
European Urban Charter 1992 A relatively recent construction The European Urban Charter[1], proclaimed in 1992 and which brings together a series of principles on proper urban management, is a precursory document. Indeed, it constitutes a major effort in the elaboration of a body of action principles concerning crime prevention meant to transcend national policies by basing itself on the pertinence of this policy at the city level. Gilbert Bonnemaison ’s influence on the wording of the sixth theme of the Charter, Urban Safety and crime prevention, is not alien to this deliberately local approach and the principles stated therein. European Urban Charter (Excerpts) Theme 6. Urban Safety and crime prevention PRINCIPLES 1. A coherent Safety and crime prevention policy must be based on prevention, law enforcement and mutual support. 2. A local Safety policy must be based on up-to-date comprehensive statistics and information. 3. Crime prevention involves every member of the community. 4. An effective urban Safety policy depends on close co-operation between the police and the local community. 5. A local anti-drug policy must be defined and applied. 6. Programmes for preventing relapse and developing alternatives to incarceration are essential. 7. Support for victims is a key component of any local urban Safety policy 8. Crime prevention must be recognised as a social priority and command increased financial resources. Concerning the European Union, the development of a crime prevention model came later. While the Stockholm Conference (1996) examined the link between crime prevention and social exclusion, it was the Amsterdam Treaty that marked an important step in the area of crime prevention at the European Union level. Indeed, in its Article 29 it mentions crime prevention (and not organised crime) amongst the policies of the European Union working towards an area of freedom, security and justice. Treaty of Amsterdam (Excerpts) Article 29 Without prejudice to the powers of the European Community, the Union’s objective shall be to provide citizens with a high level of protection within an area of freedom, security and justice, by developing common action among the Member States in the fields of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters and by preventing and combating racism and xenophobia. That objective shall be achieved by preventing and combating crime, organised or otherwise, in particular terrorism, trafficking in persons and offences against children, illicit drug trafficking and illicit arms trafficking, corruption and fraud [...]. Subsequently, the European Council of Tampere (1999) stressed the importance of this objective in its conclusions, calling for the integration of crime prevention in the strategies for combating crime and setting study priorities, which would then be taken up by the European Crime Prevention Network and the European funding line, Hippokrates[2]. European Council of Tampere (Excerpts) VIII. Preventing crime at the level of the Union 41. The European Council calls for the integration of crime prevention aspects into actions against crime as well as for the further development of national crime prevention programmes. Common priorities should be developed and identified in crime prevention, in the external and internal policy of the Union, and be taken into account when preparing new legislation. 42. The exchange of best practices should be developed, the network of competent national authorities for crime prevention and co-operation between national crime prevention organisations should be strengthened, and the possibility of a Community-funded programme should be explored for these purposes. The first priorities for this co-operation could be juvenile, urban and drug-related crime. Other dates, such as the Praia da Falesia Conference (4-5 May 2000), which was the occasion for defining the guiding lines for future actions in prevention at the European level, brought out the involvement of the European Union in prevention policies. In general, prevention was broached in the European Union: ‘vertically’, i.e., in relation to certain types of crime such as trafficking in persons or the sexual exploitation of children; and ‘horizontally’, in particular when it was a question of studying crime victims within the European Union. The notion of crime prevention at the European level Crime Although crime encompasses criminal acts committed by individuals, the European Commission distinguishes between: crime in the literal sense, i.e., acts qualified as crimes in national legislation; criminality, which corresponds to a less serious but more frequent level of criminal offence (e.g., thefts, receiving stolen goods, muggings, fraud, etc.); the violence that is tending to spread in the most diverse environments (in the street, sports stadiums, schools, family organisations, etc.); and incivility, which, without constituting a criminal offence, can create an atmosphere of tension and insecurity. Prevention For the European Commission[3], crime prevention covers all the activities that contribute to stopping or reducing crime as a social phenomenon, both quantitatively and qualitatively, be it through permanent, structured measures or through ad hoc initiatives. These activities are characteristic of all the players capable of playing a preventive role, whether from the public (legal, law-enforcement and social services), volunteer (associations) or private (businesses) sectors. As the States do, the European Union distinguishes between different approaches to prevention, depending on whether they concentrate on victims, perpetrators, persons or groups at risk, or on risky situations. It is also necessary to differentiate between categories of prevention measures according to whether their aim is the reduction of opportunities, the reduction of social and economic factors that favour the development of crime, or the prevention of victimisation. Objectives and priorities of crime prevention for the European Union This is a matter of: Reducing the opportunities that facilitate crime; Attenuating the factors that facilitate entering into crime as well as relapse; Avoiding victimation; Reducing the feeling of insecurity; Promoting a culture of legality; Preventing the infiltration of economic structures by criminal elements. In order to achieve these objectives, the European Union hopes to ensure better co-ordination of existing policies. Thus, ties will have to be made with social policy or even urban policy (as such, the Parliament, the Council of Regions and the European Commission stress the urban dimension of crime prevention policies in their work). Furthermore, the Commission supported the initiative taken by the French presidency and Sweden concerning the creation of a European network of crime prevention focussing in particular on the points raised during the European Council in Tampere. More precisely, the breakdown of the work priorities of this organisation is: Juvenile delinquency: the risk factors: alcohol, drugs, limited economic and social resources; the impact of programmes aimed at behaviour modification; judicial and reparative practices; the partnership between the police and social services for preventing juvenile delinquency. Urban crime: Here, the Commission mentions ‘the events that effect life at the local level’, more particularly: burglaries, criminal acts against automobiles and persons as well as graffiti and vandalism. Here, priority measures will concern social mediation (resolution of conflicts), the reduction of crime through urban renewal and architecture plans and the finalising of norms for automobile building. Drug-related crime Law-enforcement and prevention measures; Prevention through health and social policies The links between organised crime and crime in general Partnership These priorities and main work lines are, in reality, the fruit of reflection by European institutions on the assessment of crime prevention policies undertaken in the Member States: The development of an interdisciplinary approach; The articulation of safety and accompaniment policies (social and educational policies, etc.); The development of the partnership between prevention players with the motive that prevention is effective only if based on all components of society (notion of co-production); The development of approaches that favour proximity to citizens (plans of community police and justice). Henceforth, the European thinking that tends to favour a model of crime prevention policy is therefore not autonomous, as a good number of national and local players proclaim, but constitutes a coherent synthesis of current initiatives and practices. [1] European Urban Charter, Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE), European Council, 1992. [2] On 28 June 2001, the Council of Ministers of the European Union adopted the Hippokrates programme, a programme for encouragement, exchanges, training and co-operation in the field of crime for the years 2001 and 2002. The main work lines retained were: the horizontal themes concerning general crime as much as organised crime (the feeling of insecurity and victimation, the relationship between organised crime and overall crime, measuring criminal phenomena), the themes concerning general crime (juvenile delinquency, urban crime, drug-related crime) and themes concerning organised crime (measuring criminal phenomena, organisation of partnerships, the use of reassuring techniques in preventing organised crime, the co-operation between the public authorities and companies’ internal security departments, the feasability of the ‘crime proofing’ approach and the evolution of risks inherent to economic, technological and social changes). [3]<//a> Here, we refer to the Communication of the Commission to the Council and European Parliament, Crime Prevention in the European Union – Reflection on Common Orientations and Propositions in Favour of Community Funding, COM(2000) 786 final

European Urban Charter 1992

The European Urban Charter[1], proclaimed in 1992 and which brings together a series of principles on proper urban management, is a precursory document. Indeed, it constitutes a major effort in the elaboration of a body of action principles concerning crime prevention meant to transcend national policies by basing itself on the pertinence of this policy at the city level. Gilbert Bonnemaison ’s influence on the wording of the sixth theme of the Charter, Urban Safety and crime prevention, is not alien to this deliberately local approach and the principles stated therein.

European Urban Charter (Excerpts)

Theme 6. Urban Safety and crime prevention

PRINCIPLES

1. A coherent Safety and crime prevention policy must be based on prevention, law enforcement and mutual support.

2. A local Safety policy must be based on up-to-date comprehensive statistics and information.

3. Crime prevention involves every member of the community.

4. An effective urban Safety policy depends on close co-operation between the police and the local community.

5. A local anti-drug policy must be defined and applied.

6. Programmes for preventing relapse and developing alternatives to incarceration are essential.

7. Support for victims is a key component of any local urban Safety policy

8. Crime prevention must be recognised as a social priority and command increased financial resources.

Concerning the European Union, the development of a crime prevention model came later. While the Stockholm Conference (1996) examined the link between crime prevention and social exclusion, it was the Amsterdam Treaty that marked an important step in the area of crime prevention at the European Union level.

Indeed, in its Article 29 it mentions crime prevention (and not organised crime) amongst the policies of the European Union working towards an area of freedom, security and justice.

Treaty of Amsterdam (Excerpts)

Article 29

Without prejudice to the powers of the European Community, the Union’s objective shall be to provide citizens with a high level of protection within an area of freedom, security and justice, by developing common action among the Member States in the fields of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters and by preventing and combating racism and xenophobia.

That objective shall be achieved by preventing and combating crime, organised or otherwise, in particular terrorism, trafficking in persons and offences against children, illicit drug trafficking and illicit arms trafficking, corruption and fraud [...].

Subsequently, the European Council of Tampere (1999) stressed the importance of this objective in its conclusions, calling for the integration of crime prevention in the strategies for combating crime and setting study priorities, which would then be taken up by the European Crime Prevention Network and the European funding line, Hippokrates[2].

European Council of Tampere (Excerpts)

VIII. Preventing crime at the level of the Union

41. The European Council calls for the integration of crime prevention aspects into actions against crime as well as for the further development of national crime prevention programmes. Common priorities should be developed and identified in crime prevention, in the external and internal policy of the Union, and be taken into account when preparing new legislation.

42. The exchange of best practices should be developed, the network of competent national authorities for crime prevention and co-operation between national crime prevention organisations should be strengthened, and the possibility of a Community-funded programme should be explored for these purposes. The first priorities for this co-operation could be juvenile, urban and drug-related crime.

Other dates, such as the Praia da Falesia Conference (4-5 May 2000), which was the occasion for defining the guiding lines for future actions in prevention at the European level, brought out the involvement of the European Union in prevention policies.

In general, prevention was broached in the European Union:

‘vertically’, i.e., in relation to certain types of crime such as trafficking in persons or the sexual exploitation of children;

and ‘horizontally’, in particular when it was a question of studying crime victims within the European Union.

The notion of crime prevention at the European level

Crime

Although crime encompasses criminal acts committed by individuals, the European Commission distinguishes between:

crime in the literal sense, i.e., acts qualified as crimes in national legislation;

criminality, which corresponds to a less serious but more frequent level of criminal offence (e.g., thefts, receiving stolen goods, muggings, fraud, etc.);

the violence that is tending to spread in the most diverse environments (in the street, sports stadiums, schools, family organisations, etc.);

and incivility, which, without constituting a criminal offence, can create an atmosphere of tension and insecurity.

Prevention

For the European Commission[3], crime prevention covers all the activities that contribute to stopping or reducing crime as a social phenomenon, both quantitatively and qualitatively, be it through permanent, structured measures or through ad hoc initiatives.

These activities are characteristic of all the players capable of playing a preventive role, whether from the public (legal, law-enforcement and social services), volunteer (associations) or private (businesses) sectors.

As the States do, the European Union distinguishes between different approaches to prevention, depending on whether they concentrate on victims, perpetrators, persons or groups at risk, or on risky situations. It is also necessary to differentiate between categories of prevention measures according to whether their aim is the reduction of opportunities, the reduction of social and economic factors that favour the development of crime, or the prevention of victimisation.

Objectives and priorities of crime prevention for the European Union

This is a matter of:

Reducing the opportunities that facilitate crime;

Attenuating the factors that facilitate entering into crime as well as relapse;

Avoiding victimation;

Reducing the feeling of insecurity;

Promoting a culture of legality;

Preventing the infiltration of economic structures by criminal elements.

In order to achieve these objectives, the European Union hopes to ensure better co-ordination of existing policies. Thus, ties will have to be made with social policy or even urban policy (as such, the Parliament, the Council of Regions and the European Commission stress the urban dimension of crime prevention policies in their work).

Furthermore, the Commission supported the initiative taken by the French presidency and Sweden concerning the creation of a European network of crime prevention focussing in particular on the points raised during the European Council in Tampere.

More precisely, the breakdown of the work priorities of this organisation is:

Juvenile delinquency:

the risk factors: alcohol, drugs, limited economic and social resources;

the impact of programmes aimed at behaviour modification;

judicial and reparative practices;

the partnership between the police and social services for preventing juvenile delinquency.

Urban crime:

Here, the Commission mentions ‘the events that effect life at the local level’, more particularly: burglaries, criminal acts against automobiles and persons as well as graffiti and vandalism.

Here, priority measures will concern social mediation (resolution of conflicts), the reduction of crime through urban renewal and architecture plans and the finalising of norms for automobile building.

Drug-related crime

Law-enforcement and prevention measures;

Prevention through health and social policies

The links between organised crime and crime in general

Partnership

These priorities and main work lines are, in reality, the fruit of reflection by European institutions on the assessment of crime prevention policies undertaken in the Member States:

The development of an interdisciplinary approach;

The articulation of safety and accompaniment policies (social and educational policies, etc.);

The development of the partnership between prevention players with the motive that prevention is effective only if based on all components of society (notion of co-production);

The development of approaches that favour proximity to citizens (plans of community police and justice).

Henceforth, the European thinking that tends to favour a model of crime prevention policy is therefore not autonomous, as a good number of national and local players proclaim, but constitutes a coherent synthesis of current initiatives and practices.

[1] European Urban Charter, Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE), European Council, 1992.

[2] On 28 June 2001, the Council of Ministers of the European Union adopted the Hippokrates programme, a programme for encouragement, exchanges, training and co-operation in the field of crime for the years 2001 and 2002. The main work lines retained were: the horizontal themes concerning general crime as much as organised crime (the feeling of insecurity and victimation, the relationship between organised crime and overall crime, measuring criminal phenomena), the themes concerning general crime (juvenile delinquency, urban crime, drug-related crime) and themes concerning organised crime (measuring criminal phenomena, organisation of partnerships, the use of reassuring techniques in preventing organised crime, the co-operation between the public authorities and companies’ internal security departments, the feasability of the ‘crime proofing’ approach and the evolution of risks inherent to economic, technological and social changes).

[3]<//a> Here, we refer to the Communication of the Commission to the Council and European Parliament, Crime Prevention in the European Union – Reflection on Common Orientations and Propositions in Favour of Community Funding, COM(2000) 786 final