By Lord Verdirame KC and Professor Richard Ekins KC (Hon)

The International Criminal Court Act 2001 is an Act to give effect to the Statute of the International Criminal Court (the ICC Statute or Rome Statute). Part 2 of the Act makes provision for the arrest, detention and delivery up to the International Criminal Court (ICC) of persons against whom the ICC has issued an arrest warrant. But section 23 of the Act does not allow any action under Part 2 of the Act to be taken in relation to a person to whom state or diplomatic immunity attaches by reason of a connection with a state that is not a State party to the Rome Statute. The only exceptions to this limitation are if (a) the ICC obtains a waiver from that state or (b) the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) makes a resolution. The ICC has issued an arrest warrant against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. Israel is not a State party to the Rome Statute and has not waived state or diplomatic immunity. There is no relevant UNSC resolution. As a matter of customary international law, a Head of Government is entitled to absolute immunity against arrest. For this reason, it would be unlawful, as a matter of UK law and international law, to attempt to arrest Prime Minister Netanyahu. If the Government were to attempt to comply with the arrest warrant it would be acting beyond the parameters of the powers conferred on it by an Act of Parliament and would be violating the UK’s obligations in international law to respect state or diplomatic immunity. To the extent that the Government has indicated that it would attempt to execute an arrest warrant, its actions warrant strong denunciation. Any court hearing an application from the Secretary of State under Part 2 of the Act should reject the application on the grounds that it is incompatible with section 23 and with the rules about state or diplomatic immunity incorporated into and having effect in UK law

London: Policy Exchange, 2024. 17p.

By Brian Johnson, Kiminori Nakamura, Lydia Becker, Raquel Hernandez

Firearms violence is a major policy concern in America. How criminal courts address firearm crimes represents a critical opportunity for improving public safety. The overwhelming majority of criminal cases are settled by guilty plea, yet little is known about the ways that plea deals impact criminal punishment for firearms-involved offenders, or how they shape subsequent recidivism. This project investigates the association between plea bargaining, sentencing, and recidivism outcomes in state-wide sample of firearms-involved offenders. It provides a descriptive overview of case characteristics and outcomes in firearms cases, examines the scope and impact of plea bargaining for these offenses, and considers how plea discounts potentially impact future reoffending. Findings indicate that plea negotiations are common in firearms-related offenses – a majority of cases involve multiple filed charges but a single conviction charge, and more than half of all cases include a reduction in the severity of the top charge between filing and conviction. The mean distance traveled, or average magnitude of plea discounts, results in a significant reduction in the likelihood of incarceration and expected sentence lengths. Results also reveal significant relationships between plea discounts and recidivism. Defendants who are convicted and sentenced to longer incarceration terms have lower odds of coming back into the system for a new offense, whereas those who receive charge reductions and are given larger plea discounts are more likely to recidivate during our study period. Because average sentences in firearms cases are substantial, and because our follow-up period is limited, these results likely reflect the short-term incapacitation effects of lengthier incarceration terms. Overall, the current study suggests there may be significant public safety implications of plea discounts in firearms cases, though future research is needed before strong policy recommendations can be offered.

College Park, MD: University of Maryland, 2024. 88p.

By Deepak Premkumar, Andrew Skelton, Magnus Lofstrom, and Sean Cremin

In April 2020, the Judicial Council of California responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by implementing an emergency bail order, sometimes called “zero bail,” to reduce viral transmission in courts and jails. The policy maintained cash bail for more severe offenses but set bail at zero dollars for most misdemeanors and felonies, sharply increasing the number of people who were immediately released after being arrested. Although the statewide mandate lasted for roughly two months, many county courts temporarily adopted similar policies, and until July 2022, most Californians lived in a county with an emergency bail order in place. California’s emergency bail orders dramatically altered the pretrial process and drew concerns that those released would commit additional crimes. This report examines the impact of these emergency bail measures on the likelihood of arrested individuals being rearrested soon after release. The disruptive nature of the pandemic was likely a key factor in the temporary increase in overall rearrests when emergency bail orders were in place. Notably, increases in felony rearrests did not subside over time or when emergency orders were revoked. While our data do not allow us to determine why this was the case, arrest, and booking rates, as well as jail populations, have stayed well below pre-pandemic levels, suggesting the possibility that some pandemic-era practices may have persisted, which could affect more recent felony rearrest rates. Because their goal was to protect public health, emergency bail orders set a unilateral policy of detention or release based on the accused offenses—a marked difference from broader bail reform efforts that have implemented tools such as assessing arrested individuals’ risk to public safety and not appearing in court, as well as monitoring and/or providing pretrial services to the accused if they are released pretrial. Our findings suggest that pretrial detention policy may benefit from a more holistic measure than the arresting offense when assessing public safety risk, and pretrial risk assessments could be a promising approach.

  San Francisco:  Public Policy Institute of California, 2024. 33p.   

By Michael Jensen,  Sean Doody, and Elena Akers

To date, very little research has examined the specific challenges that individuals with ties to extremism face when reintegrating into their communities after arrest or incarceration. This has produced significant gaps in the scholarship on extremism, including a lack of data on terrorist recidivism from which to devise effective post-release supervision and support strategies. The implications of this knowledge gap extend beyond the halls of academia to matters of national security. Indeed, the United States is currently seeing an unprecedented surge in the number of individuals being released from custody due to their involvement in extremism. Without a robust research literature dedicated to this population, probation officers and service providers are without the scientific knowledge they need to help formerly incarcerated individuals achieve reintegration success. This project sought to address these challenges by focusing on three primary research objectives: 1. Build on existing NIJ-funded research to provide criminal justice professionals empirical data and rigorous analysis on the characteristics of U.S. extremists, their risks for recidivism, and their needs for reintegration success. 2. Gather evidence from in-depth interviews of pretrial services and probation officers, service providers, and system-involved individuals to understand the keys to successful reintegration. 3. Identify the training and education needs of pretrial services and probation officers to help them more effectively support the cases of formerly incarcerated individuals with links to extremism. Our mixed methods approach leveraged: (1) an extension to the Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) dataset designed to estimate instances of both ideological and non-ideological recidivism amongst system-involved individuals with ties to extremism; (2) interviews with pretrial services and probation officers, service providers, and  system-involved individuals to understand the needs and challenges this population faces during disengagement and reintegration; and (3) a survey of probation officers to identify the training and education they need to better support their releasees. We summarize our results below. Recidivism • We analyzed more than 1,800 cases of individuals who spent time incarcerated or on probation for committing extremist crimes from 1990-2022 and found an overall recidivism rate of 18.1%. • This rate is significantly higher than previous estimates, but lower than most estimates of recidivism among individuals who commit more typical crimes. • Recidivism rates were more than twice as high for the individuals in our data who were prosecuted by state or local authorities (26.4%) compared to those who were prosecuted in federal courts (13.1%). • Among individuals who recidivated, 59.2% committed new extremist crimes, 27.9% committed non-ideologically motivated crimes, and 12.9% committed both. • Our detection of a higher overall recidivism rate than previous estimates is due to the inclusion of individuals linked to domestic terrorist groups and movements in our analysis. • We find an exceptionally low rate of recidivism among individuals who committed crimes linked to their support of, or involvement in, international jihadism (7.7%), but a notably higher (19.8%) recidivism rate among individuals involved in domestic extremism. • Individuals motivated by their opposition to abortion reoffended at the highest rate (44.2%) in our data, followed by individuals motivated by environmental and animal rights concerns (27.3%). White supremacists and those with anti-government beliefs—the largest subsamples within our data—had recidivism rates of 18.9% and 16.1%, respectively. • The most important risk factor associated with recidivism is the presence of a criminal record prior to an individual radicalizing to their first extremist offense. For instance, individuals with a pre-radicalization history of violent crime were more than two times as likely to recidivate than individuals without a criminal record prior to radicalization (31.3% vs. 14.6%). • Co-offending, extremist group membership, a family history of extremism, and past trauma are associated with committing new ideologically motivated crimes. • Protective factors like being married, older, or having children did not significantly reduce the likelihood of recidivism in our data. Disengagement from Extremism • Past incarceration is a significant obstacle to disengagement from extremism and tends to co-occur with related exit barriers, such as low social mobility, low educational attainment, unstable work histories, substance use disorder, and mental illness. • The presence of a family member or romantic partner involved in extremism can be a barrier to disengagement as well. When present, this obstacle tends to co-occur with identity-related barriers, like social prestige and financial dependency on an extremist group or movement. • Individuals who spent time in prison, but who did not have family members or romantic partners with ties to extremism, were more likely to disengage when they accessed support services like mental health counseling and substance use treatment and were able to find stable employment. • Individuals who had extremist family members or romantic partners, but who did not experience confinement, disengaged when they became disillusioned with their ideology and severed personal relationships with extremists. • When individuals had both family histories of extremism and periods of incarceration, they were significantly less likely to disengage from extremism. These subjects faced a complex set of psychological, emotional, economic, and social barriers to disengagement that were challenging to overcome. Challenges to Successful Reintegration • System-involved individuals face difficult obstacles to securing basic needs, like housing, employment, and financial security, due to their criminal records and the social stigma associated with their involvement in extremism. • Severing anti-social relationships is an important part of successful reintegration, but it can be socially isolating, emotionally taxing, and traumatizing for system-involved individuals. Moreover, system-involved individuals often find it hard to establish new pro-social relationships upon release. • Mental health concerns and trauma are common experiences among system-involved individuals, as is difficulty accessing needed care. • Substance use, while not unique to extremism, can be a challenge among system-involved individuals after their release from custody. While some individuals may develop substance use disorders prior to entering prison, others describe turning to substances upon release as a form of self-medication and emotional coping. • Stigma is a constant challenge facing system-involved individuals with links to extremism. Beyond undermining individuals’ ability to find gainful employment and housing, social stigma also causes psychological distress due to public skepticism about the individuals’ ability to genuinely disengage from extremism. Case Management, Monitoring and Support Services for Successful Reintegration • Currently, there is no systematic process for identifying and triaging cases of extremism among the federally incarcerated population. Some probation officers reported the use of inconsistent heuristics and strategies to identify potential cases. Other officers reported that their districts do not flag cases with a nexus to extremism. • Probation officers do not always have well-established relationships with other law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI, that may be monitoring the individuals under their care. This can lead to a lack of information sharing and an inability for officers to adequately assess risk.  (CONTINUED)   

College Park, MD: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), University of Maryland 2024. 111p.

By Julian V. Roberts, Lilly Crellin, Jonathan Bild and Jade Mouton

This report summarises findings from a survey of the public conducted in 2024. It contributes to the well-established and still growing literature on public opinion and imprisonment. The primary focus was upon public knowledge of prisons and prison trends in England and Wales. This survey is a follow-up to an earlier report by the Sentencing Academy on public knowledge of sentencing. Key Findings ¨ Most people acknowledge that they know little about prisons in England and Wales, with almost three-quarters of respondents stating that they knew either ‘not very much’ or ‘nothing at all’. ¨ More than nine in ten respondents significantly over-estimated the proportion of women within the prison population; 93% of respondents thought that women made up 10% or more of the prison population. The correct answer is 4%. ¨ Respondents also over-estimated the proportion of the prison population serving a sentence for a violent offence; whilst around one in three adult sentenced prisoners have been sentenced for a violent offence, 58% of respondents thought that violent offenders made up 40% or more of the prison population. ¨ Offenders who have served a short prison sentence of less than 12 months have the highest re-offending rate. However, most respondents considered that prisoners released after having served longer sentences had a higher re-offending rate. ¨ When asked to specify what they considered to be the single most important purpose of imprisonment, the most popular option, chosen by 42% of respondents, was protecting the public by removing offenders from society. Rehabilitation was the next most commonly-chosen purpose, attracting 19% of respondents. ¨ Approximately three-quarters of respondents (73%) considered prisons to be either ‘not at all’ or ‘not very’ effective at rehabilitating offenders and preventing re-offending. Whilst the perception of prisons as being effective at punishing offenders was less negative, over half of respondents (53%) thought prisons were ‘not at all’ or ‘not very’ effective in performing this function. ¨ In common with many previous surveys, a significant proportion of respondents considered prison conditions to be ‘too easy’, with 49% of respondents holding this view.  

London: Sentencing Academy, 2024. 20p.

By Mark A. Motivans,

This report uses data from BJS’s Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP) and other published sources to describe persons arrested and convicted for a federal drug offense involving methamphetamine, cocaine, methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), and other amphetamines. It focuses on psychostimulants, including their classification under the Controlled Substances Act (P.L. 91–513), persons arrested for a federal offense involving psychostimulants, deaths due to overdose, and persons sentenced for a federal offense involving these substances. The FJSP receives administrative data files from six federal criminal justice agencies: the U.S. Marshals Service, Drug Enforcement Administration, Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, U.S. Sentencing Commission, and Federal Bureau of Prisons. Data represent the federal criminal case-processing stages from arrest to imprisonment and release. FJSP data are available in the Federal Criminal Case Processing Statistics Data Tool, which provides statistics by stage of the federal criminal case process, including law enforcement, prosecution and courts, and incarceration

Highlights

• From FY 2021 to FY 2022, the number of arrests the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) made for psychostimulants decreased by 9%, from 15,846 to 14,392.

• More than half (55%) of the arrests the DEA made in FY 2022 were for psychostimulants.

• Of the 26,233 total arrests by the DEA in FY 2022, 8,035 (31%) were for methamphetamine, 5,118 (20%) were for powder cocaine, 1,009 (4%) were for crack cocaine, and 230 (<1%) were for other psychostimulants.

• DEA arrests for methamphetamine increased from 6,518 in FY 2002 to 9,335 in FY 2021, then decreased to 8,035 in FY 2022.

Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2024. 25p.

By Brian Johnson,  Kiminori Nakamura,  Lydia Becker, Raquel Hernandez

Firearms violence is a major policy concern in America. How criminal courts address firearm crimes represents a critical opportunity for improving public safety. The overwhelming majority of criminal cases are settled by guilty plea, yet little is known about the ways that plea deals impact criminal punishment for firearms-involved offenders, or how they shape subsequent recidivism. This project investigates the association between plea bargaining, sentencing, and recidivism outcomes in state-wide sample of firearms-involved offenders. It provides a descriptive overview of case characteristics and outcomes in firearms cases, examines the scope and impact of plea bargaining for these offenses, and considers how plea discounts potentially impact future reoffending. Findings indicate that plea negotiations are common in firearms-related offenses – a majority of cases involve multiple filed charges but a single conviction charge, and more than half of all cases include a reduction in the severity of the top charge between filing and conviction. The mean distance traveled, or average magnitude of plea discounts, results in a significant reduction in the likelihood of incarceration and expected sentence lengths. Results also reveal significant relationships between plea discounts and recidivism. Defendants who are convicted and sentenced to longer incarceration terms have lower odds of coming back into the system for a new offense, whereas those who receive charge reductions and are given larger plea discounts are more likely to recidivate during our study period. Because average sentences in firearms cases are substantial, and because our follow-up period is limited, these results likely reflect the short-term incapacitation effects of lengthier incarceration terms. Overall, the current study suggests there may be significant public safety implications of plea discounts in firearms cases, though future research is needed before strong policy recommendations can be offered.  

College Park, MD: University of Maryland, 2024. 88p.

By The Death Penalty Information Center

It is a common assumption that the federal death penalty is reserved only for the most serious crimes against the country, like terrorism, that have a unique federal interest. However, an expansion of the federal death penalty in the 1990s added more than 60 crimes that carried a potential death sentence. The cases the federal government decides to pursue are rarely “exceptional” compared to the cases tried at the state level. Federal defendants also share many of the same characteristics as state court defendants: they are often poor, traumatized, mentally impaired, and disproportionately people of color. This report documents the use of the federal death penalty from its earliest beginnings through the modern day. Like many state-level capital punishment systems, the federal death penalty has been used in a racially biased manner, a conclusion that the many historical examples and data in this report confirm. The federal death penalty was a tool historically used by the government to intimidate and subjugate people of color, particularly Black and Native American communities. Today, the most active death-sentencing federal jurisdictions were once the nation’s leaders of extra-judicial lynchings, a through line of connection that links the past to the present and raises serious questions about the future use of the federal death penalty.  

Death Penalty Information Center, 2024. 36p.

By Frank R. Baumgartner 

I have compiled data from the FBI Supplemental Homicide Reports from 1976 through 2019 (the last data currently available) on homicides in Florida and in Duval County, and information about all death sentences imposed in those two jurisdictions since the modern system of capital punishment was created in Florida 1973. This consists of a record of 1,103 death sentences imposed state-wide and 112 in Duval County. The corresponding numbers of homicide offenders are 20,831 (state-wide) and 1,742 (Duval County). I have used this data to calculate rates of death sentences per 100 homicides, in Florida and in Duval County, by race of offender, race of victim, gender of offender, and gender of victim. This report begins by describing the race and gender information I collected and how often it was missing. It next presents a detailed table to document the figures used to calculate the rates of death sentences per 100 homicides in Florida and Duval. My narrative analysis of these tables follows, after which I give a similar analysis limited to those cases in Florida resulting in execution. As will be seen, I ultimately conclude that neither death sentences nor executions are applied in an equal manner; they are instead driven powerfully by the race and gender of the victim, with the highest rates of death sentencing and executions, both in Florida and Duval County, reserved for black offenders who kill white victims, and highest of all for black men who kill white women.  

Washington, DC: American Civil Liberties Union, 2023. 42p.

By Tim Lyman, Frank R. Baumgartner, and Glenn L. Pierce 

Out of 6,512 homicides from 1976 through 2014, we review the outcomes of 1,822 capitally charged homicide cases across eight judicial districts in Louisiana. In most cases, capital charges were reduced; but in 385 cases, the state sought death to the final stage of the prosecution. In 107 cases, a death sentence was imposed. We analyze these outcomes, looking at legally relevant factors, as well as legally irrelevant ones, in determining final capital charges and death sentences. Legally relevant factors include the number of victims as well as various statutory aggravating circumstances (e.g., victims under 12 or over 64, simultaneous felony circumstances, the type of weapon, and the relationship between the victim and offender). Legally irrelevant factors include the judicial district and the race and gender of the offenders and victims, respectively. Many legally relevant factors have powerful impacts: the number of victims, certain felony circumstances, child victims, and elderly victims are all associated with higher rates of final capital charging or death sentencing. But we also show that factors that appear legally irrelevant in theory have powerful effects; rates of capital prosecution and death sentencing are substantially different based on the race of the victim and the combined races of the offenders and the victims, for example. We found only modest differences across the eight judicial districts we studied, but especially significant differences in rates of final capital charges and death sentences in cases that involved white victims, particularly white females. No demographic combination was as likely to see a final capital charge or a death sentence as those cases with a black male offender and a white female victim, which were more than five times as likely to lead to a final capital charge or a death sentence, compared to the much more frequent crimes involving black offenders and black victims. These findings come after a review of the bivariate relations as well as a series of multivariate logistic regressions. The Louisiana death penalty system is heavily weighted by a tendency to seek the harshest penalties in those cases with white female victims. Our powerful and consistent findings of racial and gender-based disparities hold in a multivariate analysis and are inconsistent with the equal protection of the law or any common understanding of equality or justice. 

SUL Rev., 2021

By  Michael Woody, Tyrone Walker, and Joel Castón

Jurisdictions throughout the country have been exploring new approaches to the treatment and care of emerging adults in recent years. In 2018, the Department of Corrections launched the YME Unit in partnership with three individuals who served time in the federal system as emerging adults. Joel Castón, Micheal Woody, and Tyrone Walker acted as mentors for emerging adults in the DOC care. This brief is the story of the unit’s implementation, development, impact, and future.

Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2020. 21p.

By the Justice Policy Institute

Over the last 20 years, elected officials and juvenile justice system stakeholders have changed policies and practices to create a more developmentally appropriate youth justice system, resulting in a reduction of the number of confined youth by 60 percent since the 1990s and reducing the number of youth automatically prosecuted as adults by 56 percent since 2007. This change in course is largely the result of policies that restrict the use of secure detention facilities and limit prosecution of youth in the adult court system. These trends in declining youth incarceration rates, while positive, have primarily focused on youth involved in nonviolent offenses. Moreover, despite a significant decline in the overall use of confinement, racial disparity in the juvenile justice system has worsened in many jurisdictions. This is due, in large part, to the fact that too many jurisdictions still rely on confinement and transfer to the adult system for youth who engage in violence. The research clearly shows that youth are best served in the least restrictive setting, regardless of underlying offense type. However, state practices frequently do not follow these lessons, turning to secure settings and transfer to the adult criminal justice system when other interventions would be more effective at addressing the underlying cause of the behavior and delivering a better public safety return on investment. Instead, these punitive practices worsen racial disparities, saddle youth with the collateral consequences of a criminal record if they are
prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system, and contribute to recidivism.

Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2020. 24p.

By Oliver Kossack

In the past three decades, radical right parties had the opportunity to directly influence political developments from the highest public office in many post-communist Central and Eastern European countries. Oliver Kossack provides the first comprehensive study on government formation with radical right parties in this region. Even after the turn of the millennium, some distinct features of the post-communist context persist, such as coalitions between radical right and centre-left parties. In addition to original empirical insights, the time-sensitive approach of this study also advances the discussion about concepts and methodological approaches within the discipline.

Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, 2023. 392 p.

By Lynn LoPucki

LoPucki's provocative critique of Chapter 11 is required reading for everyone who cares about bankruptcy reform. This empirical account of large Chapter 11 cases will trigger intense debate both inside the academy and on the floor of Congress. Confronting LoPucki's controversial thesis-that competition between bankruptcy judges is corrupting them-is the most pressing challenge now facing any defender of the status quo."" -Douglas Baird, University of Chicago Law School ""This book is smart, shocking and funny. This story has everything-professional greed, wrecked companies, and embarrassed judges. Insiders are already buzzing."" -Elizabeth Warren, Leo Gottlieb Professor of Law, Harvard Law School ""LoPucki provides a scathing attack on reorganization practice. Courting Failure recounts how lawyers, managers and judges have transformed Chapter 11. It uses empirical data to explore how the interests of the various participants have combined to create a system markedly different from the one envisioned by Congress. LoPucki not only questions the wisdom of these changes but also the free market ideology that supports much of the general regulation of the corporate sector."" -Robert Rasmussen, University of Chicago Law School A sobering chronicle of our broken bankruptcy-court system, Courting Failure exposes yet another American institution corrupted by greed, avarice, and the thirst for power. Lynn LoPucki's eye-opening account of the widespread and systematic decay of America's bankruptcy courts is a blockbuster story that has yet to be reported in the media. LoPucki reveals the profound corruption in the U.S. bankruptcy system and how this breakdown has directly led to the major corporate failures of the last decade, including Enron, MCI, WorldCom, and Global Crossing. LoPucki, one of the nation's leading experts on bankruptcy law, offers a clear and compelling picture of the destructive power of ""forum shopping,"" in which corporations choose courts that offer the most favorable outcome for bankruptcy litigation. The courts, lured by big money and prestige, streamline their requirements and lower their standards to compete for these lucrative cases. The result has been a series of increasingly shoddy reorganizations of major American corporations, proposed by greedy corporate executives and authorized by case-hungry judges.

Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006. 335p.

Edited by Ian Hall, Troy Lee-Brown and Rebecca Strating

This book advances a holistic conceptualization of maritime security under the term ‘Blue Security’ and situates it in states across the Indo-Pacific. The Indo-Pacific encompasses a vast space, incorporating two of the planet’s biggest oceans, the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean, as well as littoral and hinterland states home to half the world’s population. Security challenges abound across the maritime Indo-Pacific, ranging from the risk of inter-state war at sea to so-called blue crimes, like piracy, smuggling, and illegal fishing. Climate change and marine pollution, as well as the over-exploitation of scarce, and sometimes fragile resources, also pose threats to human security, sustainability, and biodiversity. Using the concept of ‘Blue Security’, this book assesses these various challenges and analyses the approaches to their management used by Indo-Pacific states. It argues that we should embrace a holistic understanding of maritime security, incorporating national, regional, international, human, and environmental dimensions. To that end, it explores the Blue Security strategies of 18 Indo-Pacific states, examining their changing perceptions of threat, their approaches to managing those challenges, and their capabilities. The volume makes an innovative contribution to our knowledge of a region crucial to global security and prosperity. This book will be of interest to students of maritime strategy, security studies, Asian politics, and International Relations.  

 London; New York: Routledge, 2025. 226p.

Edited by Maria Eugenia Trombini · Elizangela Valarini · Vanessa Elias de Oliveira · Markus Pohlmann

This open access book examines the interplay between public and private sectors in Latin America's biggest market. It is the result of the binational research project “Organizational Crime and Systemic Corruption in Brazil” funded by the DFG and FAPESP (2018-2023). Its contributions analyze anti-corruption, political finance, and how for-profit organizations manage illegality.

Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2024. 293p. 

Edited by  Eveline G. Bouwers and David Nash

This book investigates the relationship between blasphemy and violence in modern history, with a focus on cases from the European world, including its (post-) colonial ties. Spanning from the late eighteenth century to today, it shows how cultures of blasphemy, and related acts of heresy, apostasy, and sacrilege, have interacted with different forms of violence, committed against both the sacred and the secular.

Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter Oldenbourg, 2022. 

By The Center for Justice Innovation

This mapping report looking at the alternatives to coercive sanctions for low-level drug offences, forms part of one of the strategic priorities identified in the mid-term review of the National Drug Strategy established in 2017. As the government has shifted towards a healthy response to drug and alcohol use in Ireland, Alternatives to Coercive Sanctions (ACS) have become a recent area of increased focus. This Irish context aligns with the wider European policy shift towards a health-led approach to drug use, and this report will feed into the wider European strategy around this. The recommendations made by the Citizens Assembly on Drugs Use (CADU), established by the Oireachtas in 2023, have also been key in shifting the state’s approach towards promoting alternatives to coercive sanction for drug use. Recommendation 17 of the CADU report specifically says ‘The State should introduce a comprehensive health-led response to possession of drugs for personal use’.1 Criminalisation of drug possession has shown to be ineffective in reducing drug use while concurrently causing harm to individuals and society and placing continual pressure on justice system resources. In Ireland, drug possession continues to make up a significant proportion of drug-related crime, and the Rooney report highlights that “significant rates of offending behaviour amongst the sample were reportedly linked to both Drugs (48%) and Alcohol Misuse (53%)”.2 Alternatives to coercive sanctions on the other hand have shown promising evidence in their ability to reduce drug use and lower reoffending rates.3 As outlined in the European Commission study on ACS, despite the need for more robust evidence in the European context, “a study conducted in Austria, Germany, Italy, Switzerland and the UK found that quasi-compulsory treatment through the criminal justice system was effective in reducing crime” and “overall studies have found evidence that ACS can help reduce levels of substance use”.4 In order to identify local ACS across Ireland, we carried out a survey disseminated to relevant professionals in the sector and held follow-up remote in-depth interviews with several of them, to gain an understanding of specific existing initiatives as well as gaining insight into the appetite for different types of ACS across stakeholders. We found a total of nine relevant initiatives spanning across diverse types of ACS, including; The Garda Adult Caution Scheme, diversionary measures, The Dublin Drug Treatment Courts (DDTC), and drug treatment programmes with various criminal justice referral pathways into them. Some of these programmes have been operating for various lengths of time with the year they were established ranging from 2001 to 2023. The majority of the ACS we came across were local initiatives, with the only national one being the Garda Adult Caution Scheme. It appeared that there was no widespread knowledge about existing ACS across the country, and those interviewed about one project were often not aware of others. There also has been very limited use of the Adult Cautioning Scheme by An Garda Síochána for simple possession of cannabis or cannabis resin, as only 5,139 people were given this caution between December 2020 and February 2024, while 17,125 people were issued with a charge/ summons for this in the same period.5 This may suggest a lack of widespread awareness about the scheme. Overall, there seemed to be an appetite for ACS among those we spoke to, particularly within probation, court workers, the judiciary and the stakeholders and networks of those running local initiatives. One stakeholder mentioned there was an “aspiration to fund more successful national projects”, while another stated, “it would be easy to do this [refer to treatment] upon arrest, the difficulty would just be in setting up the electronic referral system”. The one agency that appeared to have a more varied perspective was An Garda Síochána, although this was not the case unilaterally, as the LEAR pre-court diversionary programme collaborated very successfully with local Gardaí. The findings of this report lead us to believe that at present Ireland is at the precipice of transforming how its justice system responds to drug use in a more effective and humane way. It has shown how local initiatives have identified a need for ACS and have begun to implement them throughout the country in the absence of a national ACS for possession of drugs for personal use. The innovative work undertaken across the system to support individuals with their drug use is laudable, but it is missing opportunities earlier to prevent offending and re-offending and improve health outcomes for its citizens.  

London: The Centre for Justice Innovation (CJI) , 2024.20p.

By Jodie M. Dewey , Patrick Hibbard , Dennis P. Watson , Juleigh Nowinski Konchak and Keiki Hinami 

Roughly 24–36% of people who are incarcerated in the U.S. are formally diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD). Once released, individuals involved with the criminal legal system (CLS) face increased risks of return to use and fatality and are 129 times more likely to die from an overdose within the first two weeks of release compared to those without CLS involvement. People who are CLS-involved and who are seeking a recovery living environment can access temporary stable housing through recovery homes. However, entering a recovery home can be difficult due to fragmentation among recovery housing organizations and their non-uniform application and screening procedures. A navigation pilot program was implemented to provide clients with recovery home placement advice, pre-screening, and referrals in Cook County, IL. Existing research on recovery homes has rarely examined the importance of recovery housing navigation for enhancing service engagement among CLS-involved individuals receiving medications for OUD. Methods.   Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 22 clients and three recovery housing navigators as part of a program evaluation of the navigation program pilot. Qualitative software was used to organize and qualitatively analyze transcripts through several rounds of coding producing emergent themes, which were then triangulated, and expanded using navigator data. Results.  Clients seeking recovery home services reported multiple prior challenges securing safe and supportive recovery living environments. Despite low initial expectations, clients described their interactions with housing navigators in favorable terms and felt navigators worked with them effectively to identify and meet their housing and substance use needs in a timely manner. Clients also commented on their partnerships with the navigator throughout the process. Interactions with navigators also calmed fears of rejection many clients had previously experienced and still harbored about the process, which bolstered client-navigator relationships and client motivation to engage with additional services. 

Health Justice 2024 Sep 14;12(1):37

By Lauren B. Edelman, and Jessica Cabrera

With the rise of the #MeToo movement, there has been a groundswell of attention to sex-based harassment. Organizations have pressured high-level personnel accused of harassment to resign or fired them outright, and they have created or revised their anti-harassment policies, complaint procedures, and training programs. This article reviews social science and legal scholarship on sex-based harassment, focusing on definitions and understandings of sexual (and sex-based) harassment, statistics on its prevalence, the consequences of harassment both for those who are subjected to it and for organizations, and explanations for why sex-based harassment persists. We then discuss the various steps that organizations have taken to reduce sex-based harassment and the social science literature on the effectiveness of those steps. We conclude that many organizational policies prevent liability more than they prevent harassment, in part because courts often fail to distinguish between meaningful compliance and the merely symbolic policies and procedures that do little to protect employees from harassment

Annual Review of Law and Social Science Vol. 16:361-383 Vol. 16:361-383