Search results

Drawing on multi-method research conducted in 2013-2014, the purpose of this paper is to consider the extent and nature of disadvantage experienced by individuals with psychosocial and intellectual disabilities (PID) who come into contact with the criminal justice system in Zambia. The research was conducted as part of a wider project aiming to bring about improvements in how people with PID are dealt with by the criminal justice services.

The research activities included interviews with 29 individuals with PID who had experienced the criminal justice system as suspects, defendants or prisoners (“self-advocates”). A focus group and interviews were also conducted with the family members of people with PID who had criminal justice experience.

People with PID in contact with the criminal justice services in Zambia are disadvantaged and discriminated against routinely and systematically. Like all detainees, they experience harsh and at times brutal conditions of detention. However, because of their disabilities, such experiences can be more keenly felt: their disabilities may be exacerbated by detention or by limited or non-existent health care; and they are likely to be less resourceful than other detainees and, therefore, less able to cope with the privations of detention.

In drawing on the self-advocate interviews, this paper presents direct, vivid accounts of what it means to be a suspect, defendant or prisoner with disabilities in Zambia. These are extremely marginalised and multiply disadvantaged individuals whose voices are rarely heard.

Although precise numbers are unknown, it is generally acknowledged that between 5‐10% of the offending population are people with learning disabilities. While there are few provisions that explicitly target defendants with learning disabilities there is a general recognition in law that defendants must be able to understand and participate effectively in the criminal proceedings of which they are a part. The implications of the principle of effective participation are that criminal prosecution may be deemed inappropriate for certain defendants with learning disabilities, in which case they may be diverted away from criminal justice and into health care. There is scope for a variety of measures to be put into place to support defendants with learning disabilities to maximise their chances of participating effectively. However, in terms of statutory provision, there is a lack of parity between vulnerable witnesses and vulnerable defendants. Further, the absence of effective screening procedures to identify defendants' learning disabilities means that their support needs often go unrecognised and unmet.

No One Knows is a major initiative by the UK Prison Reform Trust which highlights the plight and predicament of prisoners with learning disabilities and of those with less severe degrees of learning difficulties. This major initiative has been sponsored by the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund and has yielded a number of pivotal recommendations which are already being explored actively by the Department of Health (England) and the Prison Health Service.

There is a lack of clarity about the prevalence of offenders with learning disabilities and learning difficulties. However, it is clear is that, regardless of actual numbers, many offenders have learning disabilities and learning difficulties that interfere with their ability to cope within the criminal justice system. No One Knows is a UK‐wide programme led by the Prison Reform Trust that aims to effect change by exploring and publicising the experiences of people with learning disabilities and learning difficulties who come into contact with the criminal justice system. The article highlights the aims of the No One Knows programme and considers recent research on prevalence, drawing attention to some of the reasons for the different findings.

This paper reports on the impact of the ‘Next Steps’ programme (and other initiatives such as ‘market testing’) on the underlying coherence and unity of the Civil Service. It concentrates on the impact of these changes on the human resource and careers structures within the Civil Service, which has arguably been the single biggest factor under‐pinning a unified Service. It reviews both the nature of the changes imposed from above and the record of their impact as recorded by official, researcher, consultancy and ‘insider’ accounts. Finally, it draws on an ongoing major consortium project (organised by the Cabinet Office) on human resource development strategies in 10 departments and agencies to review how the changes are developing in practice. It draws conclusions about the likely long‐term impact of the changes on the Civil Service.

No One Knows (Prison Reform Trust, 2008) is concerned with people with learning disabilities and difficulties who come into contact with the police and who enter the criminal justice system. The terms ‘learning disabilities’ and ‘learning difficulties’ are often used interchangeably to describe people with an intellectual disability, excluding those who, for example, have dyslexia. No One Knows, however, has adopted a more inclusive approach, and has included in its remit offenders with learning disabilities as defined by the World Health Organisation as well as those with a broader range of learning difficulties. Although there is some disagreement on prevalence, it is clear that a large number of people with learning disabilities and difficulties are caught up in the criminal justice system. Once in the criminal justice system, people with learning disabilities and difficulties, because of their impairments, struggle to cope. At worst this can affect their right to a fair hearing in court and, if they are sentenced to custody, may mean longer in prison. UK criminal justice agencies do not recognise, let alone meet, the particular needs of people who have learning disabilities or difficulties.

No One Knows is concerned about people with learning disabilities and difficulties who get into trouble with the police and who enter the criminal justice system. The terms ‘learning difficulties’ and ‘learning difficulties’ are often used interchangeably to describe people with an intellectual disability, excluding those who, for example, have dyslexia or Asperger syndrome. No One Knows, however, has adopted a more inclusive approach and has included in its remit offenders with learning disabilities as defined by the World Health Organization as well as those with a broader range of learning difficulties. Although there is some discrepancy on prevalence, it is clear that high numbers of people with learning disabilities and difficulties are caught up in the criminal justice system. Once in the criminal justice system it is unlikely that an individual with learning disabilities or difficulties will be identified or that their support needs will be met. This causes difficulties for the individual concerned and for the staff who work with them, who receive little or no training for working with this group of people. The question of whether people with learning disabilities (meaning intellectual disabilities) should be diverted from the criminal justice system is considered.

AFTER AN ABSENCE of some months I returned to the pages of NEW LIBRARY WORLD, half expecting to find a mixture of ‘How I did reorganisation good’ and ‘The penny has just dropped’, depending upon the luck and/or influence of contributors. I was not disappointed, but, in a class apart, it was sad to read Philip Hepworth's account of humiliation and unfair treatment. (‘Defeat’, January NLW). He was not alone. One's faith in the essential fairness of the local government appointment system, built up over many years, was shattered in weeks. It is to the eternal discredit of the Library Association that during the agonising months of 1973/74 the dubious practices of certain local authorities were not challenged.