Justice Reinvestment in Katherine: Report on Initial Community Consultations

Fiona Allison (2016)

The NT Council of Social Services (NTCOSS) and North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency (NAAJA) received funding from the Law Society Public Purposes Trust (NT) in early 2015 to conduct a justice reinvestment (JR) ‘proof of concept’ project in the NT. The project seeks to determine the capacity of JR to reduce incarceration and offending of 10 – 24 year old Indigenous people in Katherine. It is hoped that if successful a JR framework might be used in other NT communities.

Project consultations conducted over the last 12 months indicate that stakeholders in Katherine are overwhelmingly in support of introduction of JR. Given this, we will continue to work with the community to progress JR in coming months, dependent on sourcing additional funding and with an immediate focus on setting up a collective impact (CI) framework in Katherine. CI provides a structure within which key stakeholders come together to enact sustainable social change with respect to complex social problems: in this instance, the high level of contact by young Aboriginal people from Katherine with the justice system.

(open access) via JRNA

Justice Reinvestment in Cherbourg: Report on Initial Community Consultations

Fiona Allison (2018)

Many inquiries and reports have advocated for introduction of JR in Australia, and it is now being implemented in almost all States and Territories. Though there has been engagement with JR in a number of QLD communities, the project initiated in Cherbourg in April 2017 by the Department of Justice and Attorney General (DJAG) (Youth Justice) represents the first time there has been an attempt to implement all 4 formal stages of JR in QLD. The project seeks to identify JR’s capacity to reduce or halt rates of incarceration of young Indigenous people (10-25 years old) in Cherbourg. Cherbourg has been selected for JR because of its levels of contact with the justice system and its potential to lead JR longer-term.

The last 12 months of project work have focused on identifying whether Cherbourg supports introduction of JR and what JR might look like if introduced there. Key project tasks have involved consultation and engagement, as well as data collection and analysis. The project has been guided by a Steering Group, Cherbourg Aboriginal Shire Council and Youth Justice’s Project Board.

(open access) via JRNA

Justice Reinvestment in Northern Australia

Fiona Allison and Chris Cunneen

James Cook University (2018)

This paper looks at justice issues, and in particular, the potential implementation of Justice Reinvestment (or ‘JR’) in Northern Australia. To date, crime and criminal justice have been absent from discussions on developing Northern Australia, despite the fact that the Northern Territory (NT) has the highest imprisonment rate in Australia, followed by Western Australia (WA) (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2017) and that building and operating prisons constitute significant infrastructure and recurrent costs. The paper begins with a description of JR, which has emerged as a major policy alternative to the current emphasis on the increasing use of imprisonment. It discusses the origins of JR in the USA and the growing interest in recent years in its introduction in Australia. Key elements of JR are explained, as well as its particular importance for Indigenous people. We discuss various projects already implementing JR or exploring the potential to do so, including in Northern Australia. The paper concludes with analysis of challenges to progressing JR, with some focus on Northern Australia.

(open access) via Cairns Institute

Exploring the Potential of Justice Reinvestment in Cowra: Community Report

Jill Guthrie et al

Australian National University (2018)

Cowra, in central west New South Wales, is in the Federal electorate of Hume and the state electorate of Cootamundra.

This research project was designed to work with the community to enable them to set their priorities for how they would like money that is currently spent on incarcerating their citizens reinvested back into the community.

The project was led by Dr Jill Guthrie with colleagues from the Australian National University (ANU), the University of New South Wales and other organisations.

It was guided by a reference group of representatives from the Cowra Aboriginal Land Council, Cowra Shire Council and other local and international experts.

(open access) via Australian National University

Yiriman Project in the West Kimberley: An Example of Justice Reinvestment

Kathryn Thorborn and Melissa Marshall

Indigenous Justice Clearing House (2017)

This paper examines the Yiriman Project in the West Kimberley. The primary goal of the project was to support young Aboriginal people from remote communities connected culturally and linguistically within Nyikina, Managala, Walmajarri and Karajarri traditional lands and language groups. This paper provides an analysis as to whether the Yiriman project is an example of Justice Reinvestment and the complexities of evaluating and measuring the effectiveness of the project.

(open access) via Indigenous Justice Clearing House

Investing in Communities Not Prisons: Exploring the Application of Justice Reinvestment in the Victorian Context

YouthLaw (2017)

While Victoria does not have a justice reinvestment program or pilot, it has significant policy development, investment and work underway that have features of a justice reinvestment approach. Many of these community initiatives (including child protection programs, enhanced child health care, development services and programs to keep at risk young people engaged in school) do not necessarily have justice reform as a stated focus or outcome. They are, however, making a difference in addressing underlying causes of crime and will inevitably contribute to a reduction in the number of young people coming into contact with the criminal justice system and to making communities stronger and safer.

(open access) via YouthLaw

Unlocking the Future: Maranguka Justice Reinvestment Project in Bourke Preliminary Assessment

KPMG (2016)

In the Preliminary Assessment, it has been found that the approach aligns with NSW Government and Australian Government justice, early intervention and Indigenous policies designed to promote prevention and social policies, Indigenous self-governance and prevention of crime. The approach is aligned with a pathways life course analysis of juvenile and young adult crime and crime prevention.

The Justice Reinvestment approach, when contrasted several other crime prevention approaches was found to be a promising approach on a number of criterion. The approach has the potential to address the underlying causes of crime, the approach is data-driven and community-led.

(open access) via Just Reinvest NSW

Maranguka Justice Reinvestment Project: Impact Assessment

KPMG (2018)

To this end, the Maranguka JR Project has delivered a number of interlinked activities designed to create impact at different levels of community and the justice system. This includes the Aboriginal leadership driving a grassroots movement for change among local community members, facilitating collaboration and alignment across the service system, delivering new community based programs and service hubs, and working with justice agencies to evolve their procedures and behaviours towards a proactive and reinvestment model of justice. These activities all take different timeframes to mature into tangible results and require a phased approach to deliver systems change.

(open access) via Just Reinvest NSW

Winnunga Justice Reinvestment Trial Evaluation

The Australian National University Centre for Social Research and Methods (2018)

The evaluation of the trial showed an increase in services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander offenders had a positive impact on the participants and their families. The evaluation concluded that Winnunga provided a proactive, intensive and problem-oriented system of case management. The participants reported significant improvements in their family, personal and social well-being. The evaluation also confirmed that the Trial is helping keep families together, preventing homelessness and keeping people out of prison.

The outcomes and recommendations from the evaluation have been used to inform the funding and operating model for future service provision. The ACT Government has developed a model that will allow more organisations supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to become service providers in this space.

(open access) via ACT Government

The Promise of Justice Reinvestment

David Brown, Melanie Schwartz and Laura Boseley (2012)

This article examines the notion and practice of Justice Reinvestment (‘JR’), an emerging approach addressing the high social and economic costs of soaring incarceration rates. JR invests in public safety by reallocating dollars from corrections budgets to finance education, housing, healthcare, and jobs in high-crime communities. Key distinguishing features of JR (including justice and asset mapping, budgetary devolution and localism, and the desirability of bipartisanship) are briefly outlines, followed by discussions of its recent emergence and application in the United States, and to a lesser extent in the United Kingdom. The prospects for the adoption of JR approaches in the Australian context it is important that it be subject to critical scrutiny and therefore some of the key problems are briefly outlined, before a conclusion which emphasises the potential benefits of JR.

(pay-walled) via Sage Journals

Justice Reinvestment: What is it? Has it been tried in Australia?

Tony Foley (2015)

Justice Reinvestment (JR) is held out as a new means of lowering incarceration rates and reducing rates of return to prison. But what is it exactly, and how successful has it been? Why has it not yet been tried in Australia and what might an Australian model look like?

(pay-walled) via Informit

Redressing Indigenous over-representation in the criminal justice system with justice reinvestment

Melanie Schwartz (2013)

‘Australia is locking up more people than ever before… Less than 3 per cent of Australians identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, but Indigenous Australians make up more than a quarter of the nation’s prison population. They are among the most imprisoned people groups in the world. In fact, an Indigenous person is more likely to be returned to prison than they are to stay in high school or university. This is a national disgrace.’ Senator Penny WrightSenator Wright is among the growing number of advocates for justice reinvestment (JR), a new approach to reducing the number of people in prison while building capacity – ranging from infrastructure and program delivery to social capital and resilience – in those places that produce the highest numbers of prisoners. In Australia, consideration of a JR approach necessarily means examination of how it might reduce the contact of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) people with the criminal justice system. This article will first consider the nature of Indigenous over-representation, and then discuss the potential of JR to add a new and hopeful chapter to the long history of ATSI mass-imprisonment in Australia.

(open access) via Austlii

Crime Prevention and Young People: Models and Future Direction for Youth Night Patrols

Trudi Cooper, John Scott, Elaine Barclay, Margaret Sims and Terence Love (2016)

This article presents a typology of different approaches to social crime prevention adopted by Australian Indigenous youth night patrols. Research that informed this typology occurred in a specific context, but generic observations about youth crime prevention policy are transferable to community youth crime prevention in other settings. The typology identifies several key points of difference between various service delivery models, in particular, different perceptions of relationships between crime prevention; community safety; community development; community self-determination; child protection; and youth development and welfare. Discussion teases out how political discourse frames concepts such as community governance, self-determination, paternalism, and funding accountability. The discussion illustrates how politicised decision-making has meant that policy makers responded selectively to programme evaluations, in ways that did not always maximise benefit. The typology is intended to be useful to youth crime prevention practitioners, evaluators, and policy makers.

(pay-walled) via SpringerLink

Keeping on Country: understanding and responding to crime and recidivism in remote Indigenous communities

Glenn Dawes, Andrea Davidson, Edward Walden and Sarah Isaacs (2017)

The objectives of this qualitative study were to examine local perspectives on the causes of crime and recidivism in two remote Indigenous communities, and provide a series of recommendations regarding more effective responses that could be implemented by way of justice reinvestment.

This research found that people in remote Indigenous communities are aware of the complex issues associated with crime in their community and have clear ideas regarding what can be done. We argue that in order to understand and address Indigenous crime and over‐representation in the criminal justice system, the perspective of Indigenous people must be elevated and communities empowered to identify and implement ecologically and culturally informed solutions that will work for them.

(pay-walled) via Taylor & Francis Online

‘Justice Reinvestment as Social Justice’ in The Routledge International Handbook of Criminology and Human Rights

Chris Cuneen and David Brown (2016)

This chapter draws on the work of the Australian Justice Reinvestment Project (AJRP) (Brown et al., 2015). The AJRP examined the development of justice reinvestment particularly in the context of it’s alignment with broad social justice values. We are also specifically interested in how and whether justice reinvestment can meet the needs of those social groups that have been adversely affected by mass imprisonment and hyper-incarceration, particularly racial and Indigenous minorities, women and people with mental health issues and cognitive impairment (Cunneen et al., 2013). We argue that justice reinvestment was in its early development strongly tied to civil rights, particularly with the focus on imprisonment and racialization, and social justice for communities where large numbers of residents were recycled in and out of prison.

(open access) via SSRN

Investment in Prisons: An investment in social exclusion? Linking the theories of Justice Investment and Social Inclusion to Examine Australia’s Propensity to Incarcerate

Jill Guthrie, Michael Levy and Cressida Fforde (2013)

Much of the conceptual space occupied by Justice Reinvestment theory suggests clear links with the theoretical framework of Social Inclusion and therein understandings of the social determinants of health. This article seeks to explore this mutually interested and unified relationship, and furthermore examine how their combined adoption in Australia would provide benefits for the general population as well as those in contact with the criminal justice system. Despite the existence of consistently strong links between social disadvantage and imprisonment, it is apparent the social determinants of health have yet to adequately address their implications for incarceration. Forming these links, this article will introduce and explore the notion of the social determinants of incarceration. Moreover, the importance of the social and economic imperatives to be realised through the adoption of Justice Reinvestment ideals will be argued, in turn providing explanation for why the coalescing of Justice Reinvestment and Social Inclusion is fundamentally important to consider. Therefore, we hope to prompt insightful questioning of our current institutional processes such as: Is investment in new prisons really investment in social exclusion?

(open access) via Griffith Journal

Looking beyond Offenders to the Needs of Victims and Communities

Mick Gooda, Emilie Priday and Louise McDermott (2013)

As a result of increased advocacy for justice reinvestment in recent years, the Australian Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee is conducting an Inquiry into the value of a justice reinvestment approach to criminal justice in Australia. The Australian Human Rights Commission’s former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Dr Tom Calma, was one of the first proponents of the justice reinvestment approach in Australia in the Social Justice Report 2009. Since then advocacy for justice reinvestment has been building and a number of authoritative reports have made recommendations about justice reinvestment. This article examines the applications for justice reinvestment in Australia, primarily in relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, although some consideration has been given to vulnerable groups including juvenile offenders, people with cognitive impairment, people with psychosocial disability and hearing impairment. In particular, given that justice issues are largely the responsibility of states and territories, this article examines ways in which the federal government could support and encourage justice reinvestment approaches through Council of Australian Governments (COAG) mechanisms.

(pay-walled) via Atoda

Justice Reinvestment and Over-Policing: A Conversation with Sarah Hopkins

Eleanor Holden and Sarah Hopkins (2016)

Just Reinvest NSW was formed by a coalition of more than twenty organisations and individuals from New South Wales to address the significant over-representations of Aboriginal young people in custody through a Justice Reinvestment approach. Just Reinvest’s key message to the government and the community is that there is a solution; a smarter approach that will reduce crime and create safer, stronger communities.

(open access) via Informit

Mapping the Conditions of Penal Hope

David Brown (2013)

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

(open access) via the International Journal of Crime, Justice and Social Democracy

‘Good Kid, Mad System’: the Role of Health in Reforming Justice for Vulnerable Communities

Anthea Krieg and Jill Guthrie et al (2016)

It is time to re-define our criminal justice system to redress the over-reliance on incarceration as the means of achieving safer communities. A substantive reconfiguration of mental health, disability and substance misuse services is essential to provide comprehensive treatment rather than punish for vulnerable people. An innovative policy that is gaining traction is justice reinvestment (JR). As a systems-based approach, JR encompasses a comprehensive range of areas such as health, housing, employment, justice, family support, mental health and substance misuse services. It impels policymakers to consider the implications of current punitive polities that result in more incarceration, particularly of Indigenous Australians, and instead fund initiatives that redress the health and social determinants of incarceration.

(open access) via Research Gate

Navigating the Political Landscape of Australian Criminal Justice Reform: Senior Policymakers on Alternatives to Incarceration

Melissa Lovell and Jill Guthrie (2018)

Political ideology and populism are often thought to be major impediments to criminal justice reform. Our research has attempted to deconstruct these ideas so that the robustness of the ‘punitive turn’ in criminal justice policy can be better understood. This article reports upon in-depth interviews conducted with five very senior criminal justice policy-makers, each of whom was broadly sympathetic to reforming criminal justice policy to achieve the goal of lower incarceration levels. The interviews reveal that these policy-makers conceived of prison reform primarily in terms of political risk, especially when reform was related to the adoption of prison alternatives and models that focus on ‘decarceration’. Furthermore, policymakers’ perceptions of political risk were intricately bound up with concerns about potential public policy and program failure. This research indicates the need to develop political will for reform, alongside the further development of the myriad evaluation and policy development processes required to enable successful reform in the criminal justice space.

(pay-walled) via Taylor & Francis Online

Article 10(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Australian Prisons

Anita Mackay (2017)

Article 10(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights requires that ‘[a]ll persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person’. There is a body of international law that elaborates on its requirements. Article 10(1) and domestic legislation that incorporates this requirement have direct implications for how managers and staff within prisons behave towards those in their custody. In general, Australian prisons do not comply well with these requirements. This article first reviews the intent of Article 10(1) and guidance from the United Nations Human Rights Committee about its operation. Secondly, it reviews relevant Australian legislation and documents a number of ways in which Australian prison practice fails to live up to these standards. Thirdly, it identifies two important barriers to be overcome to address this situation. It concludes that a justice reinvestment approach has the potential to assist Australia towards compliance with Article 10(1).

(pay-walled) via Taylor & Francis Online

Prevention Initiatives within the Criminal Justice System of Western Australia and the Importance of the Reciprocal Relationship between the Individual and Their Community

Marie Ni Mahuna (2016)

This paper explores justice reinvestment as a possible solution to the issues identified in the Western Australia criminal justice system. It draws upon the connection between the philosophical writing of the relationship between the individual and the community by highlighting the reciprocal nature of this relationship, emphasising the fact that an adequate philosophical account of the human person must recognise and describe this reciprocity. The research investigates other jurisdictions and how these jurisdictions have addressed the overcrowding of prisons and recidivism. The research also includes local projects that are addressing the causal relationship between the general levels of disadvantage of particular communities and their contact with the justice system.

(open access) via Austlii

Building Communities, Not Prisons: Justice Reinvestment and Indigenous Over-Representation

Melanie Schwartz (2010)

Justice reinvestment is an emerging approach to addressing expanding prison populations. The merits of the justice reinvestment approach adopted in the United States and the United Kingdom to divert funding from correction budgets for investment in programs to reduce criminal behaviour in communities with a high rate of criminal offense are discussed, also analysing its potential for application in the Indigenous context in Australia. It is suggested that the approach is a worthy replacement to costs of Indigenous over-imprisonment, also being in line with policy aims to fulfil the social and economic needs of Indigenous communities.

(open access) via Austlii

Justice Reinvestment in Australia

Wood William (2014)

Over the past three decades, Australia has seen more than a 100% increase in its rate of incarceration. A sizable part of this has come from the rise in incarcerated indigenous people. Australia also experiences problems related to high rates of recidivism, the increasing use of custodial sentences for parole violations, and the use of incarceration for minor offenses such as traffic violations. In response to these problems, a growing number of policy makers, public and private organizations, and academics have pushed for the development and implementation of justice reinvestment (JR) initiatives in Australia. This article provides an overview of JR. It highlights some of the more pertinent problems facing the justice system, offenders, victims of crime, and local communities in regards to the use of punishment and incarceration in Australia. It then considers the degree to which JR may or may not be able to deliver on some or all of its promises, in particular problems that it faces in terms of implementation, use, and long-term viability in Australia.

(open access) via Research Gate

Justice Reinvestment: The Cost Benefits of Trusting and Supporting Indigenous People to Mediate their Troubles

Mary Spiers Williams (2016)

In June 2015, economists Anne Daly and Greg Barrett and mediator Rhian Williams presented the findings of their cost-benefit analysis of the Yuendumu Mediation and Justice Committee (‘YM and JC’) operating in Yuendumu in central Australia. Their presentation to the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (‘AIATSIS’) was subtitled ‘The Economic Case for Local Dispute Management Services’. The findings were impressive: if the YM and JC is properly funded, then for every $1 spent, there will be a benefit of $4.30 over 10 years. Greg Barrett explained the significance of these findings by making this comparison: if the World Bank receives an analysis of a cost benefit of $1.10 this is considered good; a benefit of more than four dollars is exceptional. Over 10 years if the total costs of the YM and JC are $4 359 000, then the total benefits on present value will be $18 522 000. That is a net benefit of $14 163 000 on present value.

(open access) via Austlii

Downsizing Prisons in an Age of Austerity? Justice Reinvestment and Women’s Imprisonment

Julie Stubbs (2016)

Justice Reinvestment is being actively promoted as one means of reducing high levels of incarceration through diverting expenditures from prisons to fund services intended to provide support and supervision for offenders within the community and to prevent crime. At a time of financial stringency, the huge expenditure necessitated by high incarceration rates is being re-examined. There is growing recognition that high levels of incarceration are ineffective in reducing recidivism and may be criminogenic and damaging in other ways for individuals and communities. Based on claims that Justice Reinvestment schemes in the US have produced promising results, some activists and politicians in Australia have urged the adoption of Justice Reinvestment. This advocacy has emphasised the need to find mechanisms to reduce the very high levels of incarceration of Indigenous people. Women’s imprisonment rates have increased substantially in recent years and to a greater extent than rates for men. This pattern has been observed in several jurisdictions and is even more pronounced for Indigenous women. This paper critically examines features of Justice Reinvestment, such as its endorsement of ‘evidence based policy’ and risk assessment tools, to question whether these features are likely to promote the interests of women.

(open access) via Austlii

Keeping on Country: Recidivism Research Report

Glenn Dawes

James Cook University (2016)

The over-representation of Indigenous people in the Australian criminal justice system continues to be a major social problem despite numerous reviews and academic studies. Statistics show a disparity in incarceration rates which highlight that there are 1891 prisoners per 100 000 Indigenous adults compared to 136 per 100 000 non-Indigenous adults (ABS, 2009). In addition the economic costs of keeping one person in prison per year is over $76 000 per year. There are also social and economic costs that impact on the families and friends of Indigenous people who are incarcerated. Of greater concern are the high rates of recidivism among Indigenous people, with a 2008 study indicating that a quarter of all Indigenous people who are incarcerated re-offend within six months of their release from prison. This scenario is exacerbated in remote Aboriginal communities where there is a clear correlation between remoteness and disadvantage, with high rates of people suffering from health issues, limited employment opportunities, a lack of suitable housing and people suffering from alcohol and substance abuse issues.

(open access) via North and West Remote Health

Epidemic Incarceration and Justice Reinvestment: It’s Time for Change

Wendy-Rea Young and Tammy Solonec (2011)

Australia has alarming levels of incarceration of Indigenous peoples. The problem has not been adequately addressed since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, particularly in a climate in which State and Territory Governments wish to appear ‘tough on crime’. This article poses solutions in the form of Justice Reinvestment in which the diversion of funds from prison construction and operation is channelled into anti-recidivism programs in areas with high rates of criminal incidence and offender numbers. Justice Reinvestment programs emerged in high prison population states in the US and have enjoyed successes in helping to reduce detention rates and improve community conditions. This article explores epidemic incarceration, underlying causes, and the financial costs of such issues. It goes to explore the Justice Reinvestment model and its capacity to be applied to the Australian setting, particularly given the geographic differences in high incarceration areas. Using a discussion of programs that have worked in the Australian context, the article concludes that a piloting of Justice Reinvestment programs will build on currently initiated, community programs to more effectively address the issue of Indigenous overrepresentation in Australian prisons.

(open access) via Austlii

Arguments for Raising the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility

Chris Cuneen (2020)

The age of criminal responsibility is the primary legal barrier to criminalisation and thus entry into the criminal justice system. This paper provides arguments for raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR). Nationally the minimum age is 10 years old. Some Australian states set the MACR at 10 years in the mid-to late1970s (Queensland (1976), NSW (1977) and South Australia (1979)). However, only since the early 2000s has there been a uniform approach to the MACR in all Australian jurisdictions (Cunneen et al 2015: 250). The paper provides a number of reasons for raising the age: international comparisons; the protection of children’s rights; the limited ability of the common law doctrine of doli incapax to protect young children; child developmental arguments and issues of mental illness and cognitive impairment; the over-representation of children in out-of-home-care (OOHC) among young children in the juvenile justice system, criminological arguments relating to the failure of an approach that relies on criminalisation and imprisonment; and the views of juvenile justice practitioners.

(open access) via JRNA

A Brighter Tomorrow: Keeping Indigenous Kids in the Community and Out of Detention in Australia

Amnesty International (2015)

The adoption of a justice reinvestment strategy, continuing and increasing the use of indigenous courts and conciliation mechanisms, diversionary and prevention programmes and restorative justice strategies, and recommends that, in consultation with indigenous communities, the State party take immediate steps to review the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, identifying those which remain relevant with a view to their implementation.

(open access) via Amnesty International

AMA Report Card on Indigenous Health

Australian Medical Association (2015)

Further, in its 2012 Position Statement on Health and the Criminal Justice System, the AMA recommended that ‘concerted efforts be made to establish suitable alternatives to imprisonment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in contact with the criminal justice system, including the expansion of diversionary programs, non-custodial sentencing options, and justice reinvestment programs’. The AMA also supports the call of the now disbanded National Indigenous Drug and Alcohol Committee to use justice reinvestment principles to fund the diversion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander offenders with substance use disorders into community residential drug and alcohol rehabilitation services instead of incarceration.

(open access) via Australian Medical Association

Rethinking Justice: Vulnerability Report

Australian Red Cross (2016)

The analysis of justice reinvestment both in Australia and overseas suggests this approach is more effective than the current approaches to justice. Justice reinvestment invests in people and communities to provide support, treatment and services that address the underlying issues confronting people who commit less serious offences. These issues include homelessness, mental health, deep social exclusion, and poor education and employment histories. Evidence suggests that it is more efficient and effective to address the causes and thus reduce the need for (and greater cost of) incarceration.

(open access) via Australian Red Cross

Breaking the Prison Cycle

Kate Allman

Law Society of NSW (2016)

After seeing the astounding results of Guthrie’s research, Katrina Hodgkinson, the Cootamundra State Member of Parliament, raised justice reinvestment in a notice of motion in NSW Parliament on 10 May. Hodgkinson has asked the Attorney-General, Gabrielle Upton, to invest part of the $2.3 million that could notionally be saved each year, into a justice reinvestment pilot program for Cowra. The Attorney-General’s Department and Corrective Services NSW (CSNSW) refused to answer the LSJ’s specific questions about whether the idea could become part of criminal justice policy in NSW.

(open access) via Law Society of NSW

Chief Justice: Invest Now to Save Future Generations

Michael Esposito

Law Society of South Australia (2016)

A justice reinvestment program in South Australia could save generations of Indigenous people from a life of crime and imprisonment, according to The Hon Chief Justice Chris Kourakis. Chief Justice Kourakis said while rolling out such a program would be expensive, the long-term benefits would far outweight the costs.

(open access) via Law Society of South Australia

Aboriginal Justice: The True Cost of Aboriginal Incarceration – the Case for Justice Reinvestment

Anna Finizio

Law Society of South Australia (2016)

As a nation, we are struggling to close the gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians in number of key areas, including life expectancy and education. However, an area glaring with disparity is the justice gap, where the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people is truly appalling.

(pay-walled) via Informit

Emerging Developments in Juvenile Justice: The Use of Intervention, Diversion and Rehabilitation to Break the Cycle and Prevent Juvenile Offending

Peter Johnstone (2016)

This paper focuses on developments in juvenile justice that offer alternatives: early intervention, diversion and rehabilitation. The author explains why children should be treated differently in our justice system. He draws on two recent papers. The first by Judge Andrew Becroft, Principal Youth Court Judge, New Zealand, refers to neuroscientific research which demonstrates that there is a range of factors (biological, psychological and social) that make juvenile offenders different from adult offenders. These differences justify unique responses to juvenile crime. The central theme of the second paper by Ms Kelly Richards is that most juveniles grow out of offending and adopt law-abiding lifestyles as they mature.

(pay-walled) via Informit

Justice Reinvestment Program Progressing in Port Adelaide

Robyn Layton

Law Society of South Australia (2017)

After five years of persistent advocacy for a justice reinvestment approach1 to be implemented in South Australia to reduce the over-representation of Aboriginal people in custody, Justice Reinvestment SA (JRSA)has achieved some very positive movement over the last 12 months. An essential starting point which differentiates a justice reinvestment approach from other approaches, is that it is community developed, implemented and owned. This requires a slower process because it is not simply the application of generalised government imposed solutions onto a community. Instead it is a consultative process which allows the community to discuss and develop leadership and governance and then prioritise and implement solutions which are monitored for effectiveness.

(pay-walled) via Informit

Time to Reinvest in Justice

Tiffany Overall (2017)

The Justice Reinvestment Campaign aims to create community awareness of and debate about justice reinvestment as an alternate approach to address youth offending and its potential applicability in Victoria. To identify communities interested in considering a justice reinvestment approach and to build the case for Government to adopt and invest in justice reinvestment policy. The focus of this campaign is on young people coming into contact with the justice system as they are some of Victoria’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable.

Sentencing Contradictions: Mental Illness and the Criminal Justice System

Louis Schetzer and Samantha Sowerwine

Council to Homeless Persons (2014)

It is a disturbing fact that people with a mental illness are over-represented in the criminal justice system. A 2012 study found that 38 per cent of Australian prison entrants had been told they have a mental health disorder. The numbers are even worse for young people, with a 2011 report finding that 87 per cent of young people in custody in NSW had a psychological disorder. Research also consistently identifies a strong relationship between homelessness and mental illness. Research exploring the pathways of people with mental and cognitive impairment into prison indicates that those people with disability, in particular those with complex needs, are significantly more likely to have experienced homelessness than those without disability. The question for policy-makers is how best to manage the complex needs of people with a mental illness within the framework of the criminal justice system and reduce the likelihood of re-offending by addressing the causes of crime.

(pay-walled) via Informit

2014 Sir Ronald Wilson Lecture – Justice Reinvestment: What Difference Could it Make in WA?

Tammy Solonec

Law Society of Western Australia (2014)

The concept of Justice Reinvestment is a framework for the reform of the justice system. The framework, which was developed in the US, is aimed at diverting people from crime in high-risk communities, especially repeat offenders and serves to actually reduce crime as well as the number of people incarcerated. I then noted some of the challenges to implementing it in Australia, including lessons to be learned from the American experience. It should be noted that many of the challenges could be overcome by a state / territory as opposed to a Federal implementation of Justice Reinvestment. This article calls to action to the Western Australian Government to take the lead in implementing Justice Reinvestment on a State level, especially by starting with a trial in a remote community.

(open access) via Law Society of Western Australia

Circuit breakers: How Justice Reinvestment is Reshaping Bourke

Jane Southward

Law Society of NSW (2014)

When we first started talking to the Bourke community in 2013, they told us they wanted to create better lives for children and young people. Part and parcel of that was they wanted a safer community for everybody. “Reducing crime is a win for the whole community, black and white, and what you see happening in Bourke is the service system starting to work in a different way – services for health, education and mental health as well as police collaborating in a way the town hasn’t seen before. Aboriginal community members are having real buy-in and that’s something Bourke should be really proud of.”

(open access) via Just Reinvest NSW

Insights from the coalface: the value of justice reinvestment for young Australians

Jacqueline McKenzie

Australian Youth Affairs Coalition (2013)

If implemented correctly, the Justice Reinvestment framework suggests the generation of a better return on investment in the long term. Although Justice Reinvestment is not a complete replacement for incarceration it can address the increasing costs of the justice system by reducing crime and recidivism rates, strengthening communities and increasing public safety.

The Justice Reinvestment framework shifts the focus of interventions from an individual to the community, and from reactive punishment to proactive prevention and early intervention. Therefore, community-based initiatives are utilised to confront crime at a ‘grass roots’ level, to address the factors within that environment that may be causing and maintaining crime. These initiatives include youth-specific programs and services that are relative to each targeted50 community and designed with significant community input and partnership.

(open access) via Australian Youth Affairs Coalition