Criminal Justice Systems

Criminal justice systems are vast and complex networks of state and privately run institutions generally designed to maintain and regulate social order. Ranging from local community practices to large government agencies, the criminal justice system is charged with both preventing and mitigating crime, as well as punishing and rehabilitating individuals who break the law. It also includes prosecuting and defending those [Page 197]accused of breaking the law. The specific details of criminal justice systems differ widely across countries and even within countries; however, many fundamental principles are shared, particularly among Western nations. This entry first briefly describes the current US criminal justice system and some of its social justice concerns. Next, it provides two illustrations of Participatory Action Research (PAR) attending to parts of the American and British criminal justice systems. And finally, it raises three important questions to consider when doing PAR in this area.

In the USA, the criminal justice system includes law enforcement agencies (e.g. police departments, border patrol), courts (e.g. judges, lawyers and youth courts), prisons (e.g. jails, juvenile detention centres and community-based corrections) as well as parole, probation and post-prison activity (e.g. residential placement). Incarceration rates in the USA grew rapidly throughout the 1980s and 1990s. This is in part due to policies that limited judicial discretion and favoured lengthy sentences. Also contributing was the rise in ‘hot-spot’ policing practices that aggressively attended to neighbourhood disorder and low-level street crime. This ‘zero-tolerance’ climate—found both in and out of schools—often promoted entry into the criminal justice system, particularly for young men of colour, indigenous people and poor and working-class people.

The costs of incarceration are widespread, felt individually by those behind bars, collectively by families and communities and socially as cities, states and government face weakened labour forces and sizable prison budgets. Further, as the ‘tough-on-crime’ policies of the 1990s shifted emphasis and funding away from rehabilitation, those returning home from prison have had little meaningful preparation and support to ensure a successful transition. Many obstacles exist for those holding criminal records (even for non-violent crimes) as they seek basic living needs. As a result, recidivism tends to be high, particularly for those who are unable to access adequate educational, housing or employment opportunities. While the USA may be an extreme example among Western nations, the issues considered here are shared across criminal justice systems globally.

Though infrequent, PAR projects can be found addressing most slices of the criminal justice system and partnering with diverse sets of individuals, including communities in heavily policed neighbourhoods, prisoners who are currently incarcerated or formerly incarcerated individuals while they are transitioning home. Topics range from the influence of policing practices to recidivism implications of education in prison, to the family impact of parole policies. In other words, PAR researchers have found creative ways to study with those people most affected by all aspects of the criminal justice system, and in the process, they have made important changes based on grounded expertise. In the next section, two such studies will be used to illustrate the vast possibilities of PAR.

...