7. Memorandum submitted by NAPO
NAPO welcomes the opportunity to comment on
the Panel's advice. NAPO found the advice comprehensive, thorough,
and believes it will be of great assistance to those working within
the Probation Service in the field of public protection, particularly
with sex offenders. The Probation Service has developed a range
of expertise in this work, including multi-agency arrangements,
and provides a variety of treatment programmes in and outside
prison. The Service is also involved in intensive 1-2-1-supervision,
and employees and number of effective risk assessment tools.
In addition, the Probation Service now has a
duty to consult and notified victims about the release arrangements
of all those serving 12 months imprisonment or more for a sexual
or violent offence. Victims have a right to be consulted and to
be involved in all peace stages of sentence including applications
for parole, temporary release or a move to a lower security establishment.
This work is integral to the Probation Service's public protection
work and has a vital impact on the fence focused work with a prisoner
as well as providing protection, via additional licence conditions,
where necessary for a victim.
NAPO would wish to comment on two specific issues:
A. SEX OFFENDER
PREVENTION ORDERS
These orders were introduced under the Sex Offences
Act 2003 and are civil preventative orders which can be made either
at the point of sentence or in respect of somebody previously
convicted of a sexual offence, whether person's behaviour is a
high risk and there is a strong likelihood of reoffending.
NAPO has a number of concerns about how Sex
Offender Prevention Orders are being used by the courts. The early
evidence suggests that there is inconsistency between courts in
terms of conditions and the inappropriate issuing of the orders
to persons who are at best assessed as medium risk. NAPO believes
that the orders should be specific to an individual's level of
risk and used solely for those who pose a high risk.
The orders must also be enforceable and the
conditions should be such that they prevent actions that might
lead to the individual becoming involved in further offending.
The conditions should not be offences in themselves. It is also
NAPO's view that the orders must be proportionate to the original
offense and be the subject of a detailed assessment of current
risk. There is evidence that some courts have routinely imposed
multiple conditions, often more than 10. NAPO believes this reduces
the orders' significance, makes them unenforceable and means that
it is more difficult for the police to monitor them effectively.
NAPO believes that the courts need to be advised to consider where
possible a small number of conditions that are sensible and proportionate
to the risk, such as a residence, work and restricted contact
with target victims and their age group.
Probation staff also find it useful when the
order is run in parallel with license conditions and this also
assists the aims of a supervision order. Assuming the orders are
targeted at high risk offenders, they are helpful to supervising
probation officers when discussed at MAPPA meetings, either after
sentencing or on release from prison. However, NAPO further believes
that there is evidence to suggest that some orders on not "fit
for purpose" in that they are contradictory, for example,
a prohibition on an address where a close relative resides such
as mother or father. In these circumstances exemptions have to
be negotiated with the police. It is also worrying that orders
are often made at the sentencing stage on the recommendation of
the police. They clearly needs to be better liaison with the Probation
Service prior to orders being made to avoid any conflict with
the court report.
B. SIGNIFICANCE
OF FAMILY
RELATIONSHIPS (PARAGRAPH
87 DRAFT GUIDELINE)
In NAPO's view it is important that the courts
recognise the balance between legal definitions of sexual abuse
and the long-term impact on victims. Currently the law categorises
sexual abuse in a variety of ways, including the degree of physical
intrusion. NAPO believes that judges should also take into account
when sentencing that offences committed against children over
a long period of time involve drawing those children into a web
of deceit. Often this experience is far more damaging to the child
than the physical offence itself. The level of deceit often impacts
on a child's life in virtually every way including their relationships
with other members of the family and poor self-image, and this
can cause long lasting damage.
July 2006
| 
