Expert in the juvenile sector and University Professor. Judge by Juvenile Court in Venice and victim-offender mediator.
Director of the head quartier of Don Calabria Institute in Verona. Coordinator in different activities and projects for prevention and rehabilitation of deviant minors (Europeans Programs: AGIS, Equal EC Initiative). Member of: the Magistrates Italian Association for Juvenile and Family; Groupement des Europeen des Magistrats pour la mediation (G.E.M.M.E.), France ; Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.

QUESTION.– Please could you give us a brief introduction to your activities in relation to juvenile justice as a professional involved in this field of work?

ANSWER.– Don Calabria Institute promotes and realizes the fundamental principles of its own spiritual, religious, cultural and social patrimony, through: supporting the development of services, projects and initiatives directed to processes of active citizenship and the promotion of the well-being of teen-agers, of young people and of their families that live in situations of hardship and suffering; promoting solidarity, cooperation and the respect of the person and the continuous possibility of inclusion and integration support using the tools of the work and of the social economy, of ethical politics of development of the territory with the other departments of the institution and the other partners and social organizations involved. Since 1974 “Comunità San benedetto” (headquarter in Verone) was officially addressed to the reception of many children; over the decades it has developed many types of diversified services to cope with minors disease. Following the socio-cultural and legislative developments in recent years the organization increasingly modified and adapted activity to the required quality standards. The headquarters in Verone plays a coordinating role and support to the other offices (Milan, Ferrara, Palermo) operating in the area of minors safeguard. Principal area of intervention relating to young offenders is the management of services like Residential facilities and Diurnal centre, accepting them, in convention with the Department of Juvenile Justice and the develop of Victim-Offender mediation. In the last few years it has furthermore developed an office dedicated to the national and international projects implementing and increasing the European contacts through initiatives insisting on the issues of: juvenile justice, foreign minors, socio-inclusion of offenders, restorative justice and Victim-Offender mediation.

Q.– What is the current situation of children and young people in Italy? Indeed, in the context of the socio-economic situation in Italy, what are the main consequences for the lives and rights of children?

A.- There’s a distinction to make: in general, the Italian children/young people are not motivated and tend to depression while foreigners are more determined and keen to undertake new pathways dedicated to a personal revenge. The economic crisis and therefore more difficultes in finding a job for a work-social inclusion are creating serious problems for the Italians. Certainly the economic crisis has had many consequences, and among them even a lower interest in this specific target group. The Italian panorama is not entirely positive: because of the economic cuts to Municipalities implemented and the lack of resources often interventions are based on economic possibilities instead of children/young people’s needs.

Q.- Regarding juvenile delinquency, could you describe the different realities in northern and southern Italy? Is there any difference in the type of crimes committed?

A.– Generally speaking we can say that the differences depending on the nationality of young offenders and not principally from the regions even if we assist to a main present of foreigners in the North and in the Centre of Italy. Also we have to underline that juvenile delinquency has aroused a strong social alarm especially in recent years often due to specific criminal events. Due to this social alarm it’s useful here to analyze the real incidence of foreign juvenile offenders.

Generally for Italians and foreign juvenile offenders prevail, in descending order, predatory, individual (voluntary injuries, attempted homicide, sexual violence) and drug crimes. As we can see foreign juvenile offenders’ rates increased in the last years because of an high number of immigrants.

Q.- What is the current law in force and what is its philosophy?

A.- The most significant legislation is the Decree of the President of the Republic n.448 of September 1988 called “Approval of the provisions concerning criminal proceedings involving juvenile defendants – Code of Penal procedures”, which develops the results of national and international observations and experiences, in some cases anticipating the development of the principles included in some important international Charters, such as the UN Convention on the rights of the Child, signed in New York in 1989. The approval of Decree of the President of the Republic no. 448 (D.P.R. n.488/88) introduced a new juvenile penal procedure for young offenders within the broader context of a more general procedural law reform. The following year with the Legislative Decree of 28 July 1989 n.272 were defined the 'Rules for implementation, coordination and transitional provisions of Decree of the President of the Republic no. 448 laying down rules on criminal proceedings for juvenile offenders”. With the entry into force of D.P.R. 448/88 changes the consideration/vision of offenders under 18 years; minor from “subject to safeguard/protect” becomes a person capable of active dialogue and author of personal actions”. The trial is now chance of recovery and an awareness opportunity of his/her discomfort; for the society in general, it becomes the instrument to know the hardship and to eliminate the causes. The interest of minor is the key issue involving the guardianship of his/her development needs and the respect of his/her guarantees.

All the involved parties act to reach the common objective of building connections of compatibility between the two plans of guardianship, historically in contrast: the offenders’ guardianship-rights-needs of development and the guardianship of the society with its needs of order and safety. This is a multi-dimensional and interactive conception involving the individual, family and social dimensions, considered not separately but in their active and constructive connections, linked to the conditions of the resources.

After the analysis of the main characteristics of the juvenile criminal process, fundamental is the definition of the guiding principles that can help the reader to understand which is the internal logic.

1. Principle of appropriateness (adequacy) - The provisions of the criminal procedure concerning the minor are applicable, if adequate to the personality and to the educational needs. Public Prosecutor and judge acquire the elements about the conditions and the personal, familiar, social and environmental resources of the minor to: verify the liability and the degree of responsibility; appraise the social importance of the fact; arrange the adequate measures and adopt the possible provisions. The decisions have to adapt, both in its general design and in its practical application, to the 'personality of the minor and his/her educational needs' without disrupting the educational process in progress.

2. Principle of the minimum offensiveness that expresses the awareness that the criminal justice system implies various risks for the minor because it may compromise the harmonious development of his/her personality, the personal image, the subsequent paths of socialization.

3. Principle of residuality that means the minimum permanence in jails trying to ensure in each case that the experience of detention becomes last resort (extrema ratio and not rule/modality of response);

4. Principle of specificity - In 1934 a specific Court for the minor was officially founded in which each judicial specialized Organ had a specific task. In the criminal field an important role has the honorary judge who taking part in the hearing and in the room of counsel allows to create a specific response of adoption. He/she can give a peculiar contribution about the mode of educative interaction and in the dynamics of the relation; for every case two honorary judges are chosen, a woman and a man (these people may have a degree in following subjects: education, sociology, psychology, law).

5. Principle of subsidiarity - …'The penal juvenile criminal trial has its own rules and values, but it remains a trial with all the ordinary guarantees'… D.P.R. n.448/88. The Decree is not a normative sufficient for the realization of all the procedure concerning minors and it only disciplines the institutes and the activities of the trial, based on the peculiarities of the minor. Of course, the provisions contained can’t be in contrast with the international ratified Conventions and possible dissonances would cause hypothesis of violations. The D.P.R. 448/88 establishes the most important connotations of the trial and then everything is based on the discretionary power of the judge.

Q.- Taking into account the new wave of security fears throughout Europe that started with the Paris riots in 2005, can you tell us if there were any changes in the Italian government’s policies towards juvenile delinquency? And if so, which policies? 

A.– Paris riots jointly with the clamor for those crimes that are sensational events but that occur rarely have created in society a need for more security in the last year. This request is then increased proportionally with the increased presence of foreign minors. In assessing the complaints of foreign minors it is obviously a slight decrease compared to the reference band (from 11.465 in 2003 to 10.390 in 2007); it’s also interesting notice as with an increase of foreign minor population, over five years is increased by approximately 50%, we find a corresponding decrease of complaints; all this shows that there isn’t a direct correlation between foreign population growth and the increase in complaints.

Q.- The reform of juvenile criminal legislation aimed to harmonize Italian and international law. Has the child’s legal position been reinforced by other legal instruments?

A.– As said before the most significant legislation is the Decree of the President of the Republic no. 448 of September 1988; the following year with the Legislative Decree of 28 July 1989 n.272 were defined the 'Rules for implementation, coordination and transitional provisions of Decree laying down rules on criminal proceedings for juvenile offenders”.

Another “instrument” that created an important revolution in Italy was the establishment in 1934 of a special Juvenile Court with serious delay in respect to the other European Nations; this Court is composed of four persons and includes a Judge who presides over the Court proceedings, a Court Magistrate and two “honorable” citizens, one man and a woman, whom act as assistants and consultants in the case. The citizens called honorary judge are chosen from among experts in the fields of education, sociology, psychology, law. Three competences attribute to the Court are:

1. the Penal Competence which guarantees that juvenile offenders be judged by a specialised judge;

2. the Administrative Competence addressing juveniles under 18 years of age, who, for repeated behaviour, demonstrate proof of deviance and the need for moral correction;

3. the Civil Competence which regards the area of provisions limiting the parental authority.

We have also to remember that following the “Principle of subsidiarity” the penal juvenile criminal trial remains a trial with all the ordinary guarantees referring to the code of criminal procedure for adults since the D.P.R. n.448/88 is not a normative sufficient for the realization of all the procedure concerning minors.

Q.– What kind of diversion measures are foreseen within the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure?

A.– First we must underline that in Italy exists the obligatoriness of penal action (obbligatorietà dell'azione penale); this obligatoriness is sanctioned by the Italian Constitution (Art.112). According to this provision, the Public Prosecutor (PM), when becoming acquainted with the commission of a crime (notizia criminis), is legally bound to start the investigation and, if there is enough circumstantial evidence, to take criminal action against the alleged culprit of that particular crime. Prosecution is not simply a right, but a duty of the PM.

Also we must clarify what it’s considered diversion since the Italian situation it’s a little bit particular. 'Diversion measure' is understood as an alternative measure to the process by which the defendant in exchange for the withdrawal of charges, agrees to submit to a program...so an informal procedure that arises as an alternative to the process. In Italy “diversion” has been privileged field of growth in juvenile criminal procedure code with the goal of rescuing the child. The most important diversion measures are two.

1. Article 27 D.P.R. n. 448/88 - Extinction of sentence for irrelevance of the offence (Sentenza di non luogo a procedere per irrilevanza del fatto). It states that if the offence is petty and when to proceed with the case would have negative effects on the minor’s education, the Public Prosecutor may ask the magistrate to dismiss the case for irrelevance of the offence.

2. Article 28 D.P.R. n. 448/88 - Probation (Sospensione del processo e messa alla prova) - This measure can be obtained either at the Preliminary Hearing but also during the course of the trial (The probationary period may be as long as three years for a serious crime). The Juvenile Judge has to give particular attention to understanding the personal, familiar and social situation of juvenile offender in order to identify the best educative way of sentencing: this high degree of discretion allows the chance to individualize educational and vocational measures for the juvenile offenders answering to their needs.

Q.- Despite the restorative model, particularly the role of the mediation process, being recent in Italy, is it possible to make an assessment of its contribution towards reducing and/or preventing juvenile delinquency?

A.- The new juvenile penal trial is a shift from a purely rehabilitative and punitive perspective to a new conception of the penal procedure: restorative justice. The attention to the victim is a recent development in Italy. The idea of restorative justice, and the use of mediation, is based on a growing interest in, and consideration of, the victims of crimes. In Italy Victim Offender Mediation (VOM) has become an object of reflection only in the last period. In practice, VOM is restricted mainly to juvenile offenders. VOM initiatives have been carried out in some regional Centers for the Juvenile Justice-CGMs (Turin, Bari, Catanzaro, Milan, Palermo, Rome, Trento and Venice).

Within the Italian juvenile criminal law, VOM can be activated at every point of the penal procedure: during the preliminary investigations – Article 9 of the D.P.R. no. 448/88 “Investigations/assessment of the personality of the minor” (Accertamenti sulla personalità del minorenne); during the preliminary hearing – Articles 27 and n 28 of the D.P.R. no. 448/88.

From the qualitative and quantitative perspective, results of these early years are positive. The numbers of cases followed are quite low to make statistical series and data analysis. However we’re assisting to a significant increase in reporting of cases as the confidence of the Judicial is consolidating and step by step also the interest of the Juvenile Courts is increasing. Among the qualitative aspects emerged in these early years in Venice and Palermo (territories where an agreements between Don Calabria Institute and CGMs are present), I can highlight briefly the following aspects:

1. for the parties (offender and victim) the mediation in most cases represented a 'different place' than the Court in which they can finally express their emotions, their feelings, their experience each other reciprocally;

2. the characteristics of mediation (voluntary and confidentiality) and the mediator allowed the expression and the overcoming of certain emotions such as fear, loneliness, shame, insecurity and sense of injustice;

3. the offered space has made possible real moments of recognition;

4. many offenders reported that they had really understood the effects of their actions and the pain for the victims only after hearing their story,

5. for many offenders, after the mediation, was important to be able to help in some things the victim to show their change.

Q.- Does the Italian legal order provide a specific correctional system for juveniles? Could you give us a brief description of the main provisions regarding juvenile justice issues?

A.– The new forms of sentencing are broadly inspired by diversion, probation and de-institutionalization. The interest of the minor and his/her assumption of responsabilities have much weight in the choice of judges but also the possibilities of territories play an important role. In fact there are areas where it is easier to activate tailored educational projects (ex. Probation) meeting offenders’ needs while others do not offer a range of possibilities forcing operators to offer standardized pathways. In this sense the presence and vitality of Third sector is crucial to differentiate the pathways responding to those that are the cardinal principles of DPR448/88 and first of all to the “Principle of appropriateness” (adequacy) that quotes that the provisions of the Criminal Procedures are applicable if they are adequate to the personality and to the educational needs.

Q.– What are the differences between custodial educational treatment and custodial correctional treatment in Italy?

A.– As said before the intervention for minors who commit crimes is not intended to be exclusively punitive, but, above all, rehabilitative with an individualized plan that allows successive reintegration into society once the sentence has been completed. It is necessary that the ministerial apparatus and the various professionals involved in the execution of sanctions and measures collaborate in the achievement of the unique aim of supplying a qualitatively meaningful response to minors. Both in residential facility (Community for minors) and inside IPMs (Penal Institution for Minors) the perspective and the guidelines are the same of course with different typologies of realization due to the different limits of the structures.

Q.- What are the conditions of the detention facilities for juveniles in Italy? Can you please give us some data regarding the number of children in custody? What about juveniles in pre-trial detention?

A.– The penal institutions for minors (IPMs) are independent structures of the penal institutions for adult; they are located in different place and they have also specific organization, function and treatment. In Italy there are 17 penal institutions for minors and 4 of these have also a section for women. In 2009 there was a total of 1.222 entries (of which 699 Italians and 523 foreigners) and the daily average attendance was about 503 persons.

The average age of those subjects is around 16/17 years. Also the numbers include those who are called 'young adults' with age ranging from 18 to 21 years; they have committed the crime when they were still minors but the law provides that they will be followed by the Italian Social Services for Juvenile Justice until the age of 21. The offenders that are within the IPMs committed mainly crimes against property (in particular the crime of theft and robbery) but significant is also the number of offenses relating to violation of the provisions contained in DPR 309/90 regarding drugs. Concerning crimes against person there was a minor incident. Of a total of 1.222 offenders entered into IPMs 142 are females and the remaining 1.080 are male. Among them in pre-trial detention were 1.020.

Q.– Regarding the crimes committed by Italian minors and those committed by immigrant minors, what kind of measures or standards, when it comes to the judicial measures, are applied? 

A.– In Italy, where foreign children register the highest rate of detention compared to the Italians (in the North and in the Centre), the foreigners have a lower participation in violent crime. The greater presence of foreign minors in IPMs is not due to their higher participation in the most serious crimes (murder, robbery, extortion) as Italian minors tend to commit more frequently such crimes. Foreigners within IPMs are mostly sentenced for theft and for violating the law on narcotics. In other words, if the custodial sentence is justified for the Italian minor to serious offenses, for the foreign one it is sufficient the commission of a predatory crime to be inserted in IPM. They receive this privative measure because of the lack of other alternatives. In this case detention is used as a sort of emergency response to social situations which are difficult to handle. This bifurcation is typical to many modern juvenile justice system: the modernization of the system, implemented through such measures as diversion and probation, seems to be available to the more fortunate sector of the target population, while the old methods -not completely abandoned- end up as a receptacle for those minors who are less fortunate, like foreign juveniles, who have not family (in particular unaccompanied foreign minors).

In assessing the intervention implemented by the Minors’ Social Services Offices (USSM), emerges that in case of application of precautionary measure, the cases involving Italians (14.8%) are equal to the half than the ones involving foreigners (27.7%). The request for intervention by the Judicial Authority, following the application of a precautionary measure, shows that such afflictive measures are more often applied towards foreigners. As for foreigners custody seems to be more frequent (art. 23 DPR 448/88) with 37% of cases along with the placement in community with 35.5%, far below the measure of permanence at home (14.5%) and prescriptions (13%).

Q.- A lot of forward steps have been taken in the area of juvenile detainees’ education, but how do you evaluate the correctional system? 

A.– First I have to underline that the principle of residuality (“the minimum permanence in jails”) imposes to the judges that detention must be the last resort since the code offers many other alternative measures. Answering to this question I have to repeat that the Italian law is based on the main principle that provisions of the criminal procedure concerning the minor are applicable, if they are adequate to the personality and to the educational needs. So Italy combines correction with education, request of security by Society with offenders’ assumption of responsabilities.

Q.- How have educational and social-reintegration measures, provided for by Italian juvenile law, been implemented? Can you please give us some information about the situation of young adults?

A.– For young adults the fundamental criminal and procedural laws are the same as for adults. The only special law provision for young adults regards the conditional suspension of the sentences: if a minor commits a crime, he/she can continue to receive the special benefit of minor legislation until the age of 21 (this is of particular importance if it comes to a prison sentence). For crimes committed by young people up to the age of 21, conditional suspension of the sentence is applicable for longer sentences than in the case of adults (prison sentences of 2½ years instead of 2 years for adults). The Prison Laws provide for special treatment for young people up to 21 years of age (as a consequence they remain in the IPM until their 21st birthday). It is important to remember that for young people a greater duration of bonus leaves from prison is recognized (twenty days at a time rather than fifteen for adults, up to sixty days a year, rather than 45 for adults) and that for juveniles up to 21 years of age, house arrest is allowed, connected with particular health, study, work, and family obligations in the case of a detention sentence that does not exceed four years.

The typical profile of the young adult who commits crime is characterized by the abuse of substances and the increment of violence among the young. Concerning the context in which these young adults live, it turns out that deviant young adults come from family and cultural environments that are absolutely deprived, poor and/or broken, but also from “apparently normal” contexts.

Q.- What resources are available for providing assistance to youths with psychological and mental-health needs in Italy (meaning both minors living with increased risk factors and actual offenders)? Are there officially any specific units for this target group?

A.- For each child, a specific program with differentiated points ranging from work to family to psycho-therapeutic intervention (PEI - Targeted Educational Project) is drafted. The approach is not based on pure clinical aspects but it is multidimensional (holistic approach).

The different problems that the person may have (psychopathology, addiction, crime) requires a multi-disciplinary and inter-institutional intervention in order to define a coherent and shared individual project. The Italian system moves on the basis of multi-focal approach where more professionals put together their knowledge; working with these types of target is really difficult so this type of approach is the only one that can give good results. We must first make a distinction between what is welfare and what is the criminal justice system because if the minor has a disorder of personality will be the health system to deal with his/her illness. In Italy we are in general trying to differentiate approaches that can be summarized into three categories according to the degree of containment: a) shelter; b) day hospital; c) Communities with the possibility of highly specialized intervention or purely pedagogical approaches. As regard offenders, all health functions carried out by the Department of the Penitentiary Administration and the Department of Juvenile Justice, were transferred to the National Health Service. The recent legislation (DPCM of April 1, 2008) previewed the establishment of a specific multidisciplinary service (social worker, psychologist, educator, doctor) within each Local Health Agency. Since this law is quite recent, in occasion of the Joint State/Regions Conference (Conferenza Stato/Regioni), an inter-institutional technical group on penitentiary medicine has been established. This is composed by representatives of Ministries of Justice and Health, representatives of Regions and local Authorities, providing a tool for the assessment and monitoring related to implementation of the transfer of skills and on organizational systems that each Region has adopted. Today we are not yet in possession of such data.

Within the current legal framework, the psychological intervention within the Juvenile Justice Services is primarily targeted to prevent the removal of adolescents from the social contexts of origin promoting at the same time the sense of responsibility for their own behavior. In this perspective, within intervention for adolescents submitted to criminal proceedings, it is fundamental to support evolutionary process, understood in particular as accompaniment and support to the development of responsibility. The objective is to support the evolutionary process of the child, in any case, whatever is the level of difficulty hindering his/her path of social inclusion, both in case of developmental conflicts, as well as in presence of personality disorder and antisocial behavior or psychopathologies involving the loss of contact with reality. From this point of view, penal institutions, therapeutic communities or probation can be understood as different strategies targeted to the same general purpose.

Q.- Regarding the multidisciplinary character of the juvenile reintegration process, could you describe the role of the non profit sector?

A.- In short, the NGOs and in general Third sector are called to occupy an essential space in providing services for the society in particular due to their independent character (from governments and companies) and to the direct connection with the organised civil society. They also represent the most immediate and effective institutional tools for carrying out local development initiatives. The presence of the NGOs is fundamental in establishing ties with the community, but, even more so, a notable stimulus for the revival and development of the local society; the NGOs supply this “micro” perspective necessary for carrying out “macro” actions in a way that is consistent with and responsive to the needs of the territory. Their task is to create and disseminate practices that can penetrate into the territories influencing the structure of social life. In the field of juvenile justice, the types of required intervention are structured in a series of educational and training actions distinguished by the risk factors that may have caused the deviant or at risk behavior. Within this field the intervention of NGOs must not be reduced to a simple formal collaboration with judicial and administrative Authorities since NGOs also really cooperate with many Private and Public Agencies, Offices and Institutions. This cooperation allows different activities such as: providing services or managing resources for the execution or material fulfilment of the measures or sanctions imposed by the judicial authorities; cooperation to develop projects and interventions based on the territorial possibilities thanks to networks implemented in progress; providing mediation or conciliation services as an extrajudicial solution of the conflict created by the offence (restorative justice); realization of the youth’s social inclusion with jointly proposals. NGOs operate with a degree of elasticity as their internal structure allows them to understand the emerging needs, to organize and propose effective and timely interventions without the restraints of rigid institutional ties. Fundamental for the improvement of the work of each individual involved is the continuous exchange of ideas based on dialogue and communication, founded on a common language in order to offer terminological clarity, above all in the intervention environment. For all these characteristics a synergic work with Institutions can create good praxis and better interventions with juvenile offenders.