Paraguay: La Música como estrategia de reinserción social llegará a las cárceles / Judiciales y policiales – PPN.com.py

El Proyecto “Música para la Reinserción Social en las Penitenciarías” es impulsado en el marco del Programa Sonidos de la Tierra, que cuenta con el apoyo de la Fundación Itaú, y se desarrollará por primera vez en el Correccional de Mujeres “Casa del Buen Pastor” y el Centro de Rehabilitación Social “Padre Juan Antonio de la Vega”.Firmaron el acuerdo la Ministra de Justicia, Sheila Abed, Luisa Abbate, en su carácter de directora ejecutiva de la Fundación Tierranuestra y el maestro Luis Szarán, como director del Programa Sonidos de la Tierra.

La música lleva como asociados a la disciplina que permitirá a los internos el redescubrimiento de la belleza interior, el desarrollo de la capacidad de meditar y al crecimiento personal.

Cada penitenciaria contará con un programa específico diseñado para responder a las realidades respectivas. En Emboscada se llevará a cabo la práctica orquestal, práctica coral y clases de lutería -construcción de instrumentos reciclados H2O-. En el Buen Pastor se realizarán prácticas de coro para la integración de una agrupación de “Coro Fem”.

La ministra Sheila Abed manifestó que el Ministerio de Justicia facilitará el lote de instrumentos consistentes en 15 violines y 10 guitarras, otorgará el permiso correspondiente para la realización de “Música para la Reinserción Social en las Penitenciarías” y gestionará con las autoridades penitenciarias el lugar y tiempo para la realización de las jornadas.Por su parte el maestro Luis Szarán enfatizó en el objetivo del Proyecto de generar un espacio de desarrollo humano para la transformación social, a través de la música, del estudio de instrumentos y prácticas de coro. “Además de crear una escuela de música en la penitenciaría de Emboscada, para la formación de una orquesta, se formará un taller para la creación de instrumentos musicales reciclados H2O y con esto se busca rescatar y afirmar los valores tradicionales de la cultura nacional y la reinserción social de los internos”, explicó.

A su turno, Luisa Abbate explicó que para concretar la iniciativa se llevarán a cabo un total de 71 jornadas de capacitación a internos de la Penitenciaría de Emboscada, para la formación de la orquesta, 18 jornadas de capacitación en Lutería a jóvenes integrantes de la orquesta. En el caso de Buen Pastor serán 64 jornadas de capacitación a las internas”, refirió.

vía La Música como estrategia de reinserción social llegará a las cárceles / Judiciales y policiales – PPN.com.py.

Chile: Gendarmería inauguró dos nuevos Centros de Reinserción Social en Santiago | Nacional | LA TERCERA

Desde hoy Gendarmería cuenta con dos nuevas dependencias en las comunas de Maipú y Puente Alto, donde se contempla el control e intervención de población penal condenada a penas sustitutivas.Según informó la institución, las nuevas instalaciones para la reinserción social, fueron inauguradas para brindar atención a más de 9 mil usuarios condenados a penas de libertad vigilada y libertad vigilada intensiva –entre otras- orientadas, entre otras cosas, a disminuir el riesgo de reincidencia delictiva.

El Subsecretario de Justicia, Marcelo Albornoz, manifestó que “como gobierno estamos haciendo este esfuerzo relevante, para evitar el contacto criminógeno en la población, por eso hemos estado desarrollando medidas orientadas a la segregación, a identificar a aquellas personas que por alguna circunstancia han delinquido, pero que también buscan y están a la espera de una posibilidad que les permita reinsertarse y recobrar una vida de tranquilidad, lejos de la delincuencia”.

En tanto el Director Nacional de Gendarmería, Juan Letelier, dijo que “los nuevos CRS se integran a una gama de centros de atención para el sistema abierto, descongestionando los ya existentes, brindando una atención más digna y cómoda, con gratos ambientes laborales para nuestros funcionarios que cuentan con capacitación y profesionalismo para ejercer una misión rehabilitadora, siendo un pilar fundamental para dar nuevas oportunidades a las personas sancionadas por la ley, generando nuevos espacios para una correcta inserción en la sociedad”.

El CRS Santiago Sur II está ubicado en la calle Balmaceda N° 36 en la comuna de Puente Alto. La población que será atendida en este nuevo establecimiento, concentrará las comunas de Buin, Calera de tango, Isla de Maipo, La Pintana, Paine, Pirque, Puente Alto, San Bernardo y San José de Maipo.Mientras que el CRS Santiago Occidente se encuentra en calle Monumento N° 2079, en la comuna de Maipú.

vía Gendarmería inauguró dos nuevos Centros de Reinserción Social en Santiago | Nacional | LA TERCERA.

Colombia: Instalación Mesa Prevención de la Delincuencia Juvenil y Atención a Adolescentes – YouTube

La Personería de Cali asistió y participó en la instalación de la mesa sobre Prevención de la Delincuencia Juvenil y Atención a Adolescentes con Conflictos en la Ley, la cual está conformada por todas las autoridades que integran el Sistema de Responsabilidad Penal para Adolescentes, el acto fue presidido por el Ministro de Justicia y el Derecho, Alfonso Gómez Méndez quien habló de la falta de integralidad para atender a los jóvenes infractores.

vía Instalación Mesa Prevención de la Delincuencia Juvenil y Atención a Adolescentes – YouTube.

Columna de Opinión (EEUU, Inglés): Students Help Keep Juvenile Court and Other Youth-Service Providers Honest | Juvenile Justice Information Exchange

As I approach the end of my 10th year of teaching in a clinical program at the University of North Carolina School of Law, I have been thinking a lot about the value that students add to the dynamics of the courtroom on any given day, as well as what they contribute to the juvenile justice system as a whole. The same, of course, can be said about the contributions that students in other graduate disciplines, such as social work and public policy, offer to their field placements and other types of student internships.

Recently I watched as one of my third-year students negotiated the terms of an admission with a prosecutor in a local juvenile delinquency court. The student, who I’ll call Carly, insisted the state did not have enough evidence to prove that her 14-year-old client had committed the crimes of breaking and entering or larceny. During the previous week, she had visited the scene of the offense, interviewed witnesses and researched the law. As a result, she knew that the police report was inaccurate — that one of the witnesses could not positively identify her client as the person seen leaving the empty house and that another witness had no intention of appearing in court. The most the state could prove, by Carly’s analysis, was that her client had conspired with another young person to break in, but that he had neither entered the premises nor possessed the stolen items — evidence consistent with a minor misdemeanor rather than a serious felony.

I stood several yards away while Carly made her pitch to the prosecutor, and I recognized the veteran lawyer’s facial expression: a mixture of bemusement and annoyance. Then Carly opened her case file and took out the police report, which was marked up and highlighted, and she methodically explained why the evidence was insufficient and why she had advised her client to fight the charges at an adjudicatory hearing. The investigating police officer in the case sat between them, listening closely as Carly argued that the elements of the offenses could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. When she had finished, the prosecutor slowly shook his head as he told her, “You are exhausting me.”

Moments later the case was called, and we hesitantly approached the front of the courtroom with the young client and his mother. “Do we have a deal?” I asked Carly. “I’m not sure,” she answered. “The prosecutor hasn’t told me his decision.” We soon learned that Carly’s offer had been accepted and that her client would admit to a single misdemeanor, a charge that was consistent with the evidence and acceptable to the teenager. In the context of juvenile defense practice, it was a win.

In 1899, when the first juvenile court in the United States was established in Chicago, the proceedings were closed to those who were not parties to the case, ostensibly for the purpose of protecting children’s privacy rights. In the decades that followed, as delinquency court sentences became more punitive and due process protections were ignored, there was a movement to open the courtroom to allow the public to observe and serve as witness to the proceedings. Yet the reality today is that even in states like North Carolina — where juvenile courtrooms remain open — outside observers are rarely present; instead, there are overworked defense attorneys, worn down by the systemic pressure to move cases, bargain away their clients’ rights and not ruffle the feathers of prosecutors or judges, who often determine case assignments.

This has created a system in which students practicing under the supervision of law school clinical professors provide the only scrutiny of these forums. They have been taught the meaning of burden of proof and inadmissible hearsay. They appreciate the necessity of rigorous advocacy by defense counsel, and they hold these principles to be essential to establishing an even playing field for their clients. Their faith that the other actors in the system — prosecutors, judges and police officers — will ultimately do the right thing, rather than being naïve and misplaced, is actually infectious. Their lack of cynicism helps ensure the integrity of the proceedings and re-inspires jaded lawyers like me, just as students in other disciplines infuse vigor into deliberations in their work settings and bring tenacity to the mission. This is why, after a decade of juvenile court practice, I am more than willing to continue — as long as I have a law student by my side.

 

Tamar R. Birckhead is associate professor of law and director of clinical programs at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

OP-ED: Students Help Keep Juvenile Court and Other Youth-Service Providers Honest | Juvenile Justice Information Exchange.

Columna de Opinión (EEUU, Inglés): The Prison of Poverty Will Continue to Fill the Prison of Crime | Juvenile Justice Information Exchange

Not all prisons are built with brick, mortar and razor wire.

Not all prisons are constructed by state funds or designed by correctional architects.

Not all prisons are readily visible.

But what we don’t see can be a pathway to the prisons we do see — the clanging doors, guard towers and razor wire.

“Prison” is defined by the circumstances, with one leading to another like a maze of twists and turns, not knowing what is lurking around the next corner.

Children in poverty are trapped in a maze, confused by the freedom to move about but limited by the walls that surround them. It is a paradox of freedom — the ability to be free, but in circumstances that limit opportunity.

Paradoxical problems often times lead to paradoxical solutions.

The prison of poverty is such a problem with paradoxical responses, including juvenile justice systems that receive kids to rehabilitate but instead exacerbate their situation — not because it fails to help, but because it tries to help too much.

Poverty imprisons youth in surroundings that studies show abound in educational inequalities, health care, economic opportunities and juvenile justice. Most youth in poverty are males of color shepherded into our juvenile justice systems at alarming rates. The disproportionate number reflects our stereotypes of poverty, masked by a paternalistic goodwill to help the poor when in many cases the system makes them worse — creating a pathway to prison.

There are still those who explain this disparity believing that race is the direct cause of crime. They refuse to see beyond the statistical surface and connect the statistical correlation between race and crime to the histrionics of slavery and segregation and its negative impact on social, economic, political and educational growth.

People don’t commit crimes because of their color but because of their circumstances, which for many include factors associated with being poor.

It is time that all juvenile justice professionals, myself included, acknowledge that although our intentions to get services to youth in poverty are well intentioned, our methodology is not well conceived. How we respond to their circumstances decides the extent to which we push them deeper into the system or pull them from the prison of poverty and onto a positive pathway.

Unwittingly juvenile justice systems lead the poor deeper into crime because our systems are defectively designed to receive the poor like “Lady Liberty” welcoming the tired and the poor, except immigrants tend to fare better with economic opportunities than do youth born into poverty in this country.

In her article “Delinquent by Reason of Poverty,” Assistant Professor of Law Tamar R. Birckhead describes this defective design around the concept of “needs-based delinquency” — a system that gives greater weight to the needs of the child and family over the nature of the offense and/or the quality of evidence against the child. When this occurs, children and families with greater needs are more likely to get the “Lady Liberty” treatment resulting in a disproportionate number of poor youth entering the system.

The “needs-based” criteria approach is well intentioned, but like many well intended approaches, the manner in which we operationalize the approach may have unintended consequences — increasing delinquency, which in turn compromises public safety.

Longitudinal studies reveal that court involvement contributes to continued involvement in the juvenile justice system and this in turn creates a pathway to the adult system.

The “needs-based” approach is inherently biased against the poor, including many youth of color. Poor families are far less likely to possess the resources to address their child’s needs, and in desperation they knock on our doors with the misguided belief we can give them what they can’t give their child. Believing we are helping, we open the door to a system that will label them a delinquent — and so they get worse.

It comes down to the “haves and have nots” paradox — the “haves” can avoid the stigma of delinquency, the “have nots” are not so lucky.

The importance of knowing that kids are under neurological construction is knowing that their construction must take place in positive places, and this does not include courtrooms and jails — they should be reserved for the small percentage of kids who truly scare us.

Regardless of what we do to keep the front doors of juvenile justice closed to non-violent kids, we will continue to hear them banging on the door trying to get in thinking that we can fix their manifestations of delinquency born from mental health disorders, zero tolerance policies and poverty.

This banging will never stop until communities begin collective decision-making around poverty and other social, political and psychological diseases that plague our kids everyday. Only through collective decision-making will communities realize a collective impact to eradicate these pathogens of delinquency.

The juvenile court is not a hospital, but its judges can influence the community to build one through collaboration.

Otherwise, the prison of poverty will continue to fill up the prison of crime.

vía OP-ED: The Prison of Poverty Will Continue to Fill the Prison of Crime | Juvenile Justice Information Exchange.

Chile: Diplomado Latinoamericano Analiza Reformas a la Justicia Penal en la región

Con el objetivo de revisar los procesos de reformas a los sistemas de justicia en las Américas, sus logros y sus déficits en materia de implementación y funcionamiento, el Centro de Estudios de Justicia de las Américas en CEJA – en conjunto con la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Diego Portales, de Chile- dieron inicio a la segunda versión del “Diplomado Latinoamericano sobre Reforma Procesal Penal“. El Diplomado – cuya etapa presencial se imparte en Santiago, Chile- se estructura bajo un formato que combinará dos etapas de clases presenciales y una a distancia bajo una metodología de e-learning, las que sumarán un total de 196 horas de duración, impartidas entre junio y noviembre de 2014.

El lunes 26 de mayo se dio inicio formal al diplomado, el que fue inaugurado por el decano de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Diego Portales, Juan Enrique Vargas, y el Director Ejecutivo de CEJA, Jaime Arellano y contó con la asistencia de los 28 alumnos y alumnas, provenientes de Argentina, Ecuador, México, Perú, Estados Unidos y Chile.El decano Juan Enrique Vargas, destacó la necesidad de revisar los procesos de implementación e instalación de las reformas en la región.

El director ejecutivo de CEJA; Jaime Arellano, destacó que los alumnos de este diplomado, además de incorporarse a un proceso formativo, se integran a una comunidad que dará un re-impulso a las reformas en la región que presentan dificultades en su puesta en marcha.Con este diplomado se espera que los egresados adquieran conocimientos y herramientas que les permitan fomentar enfoques y prácticas innovadoras para la resolución de problemas concretos en la implementación y funcionamiento de las reformas a la justicia penal en los países de América Latina y promover consecuentemente su desarrollo.

Para ello se abordarán distintos contenidos como: litigación en juicios orales; litigación en audiencias preliminares; gestión institucional, prisión preventiva y medidas cautelares en general; víctimas, innovaciones en el tratamiento de los casosLas etapas presenciales contarán con 60 horas de trabajo en clases y visitas a instituciones del sistema de justicia penal chileno y 40 horas de preparación de las clases revisando materiales o preparando ejercicios. La primera etapa se desarrollará entre los días 26 al 30 de mayo, y la segunda del 24 al 28 de noviembre de 2014, ambas Santiago de Chile.

vía Diplomado Latinoamericano Analiza Reformas a la Justicia Penal en la región.