Talking to Brendan Hughes at EMCDDA set me off thinking about whether there is a common understanding of what is meant by 'diversion' strategies. Brendan is of the opinion - and I tend to agree with him - that there isn't. Do 'we' (people working in the field, reformers, students, etc) mean diversion from the criminal justice system itself? Or diversion from prisons, which are overcrowded and on the whole seen as capable as achieving very little apart from temporary containment? The way we think about diversion is important. It implies, and contains, wholly different approaches and mindsets about how to treat behaviour which legally and/or socially is deemed inappropriate/undesirable. Diversion from the criminal justice system implies a non punitive set of alternative measures, which means turning 'crimes' into social issues of a different ilk: for example, as in Portugal, problematic drug use is now exclusively and consistently considered from a health point of view. This approach naturally encompass diversion from imprisonment, but the reverse is not necessarily the case. Alternatives to imprisonment proponents typically focus on measures which, although seen as typically more 'lenient', are still essentially punitive in nature. The figure below aims to illustrate these points.
AuthorMy name is Arianna Silvestri. I am a researcher and policy analyst, specialising in criminal justice. I have experience of working in housing and homelessness, human rights and immigration. I believe in a just society which seeks to reduce harm and social exclusion. My latest research focuses on exploring ways in which health policies can be used for social prevention and as an aid to integration. CategoriesArchives |