Case Study: Zimbabwe
A community service scheme was established in Zimbabwe in August of 1992 when an amendment was made to the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. The capacity of Zimbabwe’s prisons is around sixteen thousand, but at times before this amendment was made, nearly twenty thousand people were incarcerated.
A survey of these prisoners found that nearly 60% of them were imprisoned for sentences of six months or less and 80% were imprisoned for sentences of 12 months or less. Further research found that the majority of the people in the Zimbabwean prisons were not high risk offenders, and many were only there because they had failed to pay fines. This represented to the Zimbabwean government that a change needed to be made.
In the first four years after the scheme was implemented, around 18 thousand prisoners participated in community service and nearly 90% of them completed the program. Not only did the scheme have such great results in terms of completion, it also showed that a successful program can work with limited finances and use of existing resources.
Because finances were limited, the program began without staff. Instead, a National Committee was established consisting of members who had other jobs but worked on the program on a voluntary basis. The Committee consisted of High Court Judges, the Chief Magistrate, the Secretary of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, the Commissioner of Police, the Commissioner of Prisons, the Director of Public Prosecutions, and others. The purpose of the Committee was to formulate policies and oversee the smooth implementation of the scheme. Below the National Committee were the Provincial Committees, which were established in each of the eight provinces of Zimbabwe. The Provincial Committees were responsible for the operation of community service within their jurisdiction. Below the Provincial Committees were the District Committees. A District Committee was assigned to each district court and met frequently to discuss the progress of the program and fix any problems that might have arisen during implementation.
One of the first goals of the National Committee was to create guidelines for the magistrates that would foster uniform application of the community service scheme. Example guidelines include: community service orders should be considered in cases where a sentence of 12 months or less may be imposed; community service orders should consist of 35 hours for every one month the offender would have been imprisoned (not to exceed 420 hours, or 12 months); and the orders are not intended for repeat offenders or those who have committed violent crimes, such as murder or armed robbery. When magistrates sentence imprisonment for less than 12 months, an explanation is required regarding why an alternative was not used. This method makes sure that offenders are not sent to jail or prison unnecessarily and acts as a safety measure against overcrowding.
Above the magistrates are the judges, who have discretionary review over all sentences of three months imprisonment or more. This allows judges to review cases and determine if a sentence is too excessive, which is important when trying to minimize overcrowding. The goal is to establish imprisonment as the most rigorous form of punishment, only to be sentenced as a last resort after all other forms of punishment are deemed inappropriate.
When funds were allocated for permanent staff in 1994, a National Coordinator, secretary, and twelve community service officers were hired. They were responsible for making sure offenders complied with their community service orders. If the offender did not comply, one of these employees notified the clerk of court and measures were taken to bring the offender back before the court. After these employees were hired, the program experienced a significant advance in its implementation and around 550 offenders per month began to benefit from the community service program.
Overall the goals of Zimbabwe in their endeavor to establish a successful community service scheme have been accomplished. At a rate of 550 offenders per month, a number expected to increase after the addition of 14 new employees, they are achieving great strides in keeping offenders away from prison and reintegrating them back into the community. The program has not only reduced overcrowding, it has saved the government a significant amount of money.
Although the public was skeptical at first, the effectiveness of the program has caused most to appreciate the benefits of community service. As Zimbabwean Justice Paddington Garwe says: “there is no doubt that community service has made a big difference in the lives of so many.” This statement not only expresses the success of the Zimbabwe community service scheme, it also favorably represents the focus of restorative justice.