandAlcoholDependence,vol.89,pp. McCoy,A.,1972,ThePoliticsofHeroin:CIAcomplexityintheGlobalDrugTrade, Afghanistan,SouthEastAsia,CentralAmerica,Columbia.AlfredW.McCoy,2ndrev. ed.HarperandRowe:NewYork. McCoy,A.,2000,Coercionanditsunintendedconsequences:Astudyofheroin traffickinginSoutheastandSouthWesternAsia,CrimeLawandSocialChange,vol. 33,no.3,pp.191224. McKetin,R.,McLaren,J.,andKelly,E.,2005,Estimatingthenumberofregularand dependentmethamphetamineusersinAustralia,NationalDrugandAlcoholResearch Centre,TechnicalReportNo230,UniversityofNewSouthWales:Sydney. Nakoe,H,1993,TheOriginsoftheOpiumTradeandtheOpiumRegieinColonial IndochinaTheRiseandFallofRevenueFarming:BusinessElitesandthe Emergence oftheModernStateinSoutheastAsia,StMartinsPress:London,pp.18295. NationalDrugandAlcoholResearchCentre,MethamphetamineThecurrentstate ofplay:newnationalresearch,MediaRelease,3/11/06. Rulles,S.,Kushlik,D.andJay,M.,2006,AftertheWaronDrugs:OptionsforControl, TransformDrugPolicyFoundation:UnitedKingdom. Snowball,L.,Moffatt,S.,Weatherburn,D.,andBurgess,2008,Didtheheroin shortageincreaseamphetamineuse?Atimeseriesanalysis,CrimeandJustice 24450.
321
Bulletin,ContemporaryIssuesinCriminalJustice,no.114,BureauofCrime StatisticsandResearch:Sydney. Tonry,M.,1994,RacialDisproportionsinUSPrisonsBritishJournalofCriminology, vol.34pp.97115 UnitedNations,2006,WorldDrugReport,Volume1:Analysis,UnitedNationsOffice onDrugsandCrime. Vumbaca,G.,1998,FindingaBetterWay:AReviewofPolicies,ProgramandPractices CurrentlyBeingImplementedinOverseasJurisdictionstoDealwithHIV/AIDS,Hepatitis andDrugUseIssuesBothWithinthePrisonSystemandtheWiderCommunity,Churchill FellowshipReport,NSWGovernment: Wodak,A.andAdam,T.,2007,Amphetamine/StimulantUse:Presentations, Complications,Interventions.PaperpresentedatConcordDependency Seminar, January30,2007. Wright,Q.,(1924),TheOpiumQuestionTheAmericanJournalofInternational Law, vol.18,no.2,pp.28195. Sydney.
322
Traffickinginpersonsaslabourexploitation
MarieSegrave SchoolofSocialSciences UniversityofWesternSydney m.segrave@uws.edu.au Introduction InAustraliainterestintraffickinginpersonshascomeinwavesfollowingthe concentratedattentionover2002/2003whichculminatedintheFederal Governmentsannouncementofafouryearcomprehensivepolicepackageaimed, noless,ateradicatingtraffickinginpersons(MinisterforJustice&Customs,2003; Segrave,2004).Mirroringdevelopmentsinternationally(seeBerman,2003),the Australianresponsetotraffickinghasmadereferencetothisissueasacontemporary transnationalorganizedcrime(seeMinisterforJustice&Customs,2000).However, thedetailofthepolicycommitmentandtheantitraffickingframework implementedinAustraliarevealsthetraditionalnatureoftheresponsethatis foundeduponacommonsenselogicoflawandorder,whereitisthedomesticlegal regimeandthepursuitofprosecutionsthatremainstheprimaryfocus(seeHogg& Brown,1998).Whiletherearereferencesmadetotraffickinginpersonsasapractice thatmaymanifestinarangeofindustries,attentionhasbeenandcontinuestobe focusedonthetraffickingofwomenintothesexindustry(AttorneyGenerals Department,2004). Sincethepolicyannouncementinlate2003ithasprimarilybeentheannouncement ofarrests,prosecutionsandappeals,particularlythemostrecentappealand decisionsregardingtheWeiTangcasetotheHighCourtofAustralia,thathave capturedtheattentionofthemedia(seeforexample,OBrien&Wynhausen,2008; Gallagher,2008;Kissane,2008;Violante,2008;OBrien,2008).Inthereportson
323
Australiaseffortstoaddresstrafficking,theintroductionoftheexpandedtrafficking inpersonsCommonwealthlegislationandthecriminaljusticearrestandinvestigation dataarereferredtoasevidenceofourefforttoaddressthisissue,withreferences alsotoAustraliasbenevolentcommitmenttosupportvictimsoftraffickingduring theinvestigationperiod(TIP,2008:6163). Academicengagementwiththisissuehasbeensteadilyincreasingsincethefirst publishedexaminationofAustralianeffortsbyKerryCarrington&LindaHearnin 2003(seeSegrave,2004;Segrave&Milivojevic,2005;Burn&Simmons,2005;Burnet al,2005;Burnetal2006;Gallagher,2005;Munro,2006;Piper,2005;Putt,2007; David,2008)howeverresearchremainslimitedandthediscussionanddebatehas beennarrow,especiallywithregardtoitscritiqueoftheexistingresponse.Thispaper arguesthatitiscriticaltoengageandexaminealternativeunderstandingsofand responsestohumantrafficking,astheexistingresponseinAustraliapresentsa numberofconcernsnotleastofwhichisthenarrowdefinitionofexploitationandthe limitedprovisionofcompensation,supportandassistancetovictimsoftrafficking. Specifically,thispaperwillidentifykeyconcernswiththecurrentresponsetopeople traffickinginAustralia,drawinginpartonresearchtheauthorconductedin2005and 2006thatexaminedtheimplementationoftheAustralianresponsetopeople traffickinginAustraliaandThailand.Thepaperconcludeswithaproposalforan alternativeframeworkforunderstandingandrespondingtohumantraffickinga proposalthatiscapturedwithinthetitleofthepaper. Australiasresponsetopeopletrafficking ForthepurposesofthisdiscussiononlyabriefoverviewofAustraliasresponseto humantraffickingwillbeprovided(seeforfurtherinformation,AttorneyGenerals Department,2003).AsnotedaboveAustraliaintroducedanationalactionplanin 2003,theCommonwealthActionPlantoEradicateTraffickinginPersons,tobe implementedoverfouryearperiodbyanumberofgovernmentdepartmentsand
324
agencies(includingtheAustralianFederalPolice,theCommonwealthAttorney GeneralsDepartment,the(then)DepartmentofImmigrationandMulticulturaland IndigenousAffairs,the(then)OfficeofWomensPolicyandtheAustralian GovernmentOverseasAidProgram[AusAID]).In2007anannouncementwasmade foranadditionalA$20million(approximately)overthreeyearsagaintargeted primarilytowardscriminaljusticeavenues,includingfundingforimmigration compliance,investigationandprosecutioninadditiontoincreasedfundingfornew researchtobeundertakenbytheAustralianInstituteofCriminology(Attorney GeneralsDepartment,2007).ThecorecomponentsoftheAustralianresponse remainedthesameandwerereinforcedasappropriateandnecessarytoolstobuild onthesuccessoftheexistinginitiatives(AttorneyGeneralsDepartment,2007). TheCommonwealthActionPlantoEradicateTraffickinginPersonswasintroduced asawholeofgovernmentpolicyresponsedesignedtofocusonthefullcycleof trafficking(MinisterforJustice&Customs,2003).Primarily,theimplementationhas focusedheavilyonenhancingimmigrationandcriminaljusticeefforts,includingthe provisionofanewvisasystemforvictimsandasupportsystem.Thefocusofthese effortshasbeentomaximisesuccessfulprosecutions,whichremainsakeyindicator ofthesuccessofthepolicynationallyandinternationally(seeTIP,2004;Attorney GeneralsDepartment,2007). SubsequentlyinAustraliaaresponsetotraffickinghasbeendevelopedthatisclearly foundeduponalawandorderlogic(seeHogg&Brown,1998)apointIhaveargued elsewhere(seeSegrave,2004;Segrave&Milivojevic,2005;Segrave,inpress)where traffickinginpersonsistreatedasacriminaljusticeissueinvolvingindependent offencesthatrequiresawholeofgovernmentresponsegearedtowardsinvestigation andprosecution,whilevictimsreceivewelfaredrivensupportthatispredicatedon involvementinthecriminaljusticeprocess.Withinthisframework,victimsupport effectivelyoperatestosupportkeyinformantsandwitnessesandisavailableonlyto thoseinvolvedincriminalinvestigations(seeBurn&Simmons,2005;McSherry,
325
2007).Thus,whilethenationalandinternationalrhetoricsituatestraffickingin personswithinthetransnationalcrimeassemblage,itisnotthemovementofpeople acrossandwithinbordersforthepurposesofexploitationthatwedealwithin Australia,ratherthefocusandrealityofthepolicyresponseandtheeverydayworkof Australianofficialsimplementingthisresponseprimarilyrevolvesaroundpolicing exploitationwithinthenation. Outcomestodate FromtheperspectiveofpolicymakerswithinAustraliaandtheinternational community,thedominantapproachafterfiveyearsofimplementationistoconsider whathasbeenachievedtodateandtoprioritiseaframeworkthatproduces evidencebasedprocessandoutcomesdrivendata.Giventhecurrentframeworkof thepolicyresponse,itisunsurprisingthattheprimaryevidenceusedtoascertain Australiaseffectivenessinrespondingtothisissueispredicatedoninvestigationand prosecutorialdata(seeforexamplePutt,2006). Briefly,inAustraliatheAFPhasinvestigated125casesofhumantraffickingbetween 2004and2007,withthemajorityofthesecasesinvolvingwomentraffickedintothe sexindustry.ThesewomenhaveprimarilybeencitizensofSouthEastAsian countries,particularlyThailand,butalsofromIndonesia,Malaysia,SouthKoreaand China,andtoalesserextent,HongKongandthePhilippines(Putt,2006;AFP,2007). Themostrecentdataavailableidentifiesthat29defendantshavebeenchargedwith offencesrelatedtotraffickingunderAustraliasantitraffickinglaws(Divisions270 and271oftheCriminalCodeAct1995(Cth)),ofwhicharound14haveledto prosecutionsandonlyahandfulhaveresultedinsuccessfulconvictions.Initsannual reporttheAFPidentifythreesignificantsentencingdecisionsinthe20062007 reportingperiod,twoofwhichinvolvedsextraffickingcases(involvingslaveryand
326
sexualservitudeoffences)andoneofwhichreferstoalabourexploitationcasein NSW(AFP,2007:33). IncontextualisingandexplainingtheresultstodatetheAFPprovidedthefollowing explanationoftheirefforts: Themajorityofvictimsidentifiedweresexindustryworkersintheircountry oforiginandwereawaretheywouldbeworkinginthesexindustryin Australia,priortotheirbeingtrafficked.However,untiltheyarrivedin Australia,manywerenotawarethattheywouldbeexploited.Thegroups detectedinsextraffickinghavebeensmallratherthanlargeorganisedcrime groups.Australiansusingfamilyorbusinesscontactsoverseastofacilitate movementandvisaviolationscontinued. Humantraffickingcontinuedtoinvolveothercrimetypes,including immigrationfraud,identityfraud,documentfraudandmoneylaundering. Offendersactiveinthisareahaveshownadaptabilitytolawenforcement activityandmigrationgovernance.Successfulprosecutionsrelyonvictimand witnessfirsthandaccountsofexploitation.(AFP,2007:25) Therearemanyissuesraisedwithinthisstatement.Forthepurposesofthis discussion,however,Iwanttoexplainhowthisissuggestiveofandreflectsthe challengesfacingauthoritiesinAustraliaandbeyondintryingtorespondtopeople trafficking.Issuesthatwereechoedbystateauthoritiesinvolvedintheseprocesses whowereinterviewedinThailandandAustralia(seeSegrave,2007).Theirmajor concernsrelateto:findingvictimsoftrafficking(i.e.theyarerarelydetectedin transit);identifyingrealvictims(i.e.thosewhofitwithinthelegaldefinition);moving frominvestigationtoprosecuting(particularlyintermsofsecuringevidenceoften includingobtainingvictimcooperationtoappearasawitness)andconvicting offenders(i.e.anumberofcaseshaveresultedinhungjuriesinbothMelbourneand Sydney,thecasesarecomplex,lengthyandexpensive).Currentlymuchofthefocus
327
indiscussionswithresearchandpolicymakersaroundimprovingtheresponseto traffickingrevolveprimarilyonhowtoaddresstheseissuesandhowtoimprovethe criminaljusticeprocess. However,thisdatarequiresmuchcloseranalysisandgreaterconsideration.Thereis aneedtoidentifyhowlittlethisinformationtellsusabouttraffickingpatterns, practicesandexperiencesandhowlittleittellsusabouttheimpactandimplications oftheseefforts.Thereareanumberofconcernsarisingfromtheframework,its implementationandthereportingtodate.Onecriticalissueisthatthecurrent responsetotraffickingandtheofficialinformationproducedaboutthisresponse functionstomaintainagenderedmythicalnarrativearoundtraffickingwherebyit appealstoanideaofthetransnationalorganisedcriminalsexualexploitationofthird worldwomen(i.e.innocent,idealvictims).Thisnarrativeisnotreflectedinthe complicatedcircumstancesofexploitationthatoccurinrealitywithinAustraliaand elsewhere.Onlyafewcasesmakeitthroughtheselectivefilteringprocessfrom identificationtoinvestigationtoprosecution.Consequently,thecriminaljustice knowledgeanddatathatisproducedispartialandincomplete,weknownothingof casesthataredeemednottobestrongenoughtoprosecute,ofvictimswhoare willingtocooperatebutwhohavelittleinformationforauthoritiestoworkwithor casesthathavesignificantevidencebutvictimswhoareunwillingorunableto participateasinformersoraswitnesses.Criticallywealsoknowlittleaboutthosewho aresimplydeportedwhenpickedupbyimmigrationauthoritiesandidentifiedas illegalnoncitizensand/ornoncitizenswhohavebreachedvisaconditionsthatis, thosewhoarenotidentifiedaspotentialvictimsand/orwhointentionallyor otherwiseremainoutsidethepurviewoftheAustraliangovernmentsantitrafficking machine.Thecriminaljusticedata,includingthenumberofvictims,becomesthe truthofthetraffickingproblemthatisdifficulttoproveordisprove,wefocuson numbersnumbersofvictims,numbersofprosecutions,numbersofoffenders.This tellsusverylittleabouttraffickinginpersonsittellsusmoreabouttheeffortsof authorities,abouttheirpriorities,theirunderstandingoftheissueandthe
328
interpretationofthelawandthedirectionoftheirresources.Yetitisusedbynations todemonstratetheircommitmenttothemoraloutragethatistraffickinginperson, particularly,ofcoursethetraffickingofwomenintothesexindustry(seealsoKelly, 2005).Thusitisclearthatitisessentialthatweengagecriticallywiththenarrow operationofnationalandinternationalresponsestothisissuethatadoptandrely uponacriminaljusticeapproach.Throughdoingsowecanrecognisesthattrafficking inpersonsisonepartofamuchbroaderpatternofexploitationofnoncitizenswithin destinationcountriesthatrequiresamorecomplexandconsideredresponse.In ordertoadvancethisargumentitisnecessaryfirsttolocatetraffickinginpersons withinamorecomplexframework,beyondtheboundaryofcriminalisationand victimisation. Alternativeperspectives Reflectingitslocationwithintheconventionsofthepopularlawandorderpolicy rhetoric,theresponsetotraffickinginpersonsbeginsatthepointofexploitation, thatis,whenandwheretheoffenceorthevictimcomestotheattentionof authoritiesmostoftenwithinAustralia,throughImmigrationofficials(seeSegrave, 2007;Segrave,inpress).Theoffencesthatareconcentrateduponarefocusednoton themovementofpeople(i.e.deceptionorkidnappingtoenableindividualstobe transportedacrossnationalborders)butprimarilyonissueswithinthecountryof destinationissuesrelatingtotheconditionswithinwhichindividualshaveworked, discrepanciesbetweentheagreementsmadebeforetheybegantheirworkandtheir workingconditionswhentheyarriveinAustralia(includinginsomeinstancesthetype ofworkbutmoreoftendeceptionrelatedtotheconditionsofwork)(Australian FederalPolice[AFP],2007;Segrave,2007).Italsoincludesissuesrelatedtodebt bondagebasedonfeesrelatedtotravel,tojobplacement,andaccommodationthat areescalatedtosignificantamountsofmoneythatarerequiredtoberepaidthrough workingoffthedebt(TIP,2008).
329
Clearlythereisthedominantnarrativeoftraffickingasisinconsistentwiththe complexityoftheissuesandcircumstancesofthesituationsimmigrationcompliance authoritiesassessinpractice.Issuesrelatingtoimplementationandthe determinationofcasesthatmaybepotentialcasesoftraffickingrequireseriousand carefulresearchandattention.However,theprimaryconcernhereisrelationtothe problemsassociatedwithimplementingaresponsethatisprimarilydrivenbyadesire tosuccessfullyprosecutecases.Whencriminaljusticeoutcomesarethefirstand foremostpriority,thereislimitedroomforrecognisingthattraffickinginpersonsis anissuethatarisesfromthespecificinteractionofgender,race,immigration, economicsandglobalisationandthat,asaconsequence,itisanissuethatisnot simplyidentifiedoraddressedvialawenforcement(Berman,2003:58). Insteadofbeginningwithexploitationthen,thebeginningpointisthebroader contextofcontemporaryglobalisationandtheaccompanyingsocial,politicaland economicchangesthathavearisenoverthepastfewdecades(seeSassen,1998). Withinthiscontextthechangingnatureofcontemporarymigrationflowsare intricatelyconnectedtotheincreasingdegreesofcoercionandexploitationthatare occurringinmigrationprocess(Berman,2003).Thegenderednatureofthese practicesofexploitationhaverecentlybecomethesubjectofseriousinvestigation,as researchersrecognisethatitiswomensbodiesandthemovementofwomens bodies,withorwithouttheirconsent,whichhasbecomeasignificantvehiclefor economicgrowthandasourceofdependableincomeandprofitforarangeofactors (Sassen,2000).Importantly,however,itisforbothmenandwomenastheyembark uponcrossborderjourneys,astheyseekoutopportunitiestomigrateandrespondto theneedforvariousformsoflowskilled,lowwageemploymenttobefulfilled,that othersseektoexploitthem.Indeedoverthepasttwocenturieswehavewitnessed theemergenceofanewindustryofundergroundentrepreneurshipsurrounding irregularandillegalmigrationtailoredtoworkaroundshiftingborderregimesthat operatesinternationally(seeAndreas,2000).
330
Fromthisperspective,thetraffickingofwomen,includingthetraffickingofwomen intosexualservitude,canbeidentifiedasoneexampleoftheincreasingdegreesof coercionandexploitationthathaveaccompaniedthecontemporarypatternsof genderedmigrationflows(Berman2003,58;Ehrenreich&Hochschild2003;Sassen 2003).Thetendencytoisolatetraffickingfromotherissuesandtodealwithit independentlyischallengedfromthisperspective.Thereareclearinterconnections betweentraffickingandotherformsofexploitativelabourandotherformsof clandestinecrossbordermovement. Identifyingandunderstandingtraffickingwithinthisframeworkchallengesthe dominantdiscoursesthatseektoidentifycriminalisationandvictimisationasthe exclusivefactorsoftrafficking.Thuswhilepopularnarrativesoftrafficking,including theassertionsoftherealityoftraffickinginpolicyresponses,focusonextreme genderedandsexualisedformsofexploitation,theargumenthereisthatsuchcases representasmallsectionofamuchbroaderandmoreendemicpracticeof exploitationthatisoccurringwithinnationssuchasAustralia.Further,itsuggests thattraffickinginpersonsisinmanywaysaredundantterm,whatwearedealing withmostoftenisabuseandexploitationrelatedtomigrationandmigrantlabour, anditistheabuseandtheexploitationthatisrealandtangibleandknowable,yet whichremainslargelyignoredindiscussionaroundtrafficking.Whatisnecessary, then,istorecognisethelinkagesbetweentraffickinginpersonsinAustraliaandthe exploitationoftemporarymigrantlabourers,particularlylowskilledlabourers.Itis fromthisbasis,wherewerecognisetheconnectionsratherthanthedisconnections betweentheseformsofexploitationthatamorenuancedandeffectiveresponseto addressingandreducingexploitationmaybedeveloped.Thenextsection,then,will exploretheselinkagesandbuildacaseforanalternativeapproachtoexploitationand totraffickingwithinAustralia.
331
MigrantlabourexploitationinAustralia TheexploitationoftemporarymigrantlabourersinAustralia,particularlythoseon 457visas(atemporarybusinessvisathatrequiresemployersponsorship)hasbeen describedinthelasttwelvemonthsasakintoslaveryandasanexampleof moderndayslavery(Moore&Knox,2007).Priortotheemergenceofthisissuein thepublicrealm,thisterminologyhasbeenconfinedtothedescriptionand identificationoftraffickinginpersons,particularlythetraffickingofwomeninto sexualservitude. Todatepeopletraffickingandtheexploitationoftemporarymigrantlabourershave beenthesubjectofseparateexaminationandaretreateddifferentlybyAustralian authorities.Asoutlinedabove,thispaperisfocusedonreconsideringthisdistinction andinsodoingenablingananalysisoftheexperienceofandresponsetononcitizens whomigratetoAustraliatoworkandexperiencearangeofformsofworkplace exploitation. Thereareanumberofavenuesforexploringtheinterconnectionsbetweenthesetwo issues,howeverforthepurposesofthisdiscussiontwowillbeaddressed:thetypesof exploitationcomingtotheattentionofauthoritiesandthe(policy/legal)responseto exploitationparticularlyintermsoftheprocessesforseekingassistanceandredress forexploitation. In2007theCommonwealthJointStandingCommitteeonMigrationreportedthat breachesof457visaconditionsthathaveariseninAustraliahaveincluded: underpaymentatminimumsalarylevel;unlawfuldeductionsfromminimumsalary suchasfortravelormedicalcosts,ordeductionsunapprovedbytheworker,suchas accommodationcosts;nonpaymentofovertimeorworkingexcessivehours; paymentbyworkersofrecruitmentcostsormigrationagentfees;racialabuseand
332
threatsofphysicalharm;and,overchargingfortrainingandaccommodation(Joint StandingCommitteeonMigration,2007:112114). ThecasesoftraffickinginpersonsthathavebeenencounteredinAustraliamirrorthe samerangeofexperiencesofexploitation.Thiswascapturedwithinacomment madebyoneparticipantinterviewedinmy20052006researchintotheresponseto trafficking: TherearealotofwomenfromSouthEastAsiancountrieshere[inAustralia] lawfully,Imeanwhattheydo,prostitution,isinalotofstatesofAustraliaa lawfuloccupationandtheyreonaworkingholidayvisa,studentvisaetc,soitsa lawfulvisa,lawfuloccupationandtheyrehappytoworkintheindustry. Mostofthemonlyreallybecomeavictimwhenthingsgowrongforthemthere areveryfewpeoplewhogotoAustralianotknowingthattheyregoingtobe involvedinthesextradeanditsthelawofthemoney,Imeanitsonlywhen thatmoneyisnotforthcomingthattheyeitherdecidetomakeacomplaintor [they]goandtalktopeopletheyknowinAustraliawhothengoandreportitto theauthorities.(Australianlawenforcementofficer,Thailand) Primarilyitisabuseandexploitationinrelationtowagesandemploymentconditions thatdominateinbothinstances.Alsoinbothtraffickingandworkplaceexploitation weseeotherformsofabuseincludingviolence,emotionalandinsomecasessexual abuse.Theseissuescrossoverinbothrealmsandthedistinctionbetweenwhatwe labeltraffickingandexploitativelabourisblurred.Conditionsofforcedlabouras underthecurrenttraffickinglegislation(CriminalCodeAmendment(Traffickingin Persons)Act2005)canexistinbothcontextsyetresearchers,themedia,policy makers,thepoliceandotherauthoritiestendtoengagewiththeseissuesasseparate anddistinct.
333
However,despitethisdistinctionintermsofhowweconceptualiseandrespondto thetwoissues,therearealsosomecriticalinterconnectionsthatresearchersin particularhavefailedtoexamineandcritique.Inrelationtobothissuesthefocusis primarilyontheoffenderinthecaseoftraffickingthecriminaljusticesystemstepsin topursueaninvestigationandideallyaprosecution.Inrelationtoworkplace exploitationtheemployerissubjecttofinesand,potentially,prosecution.Inboth casesthevictimissolelythevehicleforcriminalisationthatis,withoutavictimto identifywhathasoccurredandtoarticulatetheirexperiencetoauthorities,the practicesremainhiddenandunknown.Thatis,thefocusisprimarilyonareactive modelofrespondingtocasesofexploitationbasedfirstoninformationand intelligencebeingprovidedtoauthoritiesandsecondonvictimsthenproviding evidence(throughtestimonyandotherformsofcorroborationoftheirexperience).It appearsthatthereisapotentialheretorethinkhowweunderstandandtherefore respondtobothissuesbyrecognisingtheseconnections. Currentlyweconceptualisevictimsofthesecrimesverydifferentlyandasanation Australiaisfarmoreresponsivetotheprovisionofvictimsupportforwomenwhoare traffickedintothecountry.Inrelationtotraffickingthedominantunderstandingof victimhoodandtheneedsofvictimsoftraffickingisfocusedonagenderedtrauma basedframework,wherewelfareandemotionalsupportaretheprimaryand immediateissuestobeaddressed.Inplaceofthis,basedontheframeworkoutlined aboveandtheidentificationoftheactualformsofexploitationthatmanifestwithin thenation,Iwouldarguethereisaneedforamuchbroaderrecognitionofindividuals asactive,economictransnationalcitizens.Identifyingthattheseindividualswho experienceexploitationareinAustraliatoworkenablesaplatformfromwhichto appreciatethatvictimsmaybemoreinterestedinreceivingtheirunpaidwagesand compensationforthebreachingofagreedworkingcontractsandagreements,rather thanonlybeingrecognisedasindividualswhoneedwelfareandemotionalsupport andwhoareprovidedwiththis,inpart,toassistinmaximisingthepotentialfora successfulconvictiontobepursued.Similarly,individualswhohaveexperienced
334
exploitationwhileinAustraliaonatemporaryworkingvisamayalsorequirethese formsofcompensationaswellastheopportunitytoaccessotherformsofwelfare andemotionalsupportshouldtheyrequireit.Currentlythereisnosystemofsupport operatingthatisasgenerousasthesupportgiventovictimsoftrafficking. Inaddition,weneedtoengagewiththewayinwhichbothissuesarefoundedupon themanagementoftheborderregime,wheretheoptionsforanyonewho experiencesexploitationandwhoisnotacitizenofAustralia,areultimately determinedbytheirmigrationstatus.Inrelationtobothformsofexploitation,the individualisplacedintheprecariouspositionofbeingreliantonanotherpartyto providethemwiththepossibilityofremaininginAustraliaiftheyreporttheir victimisation.Forvictimsoftraffickingoncetheyhavebeenidentifiedasapotential victimtheyareplacedonbridgingvisaFtoallowthemtoremaininAustraliawhile theauthoritiesdeterminewhetherthereisacasethatcanbepursued.Ifthereisno caseoriftheyareuncooperativeintheinvestigationtheywillbereturnedtotheir countryoforiginwithina28daytimeperiod(BlackburninJCACC,2004:23).For thosewhoareinAustraliawitha457temporaryvisa,theyhavetheoptionofleaving theemployerwhohasexploitedthembutiftheydosotheyhave28daystofind anotheremployerwillingtosponsorthemandtosubmitanapplicationforanew457 visaontheirbehalf.Duringthisperiodtheycannotwork,andtheycannotworkwhile the457visaispending.Iftheycannotfindasponsortheyhavetoreturntotheir countryoforigin(advicereceivedincommunicationwithDIACemployeeoperating ImmigrationDobIntelephonehotline,17thJuly2008).Suchprovisionsplaya significantroleinincreasingthevulnerabilityofindividualswhoareexperiencing exploitationorabuseinanyworkplace.Indeed,theuncertaintyofwhatmayhappen onceyoureportyourvictimisationcreatesadisincentiveforapproachingauthorities and/orforarticulatingyourexperiencewhenimmigrationraidsandchecksare conducted.
335
Itisclearthatmoreresearchintohowtheseprocessesandoptionsareexperiencedby individualswhoareexploitedwithinAustraliaisrequiredtodevelopamorenuanced understandingoftheimpactofsuchlimitedoptions. Conclusion Acoreconcernwiththedevelopmentofthispaperandotherslinkedtois,itto recognisethatifweapproachtraffickinginpersonsandlabourexploitationfroman alternativeperspectivewecanbegintoasksomeverydifferentquestionsabouthow theseissuescometomanifestinAustraliaandabouttheappropriatenessofthe currenteffortstorespond.Insomelocationsarguingthattraffickinginpersonsand exploitativelabourshouldbebroughtunderonebannerhasbeenmetwithaconcern thatthisunderminesandeffectivelysilencesthegendered,exploitativenatureofsex trafficking.Thecentralargumenthereisthatwecanonlybringtobearamore comprehensiveanalysisofgenderedandsexualisedexploitationwhenwelook beyondthesexindustryandrecognisethatwomenexperiencetheseformsof exploitationinawiderangeofindustries.Sotoounderstandingtraffickingaslabour exploitationenablesamorecomprehensiveanalysisoftheintersectionofrace, genderandexploitationwithinarangeofindustries.Thisapproachalsopointstothe limitedknowledgemadeaccessiblebyrelyingsolelyoncriminaljusticedataand disruptsthelogicofrelyingprimarilyonacriminaljusticeresponsetoaddressthese issues. Furtheritpointstotheneedforattentiontoalsobefocusedontheincreased regulationandsecuritisationofnationalbordersandmigrationregimesandthe concomitantriseinfocusupontransnationalcrime.Indeed,itpromptsustoask questionsabouthownationssuchasAustraliaarerespondingtovariousformsof exploitationinwaysthatappeartobe(andindeed,claimtobe)victimfocusedthat mayultimatelybeidentifiedasexacerbatingthevulnerabilityofnoncitizenswithin thenation.Finallyitisclearthatweneedtochallengehowweconceiveofthe responsibilitiesandobligationsofdestinationcountriesinassistingnoncitizenswho becomevictimsofallformsoflabourexploitationandtoconsidertheroleofnations
336
suchasAustraliaincontributingtoacontextwithinwhichtraffickingandexploitation inallitsformsmayproliferate.
337
References Andreas,P.(2000)BorderGames:PolicingtheUSMexicoDivide.Ithaca:Cornell UniversityPress. AttorneyGeneralsDepartment(2004).AustralianGovernment'sActionPlanto EradicateTraffickinginPersons.Canberra,AttorneyGeneral'sDepartment. AttorneyGeneralsDepartment(2007)MoreResourcestoCombatPeopleTrafficking, MediaRelease8May2007. Online:http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/RWP7561D03F6952FB64CA257 2D4000BB873 Berman,J.(2003)(Un)popularStrangersandCrises(Un)bounded:DiscoursesofSex Trafficking,theEuropeanPoliticalCommunity&thePanickedStatesoftheModern StateEuropeanJournalofInternationalRelations.9(1)3786. Burn,J.&Simmons,F.(2005)RewardingWitnesses,IgnoringVictims:AnEvaluation oftheNewTraffickingVisaFrameworkImmigrationReview(24)613. Burn,J,Blay,S.&Simmons,F.(2005)CombatingHumanTrafficking:Australias ResponsetoModernDaySlaveryAustralianLawJournal79(9)54352. Burn,J.,Simmons,F.&Costello,G.(2006)AustralianNGOShadowReporton TraffickedWomeninAustralia:Submittedtothe34thsessionoftheCommitteefor theConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationAgainstWomen (CEDAW).23January2006. PDF:http://www.antislavery.org.au/pdf/CEDAW_ShadowReport2006.pdf(accessed 7/7/2007).
338
David,F.(2008)Prosecutingtraffickinginpersons:knownissues,emerging responsesTrendsandissuesincrimeandcriminaljusticeN.358June2008.Canberra: AustralianInstituteofCriminology.PDF: http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi358t.html Ehrenreich,B.&Hochschild,A.(2003)IntroductioninB.Ehrenreich&A.Hochschild (eds.)GlobalWoman:Nannies,MaidsAndSexWorkersInTheNewEconomy.London: GrantaBooks. Gallagher,A.(2008)AquestionofbondageTheAge15May2008p17. Gallagher,A.(2005)HumanRightsandHumanTrafficking:APreliminaryReviewof AustraliasResponseinM.Smith(ed.)HumanRightsYearinReview.Melbourne:The CapstranCentreforHumanRightsLaw,MonashUniversity. Hogg,R.&Brown,M.(1998)RethinkingLaw&Order.Annandale:PlutoPress. JointCommitteeontheAustralianCrimeCommission[JCACC](2004)Reference: Traffickinginwomenforsexualservitude(Thursday26February2004,Canberra) OfficialCommitteeHansard. PDF:http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/joint/commttee/J7253.pdf(accessed7/8/2008) JointStandingCommitteeonMigration(2007)Temporaryvisaspermanentbenefits: Ensuringtheeffectiveness,fairnessandintegrityofthetemporarybusinessvisaprogram August2007.Canberra:CommonwealthofAustralia.Online: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/mig/457visas/report/fullreport.pdf Kelly,L.(2005)Youcanfindanythingyouwant:ACriticalReflectiononResearch onTraffickinginPersonswithinandintoEuropeinF.LaczkoandE.Gozdziak(eds.), DataandResearchonHumanTrafficking:AGlobalSurvey.Geneva:IOM
339
Kissane,K.(2008)JudgewarnsmanycouldbesnaredbyslaverylawsTheAge14 May2008,p5. McSherry,B.&Kneebone,S.(2008)Traffickinginwomenandforcedmigration: movingvictimsacrosstheborderofcrimeintothedomainofhumanrights.The InternationalJournalofHumanRights12(1)pp6787 MinisterforJustice&Customs(2003)AustralianGovernmentannouncesmajor packagetocombatpeopletrafficking.MediaRelease(13October2003).Canberra: AttorneyGeneralsDepartment. Moore,M.&Knox,M.(2007).ExploitationofskilledmigrantsexposedSydney MorningHerald,August28,2007. Munro,V.(2006)AComparativeStudyofResponsestotheTraffickinginWomenfor ProstitutionBritishJournalofCriminology.46(2)31833. OBrien,N.(2008)LandmarksexslaverydecisiontodayTheAustralian,28August 2008p.8 OBrien,N.&Wynhausen,E.(2008)DPPtotestlawsinsexslaverycaseThe Australian15May2008,p4. Piper,N.(2005)AProblembyaDifferentName?AReviewofResearchon TraffickinginSouthEastAsiaandOceaniaInternationalMigration.43(1/2)20333. Putt,J.(2007)HumantraffickingtoAustralia:aresearchchallengeTrendsandissues incrimeandcriminaljusticeN.338,June2007.Canberra:AustralianInstituteof Criminology.PDF:http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi338.html
340
Sassen,S.(2003)GlobalCities&SurvivalCircuitsinB.Ehrenreich&A.Hochschild (eds.)GlobalWoman:Nannies,MaidsandSexWorkersintheNewEconomy.London: GrantaBooks. Sassen,S.(2002)WomensBurden:CounterGeographiesofGlobalization&the FeminizationofSurvivalNordicJournalofInternationalLaw.71(2)255274. Sassen,S.(1998)Globalisation&ItsDiscontents.NewYork:NewPress. Segrave,M.(inpress)Orderattheborder:therepatriationofvictimsoftrafficking. WomensStudiesInternationalForum. Segrave,M.(2007)RestoringOrder:Statecraft,theborder&sextrafficking. UnpublishedPhDmanuscript. Segrave,M.(2004)Surelysomethingisbetterthannothing?TheAustralian responsetothetraffickingofwomenintosexualservitudeinAustraliaCurrentIssues inCriminalJustice.16(1)8592. Segrave,M.&Milivojevic,S.(2005)Sextrafficking:anewagendaSocial Alternatives.2005:SecondQuarter,1116. UnitedStatesDepartmentofState[USODS](2004)TraffickinginPersonsReport 2004.Washington:USDepartmentofState. PDF:http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/34158.pdf(accessed7/7/2007). UnitedStatesDepartmentofState[USODS](2008)TraffickinginPersonsReport 2008.Washington:USDepartmentofState. PDF:http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/105501.pdf Violante,V.(2008)CourtreinstatessexslaveconvictionsCanberraTimes29August 2008p.3
341
342
StunningDevelopments:SomeImplicationsofTasersinAustralia
EmmaRyan CriminologyDepartment MonashUniversity ejrya2@student.monash.edu Thispaperconsidersthedebatesurroundingtheintroductionofthestungunor TaserintoAustralianpolicingandcautionsagainsttheirintroductionasgeneralissue weapons.Thiscautionissetagainstconcernsabouttheregulationofpoliceuseof forcegenerallyandinlightofcriticalcommentaryonsublethalweaponry internationally,especiallyfromtheUnitedStateswhereTaserusebypoliceis widespread.ThepapertracestheintroductionofTasersasgeneralissueweaponsin Australiaandoutlinestheargumentsforandagainsttheirintroduction.Criticalissues addressedincludethenumberofdeathsattributedtoTaseruseintheUnitedStates, theproblemsassociatedwithidentifyingstungunsascontributorstodeath,the capacityofsuchweaponstoreducetheincidenceoflethalforceinpolicingandthe potentialimpactofTaseruseonoverpolicedpopulations. Policescholarsandotherobserversarecurrentlywatchingtherolloutofstungun(or Taser)technologyinAustraliawithsomeconcern(Meehan,2008;Singer,2008;Law InstituteofVictoria,2004).WhileTasersarebeingembracedbyAustralianpolice, internationalexperiencesindicatethatthismoveislikelytobeproblematic.Research andmediareportsfromoverseas(especiallytheUnitedStatesandCanada)showthat stungunshavebeenusedagainstchildren,elderlypeople,pregnantwomenand individualswhohavealreadybeenrestrainedand/orwhoposenodangerto themselvesorothers.ThereareexamplesfromtheUnitedStatesofTasersbeing usedbypolicetocontrolprotestorsandotherwiseobtaincompliancefrompeople posingnoimmediatethreattoanyone(PittsburghIndependentMediaCenter,2005; Killian,2007;Bobb,BargeandNaguib,2007).Theyareevidentlyusedincontexts whereresortingtofirearmswouldbeentirelyinappropriate,callingintoquestionthe
343
assertionthatstungunssavelives.Thereareexamplesofpoliceaccidentallydrawing andfiringfirearmswhentheyintendedtodeployastungun,withfatalconsequences (seeBier,2003).Childishhorseplayhasalsoresultedinoneofficertaseringanother. AFloridaSheriffsdeputywassuspendedfromdutyfortwelvedaysafteronesuch incident(NBCNewsChannel,2008).Thereisevenadocumentedcaseofanofficer beingreprimandedafteraccidentallytaseringhimself(Authorunknown,2007). PerhapsofmostconcernisanAmnestyInternationalreportconcerningsome290 deathsfollowingTaseruseinNorthAmericaalone(AmnestyInternational,2007). Someincidentshaveresultedinlegalactionagainstpoliceandalsostungun manufacturer,TaserInternational,theworldsleadingsupplierofconductedenergy weaponstopolice,includingthoseAustralianforcesthathaveadoptedtheweapon. Taserisabrandnameofstungunshandheld,gunshapedelectronicweaponsthat shoottwoneedletippeddartsintotheskin,trailingafinewireelectricalcable connectedtothehandset.Thefiringrangevariesfrom7toaround11metres (dependingonthetypeofcartridgeused),deliveringanelectricshockdesignedto temporarilyparalysethemusclesoftherecipientandimmediatelyincapacitatethem. Theopencircuit(orarcing)voltageofaTaseris50,000volts,althoughTaserargues thatthepeakvoltagedeliveredtothebodyis1200volts,infivesecondburstsandthe averagevoltagedeliveredis400volts(Kroll,2008).Compressednitrogenisusedas thefiringmechanism.Stungunscanalsobeusedindrivestunmode,indirect contactwithskin,causingseverepainbutnotmuscleincapacitation.WhiletheTaser companyitselfcontinuestoclaimthattheirweaponhasneverbeenidentifiedasa causeofdeath,AmnestyInternational(andothercivillibertiesgroups)haveserious concernsaboutthevalidityofthisclaim,recordingover290deathsfollowingTaser deploymentinCanadaandtheUnitedStates(AmnestyInternational,2007).Scientific evidenceregardingthecapacityofastungunsvoltagetocausedeathiscloudy. Whilesomestudieshaveshownthatheartrhythmscanbeaffected,manyothers showtheopposite.Themajorityofthelatterareeitherpartiallyorfullyfundedbythe marketleader,TASERInternationalandhencetheuncertaintyandconjecturethat
344
surroundstheissue.Therearemostcertainlyseriousdifficultiespresentedto CoronersrequiredtoidentifyTasersascauses,contributorsorcorrelatesincases wheredeathhasoccurred(Vilke,n.d.).Atpresent,itwouldseemthatthefactsare simplynotclearonthismatter:thisaloneisgoodreasontosupportacautionary approachtothegeneralissueofTaserstopoliceinAustralia. Stunguns,orTasers,areatthecuttingedgeofpolicingtechnologyandarecurrently beingintroducedasgeneralissueweaponsforpoliceinseveralAustralianstates.The policeviewonthematterisgenerallythatthistechnologyisinvaluableintermsof makingthejobeasier,andsaferforofficers:allowingthemtoavoidusingothertypes offorce,suchashandtohandcombat,batonuseandatthefarendofthespectrum, lethalforce.Ofconcerntomanyobserversistherangeofoptionswithintheforce continuumthatTaserscanreplaceandtheirabilitytoconsiderablyrampuppolice relianceonusingforce.Thiswouldperhapsbeunproblematicifweweresurethatuse offorcebypolicewasalwayslegitimate,wellreasonedandaccountable.Sadly,the recordshowsthatitisnot.OneoftheearliestandmostinfluentialAmericanpolice scholars,JeromeSkolnick,notedtheproblematicoutcomesofthecombinationof dangerandauthorityinpolicingasfollows: Thecombinationofdangerandauthorityfoundinthetaskofthe policeman(sic)unavoidablycombinetofrustrateprocedural regularityDangertypicallyyieldsselfdefensiveconduct,conduct thatmuststraintobeimpulsivebecausedangerarousesfearso easily.Authorityundersuchconditionsbecomesaresourceto reduceperceivedthreatsratherthanaseriesofreflective judgementsarrivedatcalmlyAsaresult,proceduralrequirements takeonafrillycharacter,oratleasttendtobereducedtoa secondarypositioninthefaceofcircumstancesseenasthreatening (Skolnick,1975,p.44).
345
Suchobservationsarekey,astheymakeclearthereasonswhythecircumstancesof sublethalweapondeploymentrequirecarefulobservation.Ofparticularconcernare thecircumstancesconsideredasdangerousbypolice,alongwithwhomandwhatis beingendangered.Wherelifeisatstake,wehaveaclearrelianceonpolicetoprevent afataloutcome(forpolice,offendersandespeciallyforbystanders),butwhereitis merelyauthoritythatisendangered,thereisarelianceontheagentsof accountability(andotherobservers)tostrivetowardsclearlimitsonpoliceuseof force. Limitinguseofforcesuccessfullyisfarfromasimpletask,scholarshaveoftenargued thatwecantevenbesurehowexcessiveforceoughttobedefined(Klockars,1996; Goldsmith,2000).Despitethis,suchlimitsarecrucial,havingaclearlinktothe legitimacyofpolicingitself.Alienatedpopulationsarepronetotherejectionofpolice authority,whichmayresultinadownwardspiralinpolice/publicrelations, exacerbatingissuesoflawandorderratherthanamelioratingthem.Thisoutcome hasconcernedpolicemanagersfromtheearliesttimes.Inhisexaminationofpolicing inVictoriantimes,Wilson(2006)statespoliceauthoritiesdiscouragedovert brutality,primarilybecauseitunderminedpolicelegitimacybyshatteringthedesired imageoftheconstableasacitizeninuniform(p.57).Thepotentialofmodern softerweaponstoshatterthecherishedPeelitenotionofpolicingbyconsentis significant,andintheabsenceoffirmaccountabilityprocessesthereisadangerthat theirusewillcometobeseen(bybothpoliceandsomecitizens)asessential.The rapidspreadofTasersacrosstheUnitedStates,andnowAustralia,suggeststhatthis isalreadytakingplace. Alongwithcapsicumsprays,Tasersfallunderthegeneraltermnonlethalweapon (thetermusedmostcommonlybytheTasercompanywhenmarketingtheirproduct andalsoadoptedbyTheUnitedStatesDepartmentofDefense)althoughthere remainsconjectureaboutthevalidityofthisterm,mainlybecausethereisno certaintythatsuchweaponsare,infactnonlethal(Feakin,2006).Otherterms
346
includelessthanlethal,disabling,incapacitating,worsethanlethalsoftkill, prelethal,paralysing,sublethalandcomplianceweapons(Feakin,2006;Wright, 2002).Theconfusionsurroundingcorrectterminologyreflectsthedoubtcastover thenotionthattheseweaponsdonotcausedeath.Muchofthesupportforthe introductionofTasersintoAustraliaisbasedonclaimsthattheywillreducethe instanceoflethalforce,andbeusedasanalternativetosuchforce.Therecordsofar, however,supportsthefactthattheywillactuallybeusedinaddition,asafunctionof whathasbeentermedmissioncreep(LewerandDavison,2006). TheimplicationsofintroducingstunguntechnologyintoAustralianpolicingarethe mainfocusofthisdiscussion.Thereareseveralissuesofconcernincludingthe assertionthatsuchweaponswillreducetheneedforpolicetoresorttofirearms,the growingarrayofweaponsavailabletopoliceinanygivensituation(theissueshere arebothpracticalandphilosophical),theadequacyofpolicetraininginusingthe weapon,thecontextwithinwhichtheyareusedandthesociodemographicsoftheir mostfrequenttargets.ItispotentiallyproblematicforpolicetoincludeTaser technologyintheirarsenalintheabsenceofstrictaccountabilityprocesses.History hasalreadyshown,especiallyinVictoria(themainfieldofthisauthorsobservations ofpolicing),thattheaccountabilityofpoliceforuseofweaponsislackinginseveral crucialaspects(seeFreckelton,2000).Thefactorscontributingtothisarewell established:evidenceaboutthecircumstancesinwhichweaponsaredeployedis generallysuppliedbypolice,useofforceisinvestigatedbypolicewhomaybe sympathetictowardsthepointofviewofthoseunderinvestigationanditisdifficult toattributeculpabilitytopolicewhenthoseinvolvedareoftenamongstthemost disempowered(andunhealthy)groupsinsociety.Finally,wheredeathorinjuryisthe resultofpoliceactions,therecordshowsthatjuriesarereluctanttobringdownguilty verdictsagainstpolicewhoareseenasonlytryingtodotheirjobsinthebestway theycan.Thereseemstoexistacertainmoraldivisionoflabourthatmakespeople reluctanttoblamepolicefortasksthatwearereluctanttoundertakeourselves
347
(Alexandra,2000).Thisnotonlymakesaccountabilityforweaponsuseproblematic, butthenotionofnonlethalweaponsalsobecomesespeciallyappealing. IntroducingTasers TheadoptionofTaserstungunsintoAustralianstatepoliceforcesbeganwiththeir introductionintospecialistpolicingunitsinallstates(LawInstituteofVictoria,2004). WesternAustralianpoliceledthecharge,introducingthemtotheirTacticalResponse Unitin1999andmakingthemgeneralissueforoperationalpolicebyearly2007. Assaultsonpoliceinthatstatehavereportedlydroppedby40%andnofatalitieshave yetbeendirectlylinkedtotheweapon,althoughatleastonehasoccurredfollowing theuseofaTaser(Bennet,2007;Eliot,2007).TheNorthernTerritoryhasalso adoptedstunguntechnology;seventyfourTasershavebeenintroduced,withsixin AliceSpringsandoneineachbushstation(Barwick,2008).Queenslandissoonto followsuit,withTasershavingbeentrialledthere(inBrisbane,LoganandtheGold Coast).TheQLDMinisterforPolicerecentlyannouncedthatTaserswillbecome generalissueinJune2008,followingthetwelvemonthtrialperiod(Crimeand MisconductCommission,2008).Thismovehasbeencriticised,however,labelledan apparentimpulsedecisiontosatisfydemandsfortheweaponbytheQueensland PoliceUnion(Meehan,2008).PoliceinQueenslandhavealreadyadmittedto investigatingacomplaintthatahandcuffedsuspect(heldintheCleveland watchhouse)wasrepeatedlyTaseredafterswearingatpolice(Meehan,2008). PoliceinNewSouthWalesareonthevergeofintroducingtheweapons,withthe StateGovernmentrecentlyapprovingtheintroductionof229Tasersatacostof$1 million.Itisexpectedthatatleast2000willbeissuedacrossthestate(Linnell,2008). TheVictoriangovernmentestablishedaworkingpartyontheissueonApril,2007that lookssettorecommendtheirwidespreadintroduction(Singer,2008).Atthetime ofwriting,however,nosuchintroductionhasyetoccurred.FormerWestern AustralianChiefCommissionerofPolice,BobFalconerhasrecentlybeenquotedin Victorianpress(Anderson,2008),urgingtheVictorianCommissioner,Christine
348
Nixon,tostopdraggingherfeetontheissueandbitetheproverbialbullet.Inhis view,sheshouldmakeadecisionnowandendthisprocrastinationoravoidance (Anderson,2008).Thiswasfollowedbyanappealfromthewifeofadeceased shootingvictimwhoargues,therewouldbemorepeoplealiveifthepolicewere usingthestunguns(Anderson,2008). CommissionerNixonscautiousapproachtotheintroductionofstungunsisnot withoutmerit.AlthoughFalconerbelievesthattheefficacyofTasershasbeenwell established,AmnestyInternationalandotherconcernedgroupsbegtodiffer.That Coroners(andthemarketingarmofTaserInternational)finditmoredifficultthan AmnestytoseealinkbetweenTaseruseandfataloutcomesisnottheonlyissue.The contextsinwhichpoliceresorttousingstungunsarealsoimportanttoconsider. Manyinstancesofstungunusehavenowbeenrecordedthatappear disproportionatetothethreatbeingfaced.TheuseofTasersintheUnitedStates showstheyarefrequentlydeployedagainstpeoplewhofleefrompoliceafterminor offencessuchasshopliftingandtrafficmisdemeanours.Theyhavealsobeenusedto breakupbrawls.Offurtherconcernistheirincreasinglywidespreadusebyprison officersandagainstthosewhoareotherwisealreadyheldinpolicecustodybut refusingtocomplywithpolice(Meehan,2008;Wray,2008).Clearly,Tasersarenot alwaysusedinplaceoflethalforce,butasacomplianceweapon,forcingpeopleto acquiescetopolicecommandsorrespecttheirauthority(PittsburghIndependent MediaCenter,2005;Meehan,2008;Bobb,BargeandNaguib,2007).Whilesuchuse mayhavemeritinsomecircumstances,thatpeacefulprotestorsandrestrained,non violentsuspectshavefallenvictimtostungunsraisesaseparatesetofconcerns regardingappropriatelimitsontheuseofforcebypolice. ItisnotwithoutironythattheUnitedStatesisleadingtheTaserchargegivenits historyofstrivingtoprotecttheindividualfromarbitrarydisplaysofstatepower.The highlydecentralisedstructureofpolicing,alegacyofahighlyliberalisedpolitical philosophy,hasnowresultedinTasersbeingwidespreadthroughoutthepolicing structureandusedagainstcitizensincircumstancesnotpossibleunderamore centralisedstructure.Forinstance,thereismuchdebateonUniversitycampuses
349
aboutthecarriageofstungunsbycampuspolice,andoneparticularlydisturbing exampleofauniversitystudentbeingrepeatedlyTaseredafterrefusingtocomply withcommandstoleaveaUniversitylibrary(Bobb,BargeandNaguib,2007).This incidenthasbeensubjectedtoseriouscriticismregradingthedisproportionatenature oftheTaseruseandgivescredencetotheabovementionedconcernsofTaserand missioncreep. Canadianpolicehavealsohadalessthansmoothexperiencesincetheintroductionof theweaponsin2001.FollowingthehighlypubliciseddeathofaPolishcitizenat VancouverInternationalAirportinNovember,2007,aninquirywaslaunchedbythe CommissionforPublicComplaintsAgainsttheRoyalCanadianMountedPolicewhich recommended,amongstotherthings,thatTasersbereclassifiedfromintermediate toimpactweaponsontheforcecontinuum,thatfarbetterrecordkeepingpractices beintroducedandthatquarterlyandannualreportsbeproducedtoallowopen scrutinyofthecircumstancesoftheiruse(CommissionforPublicComplaintsAgainst RCMP,2008). Toomanyweapons? OtherpracticalconcernsregardingtheintroductionofTasersincludewheretheysit ontheforcecontinuum(ascomparedtocapsicumspray,forexample)andalsothe practicalitiesofcarryingthemroutinely(giventhatpolicearealreadycarrying firearms,sidearms,handcuffs,torchesandcapsicumspraycanisters).Therehave alreadybeenexamplesintheUSwhereofficershavemistakenlydrawnafirearmand firedwhentheymeanttodeploytheirTaser.ThecityofMaderaandanofficerhave filedasuitagainstTaserInternationalarguingthatthecompanyprovidedrelated trainingandrepresentationsinsuchamannersoastocauseanyreasonablepolice officertomistakenlydrawandfireahandguninsteadoftheTaserdevice.(Bier, 2003).Thevictiminthiscasediedfromhisinjuries,althoughthedeathwasruled accidentalandnochargeswerelaidagainsttheofficerherself.Inanothercase,a25
350
yearoldCanadianmanissuingpoliceafterhewasshotwhentheofficermistakenly drewhisguninsteadofaTaserashehadintended(Authorunknown,2008).The officerhassinceresigned.ThefamilyofaCanadianman,RobertBagnell,whodiedin 2004afterbeingtaseredisalsopursuingthematterinthecourts,althougha CoronersInquestfoundthatTaserusehadnotcontributed(CanadianPress,2006). Bagnellwasdrugaffectedandsufferingapsychiatricconditionatthetimeofhis death. Thesecasessupportacarefulapproachtotheintroductionofstungunsandshowthe dangersinherentintherhetoricoflethalforcereductionsooftencitedbyTaser proponents.MediareportsabouttheintroductionofTasersinVictoriasuggestthat whileitisveryprobabletheywillfindtheirwayintogeneralissuepoliceweaponsit hasnotyetbeendecidedhowtheywillbecarried(Anderson,2008).Thismeasured approachislaudable,giventhedemonstratedpotentialforofficerstomake mistakes. Followingfromthisistheissueofhowofficersareexpectedtodecidewhichsub lethalweaponismostappropriateinagivencircumstance.Howcouldacapsicum sprayworthyincidentbedistinguishedfromonerequiringaTaser?Wouldthe introductionofTasersmakecapsicumsprayuselessfrequent?Theanswersareasyet unclearbutofficersarecertainlyinanunenviablepositionwhenrequiredtochoose betweenagrowingarrayofpossibleweaponalternatives,whenitseemsclearthat mostcaseswheretopendforceisnecessaryrequiresplitseconddecisionmaking.It maybethattherearesomecompellingoperationalandtacticalreasonswhysenior policeshouldanalysetheiroptionscarefullybeforeaddingtotheirofficersarsenals.
351
Policetraining Arelatedissueconcernsthenatureandextentofpolicetrainingwithregardtosub lethalweapons.Thequalityoftrainingcanhavearealbearingonthebehaviourof policeunderpressure.ThiswasaptlydemonstratedduringtheVictoriaPolice shootingsera(from198894)whereoverlyconfrontationaltrainingmodules(the FirearmsOfficerSurvivalTrainingUnit,borrowedfromtheFBI)wereidentifiedasa significantcontributortothedisproportionatenumberoffatalshootingsattributedto VictoriaPoliceofficersatthattime(seeTaskForceVictor,1994).Thisbringstomind anoldandreveredadageamongstuseofforcescholars:toamanwithahammer, everythinglookslikeanail(Chevigny,1995).Noofficerwantstoseegoodtraining hoursgotowasteandthismentalityhasthepotentialtoincreasethenumberof incidentsinwhichTasersbecometheweaponofchoice,whichinturnmayincrease theriskofinjuryordeath. Asmentionedabove,inadequatetrainingisbeginningtobeidentifiedasthe precursorofproblemsforUSpolicemistakenlydrawingfirearmsinsteadofTasers, althoughtheapparentremedyistoinsistthatthestungunsbemadetolookandfeel lesslikegunsasopposedtoacarefulconsiderationofthenecessityofsuchweapons atall.ThefamilyintheBagnellcasementionedabovehavespecificallyidentified inadequatetrainingintheirlawsuitagainstTaserInternational,VancouverPolice DepartmentandtheirChiefalongwithfiveindividualofficers(CanadianPress,2006). TheBagnellfamilyhasaccusedTaserInternationaloffailingtoconductadequate safetytestingofitsproductsandofpromotingtheTaserasnonlethalwhenitknew, oroughttohaveknownotherwise(CanadianPress,2006).Itremainstobeseenhow thisfactorplaysoutwithintheAustraliancontext. PerhapsofmoresignificanceistheestimatedcostoftrainingpoliceregularlyinTaser use.EachTasercartridgecostsaroundfifteenUSdollars,soforapoliceforceof around10,000tofireoneduringtrainingevenjustonceayearwouldcost$150,000US (Brown,2008).Thatcomesontopofpurchasingandmaintainingtheweapons.So
352
althoughTasersmightbetheeasypolicingoption,theyarecertainlynotgoingtobe cheap. ContextofUse Asalreadymentioned,thefactofmissioncreepandthenatureandcontextof incidentsduringwhichstungunsareusedisakeypointforscholarstoobserveas TasersrolloutinAustralia.Intheabsenceofaccessiblerecordkeepingpracticesby policeregardingTaserdeployment,itisprobablygoingtobethemediaandpublic witnessestoeventsthatwillkeepusinformedabouttheseissues.Reliablerecord keepinghasbeenakeyrecommendationinseveralanalysesofTaserdeployment, capsicumsprayuseandalsoofspecificincidents,thoughweareyettoseetheextent towhichsuchrecommendationsarebroughttofruition(seeCrimeandMisconduct Commission,2005;CommissionforPublicComplaintsAgainsttheRCMP,2008). TheCrimeandMisconductCommissioninQueenslandhasalreadyprovidedcluesto thepossibleoutcomesofTaserdeployment,findingthat33%ofOCsprayincidents haveinvolvedIndigenousAustralianswhomakeupjust3%oftheoverallpopulation (CrimeandMisconductCommission,2005).TherearealsoindicationsfromtheUS thatAfricanAmericansarethetargetsofTaseruseathigherratesthanotherracial groups(TheAssociatedPress,2008).Tasersaremarketedasasaferoptionthan capsicumsprayandseveralUSpolicingorganizationsreportasharpreductionin capsicumspraydeploymentaftertheintroductionofTasers.Itisreasonableto predictthatTasersinAustraliawillresultinthereplication(andamplification)of patternsofoverpolicingalreadywelldocumented(Cunneen,2001).Community representativesandhealthprofessionalsintheNorthernTerritoryarealready expressingconcernaboutthelikelihoodthatAboriginalAustralianswillpotentially haveseverelyadversehealthreactionstoTaseruseduetoalreadypoorhealth standards(Authorunknown,2008b).Thereareclearlygroundsforconcernabout Tasersasgeneralissueweaponsinacountrywithahistoryofunequaland
353
confrontationalpolicingtactics(Cunneen,2001;McCulloch,2001).Thesepatterns andmethodsoughttobeacknowledgedandcorrectedratherthanignoredand repeated. AlsoofconcernisthepotentialforTaseruseduringincidentsinvolvingthementally ill.TherearecountlessexamplesintheUSmediaofpsychoticandseverelydrug affectedindividualssufferingadversereactionsafterbeingtasered.Manyofthose whohavediedfollowingsublethalweaponusehavebeendrugaffected,orhavea diagnosedmentalillness(Amnesty,2007).Suchindividualssometimesposeadanger tothemselves,butnotalwaystoothers,andsothejustificationofusingasublethal weapontocontainthesituationiffarfromclearcut.AMelbournemandiedafter beingsprayedwithcapsicumspray(reportedlytopreventhimfromstabbinghimself) atthetimeofwriting(Authorunknown,2008c).Theissueofdeescalationof situationsinvolvingmentallyillpeopleisobscuredincurrentdebatesabouta conditionknownasexciteddelirium,whichalthoughitdoesnotappearinthe DiagnosticandStatisticalManualofMentalDisorders,isroutinelytoutedasthe actualcauseofmanydeathsthatfollowstungunuse.Thisconundrumisthecurrent focusofthisauthorsresearchandwillformthebasisofongoingwork.Nonetheless, policingstrategiesthatgivedueregardtohumanrightsconsiderationswould presumablyseektocontrolcriticalincidentsinvolvingthementallyill(especially)in waysthatstrivetoavoidfataloutcomesratherthanwhatappearsatpresenttobe ratherriskytacticsinvolvingthedeploymentofelectricalcurrents. PotentialforAccountabilitythroughNewTechnology Despitetheproblemsofaccountabilitymentionedabove,therearewaysinwhich technologicaladvancementmayassistincontrollingTaserusebypolice.Arecent legalsettlementinUtah,USAinvolvedamanawarded$40,000USafterhispassive resistanceofaHighwayPatrolOfficerresultedinhimbeingtaseredtwice(Bergreen, 2008).ThevideofootagetakenfromthepatrolcarwaspostedonYouTubetwo
354
monthsaftertheevent,andhashadinexcessof1.7millionhits.Aninvestigationwas launchedwithintwoweeksofthepostingandsettlementsubsequentlyreached (Nizza,2008).TheaforementionedCanadianInquirywasalsopromptedlargelyby thepostingofphonecamerafootageonYouTubebyawitness.Thisindicatesthe powerofa(nowenhanced)courtofpublicopiniontobringaboutpreviouslyunseen levelsofscrutinyofpolicebehaviour.Thisgivessomehoperegardingthepublic regulationofsublethalweaponsuse. AnotherpositiveisthatnewerTasermodelsarepotentiallyeasiertoregulate,asthey areequippedwithmicrochipswiththecapacitytologthedate,timeanddurationof usage.Suchdataisregularlyreliedupontoassesspolicerecallofeventswhencalled toaccountfortheiractions,thoughitisnotyetclearhowreliableormanipulatable thisdatamightbe.AfurtherinnovationistheTasercam,whichisacamera mountedontheTaserbattery.Itrecordsupto90minutesofaudioandvideoonce theTaseristurnedon,andfunctionsinlowlight(Dondoneau,2008).Sofar,lessthan tenUScitypoliceorganizationshaveadoptedthecameras,butaslitigationagainst policeincreasestheirusemayrise.Whilemighthelpensurethatpoliceremain accountablefortheiruseofstunguns,theyhavenotbeenadoptedbythemajorityof AustralianpoliceusingTasers(withtheexceptionofNSW).Budgetaryconstraints maywellberesponsibleforthisasthecostoftheenhancedmodelisgreater.While thismightexplainwhytheyhavenotbeenembraced,itisalsorevealssomething abouttheemphasisplacedonaccountabilityforuseofforceacrossjurisdictions. PoliceChiefBoisseCorreaofHonolulu(whereTaserswithcamerashaverecently beenadopted)hasbeenquotedassaying,Itscostly,butitsworthit(Dondoneau, 2008).Perhaps,onceapotentialforabuseormisusehasbeenestablished,the enhancedmodelsmaybecomethepreferredoption.IfTasersaretobebroadly embraced,thiswouldbeawelcomestep. TherearecleargroundsforconcernaboutsublethalweaponuseinAustralia.Inthis briefcommentIhavebeenabletopresentonlythetipoftheiceberganditislikelyto
355
bethecasethattheensuingdecadewillbringmoredeathsincustody,asaresultof theoverpolicingofcertaingroupsandthebroadeningofthecapacityofpoliceto restraincitizensthroughuseofforce.Thoughmanypoliceandtheirunion representativesmightbeenthusiasticabouttheintroductionofTasers,other observersarewellfoundedintheircautionaryapproach.Itwouldbefarbetterfor policetowaitfordefinitivedataonthisissuethantorushinblindly,onlytoregret beingheldtoaccountlater.Tasersarecertainlyyettoearntheirstripesbeforebeing acceptednonlethalandsuggestionsthattheirintroductionissupportedbyan abilitytoreducedeathsandinjuriesatthehandsofpoliceshouldcertainlybe regardedwithcaution.Itseemsreasonabletopredictthatitwillbethemannerof theiruseratherthanthesimplefactthatwillraiseproblemsinthefuture.
356
References AlexanderA2000DirtyHarryandDirtyHandsinCoady,T.,James,S.,Miller.And OKeefe,M.(eds)ViolenceandPoliceCulture,MelbourneUniversityPress:Carlton South AmnestyInternational2007AmnestyInternationalreleasesbriefonU.S. tasershttp://action.amnesty.org.au/news/comments/4439/accessed07March2008 Anderson,P2008TopcopurgesOKforstungunsTheHeraldSun,31/1/08 Authorunknown2007Wis.OfficeraccidentallyTasershimself http://www.mysuncoast.com/Global/story.asp?s=7352280accessed08March2008 Authorunknown2008ManSuesPDAfterOfficerGetsHisGunandTaserMixedUp http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=68802accessed11March2008 Authorunknown2008bTaserscouldkillAborigines:healthbody http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23193217948,00.htmlaccessed13 March2008 Authorunknown2008cMandiesafterpoliceusecapsicumspray http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/13/2188881.htm?site=melbourne accessed13March2008 BarwickA2008TaserstungunsonthestreetsofAlice http://www.abc.net.au/alicesprings/stories/s2159749.htmaccessed28February2008
357
BennetA2007Investigationdentstaserdeathlink http://www.forster.yourguide.com.au/articles/1151819.html?src=topstoriesaccessed 28February2008 BergreenJ2008SpeederTaseredbytrooperonYouTubevideogets$40,000from statehttp://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_8529728accessed11March2008 BierJ2003MaderasuesTasermaker:City,officercontendpoortrainingforstun devicecontributedtogundeath.http://www.fresnobee.com/local/story/7208680p 8136998c.htmlaccessed06March2008 BobbMBargeM&NaguibC2007ABadNightatPowellLibrary:TheEventsof November14,2006PoliceAssessmentResourceCenterLosAngeles BrownT200810GuidelinesfortheuseofTASERSinaSimulatedTraining Environmenthttp://www.hitechcj.com/id205.htmlaccessed11March2008 CanadianPress2006DeadmansfamilysuespoliceandTasercompany http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060623/bagnell_taser_060 623/20060623?hub=Canadaaccessed12March2008 ChevignyP1995EdgeoftheKnife:PoliceViolenceintheAmericasTheNewPress NewYork CommissionforPublicComplaintsAgainstRCMPFinalReportconcerningRCMPUse oftheConductedEnergyWeaponhttp://www.cpc cpp.gc.ca/DefaultSite/Investigations/index_e.aspx?ArticleID=1692accessed16July 2008 CrimeandMisconductCommission2005OCSpray:Oleoresincapsicum(OC)spray usebyQueenslandpoliceCrimeandMisconductCommissionBrisbane
358
CrimeandMisconductCommission2008FactsaboutTasers http://www.cmc.qld.gov.au/data/portal/00000005/content/10539001201848677972.p dfaccessed03March2008 CunneenC2001Conflict,PoliticsandCrime:AboriginalCommunitiesandthePolice AllenandUnwinNewSouthWales DondoneauD2008HPDTaserstocomewithcameras http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Feb/28/ln/hawaii802280351.html accessed13March2008 EliotL2007PolicetoprobedeathincustodyTheWestAustralian15/6/07 FeakinT2006NonlethalWeapons:Thecaseforandagainstregardingchildrenin CharlesW.Greenbaum,PhilipVeerman,NaomiBaconShnoor(eds)Protectionof ChildrenDuringArmedPoliticalConflict:AMultidisciplinaryPerspectiveIntersentia Oxford FreckeltonI2000LegalRegulationofthePoliceCultureofViolence:Rhetoric, RemediesandRedressinCoadyTJamesSMillerSAndOKeefeM.(eds)Violence andPoliceCultureMelbourneUniversityPressCarltonSouth GoldsmithA2000AnImpotentConceit:Law,CultureandtheRegulationofPolice ViolenceinCoadyTJamesSMillerSAndOKeefeM.(eds)ViolenceandPolice CultureMelbourneUniversityPressCarltonSouth KillianJ2007NinearrestedinprotestofIraqdecisionhttp://www.news record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070112/NEWSREC0101/70111024accessed 10March2008
359
KlockarsC1996ATheoryofExcessiveForceandItsControlinGellerWandTochH PoliceViolenceUnderstandingandControllingPoliceAbuseofForceYaleUniversity PressNewHaven KrollM2008ScienceandMedicineofTASERElectronicControlDevicesMarkKroll andAssociatesCrystalBay LawInstituteofVictoria2004LawyerswarnagainstTasergunsMediaRelease http://www.liv.asn.au/media/releases/20041112_taser.htmlaccessedApril2006 LewerNandDavisonN2006Electricalstunweapons:alternativetolethalforceora compliancetool?http://www.bradford.ac.uk/acad/nlw/accessed07March2008 LinnellG2008NSWPolicewanttaserstungunstoprotectallofficers www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,239793185006009,00.html accessed16July2008 MeehanT2008Stunninghasteonequipment http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,2336890727197,00.html accessed13March2008 McCullochJ2001BlueArmy:ParamilitaryPolicinginAustraliaMelbourneUniversity PressMelbourne Nizza2008$40,000forManTaseredonYouTube http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/40000formantaseredon youtube/?hpaccessed12March2008 NBCNewsChannel2008Deputytaseredduringhorseplay
360
http://www.wcbd.com/midatlantic/cbd/search.apx.contentarticlesCBD200802 250023.htmlaccessed07March2008 PittsburghIndependentMediaCenter2005Pghpolicefiretasersatrecruiting protesthttp://pittsburgh.indymedia.org/news/2005/08/19784.phpaccessed09March 2008 SkolnickJ1975JusticeWithoutTrialLawEnforcementinDemocraticSociety2nded JohnWileyandSonsIncNewYork SingerJ2008Keepfirmgriponstunguns http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,230141525000107,00.html accessed03March2008 TaskForceVictor1994PoliceShootingsaQuestionofBalanceVictorian GovernmentPrinterMelbourne TheAssociatedPress2008Report:TroopersuseTasersmoreoftenonAfrican Americanshttp://www.thestate.com/statewire/story/356711.htmlaccessed27March 2008 VilkeGn.d.UseofForceContinuum:MedicalAspectsat http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/files/ric/Publications/vilke.pdfaccessed09March2008 WilsonD2006TheBeatPolicingaVictorianCityCircaBeaconsfield WrayM2008Claimcopusedtaseronmantoshuthimup http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,232364303102,00.htmlaccessed 13March2008
361
362
Prisoners,WorkandReciprocalReintegration
RobWhite SchoolofSociologyandSocialWork UniversityofTasmania R.D.White@utas.edu.au GarryCoventry CriminologyProgram JamesCookUniversity garry.coventry@jcu.edu.au Introduction OnMarch20,2006theCategory5CycloneLarryravagedtheInnisfailand surroundingAthertonTablelandstownshipsinFarNorthQueensland.Propertyand agriculturalcropdestructionwaswidespread.Withinaday,thearmy,policeand emergencyserviceswereontheground.Notlongafter,prisonersfromCapricornia, DarlingDowns,LotusGlenandTownsvillecorrectionalcentreswerealsointhearea toassistwiththevitalcleanupefforts. Learningfromtheexperienceoftheseprisoners,thispaperdiscussesthepositive possibilitiesforrehabilitationandreintegrationintocommunitiesthatstemfrom prisonersengaginginworkthatismeaningfultothemandofimportanceto communities.Thefocusofthispaperisprisoners,workandsocialobligation,andthe waysinwhichtheseintertwine.Wewanttoarguethatgiventhesocioeconomic backgroundofmostprisoners,thereareassociatedsocialobligationsforsocietyto addressthisdisadvantage.Secondly,weassertthatthereareindividualandsocial benefitsfromdoingsomethinganddoingsomethingpositiveasaprisoner.Thirdly, wepointtothechallengeofworkingwithoffendersinwaysthatallowoffendersto
363
work,andtherebytocontributetopersonalgrowthandcommunitybuilding.Overall, ourargumentscentreonreciprocalreintegrationstrategiesbetweencorrectionsand localcommunitiesbenefittingbothprisonersandcommunitywellbeing. Thepaperbeginsbybrieflyconsideringthesocioeconomiccircumstancesofthevast majorityofoffenders,andthevariousrolesoftheprisoninrelationtothesegroups. Thisisfollowedbyconsiderationofthenatureandpossibilitiesofprisonerwork.The paperconcludeswithabriefsurveyofnewdevelopmentsinrehabilitationandwhere ,andhow,prisonerlabourmightfitintoplanningforfreedom.Wemeanherethe releaseofprisonersfromtheshacklesofthedisciplinaryregimeoftheprison(see Foucault,1995).Fundamentally,wearguethatreintegrationofprisonersisa reciprocalprocess,involvingbothsociety(largelythroughlocalcommunities)and prisonersgivingtoothersinaconstructiveandactivefashion. SocioeconomicStatus,OffendingandImprisonment Thereisconsiderableevidenceofastronglinkbetweensocioeconomicstatusand streetcrime(seeforexample,Vinson,2004;Michalowski&Carlson,1999;Fajnzylber, Lederman&Loayza,2002).Offendingbehaviouronthepartofworkingclass offendersisshapedbyaseriesofinterrelatedfactors(White,2008).Theseinclude: structuralfactorssuchastheoverallstateoftheeconomy,levelsof unemploymentgenerally,welfareprovisionandsoon,andhowthe dynamicsofthelabourmarketarereflectedinthewarehousingcapacities oftheprison; situationalfactorsrelatingtothepersonalcharacteristicsofoffenders relativetotheiropportunitiesinthecompetitionforjobs,andhow marginalisationandtheattractionsofthecriminaleconomycontributeto offending;and
364
factorsrelatingtosocialdisorganisation,asmanifestatfamilyand communitylevels,asforexamplewhentheintergenerationaleffectsofthe unemploymentcriminalitynexustranslatesintolessknowledgeabout ordinaryworkandconcentrationsofsimilarlydisadvantagedpeopleinthe samegeographicalarea. Thesefactorsconvergeintovariousclustersofneedandbehaviouralpatterns,which canincludeentrencheddependencyonthestate,ontheprisonandondrugs/alcohol misuse.Consider,forexample,therelationshipbetweeninvolvementindrugsand engagementincriminalandantisocialbehaviour.Weknowthatillicitdruguseis highamongstpolicedetainees.Table1providessomeindicationofwhichcomesfirst, bygender,whenitcomestootherkindsofoffendingand/ordruguse. Table1: SequenceofDrugUseamongOffenders Male Female 34%
54%
29%
31%
17%
35%
365
Asecondandcrucialissue,especiallyforcriminaljusticeofficialssuchasthepolice,is thattheeffectsofdrugs,legal(e.g.,alcohol)andillegal(e.g.ice),mayreduce inhibitionsandsoincreaserisktakingbehaviour,especiallyviolence.Thiscaninvolve behaviourssuchasverbalabuse,creatingapublicdisturbance,stealingordamaging property,andphysicalabuse.Indeed,therecentlyformedNationalAllianceAgainst AlcoholRelatedViolenceestimatesthat1in5peopleareaffectedbyalcoholrelated violencealonein2008. Thenatureoftheclientelethemselvesillustratesthecomplexityofissues,andthe strongassociationbetweensocialdisadvantageandoffendingbehaviour.Data collectedaboutpolicedetainees,forexample,illustratethispoint.Tables2and3 indicatetheratherhugeproblemofcomorbidityamongthosepresentingtothe criminaljusticesystem.Forinstance,psychiatricwellbeingisintertwinedwithdrug use,andtheseinturnarelinkedtoissuesofaccommodationandincome. Table2: PoliceDetainees 19992006 Homeless NonHomeless IllicitDependent 53% 19% 31% 36% 12% 15% 63% 20%
AlcoholDependent Psychiatric
Income(welfare) Income(illegal)
84% 38%
[Source:AIC,CrimeFactsNo.168,15April2008]
366
Table3: PsychologicalDistress&Alcohol/Drug DependencyamongPoliceDetainees PsychStress Low Moderate High VeryHigh 14% 18% 27% 41% 12% 19% 10% 17% 28% 45% Alcohol Drugs Both
29% 41%
[Source:AIC,CrimeFactsNo.102,19July2005] Inanutshell,theissuesarisingfromthedrugs/crimenexusincludethefactthatpoly druguseisprevalentamongthosemostdeeplyembeddedinthecriminaljustice system.Theextentandnatureofdruguseisprofoundlysociallypatterned,withthe mostpublicandharmfulusesassociatedwithlowsocioeconomicbackgroundand thosewithfewsocialresources.Again,itneedstobeemphasisedthatharmfuland problemdruguseisintrinsicallytiedintoissuesofcomorbiditythatis,the overlappingproblemsofhomelessness,abuse,familydifficulties,mentalillnessand deterioratingphysicalhealth.Thismeansthatanyprisonerprogrammustbeoriented towardprovisionofsocietalresourcesforoffenders,aswellaswhatprisonerscando tohelpthemselves.Weshallreturntotheseconsiderationsintheconcludingsection ofthepaper. Whilespecificissuesandclustersofneedareincreasinglybeingrespondedtovia variousformsofdiversion(notfromthesystem,buttoalternativeprogramswithin it)andtherapeuticjurisprudence(wherethelawitselffunctionsastherapistto addressunderlyingproblems),theprisoncontinuestobeaninstitutionthatisholding anincreasingnumberoftheseoffenders(AustralianBureauofStatistics,2008).This
367
tendencytowarduseofincarcerationiswidespreadthroughouttheworld(Walmsley, 2007). ThePrisonandPrisonLabour Dependinguponthejurisdiction,theprisoniseitherusedasawarehouseora workhouse.Inthefirstinstance,theprisonsimplyactsasacontainerforsocietys presumedenemies.Thesereputedenemiesarevariousbutthevastmajorityof inmatesinourprisonsarevictimsof,superfluoustoorrepresentthreatstothe nation'seconomy(Irwin,2007).Thewarehousemodel,asevidencedbysupermax facilitiesintheUnitedStates,paylittletonoattentiontoworkasastatus enhancementapproachforprisonerrehabilitationandreintegration. Storiesabouttheprisonareusuallybadnews.Prisonisaboutincapacitationaplace toputbadorunproductivepeople.Prisonsarealsoplacestoputbadand unproductivepeopletowork.Asaworkhouse,thefunctionoftheprisonistodeal withpeoplewhohavenotbeenengagedinlegitimateworkpriortoimprisonment. Inthisinstance,prisonersaresometimesforcedtoundertakeworkinaregime designedtoinstildisciplineintimeandplaceterms(seeFoucault,1995).Inthissense, prisonlabouritselfisbasicallyarepressivemechanismofcontrolandpunishment. Thewarehousethatisaworkhousecanbeaplaceofpain.Thepunitivenatureof incarcerationispartandparcelofthemandateoftheprisontopunishandconstrain. Tous,thechaingangmentalityofsomeUSprisonschemesisaboutstrippinghuman dignityandusingdemeaningworkasameansofhumiliation.Work,inthiscontext,is integraltopunishment(ratherthantorehabilitationorreparation)andisintendedto inflictpainofsomesort(bothemotionalandphysical).Demeaningworkisalso symptomaticofalackofinnovationonthepartofcorrectiveservicesinforming partnershipswithexternalorganizationsthatmightprovidemoreinnovativeprison
368
industries.Itisapunitive,viciousandlazyresponsetocomplexandentrenchedsocial problems. Whilelesspunitive,othertypesofprisonworkofteninvolveworkteamsundertaking negativework,suchasmenialwork,dirtyworkandworkthatnobodyelsewantsto do.Ironically,suchworkfrequentlymirrorstheworkexperiencesandemployment prospectsofprisonerswhentheyareontheoutside.Eventhesekindsofworkcanbe ofadvantagetoprisoners,however,withmanyjurisdictionsintheU.S.exchanging goodtimeworkcreditstoeaseoffsentencetime. SuchlargequestionsabouttheuseorvalueofprisonerworkareevidentinAustralia (White,1999).Whilemuchworkassignmentscouldbeconsideredtobeofanegative kind,thereareothertypesofwork,arguablyofamoreconstructivetype,including: In1985,forexample,prisonersfromRisdonPrisoninTasmaniasuppliedmealson wheelstopensioners,andconstructedoutdoorsettingsforchildren(Evans,2004:71). In2008,theDepartmentofCorrectiveServicesinWesternAustraliacelebratedthe 10thanniversaryofworkcampsinthatstate(WADepartmentofCorrectiveServices, 2008).Theexpresspurposeoftheworkcampsistofosterreparationand rehabilitation,providingprisonerswiththeopportunitytogetinvolvedinmeaningful workinacommunityenvironment,repayadebttosociety,developvocationaland personalskills,andforthoseprisonersnearingtheendoftheirsentence,increase constructionofwalkingtrails; constructionofchildren'splaygroundsandpublicbridges; vegetableharvesting; paintingandundertakingminorrepairstoanagedcarefacility; themaintenanceofcemeteriesandpublicparks; restorationofrailwaytracks;and removalofgraffiti
369
theirchancesofmakingasuccessfultransitionfromprisontothecommunityon release(WADepartmentofCorrectiveServices,2008:13). Theroleandplaceofworkis,wewouldargue,acentralquestionwhenitcomesto considerationofissuessuchascommunityreintegrationandrehabilitation.Arethe abovementionedtypesofworkastepintherightdirection?Yes,webelieveso,in thattheyrepresentwaysinwhichcommunitiescanbeimprovedandofferthe potentialfortheenrichmentofprisonerslives.However,weneedtogofurtherin criticalthinkingaboutthereciprocityofinteractionswithprisonersandlocal communitiesinwaysthatenrichboth.Thisisanessentialelementofbeingprepared tobefreefromtheprison. PrisonerWork Thereareseveralargumentsthatsupporttheprovisionofpositiveformsofworkfor prisoners.Forexample,itcanreduceviolencebyaddressingboredomandidleness.It canprovideanopportunitytodevelopworkskills,workhabits,selfesteemand preparationforcommunityreintegration.Forthetaxpayer,itcanprovidebenefits suchasreducingthecostsofincarceration,beusedtohelptosupportprisoner familiesandcontributetostatetaxationrevenuesdependinguponthenatureofthe work.Thereareneverthelessimportantinstitutionalissuesassociatedwithprison labour,suchasworkerscompensationclaims;callsforincreasedwages,statutory rightsunderlabourlawsandenhancementofpublicsafetyworkingconditions;and lackofequipmentandoperationofequipment.And,ofcourse,thepotential exploitationofanunskilledpoolofprisonersisaperennialissueofconcerntobe watched(seeCoventryandWesterhuis,2009;White,1999forfurtherdetails). Weviewworkasanessentialpartofpreparationforfreedom.Almostallprisonersare releasedfromcustodyatsometime.Manydonotfarewellintheearlyphasesoftheir reentryintovariouscommunities.Mostareatsomestagerearrested,triedandsent
370
backintocustody.Recidivismisveryhighamongstourprisonpopulation (ProductivityCommission,2007;Callan&Gardiner,2007). Inlightofthis,wearguethattherearebenefitsforprisonerstobedoingsomething constructiveandpositive,andforprisonerstobeexercisingactiveagency,beforethey arereleasedfromprison.Weseethisasimportanttothehumanconditiongenerally, thatincludesthingssuchasasenseofbelonging,asenseofmeaning,asenseof competence,asenseofusefulness,asenseofpsychologicalsecurity,asenseof financialsecurityandasenseofthefuture(seePolkandKobrin,1972,foranearlier discussionofsuchqualityoflifeprinciples). Inspecificcriminaljusticeterms,workcanbeviewedasservingthreeimportantsocial goals: Reintegration Preparationforreleasebyestablishingsocial/familybonds Lowerratesofrecidivism,especiallyforlowriskprisonersonplacement
371
prisonerswhovolunteeredtoparticipateintheextendedcleanupphasefollowing thecycloneworkedhardattheirtasks.Whodidwhatisinteresting: 35prisoners(almost70%Indigenous)fromTownsvilleCorrectionalCentre attendedcampsatMalandaandInnisfail; asofearlyMay2006,1500personworkhourswereundertakenbythese prisoner; participationwasvoluntaryandwasrestrictedtothoseservingthetailend oftheirsentencesattheprisonfarmofTownsvilleCorrectionalCentre; someprisonersweredeemedtobeineligible(e.g.sexoffenders,violent offenders); workincludedpullingdownsheds,removingtreesofffencelines,cutting trees,stackingroofingtinandrepairingfences. Manyoftheprisonerswereinterviewedabouttheirexperiences(Coventryand Westerhuis,2009).Typicaloftheresponseswerethefollowing: We[prisoners]getlittlepraise,likethoseontheGoodMorningShows[sic] flyingthemupherebutweCHOSEtocomeoutandwork(Prisoner1) [thefarmers]treatuslikenormalhumanbeings(Prisoner3) 4050(approx)farmerspropertieswereattended;and prisonersworked6hourdays,67daysperweek;
372
givingthemahand,feelinggood(Prisoner5)
didnttreatuslikeprisoners(Prisoner4)
Bygoingoutwearepayingback,notjustthetaxpayerswedontdoit shoddy(Prisoner5)
AtInnisfail,theyhadalotofpride,theybusttheirguts.Youdontneedtodo thatwhileyouareinjail(Prisoner4) [theworkprogram]helpsreintegrationintothecommunity,andmakesjail timeeasier(Prisoner5) Suchpositiveresponsesfromprisonersthemselvesreaffirmforustheimportanceof worktothereentryprocessuponprisonrelease.CoventryandWesterhuis(2009)tap intotheemotionalsideofthereintegrative/rehabilitativeprocess,consistentwith notionsaboutthequalityofliferequiredbyall,notjustprisonersreentering communities.Thisrelativelysmallgroup(almostallofwhomhavesincebeen released)wereproudoftheirwork,feltstronglythattheypositivelycontributedtoan areaincrisisafteranaturaldisasteranddevelopedasenseofbelongingwiththe AthertonTablelands.Fordairyfarmers,theirworkthwartedthelossofherdsto mastitisandtheensuingfinancialdevastationofsuchherdlosses.Forprisoners,the experiencesopenedthedoortotheoutsideworldandhowtheymightconnecttoit. WorkingintheCycloneLarrycleanupwasabouttheexertionoflabourpower,some skilldevelopmentandtheopportunitytoplayaconstructiveandmeaningfulrolein contributingtothecommunitynotriteoutcomes.
373
RehabilitationandReentry Therehabilitationagendaisnowbeingrevisitedinavarietyofnewframeworksthat frequentlysharesimilarinterventionprinciples.Thisisevidentatatheoreticaland therapeuticlevelbythosewhostresspositiveratherthannegativeinterventions preparationforfreedom,goodlives,socialrecognition,restorativejustice.Itisalso demonstratedatapoliticallevelbythoseconcernedwiththesheernumberofpeople reenteringthemainstreamandtherealityofrecidivismsystemcontradictionsand thefinancialandsocialcostsofrepression.Howtostoppeoplefromreoffendingis becomingincreasinglyimportant. Dealingwithclientswithmanifestanddiverseclustersofneedsiscertainly challengingtoallconcerned.Manywithinthecriminaljusticeandalliedfieldswould befamiliarwiththeRiskNeedsResponsivityModelofintervention(Bonta& Andrews,2007).TheRNRModelconsistsofthreekeycomponents: Theneedprinciple:theassumptionisthatthemosteffectiveandethical approachtothetreatmentofoffendersistotargetdynamicriskfactors. Theriskprinciple:theassumptionthatthetreatmentofoffendersoughtto beorganisedaccordingtothelevelofrisktheyposetosocietythehigher thelevelofriskthegreaterthedosageorintensityoftreatmentshouldbe. Theresponsivityprinciple:theassumptionthatwematchthedeliveryof correctionalinterventionstocertaincharacteristicsofparticipations,suchas motivation,learningstyleandethnicidentity. However,theRNRModelisinsufficienttoreallytacklethecoreissuesof rehabilitation.Supplementaryworkhasthusattemptedtobuilduponitandtoadd furtherelementstowhatconstitutesgoodpracticeinrehabilitation.
374
Fromwithinthesphereofcriminologyandcriminaljustice,therejuvenationof traditionalconceptssuchasrestoration,reparation,rehabilitationandrecognition hasmajorimplicationsforhowpractitionersandtheoristsrespondtoissuesrelating topunishment,treatmentandgeneralresponsestooffendingandoffenders. Forinstance,itisimportanttoacknowledgethedynamicinterplayofstructureand agencyofhowpersonalchoicesandpersonalvaluesaremadeandexperienced withintheconfinesofcertainexternalmaterialconstraints.Socialinterventionhasto addressthoseinternalandexternalfactorsthatimpingeuponpeoplessenseofself andtheirplaceintheworld.Byfocusingonselfempowermentandself determinationthroughcapacitydevelopment,modelsofinterventionbaseduponthe notionofpositivestrengthsoperateontheassumptionthatincreasesinthepositives willnaturallyresultindecreasesinthenegatives,forexample,desistancefrom offending.Thisnewoldthinkingaboutrehabilitationandreintegrationispremised uponahighdegreeofclientparticipation,clientchoicesandclientengagement.It alsohighlightstheessentialneedforcollaborationandforaconstellationofservices acrosstheboardfordiverseinterventions. Snapshotsofrecentthinkingvisvisrehabilitationandreintegrationwithincriminal justiceinclude: TheGoodLivesModel Allhumanbeingsarenaturallyinclinedtoseekcertaintypesofexperienceorhuman good,andtheyexperiencehighlevelsofwellbeingifthesegoodsareobtained. Offendersareessentiallyhumanbeingswithsimilarneedsandaspirationstonon offendingmembersofthecommunity.Criminalactionsarethoughttoarisewhen individualslacktheinternalandexternalresourcestoattaintheirgoalsinaprosocial way.TheGLMisanapproachbasedonthepursuitofabetterlife,waysoflivingthat areconstructedaroundcorevalues,andconcretemeansofrealisingtheirgoalsin
375
certainenvironments(Ward&Maruna,2007).Inorderforindividualstodesistfrom offendingtheyshouldbegiventheknowledge,skills,opportunitiesandresourcesto liveagoodlife,whichtakesintoaccounttheirparticularpreferences,interestsand values.Inshort,treatmentshouldprovidethemwithachancetobebetterpeople withbetterlives. TheSocialRecognitionApproach Socialrecognitionisvitalforyoungpeopletogainasenseofachievementandsocial belongingastheymovethroughthechildhoodandteenageyears(Barry,2006).The familyoforiginandoneslocalcommunityprovidestheplatformuponwhichcapital accumulationgrowsanddevelops.Inotherwords,resourcesandrecognitionof varyingkindssteminthefirstinstancefromwhatthefamilyandfriendscanprovide. Issuesofpoverty,unemployment,lackofincome,homelessnessandsoonare relevanthere.Butitistheexpenditureofaccumulatedcapitalthatbringstherewards ofindividualgratificationandsocialstability.Examplesofthisincludesuchthingsas makingyourowndecisions,buyingyourownclothes,engaginginvolunteerwork, andgenerallyencouragingandhelpingothers.Socialrecognitionandselfesteem, generally,arebuiltthroughexpenditureofcapital(doingsomethingforoneselfand forsomeoneelse). RestorativeJustice Inmanycasesofrestorativejustice,thereisanemphasisonactiveagency(Cunneen &White,2007).Thisreferstotheideathatpeoplearetobehelddirectlyaccountable insomeway,andthattheyaremeanttodothings,themselves,ratherthansimply beingpassiveactorsinthecriminaljusticesystem.Importantly,whentheyengagein doingsomething(e.g.,paintingafence),thisisgenerallyconstructedasbeingtothe benefitofsomebodyelse(e.g.,avictimofgraffiti).Restorativejusticethusinvolves actsofgiving(onthepartoftheoffender),aswellasactsofforgiving(onthepartof
376
victims).Theoffendingactmaybecondemned,andrespectfortheoffender maintained,butoffendersarenonethelessexpectedtorepairtheharmstheyhave caused. TowardReciprocalReintegration Whilesomeofthemorerecentrehabilitationandreintegrationapproaches emphasisetheactiveagencyofprisonersinthereentryprocess,thenatureof offendinganditssocialcircumstancesdemandsaframeworkthatprovidesfor reciprocalreintegration.Inotherwords,communitylevelinterventionisrequiredto addressthestructuralunderpinningsofmuchstreetcrimeandantisocialbehaviour. Forexample,thepenaltiesofsocialexclusionincludehavingtodealwithsocial stigmaandeconomicmarginalisation,bothofwhichdemandmaterialandsymbolic rectificationaspartoftheprocessesofsocialjustice. Whileoffendersareinmanycasesnotsociallyresponsiblefortheiractions,they neverthelessbearamoralresponsibilityfortheharmstheycause.Thisdualityof responsibilityhascertainpracticalimplications. First,itmeansthatoffenderrehabilitationisasocietalimperative,giventhepersonal backgroundandsocialdisadvantagesofmoststreetorworkingclassoffenders.As such,rehabilitationdemandsthatsignificantcommunityresourcesbeputinto changingthelifecircumstancesandsocialopportunitiesofoffenders.Societyhasto givesomethingtotheoffenderinorderforthatindividualtomovebeyondoffending. Secondly,responsibilityofamoralkindrequiresthatindividualoffendersshouldhave aninterestinmakingthingsright,inrepairingtheharm,inaddressingthewrongswhich theyhaveperpetrated.Rehabilitationinthiscontextthusdemandssomethingfrom theoffenderthemselves,aswellasfromthoseinthecommunityaroundthem.The
377
offenderhastogivesomethingtosocietytosomeoneelseifredemptionandthe creationofanewlifearetobepossible. Contemporarydiscussionsofrehabilitation,desistanceandrestorationareconstrued asbeingmainlyaboutcapacitybuildingratherthanpersonaldeficits.Thepointof interventionistoachievearesultwherebytheoffenderwillbeseenasacommunity assetratherthanaliability: Thecapacityorcapabilityaspectofrehabilitationdirectlyinvolvesproviding individualswiththeinternalandexternalconditionsnecessarytoattainvalued outcomesinwaysthatmatchtheirabilities,preferencesandenvironments. Internalconditionsrefertopsychologicalcharacteristicssuchasskills,beliefs andattitudes,whileexternalconditionsrefertosocialresources,opportunities andsupports(Ward&Maruna,2007:174). Hencethegoalofinterventionwithintheseframeworksistodisplaythetalentsand skillsoftheoffenderinausefulandvisiblerole,allowingthepersontoexercisea greaterdegreeofindividualagency. Thesocialrecognitiontheory,thegoodlivesperspective,andtherestorative justiceapproachallacknowledgethedynamicinterplayofstructureandagencyof howpersonalchoicesandpersonalvaluesaremadeandexperiencedwithinthe confinesofcertainexternalmaterialconstraints.Foryoungpeopleespecially,social interventionbasedupontheseapproacheshastotakeseriouslythenarrative accountsofthejuvenileoffendersthemselves.Theyalsohavetoaddressthose internalandexternalfactorsthatimpingeuponyoungpeoplessenseofselfandtheir placeintheworld. Byfocusingonselfempowermentandselfdeterminationthroughcapacity development,modelsofinterventionbaseduponthenotionofpositivestrengths
378
operateontheassumptionthatincreasesinthepositiveswillnaturallyresultin decreasesinthenegatives,forexample,desistancefromoffending.Wewouldargue thatopportunitiestogive,andinsomecasesactuallylearningtogive,isanimportant stepinoffenderrehabilitation.Thisrequiresdevelopmentofspacesinwhichthis mightoccurasinthecase,forexample,ofprisoneducationmentorschemes,or volunteerworkbrigadesthatassistwithdisasterreliefefforts(suchasrespondingto cyclonedamageinfarnorthQueensland). Thechallenge,therefore,istoacknowledgethatinstitutionalsupportsareneededfor workingwithoffendersinwaysthatallowthemtoworkandtherebytocontributeto society.Reciprocalreintegrationmeansthatthegivinghastobeonbothsidesofthe offendercommunityrelationship.Weneedtoreconfigureprisonworkasan opportunitytobesomeoneofworthandvalue.Thatworkshouldalsobearsome relationtothetaskofcommunitybuilding.Inthiswayweextendtheminimalvalueof theworkhousefromthegrantingofgoodtimefornegativeworktoa reconceptualisedandintegratedcorrectionalapproach,wherebysuccessful reintegrationiscouchedintermsofopportunitiesforimportantworkthatdevelops skillstocounterworkforcemarginalisation,enrichedpersonalidentity,enhanced qualityoflife,positiveformsofcommunitybelongingandinteractiveengagementa statusenhancementapproachtoprisonlabour.Suchanapproachwouldemphasise expansionofopportunitiesandhumanitarianvaluesofsocialjustice. Forinstance,disasterreliefhasdemonstrablebenefitsforoffendersandcommunities alike.Thebiggerquestion,however,ishowtolinktheprisonworkagendatothatof communitybuildingassuch,andnotsolelyasdisasterrelief.Wemightask,for example,candisasterreliefberedefinedtoincludeinstitutionaleffortstoovercome socialdisadvantage?Unemployment,povertyanddecliningopportunitiescontinueto directlyaffectthephysicalandpsychologicalwellbeingofpeopleinour communities.Suchsocialproblemsareentrenchedataspatiallevel,andare increasinglyconcentratedinspecificlocationswithinourcities.Thisissometimes
379
referredtoasaprocessofghettoisation.Thesocialcostsofmarginalityareinevitably translatedintotheeconomiccostsofcrime.Disastrouslivesandlivingconditions equallydemandsrelief.Communitybuildingandphysicalrejuvenationof neighbourhoodsisasocialtaskthatlikewisecanbeaddressedthroughinnovative socialplanningandcreativeoffenderprograms. Manyjurisdictions,forexample,nowdemandsomekindofinvolvementin restitution,reparationorrestorativejusticeactivities,bothwhileanoffenderisin prisonandwhiletheyareonleavefromprisonoronparole.Whereappropriate,and wheresuitable,humanandmaterialresourceshavebeenputintoplace,such mechanismscanbeusefullyappliedinrelationtoprereleaseprogramsand strategies. Practicalexamplesofhowcommunitycorrectionscanbeimbuedwitharestorative ethicataconcretelevelarestillrelativelyfewandfarbetween,althoughthisis changinginsomejurisdictions.Theusualemphasisincommunitycorrectionsworkis whatcanbedonetobettersupervisetheoffender,orwhatcanbedonetoassist themtomakethetransitiontowardsbeingalawabidingcitizen(seeforexample, Nelson&Trone,2000).Restorativejusticeinvertsthisrelationshipbymakingthe offenderanactivecontributorandparticipant.Thus,intheUK,Offendersinsome programscarryoutworkfortheirowncommunities,whichcanhelpgivethe offendersasenseofsocialresponsibilityandanexperienceofsocialacceptanceand recognition(Marshall,1999:14).Seymour(2001)citesexamplesintheUSAwhere theconceptofrestorativecommunityservicehastakenhold.Relevantcommunity workhasincludedsuchthingsasyouthfuloffendersescortingAlzheimerspatients fromalocalretirementcentreandtheirfamiliesforadayattheStateFair,throughto alicensedpharmacistwhowasconvictedofforgingdrugdocumentsperforming500 hoursofcommunityserviceatthefreeclinicintheneighbourhoodinwhichhehad solddrugs.
380
Importantly,communityservice,assuch,shouldnottobeequatedwithrestorative justice.Walgrave(1999)discusseshowinsomejudicialsettings,authoritiesuse communityserviceasapunishment(i.e.,intendedtoinflictpain),whileinother settingsitisinformedbyarehabilitativeobjective(asmanifestinvariousformsofre educationandtreatment).Incontrasttotheseapproaches,hearguesthat communityservicecanalsobeusedinarestorativesense,ifitismeantto compensateforharm,restorepeaceinthecommunityandcontributetosafety feelingsinsociety.Attentionwillnowbeturnedtotheharmandtherestorationof it,includingthereintegrationoftheoffender,asthisisanimportantiteminrestoring peaceinthecommunity(Walgrave,1999:140).Thistypeofcommunityservice demandsaclearappreciationofthephilosophicalfoundationsofrestorativejustice, andhowcommunitycorrectionsworkerscanachievethepotentialssuchaphilosophy appearstooffer. Aprincipledapproachtoplanningforfreedomdemandscertainpracticalsafeguards, toprotecttheinterestsofoffenders,victimsandthewidercommunity.Thismeans addressingthosebureaucratic,legalandpoliticalobstaclesthatneedtobeovercome forpositiveworkexperiences(e.g.,worktickets,arangeofcorrectionalguidelines, restrictionsontypesofoffenders,regulatoryauthorities,ACTUstances,ILO conventionsetc).Wealsohavetoensurethatundernocircumstancesshouldprison workslideintoexploitationoranewformofslavery.Opportunitiestogiveonthepart ofoffendersmustbematchedbyopportunitiestogiveonthepartofcorrectional authoritiesandthewidercommunity.
381
References AustralianBureauofStatistics(2008)PrisonersinAustralia,Catalogue4517.0. Canberra:ABS. AustralianInstituteofCriminology(2005)CrimeFactsNo.90,1February2005. Canberra:AIC. AustralianInstituteofCriminology(2005)CrimeFactsNo.102,19July2005.Canberra: AIC. AustralianInstituteofCriminology(2008)CrimeFactsNo.168,15April2008. Canberra:AIC. Barry,M.(2006)YouthOffendinginTransition:TheSearchforSocialRecognition. London:Routledge. Bonta,J.&Andrews,D.(2007)RiskNeedResponsivityModelforOffender AssessmentandRehabilitation.Ottawa:PublicSafetyCanada. Callan,V.&Gardner,J.(2007)TheroleofVETinrecidivisminAustralia,inS.Dawe (ed)VocationalEducationandTrainingforAdultPrisonersandOffendersinAustralia: ResearchReadings.Adelaide:NationalCentreforVocationalEducationResearch. Coventry,G.&Westerhuis,D.(2009,forthcoming)PreparationforFreedom:Cyclone LarryandPrisonWork. Cunneen,C.&White,R.(2007)JuvenileJustice:YouthandCrimeinAustralia. Melbourne:OxfordUniversityPress.
382
Evans,C.(2005)APinkPalace?:RisdonPrison,19602004.Hobart:Tasmania DepartmentofJustice. Fajnzylber,P.,Lederman,D.,&Loayza,N.(2002)InequalityandViolentCrime,The JournalofLawandEconomics,45(1):140. Foucault,M.(1995)DisciplineandPunish:TheBirthofthePrison.NewYork:Vintage Books. Irwin,J.(2007)TheWarehousePrison:DisposaloftheNewDangerousClasses. OxfordUniversityPress. Michalowski,R.&Carlson,S.(1999)Unemployment,Imprisonment,andSocial StructuresofAccumulation:HistoricalContingencyintheRuscheKirchheimer Hypothesis,Criminology,37(2):217249. Polk,K.&Kobrin,S.(1972)DelinquencyPreventionThroughYouthDevelopment. WashingtonD.C.:U.S.DepartmentofHealth,EducationandWelfare. ProductivityCommission(2007)ReportonGovernmentServices.Melbourne: ProductivityCommission. Vinson,T.(2004)CommunityAdversityandResilience:Thedistributionofsocial disadvantageinVictoriaandNewSouthWalesandthemediatingroleofsocial cohesion.Sydney:TheIgnatiusCentreforSocialPolicyandResearch. Walmsley,R.(2007)WorldPrisonPopulationList(seventhedition).London: InternationalCentreforPrisonStudies,KingsCollege.
383
384
ResearchingCCTV:SecurityNetworksandtheTransformationof PublicSpace
DeanWilson CriminologyDepartment MonashUniversity Dean.Wilson@arts.monash.edu.au
ThispaperchartssomeofthedirectionsthathaveemergedinthestudyofCCTVin thepastdecade,bothwithinAustraliaandinternationally.Indoingso,myintentionis tosuggestanagendaforfutureresearchthatwilltakeaccountofthisimportant developmentinsecurityanddevelopamoresophisticatedaccountthatmoves beyondeithertheinstrumentalwhatworks?paradigmorsimplisticallycritical accountsengagingvariantsofthebigbrothercritique.InitiallyIwishtosketchsome recentdevelopmentsinthepoliticalcontextofCCTV,bothinternationallyandwithin Australia,thatIbelievemarkthisasatopicofconsiderableinteresttocriminologists. Iwillthenprovideacriticalaccountofsomeofthedominantexplanatoryframeworks thathavebeenengagedtodateinthestudyofCCTV.Indoingso,theintentionisto highlightasignificantlacunawithinAustraliancriminology.Isuggestthatour knowledgeofhowCCTVoperates,anditsbroadersocialimplications,areatpresent poorlyunderstood.WhatisrequiredisaresearchmodelthatpositionsCCTVwithina broadertheoreticalframework,whilebeingsensitivetotheimportanceoflocal organizationalcontextsandtheambiguitiesofsurveillance.Criticalscholarsneedto examinewhattheriseofvisualsurveillancemaypresageforexperiencesof citizenshipandinclusion;howtheseexperiencesofsurveillancearemediatedbythe specificlocalandnationalconditionsencounteredinAustralia,andwhatthespecific outcomesofvisualsurveillanceareindifferingcontexts.
385
TheRiseandRiseofCCTV ThegrowthofCCTVinAustralianpublicspacesmirrorsbroaderglobaltrends.The mostwidespreaddiffusionofsuchCCTVisintheUK.In1999itwasestimated530 towncentrepublicsurveillanceschemeswereoperatingorscheduledfor establishmentacrosstheUnitedKingdomforwhichfundinghadbeenallocated. BritishgovernmentsupportforCCTVhasnotdeclinedundertheBlairLabour government,andnewfundingchallengeswith50millionavailablein2000and103 millionintwofutureroundswereannouncedin1999(Williamsetal2000:170). McCahillandNorris(2003)estimatedonthebasisofoneLondonboroughthatthere maybeasmanyas4.2millioncamerasintheUKor1forevery14ofthepopulation.In EuropethereisalsoanotablediffusionofCCTVinpublicareas,althoughlessuniform andpervasivethanintheUK.TheEUfundedUrbaneyeprojectdocumentedthe deploymentofCCTVacrossEurope.Somenations,suchasAustriaandDenmark, werefoundtohavenopublicspaceCCTVsystems.Othernations,however,suchas France,HungaryandIrelandweremirroringtheBritishexperiencemoreclosely (Norrisetal,2004;Urbaneye2004;Hempfel&Tpfer2002). TheparticularpoliticalcontextofBritain,notablytheabundantfundingprovidedby theUKHomeOffice,hasfacilitatedtheexpansionofCCTVinthatcountry.However thereareindicationsthatinthewakeof9/11manyothernationsarefollowingsimilar patterns.TheuseofCCTVintheUShasundergoneanoticeablesurgesince9/11 (Nietoetal,2002).LikewiseCCTVsystemsinpublicareasaredocumentedinNew Zealand,SouthAfrica,China,Japan,Israel,Iran,Russia,theCzechRepublic,Indiaand Pakistan(Norrisetal2004).Thereisthereforeanacceleratingtrendtowards deployingCCTVinpublicspaces.Thismaybeattributedtoglobaltrendsinlate modernsocieties.Increasingurbanizationhasexacerbatedtheanonymousnatureof contemporarycitiesandtowns,leadingtoconcernsoverhowidentityistobe establishedandverified(NorrisandArmstrong1999).Theincreasingcentralityofrisk managementparadigms(OMalley2004),bothwithingovernmentsandcorporations,
386
isaccompaniedbyactuarialpracticesincriminaljusticesuchasopportunity reductionandsituationalpreventionofwhichCCTVisanotableexample. ThePoliticsofAustralianCCTV WhileAustraliamirrorsglobaltrendsinthedeploymentofCCTV,itiscrucialthatthe localcontextofthisglobaltrendbecriticallyassessed.DavidLyon(2004)hasnoted thatwhilesurveillancetechniquesareincreasinglyglobalized,localandregional social,politicalandculturalcontextsmediatetheexperienceofsurveillancein differentways.AninitialquestionofinterestwaswhytheexpansionofCCTVin Australiawasinitiallyrelativelymodestatleastincomparisontoitsdiffusioninthe UK.AustraliasfirstpublicareaoropenstreetCCTVsystembeganoperationin Perthin1991.Openstreetsurveillancesystemshavesubsequentlyexpandedtocover publicspacesinthecapitalcentresofAdelaide,Hobart,Sydney,Brisbaneand Melbourneandmanyregionallocations.Attheendof2002Australiahad33schemes (WilsonandSutton,2003;2004),which,whilenotinsignificant,demonstrateda considerablymorerestrainedrolloutthantheUK.AdamSuttonandmyselfhave arguedelsewhere(Sutton&Wilson2004)thatthiswaslargelyattributabletoCCTVin Australiabeingfundedatthelocalgovernmentlevel.Aconsequenceofthiswasthat CCTVwasoftenstronglycontested,mainlydueitssymbolicfreightasatough securitymeasure,viewedtobesometobeinvestedintothedetrimentofmore inclusiveprogramsofsocialcrimeprevention.Inlocalcouncilswheretherewasa strongdedicationtosocialjusticeamongstthoseresponsibleforcrimeprevention, CCTVthuscametoepitomizeanarrow,sociallyexclusivelawandordervisionof localcrimecontrol.Wealsowarned,however,thattheincreasingdistributionof fundingfromstateandfederalgovernmentcouldtipthebalanceofthesevigorous localdebatesstronglyinfavouroftheadvocatesofCCTV(Sutton&Wilson2004). Thispredictionhassubsequentlytranspired.Priorto2005stategovernmentshad alreadybecomemoredeeplyinvolvedinthefundingofCCTVthrougharangeof
387
crimepreventionfundingschemes(Wilson&Sutton2004:215).Researchconducted in2005indicatedconsiderableexpansion,withnearly66schemesreportedaround Australia(IBISResearch,2005)doublingthenumberofsystemsthathadexistedin 2002(Wilson&Sutton2003).FollowingtheLondonbombingsenthusiasmforthe installationofCCTVinAustralianpublicspaceshasaccelerated.Federalpolitical enthusiasmforCCTVintensifiedin2005followingthereturnofthenPrimeMinister JohnHowardfromavisittotheUKproclaimingtheextraordinaryvalueof surveillancecameras.Suchsurveillanceboosterismwasechoedbyothermembersof theLiberalGovernmentCabinet,withAlexanderDowner,thenForeignMinister, claimingthatCCTVhadclearlyprovedtobeveryeffective(anassumptionbased onlyonthefactthatsurveillancecamerasarewidelyused)(Humphries2005,July25). SubsequentlysubstantialwerefundswereallocatedtowardstheinstallationofCCTV inlocalcommunities.On30September2005thenPrimeMinisterJohnHoward announcedanadditional$6millionoffundingthroughtheNationalCommunity CrimePreventionProgrammeadministeredbytheFederalAttorneyGenerals Department,underthespecialheadingFundingforSecurityRelatedInfrastructure IncludingClosedCircuitTelevisionSystems(AGD,6October2006).TheAttorney GeneralsDepartmentalsopreparedatipsheetonCCTV,whichpointedlyfailedto mentiontheambiguousfindingsofexistingevaluations(AGD,2006).Enthusiasm andfundingforCCTVisbeingcontinuedbytheRuddLabourGovernment,with MinisterforHomeAffairsBobDebusannouncing$5.9millionallocatedunderthe SaferSuburbsPlanforimportantcommunitysafetymeasureslikeCCTV(Debus 2008,26May).ThesedevelopmentsindicatethatthediffusionofCCTVwillcontinue apaceinthenearfuture.ItisthereforeimperativethatAustraliancriminologists developtheoreticalframeworksandaresearchagendatoexplainhowandwhyvisual surveillanceisbeingdeployed,andwhattheimplicationsofthisdeploymentare. ExplainingCCTV
388
CCTVresearchismostdevelopedintheUK,understandablygiventherapid expansionofthetechnologythere.Howeverthescholarshipremainssharply bifurcatedbetweenadministrativeaccountswhatGarlandtermsthecriminologies ofeverydaylife(2001:127131)andcriticalaccountswhichsituateCCTVwithin largercontextsofpower,neoliberalcrimecontrolandspatialordering. CriminologicalliteratureonpublicCCTVwasinitiallyconcernedwiththebasic questionofwhetherCCTVledtoareductioninoffending.Nevertheless,overviewsof CCTVevaluations(Phillips1999;Welsh&Farrington2002)confirmthat,despite considerableresearchenergyexpendedinthisdirection,resultscontinuetobe ambiguous.QuantitativeandevaluativestudiesofCCTVeffectivenesscontinueto attracttheattentionofgovernmentsandsomescholars(Farrington&Painter2003; Welsh&Farrington2004).Nevertheless,theirnarrowlytechnicalfocusrendersthese studiesoflittleexplanatoryvalueforcriminologistsconcernedwiththebroadersocial andculturalramificationsofCCTV. Itiscriticalaccountsthathaveofferedfarmoreintermsofexplanatoryframeworks. However,asNorris&McCahillnote,thesehavetendedtobeconductedatavery highlevelofabstraction(2006:98).Oneofthecentralimagesengagedindiscussions ofCCTVhasbeenthatofthePanopticon,drawinguponJeremyBenthams18th centuryvisionofanarchitecturewherethepromiseofobservationwasasimportant asobservationitself.ForFoucault(1977)thePanopticonwasamodelfornew configurationsofdisciplineandpowerthatreshapedindividualsubjectivitiesthrough inculcatingabeliefintheunbridledsurveillancecapacityofthestate(Norris&Wilson 2006).Equallyasinfluential,thoughlessfrequentlydirectlycitedintheacademic literature,hasbeenthemetaphorofBigBrothertakenfromthefictionaltotalitarian regimecreatedbyGeorgeOrwellinhisnovelNineteenEightyFour.Orwellsdystopian vision,inwhichtelescreenscontinuallymonitorallactivities,hashadastrong influenceonsurveillancetheory,particularinraisingspectresofatotalsurveillance society(Norris&Wilson2006).
389
ThePanopticonmetaphorhasprovenparticularlyinfluentialinthestudyofCCTV, withauthorssuchasReeve(1998)andFyfe,Bannister&Kearns(1998)seeinginCCTV thedispersalofanelectronicpanopticonacrossurbanspace.Thepanopticon metaphorisviewedasespeciallyapt,asitisnotpossibletoknowwhetherornotone isbeingmonitoredbyCCTV,facilitatinganticipatoryconformity(Norris& Armstrong1998:5).AsNorris&McCahill(2006)notehowever,othertheoristsview theemergenceofnewsurveillancetechnologiesaspresagingnovelformsofsocial controlthatmovebeyondthedisciplinarypoweroutlinedbyFoucault(1977).Some writersmaintainthatsurveillancehasmovedfromtheobservationofindividuals whoseidentitiesarealreadyknown,towardsamoregeneralizedgazeacrossspace, temporalityandcategoriesofpersons(Marx2002;Lyon2002).CCTVisthus emblematicofabroaderparadigmshiftincrimecontrol,identifiedbyFeeleyand Simon(1994)asthetransitionfromtheoldpenology(inwhichtheindividualwas identifiedforthepurposesofassigningguiltandblame,andthenimposing punishmentandtreatment)tothenewpenology(concernedwithidentifyingand managinggroupsclassifiedbylevelsofdangerousness)(Feeley&Simon1994; McCahill&Norris2002;Norris&McCahill2006).CCTVhasalsobeentheorizedas beingemblematic(ifnotconstitutive)ofanemergingprecrimesociety(Zedner 2007)inwhichactionsaretakenagainstpotentialcriminalactsbeforetheyoccur (Boyne2000;Lianos&Douglas2000). TherehavealsobeenusefulcritiquesofthepoliticalcontextofCCTV.Williamsand Johnston(2000),NorrisandArmstrong(1998;1999),Coleman&Sim(2000),Coleman (2004)andFussey(2004)situateCCTVwithinabroaderpoliticalmilieuwherethe impetusforCCTVisunderpinnedbytheriseoflawandorderpoliticsandneoliberal urbaneconomies.Mackay(2003)andSuttonandWilson(2004)alsonotethe importanceoflocalpoliticalframeworksintheinstallationanddeploymentofCCTV. AfurtherstrandofcriticalscholarshiphaspositionedCCTVmoregenerallyasan aspectoftheriseoftheconsumercityandthereconfigurationofpublicspaceforthe purposesofmassconsumption(Bannisteretal1998;Fyfe&Bannister1996).Drawing
390
uponDaviss(1990)influentialthesisontheurbanfortificationofLosAngeles, numerousscholarshavesuggestedthatCCTVcontributestowardsthe commodificationofpublicspace,theerasureofsocialdifferenceandthe stigmatisationandexclusionofthoseBaumantermedflawedconsumers(1997:14). Thatthegazeofvisualsurveillancefallsunevenlyandismediatedthroughthe categoriesofrace,genderandageisnowwelldocumentedthroughdetailedstudies ofCCTVoperationinparticularlocations(Norris&Armstrong1999a;Lomell2004; Coleman2004).AsNorris&Armstrong(1999b)foundmaleyouths,particularlyif blackorstereotypicallyassociatedwiththeunderclass,representthefodderofCCTV systems(172).ThereforetheargumentthatCCTVhasthepotentialtoamplify existingpatternsofdiscriminatorypolicepracticeandexacerbatesocialexclusionis convincing. TheAmbiguitiesofSurveillance WhilecriticalaccountsofCCTVraiseimportantquestionsandpossibilitiesworthyof exploration,theytendtomakeanumberofmajorassumptionsthatareopento contention.AsNorrisandArmstrongnoted,boththecriticsandpromotersofCCTV oftenassumethatCCTVactuallyproducestheeffectsclaimedforit.Astheynote bothshareatendencytowardstechnologicaldeterminism:anunquestioningbeliefin thepoweroftechnology,whetherbenignormalevolent(1999:9).Importantlyalso, asSmithnotes,suchcriticalperspectivesfrequentlyassumewatchersasempowered agentswhilesimultaneouslyconceivingthewatchedaspassivedisempowered objects(2007:282).Thuscriticalaccountshavetendedconceptualizevisual surveillanceasaunidirectionalexerciseofpowerwithnegativeoutcomesforthose surveilled.However,asDavidLyon(1994;2001)remindsus,surveillanceisoften Janusfacedbothenablingandconstrainingandridingacontinuumbetweencare andcontrol.Criticalaccountsthereforeneedtobecognizantoftheambiguitiesof surveillance.Thefollowingsectionsofthispaperwillthereforeoutlinesomekeyareas wheretheambiguousnatureofvisualsurveillancebecomesmoreapparent,including
391
tacticsofresistance,thepotentialforthewatchedtoharnesssurveillancefortheir ownends,thepeculiaroccupationofCCTVoperativesandtheimportanceof organizationalcontext. Whilemostaccountsstressthepowerresidingwiththosemonitoringcameras,there areseveralstudieswhichindicatethatresistancetacticsarepracticedbythose monitored.AsScott(1985;1990)hasimportantlynoted,thosesubjectedto relationshipsofdominationrespondinarangeofcreative,diverseandsignificant ways.OurknowledgeofhowCCTVisperceivedbythosemonitoredremains fragmentary.Nevertheless,thereisevidenceofovertresistancefromsurveillance subjects.InSmiths(2007)intriguingstudyfromtheUK,thosemonitoredfrequently wavedandgesticulatedatthecameras,oftenwithdefiantgestures.Ihavenoted similaractsofdefianceinAustralianCCTVcontrolrooms.InoneAustraliancentral citycontrolroom,astreetleveldrugdealerflashedabundleofhighdenomination banknotesatthecameraanactwhichdirectlychallengedthecameraoperators, andperhapsonecalculatedtoremindthemoftheirminimumwageincome.In anotherAustralianlocationIwasinformedthatmanywhoregularlyinhabitedpublic spaceswerewellawareofthecameralocations.Asoneofficernoted:Theyknowthe camerasarethere.Theresnodoubtaboutit.Wevehadthembrowneyethecamera, wehavethemdodancesinfrontofthecamera.Thecamerasareveryobvious(Senior Officer,SAPOL,2002).Smiths(2007)researchalsorevealscomplexactsofwhathe termsentrepreneurialdefianceinwhichthosemonitoredoutwittedcamera operatorsincatandmousegamesrevealingadvancedknowledgeofthesystemand itslimitations. Ifthereareactsofdefiance,therearealsoinnovativewaysinwhichthesubjectsof surveillanceengagethecamerasgazefortheirownprotectionandsafety.For example,Smithnotesthatmanybeggarschosetositdirectlyinfrontofthecameras aswouldmakethemfeelsafer.Likewise,henotesthatstreetprostitutesinurbanred lightzoneschosetoworkinfullcameraview,whereprospectiveclientsnumber
392
platesandfaceswererecorded,toenhancetheirpersonalsafety(2007:309).Similar tacticshavebeennotedinMelbourne,wheresomeinjectingdrugusershavechosen toinjectnearsurveillancecamerasinordertoensureemergencyservicesarequickly alertedintheeventofoverdose(Malins2000).Thisevidenceisfragmented,andinno wayunderminesargumentsthatCCTVsystemsmaybeoperatedwithexclusionary intentions.Itdoes,however,pointtothepossibilitythateventhemostmarginalized mayengagewithsurveillancesystemsfortheirownreasons. Asalreadysuggested,oneweaknessofmanycriticalaccountsistoassumeaoneway relationshipbetweenempoweredwatchersandthedisempoweredwatched. Howeverrecentstudiesmakeapointalreadyapparenttoanyonewhohasconducted ethnographywithinprivatesecuritysettingsnamelythatprivatesecurityguardsare nottheidealizedembodimentoftheeyeofpower.AsJohnMcGrath,inhis fascinatingcontemplationofcontemporarysurveillancenotes: Thesecurityguardisinapositionofpeculiarlyabjectauthority.Withinthe corporatestructureofthebuildingsandcomplexestheymonitorsecurityguards areamongstthelowestontheladdersofpayandprestigetheuniformedbody staringatabankofvideomonitorsislikelytobeunderqualified,lowpaidand,not unusually,anexoffender(2004:186) CCTVoperatorsthusoccupyaverypeculiarpositionwithinthesecurityhierarchy. Whilesupposedlytheagentsresponsibleforadministeringtheexclusionaryimpulse, theyarethemselvessubjectedtoclosemanagerialsurveillanceandthedulltoilofa jobthatcanbeastoundinglymonotonous.Smith(2004)reportedthatoneofthekey findingsofhisresearchwaswhathetermedtheboredomfactor,wherehefound thatconcentrationafter60minuteswasextremelydifficult.Thiswascompoundedby thefactthatitwasajobpayingonlyaminimumwageandwithlittlechanceof occupationaladvancementorflexibility(388).
393
TheimportantstudiesofMcCahill(2002)andNorrisandMcCahill(2006)revealthe importanceoforganizationalcontextinthedeploymentofsurveillance.McCahill (2002)notes,forexample,thathumanmediationofsurveillancesystemsplaces severelimitsontheirpotentialtofunctionasmechanismsofdisciplinarypower. Indeedinhisstudy,McCahillobservedthatmanyCCTVoperatorsusedthesystem itselftocreatespacesofresistancetocounterorevadethemanagerialstructures controllingthem(2002:1456).Thusthepotentiallydisciplinaryandexclusionary potentialofvisualsurveillanceisalwaysmediatedthroughparticularorganizational contextsandthroughindividualhumanagentsbothofwhichexertnotasingle gazebutamultitudeofvariablegazes.Whilesomeoperativesmayenthusiastically engageinthetaskofcrimepreventionandviewthemselvesasundertaking importantsecuritywork,otherswillbefarmorevariedintheirefforts(cfNorris& McCahill2006).IndeedSmith(2007)goesfurther,notingthatmuchofthe observationalliteratureonCCTVseemsalmosttoneglectthefactthatoperatorscan exerciseintheirgazecare,empathyandcompassionaswellasprejudiceand intolerance(2007:301). ItwasthelandmarkstudyofNorrisandArmstrong(1999a)thatfirmlyestablishedthe importanceofcontrolroomobservationasaresearchmethodforthestudyofCCTV. Sincethen,otherstudieshaveconfirmedtheimportanceofthismethodto understandtheparticularcontextsinwhichCCTVoperates(McCahill2002;Smith 2004;2007;Goold2004;Lomell2004).Onecentralissueraisedbythesestudiesis whethertheexclusionaryimpulseoutlinedinlargertheorizationsisoperationalized withinspecificcontexts.AsLomellsuggestsforCCTVtocontributetoincreased socialexclusion,itisnotenoughthatsomecategoriesaretargetedmorethanothers. Thistargetingmustalsohavetheconsequenceofexcludingtheunwanted(2004: 351).Andyettheevidencethatexclusionarypotentialismobilized,atleastinpublic settings,istodateuneven.EveninthemajorstudyconductedbyNorrisand Armstrong(1999a),whichobservedoperatorsforatotalof592hours,policewere deployedonly45timesresultinginonly12arrests.Otherstudies,suchasthat conductedbyGoold(2004),alsosuggestthatweneedtoexercisecautionin
394
assumingthatvisionitselfissufficienttobringaboutpanopticpower.Troubled relationshipsbetweenpoliceandCCTVoperators,disgruntledworkforcesandpoor managerialpracticesallservetocurtailthepowerofthesurveillancegazeinpublic spaces. Conclusion InconsideringthelimitationsandambiguitiesofCCTV,itisthereforeimperativethat criminologistsaresensitivetotheparticularorganizationalandculturalcontextsin whichthetechnologyisdeployed.CCTVisnotaunitaryphenomenonwhose impactsarereplicatedregardlessofgeographicororganizationalcontext.Whilethe abstracttheoriesofactuarialjusticetheelectronicpanopticonortheconsumer cityhavemuchtocontribute,thismustbalancedagainsttheneedfordetailed empiricalobservationofparticularcontexts.Whatisrequiredtheninthestudyof CCTVistouseMertonsfamousterminologyatheoryofthemiddlerangewith thecapacitytocutacrossthedistinctionbetweenmicrosociologicalproblemsand macrosociologicalproblems(1968:68).Moreover,IbelieveitisvitalthatAustralian criminologistsnotsimplyrelyonBritishscholarshipassumingthatthesameapplies withinthelocalcontext.AsIhavearguedelsewhere(Wilson2007),localandregional culturesstillplayapartinfashioningtheexperienceofsurveillance,evenifmirroring broaderglobaltrends.ThisisparticularlypoignantinthecaseofCCTV,whichisso conditionedbythelocalorganizationalcontextbothinitsdeploymentandimpact. Lastly,criticalscholarsneedtointerrogateandinterprettheambiguitiesof surveillance,asthiswillprovidefarmorecredibleandnuancedaccountsthathavethe capacitytotranscendthepullofthetimewornmetaphorsofthePanopticonandBig Brother.
395
References AttorneyGeneralsDepartment(CommonwealthofAustralia)(AGD)(2006,6 October)NationalCommunityCrimePreventionProgramme:FundingforSecurity RelatedInfrastructureincludingClosedCircuitTelevisionSystemsMediaRelease, www.ag.gov.au AttorneyGeneralsDepartment(CommonwealthofAustralia)(AGD)(2006)CCTVas acrimepreventionmeasureTipSheet5,NationalCommunityCrimePrevention Programme,www.ag.gov.au Bannister,J.,Fyfe,NandKearns,A(1998),ClosedcircuittelevisionandthecityinC. Norris,J.MoranandG.Armstrong(eds.),Surveillance,ClosedCircuitTelevisionand SocialControl,Aldershot:Ashgate. Bauman,Z.(1997)PostmodernityanditsDiscontents,Cambridge:Polity. Boyne,R.PostPanopticism,EconomyandSociety,29(2):285307. Coleman,R.&Sim,J.(2000),Youllneverwalkalone:CCTVsurveillance,orderand neoliberalruleinLiverpoolcitycentre,BritishJournalofSociology,51(4):623639. Coleman,R.(2004)ReclaimingtheStreets:surveillance,socialcontrolandthecity. Cullompton:Willan. Davis,M(1990)CityofQuartz:ExcavatingtheFutureinLosAngeles,London:Verso. Debus,B.(2008,26May)GrantsAnnouncedforSaferSuburbsMinisterforHome AffairsMediaRelease,www.ag.gov.au
396
Farrington,D.&Painter,K.(2003)HowtoevaluatetheimpactofCCTVonCrimein M.Gill(ed)CCTV,Leicester:PerpetuityPress. Feeley,M.&Simon,J.(1994)ActuarialJustice:TheEmergingNewCriminalLawin D.Nelken(ed.)TheFuturesofCriminology,London:Sage Fussey,P.(2004)NewLabourandNewSurveillance:TheoreticalandPolitical RamificationsofCCTVimplementationintheUKSurveillanceandSociety, SurveillanceandSociety2(2/3):251269. Fyfe,N.andBannister,J.(1996),CityWatching:closedcircuittelevisionsurveillance inpublicspaces,Area,28(1):3746. Goold,B.(2004)CCTVandPolicing:PublicAreaSurveillanceandPolicePracticesin Britain.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Hempel,L.&Tpfer,E.(2002)Urbaneye:InceptionReporttotheEuropeanCommission 5thframeworkprogramme,Berlin:TechnicalUniversityofBerlin. Humphries,D.(2005,July25)HowardbacksmoresecuritycamerasSydneyMorning Herald. IRISResearch(2005)AustralianCouncilsCCTVSurvey2005:FinalReport. Lianos,M.&Douglas,M.(2000)DangerizationandtheEndofDeviance:The InstitutionalEnvironmentinD.Garland&R.Sparks(eds)CriminologyandSocial Theory,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Lomell,H.(2004)TargetingtheUnwanted:VideoSurveillanceandCategorical ExclusioninOslo,Norway?SurveillanceandSociety,2(2/3):34761.
397
Lyon,D.(1994)TheElectronicEye:TheRiseofSurveillanceSociety,Minneapolis: UniversityofMinnesotaPress. Lyon,D.(2001)SurveillanceSociety:MonitoringEverydayLife,Buckingham:Open UniversityPress. Lyon,D.(2002)SurveillanceStudies:UnderstandingVisibility,Mobilityandthe PhreneticFixSurveillanceandSociety,1(1):17. Lyon,D.(2004).GlobalizingSurveillance:ComparativeandSociologicalPerspectives InternationalSociology,19(2),135149. McCahill,M.(2002),TheSurveillanceWeb:TheriseofvisualsurveillanceinanEnglish city,Cullompton:Willan. McCahill,M.&Norris,C.(2003)EstimatingtheExtent,SophisticationandLegalityof CCTVinLondoninM.Gill(ed)CCTV,Leicester:PerpetuityPress. McGrath,J.(2004)LovingBigBrother:Performance,PrivacyandSurveillanceSpace, London:Routledge. Mackay,D.(2003)MultipleTargets:TheReasonstoSupportTowncentreCCTV systemsinM.Gill(ed)CCTV,Leicester:PerpetuityPress Malins,P.(2000)MakingSpace:Space,RiskandIdentityinthenarrativesoffemale injectingdrugusersBAHonoursthesis,DepartmentofCriminology,Universityof Melbourne.
398
Marx,G.(2002)WhatsNewAbouttheNewSurveillance?ClassifyingforChange andContinuitySurveillanceandSociety,1(1):929. Merton,R.(1968)SocialTheoryandSocialStructure,NewYork:FreePress. Nieto,M.,JohnstonDodds,K.,&Simmons,C.(2002),PublicandPrivateApplications ofVideoSurveillanceandBiometricTechnologies,Sacramento:CaliforniaResearch Library.www.library.ca.gov/crb/02/06/02006.pdf Norris,C.andArmstrongG.(1998),VisionandPowerinC.Norris,J.MoranandG. Armstrong(eds.),Surveillance,ClosedCircuitTelevisionandSocialControl,Aldershot: Ashgate Norris,C.andArmstrong,G.(1999a),TheMaximumSurveillanceSociety:TheRiseof CCTV,Oxford:Berg. Norris,C.&Armstrong,G.(1999b)CCTVandtheSocialStructuringofSurveillance CrimePreventionStudies,10:15778. Norris,C.,McCahill,M.&Wood,D.(2004)Editorial.TheGrowthofCCTV:Aglobal perspectiveontheinternationaldiffusionofvideosurveillanceinpubliclyaccessible spaceSurveillanceandSociety,2(2/3):110135. Norris,C&McCahill,M.(2006)CCTV:BeyondPenalModernismBritishJournalof Criminology,46(1):97118. Norris,C.&Wilson,D.(2006)IntroductioninNorris,C.&Wilson,D.(eds.) Surveillance,CrimeandSocialControl,Aldershot:Ashgate. OMalley,P.(2004)Risk,UncertaintyandGovernment.London:GlasshousePress.
399
Phillips,C.(1999),AreviewofCCTVevaluations:crimereductioneffectsand attitudestowardsitsuseinK.Painter&N.Tilley(eds.),SurveillanceofPublicSpace: CCTV,StreetLightingandCrimePrevention,CrimePreventionStudiesvol.10, Monsey,NY:CriminalJusticePress. Scott,J.(1985)WeaponsoftheWeak:EverydayFormsofPeasantResistance,New Haven:YaleUniversityPress. Scott,J.(1990)DominationandtheArtsofResistance:HiddenTranscripts,NewHaven: YaleUniversityPress. Smith,G.(2004)BehindtheScreens:ExaminingConstructionsofDevianceand InformalPracticesamongCCTVControlRoomOperatorsintheUKSurveillanceand Society,2(2/3):376395. Smith,G.(2007)ExploringRelationsbetweenWatchersandWatchedinControl(led) Systems:StrategiesandTacticsSurveillanceandSociety,4(4):280313. Sutton,A.&Wilson,D.(2005)OpenStreetCCTVinAustralia:Politics,Resistance andExpansionSurveillanceandSociety2(2/3):310322. Urbaneye(2004)OntheThresholdoftheUrbanPanopticon?Analysingthe EmploymentofCCTVinEuropeanCitiesandAssessingitsSocialandPoliticalImpacts, FinalReporttotheEuropeanUnion.Berlin:TechnicalUniversityofBerlin. Welsh,B.&Farrington,D.(2002),CrimePreventioneffectsofclosedcircuittelevision:a systematicreview,HomeOfficeResearchStudy252,London:HomeOfficeResearch, DevelopmentandStatisticsDirectorate.
400
Williams,K.&Johnstone,C.(2000),Thepoliticsoftheselectivegaze:ClosedCircuit Televisionandthepolicingofpublicspace,Crime,LawandSocialChange,(34):183 210. Wilson,D.(2007)AustralianBiometricsandGlobalSurveillanceInternational CriminalJusticeReview,17(3):207219. Wilson,D.&Sutton,A.(2004)WatchedOverorOverWatched:OpenStreetCCTVin Australia,AustralianandNewZealandJournalofCriminology.27(3):211230. Wilson,D.&Sutton,A.(2003)OpenStreetCCTVinAustralia,TrendsandIssuesin CrimeandCriminalJustice.No.271,AustralianInstituteofCriminology:Canberra. www.aic.gov.au Zedner,L.(2007)Precrimeandpostcriminology?TheoreticalCriminology,11(2): 261281.