Following the model which has been adopted since 1997, all delegates to this conference were invited to present an overview of the key issues currently facing their nation or territory. These national reports canvassed a very wide range of issues, reflecting the socio-economic and cultural differences across the region. However, there was a broad measure of agreement with respect to most of the key issues.

There was clear agreement that correctional systems are directly affected by broader socio-economic changes and political considerations. Thailand provided a dramatic example of the effect of political policy changes. A ‘war on drugs’ has resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of prisoners, with the total prisoner population increasing by around 140 per cent from 1996 to 2000. A large number of these prisoners have been convicted of offences relating to possessing, selling and trafficking in amphetamines-related drugs (see Agenda Item three). Indonesia’s report also noted a link between political issues and an increasing number of prisoners, and suggested that there was also a link between political stability and security and control in the prisons. The delegation from the Philippines noted that political decisions affect the funding of corrections and that this is not a priority for government expenditure in that country.

Macau (China) provided another very interesting example of the relationship between political change and correctional administration. It noted that, following the handover to China, there was a concerted attack on organised crime. This saw an increase in the number of prisoners but ‘public safety improved significantly’.

Broader socio-economic factors affect both crime rates and correctional administration. Several nations still face some difficulty with respect to the provision of basic food, hygiene and health. For example, Mongolia reported that a large number of prisoners have tuberculosis, however, improved prison and medical facilities are now being developed. Cambodia reported that it had made significant progress in addressing prisoners’ needs as a result of international assistance and the support of non-governmental organisations. China noted that “As human history has entered a new century, China has also entered a new historical era. Following the success of the application for sponsorship of the 2008 Olympic Games, China is at the gate of the WTO. With such an optimistic beginning, we should adjust to the situation. In terms of corrections, we should make a more enthusiastic commitment to reduce recidivism and to rehabilitate offenders into law-abiding citizens.”

However, whilst globalisation does present some positive opportunities, it also presents a range of challenges. The paper from Canada outlined these challenges. The most obvious is a growth in offences of cyber fraud, organised transnational crime and corruption, a problem also noted by Malaysia. In addition, as our access to knowledge increases through the world wide web, value systems in all societies are likely to undergo some change. Vietnam’s report recognised these tensions: “The social and political situation remains stable, the economy reaches some development, and the material and mental life of people has been improved. However, during the process of falling in line with the international economy, the change in the system and other negative influences have created social evils and some new types of crime.”

Korea provides a particularly interesting example of the link between economic circumstances and correctional systems. During the economic downturn from 1998 to 1999, the number of inmates in Korean prisons increased rapidly, owing to the increase in property crime. However, following an economic recovery, the rate of property crime declined. A number of other nations, including Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Malaysia also noted the link between economic conditions and corrections, with Malaysia expecting its prison population to increase due to the regional economic slowdown.

Prison populations continue to rise across most of the region. As mentioned earlier, Thailand has seen a dramatic increase over the last three years. Over the past twelve months, however, the most dramatic change has occurred in Tonga, where the prison population has almost doubled (from 68 to 124). After a decline in 1999, Brunei Darussalam also had an increase during 2000.

Indonesia reported similar trends; after a level population from 1997 to mid-1999, there was a big increase from mid-1999, and especially during 2000 and 2001. In Australia, prison populations are generally increasing, but the patterns vary across the country; some states such as Victoria still have a much lower rate of imprisonment than others such as Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. This means that different jurisdictions within Australia face rather different problems. This is also the case in China, where the increase is much higher in some provinces than in others. Other national papers to report an increase were Hong Kong (China), Macau (China), New Zealand, Japan, Malaysia, Fiji, Sri Lanka and Papua New Guinea.

Korea provided an interesting exception to the general trend upwards. Between 1998 and 1999, the number of inmates has risen to over 70, 000. However, it then declined to less than 63, 000 (a drop of over 10 per cent) by June 2000 and has remained constant since then. There appears to be three main factors behind these changes. The first was the improved economic conditions in the country. The second was that the Korean Prosecutor’s Office sought to reduce the number of prisoners held on remand by controlling indictment rates. The third strategy was a broader application of early release on parole.

Two nations reported that their prison population was relatively stable - the Philippines and Canada. In the Philippines, the prison population has been relatively stable since 1995. In Canada, there has been a slight decline in the incarceration rate since 1997.

Prison overcrowding reflects two factors: the number of prisoners and the capacity of prisons. In most jurisdictions, the increase in prison capacity has not kept pace with the increase in prisoner numbers. For example, in Australia, most jurisdictions are expanding their prison capacity but overcrowding remains a problem. Even in Victoria, which has the lowest rate of imprisonment in the country, occupancy rates stand at 115 per cent: elsewhere, ‘doubling up’ is common. In Thailand, the number of prisoners has more than doubled in the last four years, and the population of 245, 000 far exceeds the official capacity of 100, 000. In Tonga, the central prison has a capacity of 28 but a population of 85. In the Philippines, there is congestion in all parts of the system but there is a policy to limit overcrowding to 80 per cent in some areas. Malaysia reported that the prison population exceeds available capacity by around 20 per cent.

The national reports revealed that a range of strategies to attempt to reduce overcrowding. These include expanding parole and early release schemes (Korea and Malaysia) and the prerogative of mercy (Vietnam). However, there is no doubt that, for the foreseeable future, most jurisdictions will need to expand capacity and to modernise their prison estate to accommodate the growing number of prisoners. Ambitious renovation and new prison - building programmes are in progress in Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Hong Kong (China), Macau (China), Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore and Tonga. Thailand is in the unusual position of having constructed a number of prisons but not yet having the funding for staff to allow these prisons to become operational. As a result of expanding capacity and taking other measures, some jurisdictions have been able to reduce levels of overcrowding despite often facing increasing prisoner numbers. For example, Hong Kong (China) has managed to reduce occupancy levels from 140 per cent in 1996 to 114 per cent in 2000/2001.

Overcrowding therefore remains the major issue across the region. Only two jurisdictions were able to report that prison capacity exceeds prisoner numbers. However, they are also now closer to 100 per cent capacity. In Indonesia, occupancy rates are around 99 per cent, compared with 76 per cent in the period from 1996 to 1999.

As discussed in previous APCCA conferences (especially the 1997 conference in Kuala Lumpur), there continues to be different views about the extent to which the private sector should be involved in the provision of this extended prison capacity. New Zealand reported the successful commissioning of a new remand prison (the first privately run prison in New Zealand) and a new privately run prison has opened in Western Australia. Korea reported that legislation has been enacted to permit the operation of a private prison and that a Request for Proposals had been published in August 2001. Thailand is also open to the possible involvement of the private sector in prison management. However, other parts of the region including China, Hong Kong (China), Malaysia and Papua New Guinea remain opposed to such developments in principle.

The conference delegates all agreed that prison population levels are not necessarily related to changes in crime rates. For example, Canada noted that reported crime rates are continuing to decline but that this has not been matched by an equivalent decline in incarceration rates. As noted in the Report of the Twentieth APCCA conference in Sydney in 2000, incarceration rates are therefore affected not only by the public perceptions and political responses.

It also appears that some forms of serious criminal activity have increased. This can affect the number of people who are sentenced to terms of imprisonment and the length of sentences imposed by courts, with consequences for prison management. Violent offences (such as assaults and robbery) appear to be on the increase in several jurisdictions, including Australia, Canada, Hong Kong (China), and Korea. Drug offenders are increasing across much of the region, especially China, Canada, Indonesia, Brunei Darussalam and Thailand. More ‘local’ problems also arise in some parts of the region, with Mongolia reporting an increase in cattle rustling.

Clearly, these trends can create significant problems for prison management and the provision of relevant treatment programs to address substance abuse, anger management and other issues.

There is considerable regional variation with respect to the number and proportion of unsentenced prisoners. These patterns partly reflect the different investigative procedures and criminal justice traditions across the region. Brunei Darussalam has the lowest proportion of remand prisoners (5 per cent of the prison population). The highest figures are for Thailand (34 per cent), Cambodia (31 per cent) and Malaysia (30 per cent).

In some parts of the region, it is therefore clear that the remand population is having a major impact on the total prison population, as different regimes and procedures should, in principle, apply to such offenders. Australia and New Zealand share some common ground on this. In both jurisdictions, the remand population is lower than in many parts of the region (20 per cent and 15 per cent respectively) but the remand population is growing at a faster rate than the sentenced prisoner population. This may, in part, be the result of more people being charged with more serious offences. However, in both jurisdictions, there has also been a tightening up of bail for certain categories of offenders.

All of the national reports make mention of demographic characteristics of prisoners. The report from Canada contained a valuable discussion of the impact of demographic changes and noted that “the identification of future demographical trends can assist in better predicting the profile and size of the offender population and, in turn, anticipate the staff required, the institutional environment and the types of programs and services that would best meet the projected population needs.” Similarly, New Zealand is already planning for a demographic bulge in the number of young people, especially of Maori or Pacific Island descent, who tend to be over-represented in certain types of criminal activity.

One of the most striking common trends across the region is an increase in the number of female prisoners. Thailand, for example, noted that the ‘war on drugs’ had led to a big rise in the number of female prisoners convicted of offences relating to amphetamines. It was a matter of special concern to the conference that the female imprisonment rate is generally increasing faster than the male imprisonment rate. In Hong Kong (China), for example, women constitute 9 per cent of total admissions in 1991 but 28 per cent in 2000. Malaysia, New Zealand, Korea, Mongolia, Japan, Canada and Australia have all witnessed a similar, if less dramatic, trend to that experienced by Hong Kong (China). These trends create some major issues for all nations in the region. Female offenders have, historically, been relatively few in number. The conference recognised that, as their numbers increase, it will be necessary to consider the most appropriate accommodation facilities and more effort will need to be given to the development of treatment programs which address the particular needs of female offenders.

Several nations also expressed concern at the imprisonment rate for different ethnic and indigenous groups. Canada, New Zealand and Australia continue to face major difficulties with respect to Indigenous peoples and in New Zealand the demographic trends are such that the problems are likely to increase in the foreseeable future.

The issue of older prisoners is discussed in this report under Agenda Item four. At this stage, it is sufficient to note that all those jurisdictions which addressed this question noted that there was a significant increase in the number of prisoners aged 40 to 50 and above. As noted by the delegate from Canada, many of those aged 50 or more also tend to be in poor physical and/or mental health and to have a high level of needs.

The Report of the Twentieth APCCA conference in Sydney in 2000 noted that there was an increasing interest across the region in prison standards, including compliance with both domestic laws and general international standards such as the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. This remained an area of discussion in many of the reports. A number of developing nations, including Mongolia, Cambodia and Vietnam reiterated their commitment to developing and maintaining prisons which meet world-level standards and to ensuring compliance with human rights obligations. China has made particular effort in this regard. It requires prisoners to “ respect the offenders’ personality and protect their fundamental rights of living, sanitation, medical treatment, education and work.” China has also taken a policy decision to make prison administration more open to public scrutiny. To that end, it has established ‘Director Inspection Dates’ for prisons and ‘supervision hotline’ for members of the public.

Several national reports, including those from Malaysia, Japan and Korea, also noted that their domestic prison laws had become somewhat out of date and was being redesigned to meet more modern correctional needs, including improved procedures for the treatment of offenders and clearer rules and regulations regarding prisoner classification and discipline.

Across the region, there is now a clear acceptance of the principles of integrated offender management. This involves the establishment of a systematic approach to the management of offenders from the time of their reception into a prison to their reintegration into the community. The type of approach to integrated offender management must differ across the region to take account of regional and cultural differences and the availability of different treatment programs. However, the New Zealand paper neatly encapsulated integrated offender management under four headings: Induction to the prison, Assessment of an offender’s needs; Sentence Planning and management; and effective Reintegration Services. Similarly, Singapore has recently developed a Strategic Framework for Action based on four focal areas: operational capabilities, integrated incare, staff development and co-ordinated aftercare. Integrated incare involves a clear structure to the custodial part of the sentence and all prisoners are assessed to develop their ‘personal route map’. Considerable effort has been given to the development of more coordinated aftercare to assist in the reintegration of offenders and the CARE Network was formed in 2000 to co-ordinate the efforts of government and non-government agencies. Australia, Canada and Hong Kong (China) have adopted a similarly integrated approach to offender management.

A large number of other jurisdictions are moving towards the some general approach, subject to local needs and conditions. The move towards integrated offender management is closely tied to trends towards new management structures within correctional organisations. For example, Brunei Darussalam, China, Japan and Tonga are now giving a great deal of attention to more efficient management structures. Malaysia has modernised its management structures and, like many other jurisdictions, has seen improvements in effectiveness, efficiency and transparency. It is notable that, in line with these ‘managerial’ changes, many nations are now developing new “mission Statements.” Thailand, for example, is currently reviewing the role and mission of its Department of Corrections. The reports from Canada, Singapore and Hong Kong (China) all tie specific correctional initiatives back to their mission statements. It would appear that carefully crafted mission statements therefore have a useful role to play in ensuring that practices within different departments will pursue a common goal in a coherent and consistent manner.

It is clear that prison population levels and overcrowding remain the predominant concern of correctional administrators in the Asian and Pacific region. The trend across the region, with only a few exceptions, is to higher prisoner numbers. It is not always possible to plan in advance for changes in the prison population because government policies may change with respect to the treatment of certain groups of offenders (such as drug offenders in Thailand) or bail practices (as in Australia and New Zealand). However, planning and integrated offender management remain core objectives. Different jurisdictions face different pressure points, but all jurisdictions face challenges as a result of the growing number of female prisoners.

Although difficulties will remain, it is important to record some of the many positive features and developments. As in 2000, all jurisdictions appear to be effectively meeting the core functions of custody and control. There are also some very positive trends with respect to international standards and integrated offender management.