Participation of the Public in the Prevention and Control of Crime and Delinquency

Abstract

Abstract [Editor's Note] No criminologist today would deny the importance of public participation in crime control. Public involvement—through the family, neighborhood, schools, private businesses and public agencies—are potential assets in curbing rising crime and delinquency rates. In this article the basic concerns are two in nature: 1) how to best utilize community resources, including meaningful participation of citizens; and, 2) how public and community organizations can effectively participate in preventing, treating and controlling offenders on parole or probation. In all these endeavors, public support—moral, financial and otherwise are necessary for success. What is more important is to achieve the most salutary form of public participation, and to obtain the most beneficial balance between local participation and the actions of many government agencies involved. Not all pure local participation is at all times positive, as is illustrated by the actions of a lynch mob. It is also true that the closer one is to local institutions, the more difficult it is to achieve any degree of impartiality. On the other hand, highly centralized judicial and law enforcement structure often tends to be arbitrary and impersonal. This balance although essential, is difficult to achieve. The community agency (welfare boards, citizen's groups, parole boards), independent of the judicial and law enforcement institutions, plays an increasing role in enlightened public participation. Other important factors include education for crime prevention and reporting of offenses, and the relative closeness individuals feel toward their local groups (family, clan, school, neighborhood), as well as the efficiency of the police and judicial organs. No effective public participation in crime control programs can be achieved when there is a wide divergence between the value systems of local and national groups, and when there are great differences of opinions as to exactly what the public can do to prevent crime. Broadly speaking, there are four ways in which community groups can participate in crime prevention: 1) political support for social defense programs; 2) public co-operation with social defense programs; 3) delegation to community groups of elements of social defense programs; and 4) provision by community groups of autonomous social defense programs. Much more work must be done to collect reliable data and make significant critical analyses and evaluations of the myriad ways of public participation in crime prevention throughout the world. [Source: “Participation of the Public in the Prevention and Control of Crime and Delinquency,” Fourth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (Tokyo, Japan, 17–26 August 1970)]