By International Crisis Group

What’s new? Since taking power in Burkina Faso in September 2022, President Ibrahim Traoré has begun arming tens of thousands of civilians, known as the Homeland Defence Volunteers (VDPs). He has thus considerably stepped up the use of auxiliary corps created in 2020 to reinforce the army’s campaign against jihadist forces.

Why does it matter? The use of VDPs is a double-edged sword. They help defend national territory from jihadist groups by strengthening counter-insurgency operations. Yet, due to inadequate training and supervision by the armed forces, these volunteers suffer heavy casualties. Civilians are increasingly caught in the crossfire of their battles with jihadists.

What should be done? The authorities should recruit fewer VDPs and continue integrating those already enlisted into the regular armed forces under certain conditions. They should enhance the VDPs’ training, supervision and representativeness. They should sanction any proven abusers and improve relations with communities excluded from recruitment. External partners could support these endeavours.

  Africa Report N°313 | 15 December 2023

Brussels, Belgium: International Crisis Group, 2023. 43p.

By Toronto Community Housing

In 2020, Toronto Community Housing established a Confronting Anti-Black Racism (CABR) Strategy team to develop a company-wide confronting anti-Black racism strategy.

The strategy aims to identify systemic barriers, provide recommendations to address anti-Black racism issues embedded in Toronto Community Housing's (TCHC) policies, programs, and service delivery, and help create a diverse, inclusive, and equitable environment for tenants and staff.

Toronto: Toronto Community Housing, 2021. 59p.

By Matthew Bogdanos

As the head of the investigation into one of the greatest art crimes in recent memory— the looting of the Iraq Museum in 2003—I have spent more than a decade attempting to recover and return to the Iraqi people their priceless heritage (Bogdanos, 2005a and 2005b; Cruickshank, 2003). 16* I have also spent a significant amount of time in three parallel pursuits: 1) attempting to correct the almost universal misconceptions about what happened at the museum, in those fateful days in April 2003; 2) highlighting the need for the concerted and cooperative efforts of the international community to preserve, protect and recover the shared cultural heritage of all humanity; and 3) trying to increase awareness of the continuing cultural catastrophe that is represented by the illegal trade in stolen antiquities, which is indeed funding terrorism. Toward these ends, and in more than one hundred and fifty cities in nineteen countries, in venues ranging from universities, museums and governmental organizations to law-enforcement agencies, from Interpol (the International Criminal Police Organization) to both houses of the British Parliament, I have urged a more active role for governments, international organizations, cultural institutions and the art community. I have done so, knowing that most governments have few resources to spare for tracking down stolen artifacts; that many international organizations prefer to hit the conference center rather than the streets; and that many academics are content to issue a call for papers, rather than a call to action. As for the archaeological community, I have learned that some members wash their hands of unpleasant realities and argue that, while technically illegal, the market in purloined antiquities is benign—victimless—as long as it brings the art to those who can properly protect and appreciate it (namely, themselves). All the while, the situation in Middle East deteriorated dramatically after 2003, causing the United States to withdraw its forces from Iraq—an action most knowledgeable (read “non-political”) observers predicted would lead to a power struggle, such as the one that has played out in vivid color as ISIS (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) commits one atrocity after another. Given the bloodshed, it is a pretty tough sell to ask people to care about a bunch of old rocks with funny writing. Finding the political will to divert resources to saving cultural artifacts, no matter how precious, seems like cutting funding for police and fire in order to expand the public library. There might be a case for it one day, but not now. After all, looting has always been a cottage industry in the Middle East, the region that gave birth not just to agriculture, cities, the wheel, and pottery, but to war and conquest, as well. T he argument for protecting artifacts takes on added strength when we recognize that Iraq and Syria have been so bloody, not just because of the failure to provide sufficient security to overcome the long-festering tribal and religious animosities, but also, I submit, because of the continuing failure to appreciate the importance Iraqis and the rest of the Middle East place on the preservation of their history. This failure to protect a rich heritage going back to the dawn of civilization has convinced many that we in the West do not care about any culture other than our own. Even today, more than a decade after the initial looting, and despite having recovered almost two-thirds of the antiquities stolen from the museum,3 we are hard-pressed to keep pace with the artifacts that are  being looted from archaeological sites every day. In light of such efforts to destroy important historical and archeological sites in this region, the excavations in the City of David stand out as a model of cultural preservation. T he excavations shed light on 4,000 years of the history of Jerusalem and the origins of Western civilization at large. The dedicated efforts of the Israel Antiquities Authority and the Israel National Parks Authority, working in coordination with the City of David, have ensured that their discovery and preservation of antiquities and sites serve to educate over half a million visitors each year. Their publication of their findings also enriches the understanding of historians, academics, and researchers of ancient Jerusalem from the pre-Biblical period to the present day.

The Megalim Institute, 2020; 21p.

By Aaron Littman

Prisoner litigation proceeds along two distinct tracks. On the first and predominant track, prisoners are pro se; their litigation is processed according to exceptional and largely extrajudicial procedures; and they almost always lose. On the second and much rarer track, prisoners obtain counsel—often through appointment; their cases receive serious consideration; and success is much more likely. Federal judges, magistrates, and staff attorneys play important roles in shaping prisoner civil rights litigation by assigning cases to these tracks.

Perhaps so few prisoner civil rights cases are counseled and robustly adjudicated because most claims lack merit, or instead, perhaps so few prisoner civil rights claims succeed because so few prisoners are afforded counsel and receive the benefits of a fulsome adjudication.

This essay analyzes over a decade of data on federal prisoner civil rights cases and suggests that the latter explanation is, at least in large part, correct. It compares, for the first time, success rates in prisoner civil rights cases across districts and circuits and across years with widely varying representation rates; it also employs a novel method to identify prisoner civil rights appeals in which counsel was appointed. Together, these analyses suggest that lawyering—and the serious engagement by courts that comes along with it—really matters. When more prisoner litigants are represented and fully heard, it seems, more of them win.

43 Review of Litigation 43 (2023)
UCLA School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 24-6

By  Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe,  Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR)

   In a globalized world, more and more people cross international borders to develop and maintain personal contacts, pursue educational and professional opportunities, to migrate or to realize the right to seek asylum when fleeing from persecution. At the same time, new technologies, which rely on the gathering, processing, and sharing of data, are increasingly used by states to manage migration flows and to address transnational security threats, including terrorism. These technologies heighten the risk of human rights breaches in an area that is already highly opaque and discretionary, with weak safeguards, accountability and oversight, and where the private sector plays a strong role in their development and use. This policy brief, therefore, provides an overview of the implications of collecting and sharing information in the context of border management and how the introduction or continued use of new technologies in the border space may affect human rights. It also provides recommendations to OSCE participating States on how to respect and protect human rights when using new technologies to manage their borders. The policy brief has been prepared as part of the ongoing work of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) in the field of migration, freedom of movement, human rights and counter-terrorism.1 More specifically, it is based on analysis from a series of online expert consultation meetings on new technologies in the context of border management and their impact on human rights, organized by ODIHR in June 2020, following a preliminary assessment that the increase in the use of new technologies for border management deserved attention, particularly considering potential human rights concerns.2 This policy brief references various digital technologies used in migration management and counter- terrorism, referring to passenger and biometric data collection, algorithmic decision-making, and artificial intelligence-based technologies as the innovations that are currently being developed and deployed for border and migration management, and to counter transnational organized crime and terrorism.  

Vienna: 

OSCE, 2021.  OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), 2021. 34p.

By Centre for Justice Innovation

   Whoever forms the new Government is going to be faced with difficult dilemmas about public service reform, not least in crime and justice. There are tens of thousands of unprosecuted serious crimes awaiting Crown Court trial in the highest backlog on record. Our prisons are so close to capacity that the system is running the risk of a prison riot and the risk that the day will arrive soon when the courts are told they can’t send any more people to prison. This paper, Systems Shift, sets out our plan to, first, stop the system from overloading, and then fundamentally shifting how our criminal justice system operates, putting it on a path toward long-term recovery. Given the urgency of the issues facing both the prison system and the Crown Courts, we recommend that a new Government consider: • Shortening the amount of time people sentenced to four years or less serve in prison, excluding those who are assessed as posing a high risk of serious harm to the public, using secondary legislation as soon as possible.; • Legislating to reduce the flow of people into prison on short sentences and remand while also tackling the long standing injustice of Imprisonment for Public Protection sentenced prisoners.; • Once the acute crisis has abated, taking immediate action to reduce the Crown Court backlog, setting a clear ambition to speed up Crown Court cases, creating streamlined processes to siphon off the least serious not guilty cases, and fast-tracking rape cases. Once the system is stabilised, they can than shift the system to focus its limited resources on the highest harm crime. This includes working towards to a future in which every victim of sexual violence or domestic abuse has their case heard in a specialist court, whether that be in criminal, private family law or public family law courts. We argue that such a shift can occur by implementing smarter ways of tackling ‘quality of life’ crime and anti-social behaviour, not least in strengthening our community justice services and investing in earlier intervention. We call for some incremental reforms building on existing evidence of what we know works, and more radical changes, not least in reforming our courts and opening up public discussion on drugs policy. Lastly, we need to build a more strategic centre within national Government. This should include an independent Institute for Justice to provide annual, independent forecasts of criminal justice capacity and demand (like an Office for Budget Responsibility for justice). These forecasts would help open up the public debate to help us make long term choices about what kind of prison system we want, what type of prisons we need and where those prisons need to be. We need to be clear-eyed about what the criminal justice system can achieve, and a new Government needs to be honest with the public that the justice system can’t fix all the problems that our communi ties face overnight. But, in our view, we cannot delay any longer. We urge whoever forms the next Gov ernment to take the opportunity presented by a new Parliament to deliver the fundamental ‘systems shift’ we need, in order to create a fairer and more effective justice system that holds the confidence of all our people.  

London: Centre for Justice Innovation, 2024. 20p.

By Corey Davis, Ashleigh Dennis, and Amy Lieberman at the Network for Public Health Law’s Harm Reduction Legal Project

State laws can both increase and reduce harms related to drugs and drug use. All U.S. states continue to rely primarily on a punitive approach to people who use certain drugs, criminalizing not only the possession, distribution, and use of those drugs but also the possession and distribution of devices used to consume them and check them for adulterants such as fentanyl. Consistent access to new injection and inhalation supplies is critical to prevent the transmission of HIV, viral hepatitis, and other communicable diseases among people who use drugs, and to prevent subsequent infection of sexual partners, children, and others. Drug checking equipment can help inform people who use drugs about the content of those drugs, leading them to make more informed decisions about their drug use. Laws that criminalize the possession and distribution of these objects lead to increases in preventable injuries and deaths. Similarly, state laws governing prescription medications make it difficult for community groups, harm reduction organizations, and similar entities to distribute naloxone, and a variety of laws designed to punish people who use drugs discourage those who are experiencing or witnessing an overdose to call for help. Most states have passed laws designed to mitigate some of the impact of criminalization. There is great variation in the presence and specifics of these laws, which can create confusion among both people who use drugs and people and organizations working to ensure that they have the supplies they need to protect themselves and others. This document is designed to reduce this information gap and help individuals and organizations better understand how the legal landscape in their state may impact access to harm reduction services and supplies and emergency medical assistance in an overdose. Specifically, this document includes detailed information regarding laws related to the possession and distribution of injection and smoking equipment, drug checking equipment, naloxone access, statewide naloxone standing orders, and overdose Good Samaritan overdose protections in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. For each state, each argether with a hyperlink that will take the reader to the text of the law. All iea of law is briefly explained in plain language. The relevant citation is also listed, tion is current as of August 1, 2023. 

Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2024. 101p.

By Megan Pfeiffe

   Parental incarceration impacts all members of a family unit, including parents who are incarcerated, their children, and the parents, legal guardians, or caregivers who aren’t incarcerated. Implementing evidence-based programs and practices tailored to support parents who are incarcerated and their families is crucial for addressing their complex needs, mitigating the negative consequences of incarceration, and promoting positive outcomes for families. Investing in evidence-based programs and practices promotes long-term sustainability by allocating resources to interventions with proven effectiveness and fosters commitment by holding stakeholders accountable for achieving measurable outcomes. While the landscape of programs and practices addressing the needs of parents who are incarcerated and their families is vast and continuously evolving, this brief will discuss examples from the field, providing a glimpse of the diversity of approaches. The following programs and practices are informed by research that reflects best practices, as well as input from practitioners and administrators on evidence-based and promising practices and programs used by the field collected through a survey of Second Chance Act Addressing the Needs of Incarcerated Parents and Their Minor Children grantees.

New York: The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2024. 16p.

By Travis McIntyre

A new study by The Pew Charitable Trusts shows that young people assigned to probation after their first offense are more likely to be rearrested in the future, particularly for technical violations, than their peers diverted away from probation. The study, based on data provided by the Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD) and analyzed by researchers at The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center and Pew, suggests that diverting more youth from probation could improve justice system efficiency and public safety outcomes. Background Past research has shown that young people removed from their homes have higher likelihoods of future rearrest—and of arrest for more severe offenses—than similarly situated youth supervised in their communities instead.1 These findings spurred a major change in state youth justice policy over the last two decades that shifted the balance from out-of-home placements toward community supervision.2 However, more recent research has suggested that youth who are formally processed and supervised are more likely to be rearrested in the future than comparable youth who receive diversion from formal prosecution.3 New research from Pew builds on this work by examining rearrest rates among statistically similarly Texas youth assigned to probation versus diversion. The study looks at arrests for both new offenses and technical violations, as research suggests that arrests for technical violations do not have a deterrent effect, may increase subsequent offending, and can contribute to an overrepresentation of youth of color in the juvenile justice system 

New York: The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2024. 3p.

By  Amy J. Schmtz and  Cynthia Alkon

This article explores the potential of technology to improve access to justice (A2J) in criminal courts, specifically for nonviolent misdemeanor cases. Despite a push for innovation in courts, criminal courts have been slow to embrace change and technological innovation due to factors like constitutional constraints and funding limitations. This article argues that criminal courts need "virtual windows" alongside traditional "brick and mortar doors" to enhance A2J. It proposes a problem-solving approach focusing on misdemeanor cases, a high-volume category where technology can have a significant impact. The paper highlights the importance of ensuring defendants make "knowing and intelligent" pleas despite the often-real consequences of misdemeanor convictions. The analysis also proposes a "green light, yellow light, red light" framework to categorize technologies based on their potential to improve A2J vs. the dangers they pose for defendants. Notably, the article acknowledges the digital divide but argues that the increasing prevalence of mobile devices and internet access necessitates exploring technological solutions for lowering barriers to justice. The paper concludes by calling for the adoption of "green light" technologies to improve A2J in misdemeanor cases, while acknowledging the need for thoughtful implementation to avoid unintended consequences. It also suggests further research with respect to “yellow light” ideas that may be worth further exploration with an aim toward furthering fairness and A2J.

25 Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 177-228 (2024)

Ohio State Legal Studies Research Paper No. 854

by Alba Kapoor, Simon Hood, and Hannah Marwood 

People of colour are bearing the brunt of shocking conditions in mass asylum accommodation, which amount to racial segregation, our new briefing with Care4Calais says. 

‍

Testimonies from residents, volunteers and employees at RAF Wethersfield, an asylum accommodation site, detail the harrowing conditions in so-called ‘contingency’ asylum accommodation, demonstrating the harm that this form of accommodation causes on people of colour.

‍

Care4Calais’ data demonstrates that the vast majority of people currently living at RAF Wethersfield are people of colour. Of the 327 people seeking asylum who Care4Calais are currently providing services for, all are from a West Asian or African nationality. 91 (27.8%)  are from Iran,  71 (21.7%) from Afghanistan, 32 (9.8%) from Eritrea. Many of the people who currently reside in RAF Wethersfield are vulnerable - victims of trafficking, torture, and physical violence.

‍

For M, an engineering student from Sudan and resident at RAF Wethersfield, it “is like a prison.” C, another resident at RAF Wethersfield, describes how the extent of the segregation has affected residents’ mental health: 

‍

“Nothing about my life in the UK so far is about freedom. We risk our lives over and over again. This is no way to treat a human being. People are suffering. I have seen people trying to kill themselves by jumping off buildings. One refugee sewed up his own mouth. He told them that he did not want to talk to anyone. That he did not want to eat anything. That he did not want to be here. He did 8 stitches in his own mouth - only then did they transfer him.”

‍

People housed at RAF Wethersfield are separated from the surrounding rural population by barbed wire, guards and ring-fences. We outline how these detention-like conditions amount to a modern form of racial segregation, or “segregation by nationality”. 

‍

According to one Care4Calais volunteer, residents show symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder: “people tell me that they have flashbacks, sweats, memories, sleep loss because of the camp directly, not because of what they suffered before they got here but as a direct result of the camp”. 

‍

We outline how housing people seeking asylum in detention-like conditions is a racial justice issue, where people of colour are actively being segregated from surrounding populations, and treated as criminals where no criminality exists. As demonstrated in the briefing, the extent of this isolation enables residents at sites like RAF Wethersfield to become targets of racial harassment, and vulnerable to threats from staff members who work in the accommodation.  

‍Runnymede Trust, 2024. 15p.

By Stephen N. Oliphant, April M. Zeoli

Research Summary

Although federal law prohibits firearm possession by individuals who have been convicted of a disqualifying offense and those who are subject to certain domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs), it does not provide a mechanism for enforcing firearm dispossession. Some states have adopted relinquishment laws to enforce firearm possession restrictions among prohibited persons following a disqualifying status or conviction. To date, limited research has assessed the statutory characteristics of firearm relinquishment laws related to DVPOs. We build on this work by assessing DVPO and conviction-based relinquishment statutes, including legislative changes through time, to identify gaps in policy.

Policy Implications

Our analysis revealed that many states still lack statutory elements that are expected to increase the likelihood of firearm dispossession, such as requiring the court to order relinquishment, strict standards for providing proof of firearm transfer or some form of compliance verification, and provisions that authorize law enforcement to recover unrelinquished firearms. The absence of such elements may facilitate unlawful firearm retention by those who become prohibited possessors. States might consider adopting relinquishment provisions that outline clear requirements for actors (i.e., judges, prohibited possessors, law enforcement) at each stage of the process to ensure that firearms are relinquished following a disqualifying conviction or DVPO.Criminology & Public Policy. 2024;1–26. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/capp 1

By Richard J. Stringer a and Scott R. Maggard

Public opinion concerning marijuana legalization has varied greatly over time. While prior research suggests presidential drug rhetoric is related to public opinions on drugs, the relationship between the sitting president and attitudes specifically toward marijuana has not been explored. This study utilized data from the General Social Survey and the American Presidency Project to examine the relationship between the president and Americans’ attitudes toward marijuana legalization from 1975 through 2016. Findings indicate that confidence in the executive branch, fear of crime, and presidential drug rhetoric predict attitudes toward legalization despite controls for other factors such as estimated levels of marijuana use and arrests. These findings are discussed in the context of prior research that suggests presidential rhetoric, drug enforcement, and fear of crime may be related to American attitudes toward marijuana legalization.

2019, Deviant Behavior

By the United States Sentencing Commission -  Kristin M. Tennyson,  Melissa K. Reimer,  Tessa Guiton,  Charles S. Ray

This report examines trends in the prevalence of federal methamphetamine trafficking sentences, and the purity levels of methamphetamine trafficked in the United States. The Commission analyzed 20 years of sentencing data and conducted a special data collection project examining the purity of methamphetamine trafficked and offense conduct of individuals sentenced for trafficking methamphetamine in fiscal year 2022. This report is the Commission's first comprehensive analysis of federal methamphetamine trafficking offenses in nearly 25 years.

Washington, DC: USSC, 2024. 66p.

By Fintel Alliance,  Australian Federal Police, Australian Border Force

Criminal networks seek to exploit vulnerable members of the community. They target and recruit them as money mules to launder their proceeds of crime and reintegrate the funds back into the economy. This creates distance between the networks and the crime, and helps to avoid detection by law enforcement.

Criminal networks primarily target international students and non-permanent residents through face-to-face contact or online platforms. They use a variety of means to recruit them as money mules, offering them a way to make money while living in Australia. Criminal networks can also use these methods to recruit others outside of the student cohort.

This guide has been developed to assist government agencies and financial service providers, including remittance service providers and digital currency exchanges, to understand and identify signs of criminal networks exploiting vulnerable members of the community as money mules.

Sydney: AUSTRAC, 2024. 19.

The Young Advocates project is a youth-led project that places the voices and experiences of children and young people affected by the justice system at the heart of decision-making.

The project is delivered in partnership by the Alliance for Youth Justice (AYJ) and Leaders Unlocked and is led by children and young people who have lived experience of the youth justice system. The current report presents findings from conversations with 90 children and young people with experience of the youth justice system.

Peer research

The report is based on group workshops and an online survey and focuses on three priorities:

1.    Criminalisation: A process whereby acts become seen and treated as criminal, through public perception, legislation and law enforcement.

2.    Policing: The first contact most children have with the justice system and law enforcement.

3.    Intervention and Diversion: Things that can help young people avoid the justice system.

Criminalisation

The key finding is that young people are put under suspicion due to their age, associations and ‘the group’ and most targeted due to race and nationality. Intersectionality significantly impacts targeting and treatment.

Negative stereotype-driven, long-term labelling continues to be a trust-eroding issue across many of the services that young people access. Common aspects of childhood and adolescence – travelling to and from school, being with friends or family, and changes in appearance or style – are perceived as suspicious and often amplified by the specific demographic characteristics of those involved. This is reportedly felt regarding treatment by schools, policing, social and mental health services, as well as extending to portrayals of youth in mainstream media.

Young people repeatedly suggested race, nationality, and perceived age as reasons for unequal treatment. This makes experiences of labelling, targeting and criminalisation feel indistinguishable from each other, and has a cumulative impact. However, children and young people’s age, associations and groups were most frequently mentioned as being penalised and punished in their day to day lives. These broad categories allow for even more opportunities to be labelled for children and young people who are also racialised or otherwise marginalised.

Young people felt that targeting of their social lives is partly related to perceptions of young people and why they are viewed this way. There is a sense that ‘good news doesn’t sell’ and stories from and about social media show inaccurate portrayals of youth culture, allowing for a generation to be generalised

Policing

Young people generally felt that the police have too much power, and not enough accountability. Some young people could acknowledge that they had experienced fewer negative interactions with police officers than others they know. There is increasing cultural significance in the numerous cases of police sexual misconduct and brutality in the news, and a heightened sense of fear and frustration that no consequences have been seen for officers involved.

Survey respondents disagreed strongly with the idea that police in schools would increase feelings of safety, and strongly agreed that the presence of police changes where they go. This raises a worrying question about where children at risk of violence, exploitation or exposure to criminal behaviour can go
to feel truly safe.

Description

The UNiTE by 2030 to End Violence against Women campaign of the Secretary General of the United Nations, which has been underway since 2008, aims to prevent and eliminate gender-based violence against women and girls worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO, 2021) estimates that 31% of women aged 15–49 have experienced violence at the hands of an intimate partner and sexual violence inflicted by others. This multi-stakeholder campaign is part of the United Nations system’s efforts to support Latin American and Caribbean States in fulfilling their due diligence obligation to prevent, investigate, and punish gender-based violence against women (CEDAW, 2010), as well as to ensure “restitution, reparations, or other just and effective remedies” (OAS, 1994).

Table of contents

A. The obligation of States to prevent femicidal violence continues to be a challenge in the region .-- B. In most Latin American countries femicide rates have varied little in recent years .-- C. Femicides, feminicides or gender-related killings of women in Latin America .-- D. Numbers and rates of femicide, feminicide or gender-related killings of women in the Caribbean .-- E. Production and management of data on feminicide, femicide or killings of women in Latin America .-- F. Notable practices in the production of official femicide data .-- G. Femicidal violence can be prevented with robust and forceful state responses .-- H. Moving towards a care society requires transforming discriminatory, violent and patriarchal cultural patterns.

by  Deborah Butler (Inspection Team Leader) and Alice Oddy (Inspector). HM Chief Inspector of Prisons  

‘Prisons in England and Wales are almost full, with men and women serving increasingly long sentences often in overcrowded and squalid conditions. Reoffending rates remain high, and levels of assaults and self-harm are rising. Drugs too are an increasing problem in many jails, despite the use of technology designed to prevent their incursion.

‘Against this backdrop, it is more important than ever that prison leaders find ways to develop cultures that support prisoners to behave well. If we want to see less reoffending and fewer victims of crime, prisons must deliver on their purpose to protect the public by working with prisoners to help them prepare for their return to society. But we know how difficult it is for staff to do their job when they are spending too much of their time managing disruptive behaviour. We often report on prisons where behaviour is unacceptable, rules are not clear or enforced, staff lack confidence and do not feel supported by leaders, sanctions are not followed up and there is no effective system in place to motivate prisoners to behave.

‘Yet we know that some prisons have bucked this trend, creating cultures that encourage men and women to engage constructively with staff and make better use of their time in custody.

‘In this thematic report, we identify the features of these prisons in the expectation that others will learn from the example, innovation and insight that they offer. We visited eight jails during our research, as well as holding discussion groups with ex-prisoners, governors and academics.’

By  U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

The National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment is a comprehensive report on firearms commerce and trafficking. This volume presents and analyzes data collected by ATF and other federal agencies related to the manufacture, exportation, and importation of firearms.

As part ofan administration-wide strategy to combat the rise in violent crime, in April 2021 , President Biden and Attorney General Garland directed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to issue a comprehensive report on firearms commerce and trafficking. To execute this directive, ATF has assembled a team of subject experts from within the Bureau and experts from academic and related fields to produce the National Firearms in Commerce and Trafficking Assessment (NFCT A), a comprehensive examination of commerce in firearms and the diversion of firearms to illegal markets. Although A TF issues a variety ofpublic and law enforcement reports and bulletins regarding firearm commerce, trafficking, and related issues every year, it has not undertaken a joint academic study on the scale of the NFCT A in more than 20 years. Recognizing that effective approaches to reducing gun violence are data-driven, grounded in research, and informed by multi-disciplinary input, the NFCTA will issue its initial assessment in a series of four separate reports. To ensure NFCT A reports remain timely, ATF will be updating key findings annually. A critical part of ATF's mission is to regulate the lawful commerce in firearms to help prevent diversion of these firearms from the legal to the illegal market. Understanding the firearm marketplace from the perspective of the general public, firearm owners, and the regulated firearm industry is essential to this mission. That is why Volume I of the NFCT A report, issued today, is a broad overview of firearms commerce in the United States. This volume covers the period from 2000 to 2020; much of the analysis, however, focuses on the period for which the most comprehensive data is available, 2016 to 2020 (2020 is the most recent calendar year for which information was available at the time of the assessment). This volume presents and analyzes data collected by A TF and other federal agencies related to the manufacture, exportation, and importation of firearms. Between 2000 and 2020, the number of Gun Control Act (GCA) firearms and National Firearms Act (NF A) weapons that were domestically manufactured, exported by U.S. manufacturers, or imported into the U.S. increased by 187%, 240% and 350% respectively. This data illustrates the flow of new firearms into the domestic market over time which can help document trends and patterns in commerce. Trends in firearm commerce highlighted by this report include the pistol becoming the dominant firearm type manufactured and imported into the U.S. over the last decade, and an increase of24,080% in annual manufacturing of short-barreled rifles in the period from 2000 to 2020. This volume analyzes technological developments that have occurred in the past 20 years. One of the most significant developments affecting lawful firearm commerce and law enforcement's ability to reduce illegal access to guns in this period has been the proliferation of privately made firearms (PMFs). Since the early 2000s, advances in firearm manufacturing and design, combined with the readily online availability ofparts and information necessary to assemble PMFs have made it easier for unlicensed persons to make a firearm at home without any records or a background check. These PMFs lack identifying markings or recordkeeping requirements making it difficult for law enforcement to completely know how many are being made and distributed into commerce. The data available, however, makes it clear that criminals are actively making, using, and distributing PMFs both domestically and internationally. Indeed, the number of suspected PMFs recovered by law enforcement and subsequently traced by ATF increased 1,000% between 2016 and 2021. As is detailed in the report, to address the challenges posed by the proliferation of PMFs, the Department of Justice and ATF have recently updated the regulatory definitions applicable to the federal firearm laws..

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 2022. 301p.

Edited by Benjamin Nickl & Mark Rolfe  

This volume explores the concept of humour and its relationship with human behaviour. The interdisciplinary essays in this book cover a wide range of time, from the sixteenth century to the present day. They delve into various cultural contexts, challenging social norms and prompting readers to reflect on the ethical implications of humour. The collection highlights the varied metaphors of heroes and monsters in each case study, which are crucial to understanding the moral spectrum of human existence. These metaphors represent aspirational ideals and darker aspects of what it means to be human. The book encourages readers to critically analyse the complexity of humorous objects and social practices in contexts like digital culture, mythical folklore, entertainment technology, or politics, recognising their interconnectedness with societal issues and emphasising that different settings might call for different interpretations.

Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press, 2024. 234p.