THE IMPACT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM ON CRIME PREVENTION IN

MOGADISHU, SOMALIA

Abdirashid Ismail Nor, LLB

ABSTRACT

Criminal justice system describes the offences punishments, producers and way to punish those
who break law of the society .its criminal justice system which creates deterrence in society
.without effective criminal justice system, a society or country cannot survive for long. In today
modern world the criminal justice system comprises of three main institutions i.e. Police,
prosecution and judiciary although. In most all countries of the world the system consists of these
three main institutions although their names may vary from country to country. This thesis
examines the effectiveness of Somalia criminal justice system. An effective criminal justice system
is the key pillars upon which the concept of the rules of law is built because it serves as a
fundamental mechanism to redress grievances and bring violators of social norms to justice, and
how well a country manages its criminal justice system affects its overall performance on the
governance index. Unfortunately the Somali criminal justice system is fundamentally flawed and
the defect manifest at every processing point on the entire criminal justice system line. This paper
find that the failure of governance institution to design as suitable criminal justice policy ,the
inability of the legislature to appropriately transform policies into laws on oddly designed judicial
justice system an outdated and counterproductive services style of policing and correctional
services that inhumanely warehouses those considered innocent by the very law of the society that
imprison them are the factors that have collectively rendered the system out of the sync with
contemporary global practices in criminal justice system administration.

Keywords: Criminal Justice system, Law enforcement, crime prevention, punishment, deterrence
INTRODUCTION

The criminal justice system is a complex system comprised of four major components each with
separate and distinct subcomponents. A diverse group of criminal justice practitioners are
employed in these systems, including law enforcement officers, corrections officers, probation and
parole officers, judges, attorneys, paralegals, mental health professionals, and paraprofessionals.
Each of these professional groups, as well as individuals within these groups, hold different
perspectives on offending behavior, punishment, and rehabilitation. Coordinating these various
systems and criminal justice practitioners, and establishing partnerships among them is also a
complex task. To add to this complexity, there is much diversity among criminal justice
populations and within communities. Consequently, including offenders and former offenders, and
communities in criminal justice initiatives is also a huge undertaking. Further, communities are
characterized by different laws, crime rates, and attitudes toward the criminal justice system,
particularly towards police officers and police initiatives (Corsaro, Frank, & Ozer, 2015; Scaglion
& Condon, 2006; Wehrman & De Angelis, 2011).

The practice of criminal justice in developed countries, however, remains a useful indicator of how
the state has been able to dispense justice to its people. Criminal justice theory provides a lens for
scrutinizing the practices and how much they adhere to laid-down principles and standards. Africa
is not unique compared with the rest of the world, except that it is a recovering colonial addict that
unfortunately has lived up to the dictates of the remnants of the colonial paradigm. In the face of
failed states that are recovering from colonialism, dictatorships that are undergoing political
transformation, tyrannies and unstable states, the theory and practice of criminal justice produce
results that either threaten or confirmed the political legitimacy of such states (Centre for Conflict
Resolution 2004a). This has been no less obvious in Zimbabwe, where a plethora of charges have
been laid against the leaders of the political opposition to Robert Mugabe‘s government. People
are held in detention without trial; others are arrested for loitering; and leaders of opposition
political parties are charged with high treason, only to have the charges dropped the next day
(International Crisis Group 2008). Practicing criminal justice and democracy becomes expensive
and inexpedient for ruling elites who prefer to remain in power.

Africa has been synonymous with wars and conflicts and the displacement of thousands of people
as a result. Countries recovering from wars and internal conflict, such as Sierra Leone, Kenya, the
Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and recently Zimbabwe, have demonstrated the
dispensability of the criminal justice system in the process. Military leaders usurp the powers, roles
and functions of the criminal justice system and in its place they usually substitute their own laws3
with makeshift justice and policing systems: systems that are fundamentally dangerous and
sometimes fatal to the victims of these regimes, Nigerian Commercial Law Report (1985)
(6NCLR). These practices raise an important question. How do ruling elites interact with and use
the criminal justice system to further their interest? Answering this question is not the purpose of
this monograph, but the ways in which the ruling elites are created and perpetuated through
tinkering with the criminal justice system remain a central theme of criminal justice studies in
Africa, Nigerian Commercial Law Report (1985), Legitimacy of the legal system in Africa has
become fundamental to the establishment of the rule of law and the resultant efficacy of regimes
and criminal justice systems in dispensing social justice. In states where there is no legitimacy of
the state or its instruments of coercion, it cannot reasonably be expected that the criminal justice
system will work for opponents of the state or its citizens.

The apartheid South African legal system was often open to challenges and had no legitimacy, as
the records of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) reflect (TRC Report
2003). Afro-pessimists argue that Africa is unable to effectively bring about the changes that are
required for upholding the rule of law. This, they argue, is because African governments do not
have the capacity to change the legacy of colonialism. Instead, they perpetuate the conditions under
which British, French, Belgian and Portuguese colonizers abused the people of Africa through
colonial justice systems. As a result, the effective administration of justice in Africa remains
elusive. Access to justice remains another, particularly for people in rural communities.

The new initiative to challenge the Eurocentric governance of criminal justice can be achieved
partly through the New Partnership for) and the African Union‘s Peer Review Mechanism (APRM)
Africa‘s Development (NEPAD) and (Centre for Conflict Resolution 2004b) In this monograph,
four eminent critics and researchers examine the theory and practice of criminal justice in Africa.
This monograph provides us with an important opportunity to engage in the debate through
exploring various themes on the expression of democracy and justice through the workings of
criminal justice systems of some countries in Africa. Nigerian Constitutional Report (1980).

Simon Robins provides us with a case study of Uganda and its emphasis on restorative justice
processes. These processes have been a product of the European and North American states.
Uganda has a dual system of criminal justice which encompasses formal law and informal law and
their application. It incorporates the formal English system and local council courts. Constitution
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, section 36(5).

Since the collapse of the state in 1991, Somalis have relied primarily on customary and Sharia
legal systems to adjudicate disputes (US Department of State 2016). A legal system with both
civilian and military courts nominally operates under the federal government, but existing laws are
difficult to enforce, given the weak capacity of judicial and law enforcement institutions and
general instability (US Department of State 2016). For instance, there have been zero prosecutions
or convictions related to money laundering12 (US Department of State 2016).

Despite over a decade of statelessness, however, this process will not be starting from scratch.
Notwithstanding the prevalence of violent crime, particularly in urban areas, and regular armed
clashes between the factions, Somalia does not exist in a state of anarchy or chaos. Although
lacking an effective central government, the country has had no lack of governance over the past
decade. The latter has been established both top-down by powerful political interests seeking to
entrench control over particular towns and regions, and bottom-up by Somali religious leaders,
businessmen and local communities, attempting to establish basic security conditions for the
normalization of social life and the expansion of trade. Africa Report No. 88, Nairobi (21
December 2004).

The application of Islamic law as a separate, but complementary system to modern judicial
institutions persisted through both eras of colonial administration and independent government.
However, since the mid-1990s, independent shari‘a courts emerged in various parts of Somalia,
but particularly in urban areas. Often administered on a clan-by-clan basis, these courts managed
militia forces capable of establishing basic law and order in their immediate area of operation, and
enforcing court decisions. While these shari‘a courts are an indigenous response to persistent
insecurity to which neither factions nor traditional Xeer could effectively respond, concerns exist
with regard to their affiliation with fundamentalist elements. SIDA Conference, Nairobi:
(UNDOS, September 1997).

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of criminal justice system on crime prevention
in Mogadishu, Somalia based on Somali judiciary system in Somalia as case federal government
of Somalia.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. To investigate the impact of law enforcement on crime prevention in Somalia

2. To determine the role of punishment on crime prevention in Somalia

3. To identify the role of community education on crime prevention in Somalia

4. To determine the social development and its impact to the crime prevention

5. To promote and support the organizations and initiatives seeking to prevent crime

RESEARCH DESIGN

Descriptive research design has been used where the problem is well defined without looking at
the relationships between the variables. Backlund and Suikki (2005) explain that with descriptive
research design, the researcher aims to determine the aspects of the problem which are crucial for
a thorough analysis. With descriptive research design, the researcher has an opportunity to have a
clear view of the problem from other related sources and narrows the research around these
important items. In this case, the researcher adopts a technique that leads to exact or almost detailed
facts when carrying out the study. This study applied descriptive research design and only
secondary source have been used to collect data from research articles and various research
journals. The design was chosen because of its appropriateness in educational research findings
that yield accurate information.
LITERATURE REVIEW

Various studies have been conducted in the impact of criminal justice system of Somalia on crime
prevention in Somalia but this study reviewed the various literature and research work on criminal
justice system in Somalia.

CONCEPT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Previous arguments about criminal justice as a system Since the American Bar Foundation (ABF)
study of criminal justice over forty years ago, scholars often described criminal justice as a system
(Walker, 1992). Taken literally, this implied criminal justice agencies and institutions (Police,
courts, and corrections) were interrelated and worked toward common goals. Most scholars who
referred to criminal justice as a system did not intend this implication and instead simply used the
term as a convenient way to refer collectively to those agencies and organizations. In contrast, Van
Gigch (1978) used GST as a framework for understanding the major criminal justice components
(i.e., police, courts, and corrections), as well as additional levels of agencies and institutions. Van
Gigch identified the inputs and outputs of each agency or institution and argued that these were
regulated by the needs of the overall criminal justice system. In sum, Van Gigch argued that there
was a whole criminal justice system that was greater than the sum of the individual parts. Van
Gigch also argued that there were multiple interlocking and overlapping systems in criminal
justice, as was true with any complex organization (pp. 23–25). Specific criminal justice agencies
and agents were subsystems within the criminal justice system, which itself was a subsystem
within larger political, economic, educational, and technical systems.

In addition to these vertical (or hierarchical) systems, there were also horizontal system
connections. For example, courts that handled civil law functions had little (or nothing) to do with
criminal justice More recently, Kraska (2004) argued that the systems approach to criminal justice
facilitated the observation of criminal justice in macro-terms (i.e., looking at the big picture) and
was a useful perspective for potential reforms/ improvements of criminal justice because the
practical goal of systems theory was to make systems more effective by detecting problems and
focusing on organization and management concerns. Kraska argued that systems.

Theory was not resonated with criminal justice scholars because it was not adopted in its entirety.
Instead, bits and pieces were included and excluded where convenient (p. 44). In particular,
criminal justice was an open system that interacted with larger societal systems, but in practice
criminal justice scholars proposed closed system arguments, focusing only on what happened
within the criminal justice system itself or within particular criminal justice agencies. T

he most common objection to applying GST to criminal justice, however, was the lack of clearly
defined goals across system components (e.g., Skoler, 1977). Duffee (1990, p. 3), for example,
asserted that police, judicial, and penal agencies — even those operating in the same locality under
the same law — often have such contradictory objectives, and such independent sets of constraints,
that it becomes very hard to imagine that the primary determinates of criminal justice agency action
are the actions and needs of other criminal justice agencies‖ Other criminal justice scholars,
however, took a different stance on this issue. For example, Maguire, Howard, and Newman (1998,
p. 38) argued that criminal justice systems (and the subsystems within them) shared at least three
common goals: effectiveness, fairness, and efficiency. Hagan (1989) took a position in between
these two extremes by arguing that criminal justice was a bloosely coupled system. All of this
suggested that the concepts of general systems theory, such as input, processing, and output, could
be used to describe criminal justice agencies and functioning, but that the complex and
disorganized operational realities of criminal justice made it unclear whether GST added any
insight or content to that description.

Criminal justice is oft en classified into substantive and formal (or procedural) dimensions. The
substantive aspect of criminal justice pertains to the norms of law making; the requirements of
desert; normative prescriptions of desert, equity and fairness in the distribution of socio-economic
and political opportunities, and burdens as determinants of criminal motivations, inequality and
deserved punishments. In this sense, criminal justice demands that conducts that cause similar
consequences, irrespective of differences in form, must be subject to similar penalties or rewards,
without discrimination because of class, religion, ethnicity and origin of those engaged in those
actions. Nor must criminal law and procedure be loaded against any class, socio-economic stratum,
religious group, ethnic nationality or gender group, or be contingent on other social and political
differentiations. In reality, the substantive rules of criminal law are often inequitable, unjust and
unfair. The two broad sociological perspectives on the nature and functions of criminal law are the
consensus-functionalist and the conflict-radical paradigms. The consensus-conflict perspective
approach in criminology and sociology of law conceives criminal law as aggregation or
embodiments of the values and norms of the diverse groups in society regarding conducts that
should be prohibited, so that peace, safety and security can be guaranteed. In the context, the goal
of criminal justice is to ensure that violators of criminal law are punished, so that the prevailing
values and norms of society are protected, and harmony among individuals and groups is
guaranteed and sustained. The provisions of criminal law, undoubtedly, embody religious,
political, economic and socio-cultural values shared by a very significant proportion of the
population in society. According to Barlow (1970:15).

LAW ENFORCEMENTS

It is also necessary to stress in police actions, especially encounters between the police and citizens,
police discretion, and handling domestic violence. Police depend on the public to help them
identify crime and carry out investigations. Although people are willing to help the police, fear,
self-interest and other factors keep some from co-operating. Many people fail to call the police
because they think it is not worth the effort and cost. They do not want to spend time filling out
forms at the station, appearing as a witness, or confronting a neighbor or relative in court. In some
low-income neighborhoods, citizens are reluctant to assist the police because their past experience
has shown that contact with law enforcement "only brings trouble." Without information about a
crime, the police may decide not to pursue an investigation. Clearly, then, citizens have some
control over the work of the police through their decisions to call or not to call them. Another
significant topic is the clearance rate – the percentage of crimes known to the police that they
believe they have solved through an arrest – a basic measure of police performance – can be also
seen as a source of police deviance when police officers record only crimes which seem to be
solved easily or an offender seem to be caught without any special effort or a victim knows the
assailant. (Jacob, 1973: 27).

Cases of domestic violence are dealt by the police with special attention. Police officers are aware
that such cases can mean "a thin ice experience" and leave police officers in an ambiguous state
of mind – a wish to protect the victim and risk of making a questionable decision. From the
viewpoint of the police, domestic violence thought to be a "no-win" situation in which officers
responding to calls for help were often set upon one or both disputants. If an arrest was made, the
police found the victim often refused to co-operate with prosecution. In addition, entering a home
to deal with an emotion-laden incident was thought to be more dangerous than investigating "real"
crimes. Many officers believed that trying to deal with family disputes was a leading cause of
officer deaths and injury (Hirschel et al, 1992: 247) but research showed that solving domestic
disputes is not more dangerous to police officers than other incidents. Police need clear regulation
and knowledge of conflict resolution to solve domestic violence cases successfully, as discussed
in this volume by Ani and Gaber (2004).

Aspects of policing in post-war circumstances and peacekeeping (Garb, Er`en and Jelu, 2004), the
impact of methamphetamine on policing in south western Indiana (Huckabee and Skelton, 2004),
use of firearms (Knutsson, 2004), managerial matters (Shutte, Meyer, 2004), policing in El
Salvador (Skelton, Woods and Ponce, 2004), and elimination of kidnappers in El Salvador (Ponce,
Skelton and Woods, 2004), are also dealt with in detail in this volume.

Criminal investigation as a specific field of police work is about criminal investigators (detectives)
who investigate serious crimes. Criminal investigation is largely reactive. The job of criminal
investigators is to find out what happened by talking to people – victims, suspects, and witnesses.
On the basis of this information criminal investigators develop theories about who committed
crime and then set out to gather evidence that will lead to arrest and prosecution.

Detectives/criminal investigators must not only find the suspect, but also collect physical evidence
to support testimony that identifies a suspect. Criminal investigators rely also on forensic
techniques (Ivanovi} and Bazovi}, 2004) and psychological profiling of suspects in their efforts
to find a suspect and provide a prosecutor with substantial evidence, characteristics of victims and
witnesses (Areh and Umek, 2004), and intelligence (Makans, 2004).

The role of criminal investigator in the police organization is a significant one because the status
of a criminal investigator provides a goal to which patrol officers may aspire and gives them an
incentive to excel in their work. The public expects the police to conduct investigations. Citizens
may have more trust in the police or feel more willing to cooperate with them when they see
investigations being conducted, even if those investigations may not lead to arrests (Cole and
Smith, 1998: 198).

Criminal investigation of robbery in Slovenia (Meko, Dvorek and Dujmovi, 2004), and Croatia
(Dujmovi) and Mikaj-Todorovi), economic crime investigation (Dvorek, 2004), corruption
(Dobovek, 2004), and war crimes (Maver, 2004) are the topics discussed from diversity of
perspectives. Dilemmas about the definition of criminalistics/criminal investigation from a
Continental perspective are also of a great interest of Halilovi and Bojani (2004).

Another problem is corruption and its networks as described by Dobovek (2004). In regard to the
topic of this book, especially corruption and challenged integrity of the police are dimensions
studied closely by the authors (Body-Gendrot, 2004; Gai and Pagon, 2004; Kutnjak-Ivkovi, 2004;
Kutnjak-Ivkovi, Cajner-Mraovi and Ivanuec, 2004; Pagon, Lobnikar and An`elj, 2004; Zidar and
Klemeni, 2004).

In regard to police corruption, "grass and meat eaters" can be distinguished. "Grass eaters" are
police officers who accept pay-offs that the routines of police work bring their way. "Meat eaters"
are officers who actively use their power for personal gain. Although "meat eaters" are few in
number, their actions make headlines when they are discovered. By contrast, because "grass eaters"
are numerous, they make corruption seem acceptable and promote a code of secrecy that
stigmatises any officer who exposes corruption as a traitor. Grass eaters are the heart of the
problem and are often harder to detect. In a study of police corruption (Stoddard, 1968).

PUNISHMENT

The criminal justice system is responsible for the dispensation of justice (allocation of entitlements
and deprivations or disabilities) that is due to or deserved by the criminals, victims and society.
The system is an amalgam of loosely coupled subsystems sequentially involved in law making,
law enforcement and policing, prosecution, judgment and sentencing, administration of penal
sanctions and correctional programs. One of challenges of the criminal justice system is poor
coordination of its numerous institutions, processes and actions. As a result, the various agencies
oft en operate at cross-purposes and producing contradictory results. As Blumberg (1979:7).

The production or administration of criminal justice involves ideologies, processes, actions and
experiences. It also involves diverse institutions and groups that are politically configured to
achieve diverse social, economic and political goals. Punishment for crime constitutes the core
concern of the criminal justice system. It is often justified on the basis of retributive or utilitarian
philosophy. According to the neo-Kantian, punishment is the right of the offender and means of
restoring him to full contractual relationships with his fellow citizens and in accordance with the
logic and contemplation of social contract. Thus, punishment is viewed as an inevitable
consequence of criminality and the vindication and compensation of the law-abiding citizens. In
the context, punishment is past-oriented, and directed towards the offending conduct of the
criminal and should be graduated to fit the harm occasioned by the instant crime (von Hirsch 1976,
1993; Ashworth & Wasik 1998).

Basically, when we discuss punishment we are confronted with two points of view. The first argues
that wrongdoings should be punished, regardless of what the lawbreaker‘s future conduct can be.
H. L. A. Hart, ‗‗Prolegomenon to the principles of punishment‘‘, in H. L. A. Hart, Punishment
and Responsibility, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1968; Norval Morris, The Future of
Imprisonment, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1974. Many crimes have identifiable
victims. In the case of crimes against the person, physical or psychic injuries have been visited
upon the victim. In the case of crimes against property, someone's property has been stolen or
destroyed. In pressing charges against the offender, the victim may express hostility against the
person who injured him in a socially acceptable way.

Those who identify with the victim-not only his friends and family but those who can imagine the
same injury being done to them-may join with him in clamoring for the punishment of the offender.
If, as has been argued, the norm of reciprocity is fundamental to human interaction, this hostility
of the victim constituency toward offenders is an obstacle to the elimination of punishment from
social life. Gouldner, the Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement, 25 Am. Soc. Rav. 161
1960).

Conformists who identify with the victim are motivated to punish the offender out of some
combination of rage and fear. Conformists who identify with the offender, albeit unconsciously,
may wish to punish him for quite different reasons. Whatever the basis for the motivation to punish,
the existence of punitive reactions to deviance is an obstacle to the abolition of punishment.
However, it is by no means the sole obstacle. Even though a negligible segment of society felt
punitive toward offenders, it might still not be feasible to eliminate punishment if the social control
of deviance depended on it. Let us consider, therefore, the consequences of punishing offenders
for (a) preventing crime, (b) sustaining the morale of conformists, and (c) rehabilitating offenders.
Punishment as a Means of Crime Prevention Durkheim defined punishment as an act of vengeance.
"What we avenge, what the criminal expiates, is the outrage to morality. Durkheim, the division
of labor in society 89 (1947)."' But why is vengeance necessary? Not because of the need to deter
the bulk of the population from doing likewise. The socialization process prevents most deviant
behavior. Those who have interjected the moral norms of their society cannot commit crimes
because their self-concepts will not permit them to do so. Only the unsocialized (and therefore
amoral) individual fits the model of classical criminology and is deterred from expressing deviant
impulses by a nice calculation of pleasures and punishments Other things being equal, the
anticipation of punishment would seem to have more deterrent value for inadequately socialized
members of the group. It is difficult to investigate this proposition empirically because other
motivationally relevant factors are usually varying simultaneously, e.g., the situational
temptations" confronting various individuals, their optimism about the chances of escaping
detection, and the differential impact of the same punishment on individuals of different status.
Toby, Social Disorganization and Stake in Confortuity: Complementary Factors in the Predatory
Behavior of Young Hoodlums, 48 J. Cxm. L., C. & P.S. 12 (1957).

Clearly, though, the deterrent effect of anticipated punishments is a complex empirical problem,
and Durkheim was not interested in it. Feeling as he did that some crime is normal in every society,
he apparently decided that the crime prevention function of punishment is not crucial.

He pointed out that minute gradation in punishment would not be necessary if punishment were
simply a means of deterring the potential offender (crime prevention). "Robbers are as strongly
inclined to rob as murderers are to murder; the resistance offered by the former is not less than that
of the latter, and consequently, to control it, we would have recourse to the same means."
Durkheim, the division of labor in society 89 (1947).

Rehabilitation of offenders swells the number of conformists and therefore is regarded both by
humanitarians and by scientifically minded penologists as more constructive than punishment.
Most of the arguments against imprisonment and other forms of punishment in the correctional
literature boil down to the assertion that punishment is incompatible with rehabilitation. The high
rate of recidivism for prisons and reformatories is cited as evidence of the irrationality of
punishment. Gouldner, the Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement, 25 Am. Soc. Rav. 161
(1960)..What sense is there in subjecting offenders to the frustrations of incarceration? If
rehabilitative programs are designed to help the offender cope with frustrations in his life situation,
which presumably were responsible for his nonconformity, imprisoning him hardly seems a good
way to begin. To generalize the argument, the status degradation inherent in punishment makes it
more difficult to induce the offender to play a legitimate role instead of a nonconforming one.
Whatever the offender's original motivations for nonconformity, punishment adds to them by
neutralizing his fear of losing the respect of the community; he has already lost it. Plausible though
this argument is, empirical research has not yet verified it. The superior rehabilitative efficacy of
"enlightened" prisons is a humanitarian assumption, but brutal correctional systems have, so far as
is known, comparable re-civism rates to "enlightened" systems. True, the recidivism rate of
offenders who are fined or placed on probation is less than the recidivism rate of offenders who
are incarcerated, but this comparison is not merely one of varying degrees of punishment.
Presumably, more severe punishment is meted out to criminals who are more deeply committed to
a deviant way of life. Until it is demonstrated that the recidivism rates of strictly comparable
populations of deviants differ depending on the degree of punitiveness with which they are treated,
the empirical incompatibility of punishment and rehabilitation will remain an open question.

DETERRENCE

Theories of deterrence draw on Jeremy Bentham's philosophy of utilitarianism, captured in the

maxim, "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" (see for example: Shackleton, 1972;
Baujard, 2009). In similar vein to incapacitation, deterrence justifies punishment based on what it
will achieve in the future. Theorists claim that the pain of punishment and the costs of imposing
that pain upon the offender are outweighed by the social benefits consequently enjoyed. A
distinction has been drawn between two types of deterrence: individual (or specific) and general
deterrence.

Individual deterrence refers to the aim of imposing punishment to deter individuals who have
already offended from doing so again. General deterrence justifies the imposition of punishment
to deter other potential offenders. The logic of this theory is that if the imposition of criminal
punishment deters people from committing crimes then the general public can enjoy a greater sense
of safety and security (Hudson, 2003).
Deterrence has often been criticized for being neither effective nor morally acceptable. The
research evidence is generally inconclusive on whether punishment deters potential offenders from
committing future crimes. Furthermore, deterrence allows for punishments to be imposed that are
disproportionate to the harms done, for the innocent to be punished and for the punishment of
crimes that have not yet been committed (Hudson, 2003; see also von Hirsch etal., 1999).

PUBLIC EDUCATION AND THE MEDIA

There are some major reasons why Governments must engage with the public and the media on
crime prevention issues and their strategy. Public policy can be driven by public anxiety and
demands for tougher action, in the absence of a clear understanding of the alternatives. In almost
all countries the media tend to focus on the most violent offences and events, and are a powerful
influence shaping public attitudes towards crime. It is evident, nevertheless, that when people are
given more balanced information, they are willing to support crime prevention.

In Canada, for example, while media coverage sometimes suggests that the public would like more
police and tougher sentencing of offenders, when public views are specifically sought, strong
support for a preventive approach is often apparent. A number of public opinion surveys have
indicated strong positive attitudes towards investment in prevention programme. 37J. V. Roberts
and M. Grossman, ―Crime prevention and public opinion‖, Canadian Journal of Criminology,
vol. 32, 1990).

The Police Department recognizes most important defense against crime is awareness through
education and has been continually involved in innovative and comprehensive prevention
programming.

Community Education/Crime Prevention Specialists work cooperatively with co-workers, schools,

community groups, businesses, volunteer organizations and individual citizens to provide effective
crime prevention and promote excellent community relations throughout the city. They are an
essential element in the NPD‘s mission to partner with the community to prevent crime through
education and provide greater understanding and cooperation between the citizens and their police
department. By educating the community on crime prevention techniques and by getting citizens
involved in crime prevention activities such as neighborhood watch, can reduce the number of
crimes in any community and increase the quality of life for its citizens.

THEORY OF CRIME PREVENTION

Principles of crime prevention can be illustrated with a triangle whose three sides are labeled
"desire," "target," and "opportunity." The elimination of any one side will prevent a crime from
being committed. Crime-prevention actions that are the most effective reduce or remove the
"opportunity" for a criminal to commit a crime. A crime-prevention practitioner or older volunteer
should be knowledgeable about the technical aspects of crime prevention activities, but success in
eliciting crime- prevention actions from others lies in being an effective salesman, educator, and
resource manager. The role of the crime- prevention practitioner is to change attitudes, persuade
individuals and communities to accept their responsibilities, and initiate community action
programs. To achieve these objectives, the practitioner must develop and implement awareness
programs, educate the public about crime prevention, inform people about the limitations of the
criminal justice system, and motivate people to take individual and collective action. This paper
provides examples of effective crime prevention programs in the areas of check theft, bank
robbery, robbery of bus drivers, criminal fraud, and residential burglary.

Criminological phenomenology is another important part of criminal justice because it deals with
patterns of crime and characteristics of offenders, ways of commission of crimes and
circumstances in which certain crimes occur. Categories or groups of crime can be presented in
many ways in diverse criminological schemes using different criteria or simply using specific
criminal law chapters as categories.

Cole and Smith (1998) classify crimes into the following categories: occupational crime, organized
crime, visible crime, criminal offences without victims and political crime. Meko (1998b)
discusses patterns of crime in the following manner: basic characteristics of crime, characteristics
of the most often reported crimes, characteristics of suspects, factors of crime, property crime,
violent crime, white-collar crime, sexual crime, organizational crime, organized crime, etc.

Various approaches to preventing crime have been developed over approximately the past two
decades on the basis of a considerable amount of research and evaluation. The major fields of
crime prevention include a range of responses developed over many years, including
developmental, environmental, situational, social and community-based crime prevention, and
interventions may be classified into a number of groups. One system refers to social intervention
mechanisms, individual treatment mechanisms, situational mechanisms and policing and criminal
justice mechanisms, for example. Nick Tilley and others, Problem-Solving Street Crime: Practical
Lessons from the Street Crime Initiative (London, Home Office, 2004).

CRIME PREVENTION DUE PROCESS

Writing in the 1960s, when major changes were taking place in the United States criminal justice
system, Packer (1968, p 150) observed that ―we are faced with an interesting paradox: the more
we learn about the Is of the criminal process, the more we are instructed about its Ought and the
greater the gulf between Is and Ought appears to become‖. As an example of the Is and Ought,
Packer pointed out that while at the time, few suspects got ―adequate legal representation‖ (the
Is), a United States Supreme Court decision in the 1960s made it a requirement that everyone
charged with a felony (that is, an offence punishable by more than one year of incarceration) should
receive adequate legal representation (the Ought). Although the evolution of rights and protections
accorded citizens accused of crime differs in the United States and Australia, Packers discussion
of different values in the criminal process is relevant to Australia. Packer depicted two value
systems in the criminal process, calling them the Crime Control Model and the Due Process Model
(Table 17.2 below). The Crime Control model is concerned with the efficiency of the criminal
process, whereas the Due Process Model is concerned with the accuracy and reliability of the
decisions made. An efficient criminal justice system calls for weeding out what Packer refers to as
the factually guilty from the non-guilty cases as early as possible by police officers and
prosecutors, who make decisions based on talking with witnesses and reviewing the evidence.
Once this screening is accomplished, the case proceeds through successive stages until it is
disposed. During these later stages, Packer said that officials operate on a presumption of guilt,
meaning that, based on earlier informal investigations, they can assume that innocent individuals
have been weeded out.

CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

Includes a range of social, educational, health and training programmes, such as those that target
at-risk children or families when the children are very young, to provide them with support and
child-rearing skills. Some early intervention programmes are also referred to as developmental
crime prevention, since they try to intervene to develop resilience and social skills among children
and their families. Programmes may also target groups of children in areas where children and
young people are at particular risk, such as street children or children living in informal settlements
or disadvantaged areas. Other examples include education projects in schools, or recreation and
skills training projects for children and young people in the community, also in an attempt to
increase awareness and resilience as they grow up and develop.

According to paragraph 6 (a) of the Guidelines for the Prevention of Crime, prevention
programmes of this type: ―Promote the well-being of people and encourage pro-social behavior
through social, economic, health and educational measures, with a particular emphasis on children
and youth, and focus on the risk and protective factors associated with crime and victimization.‖

COMMUNITY, OR LOCALLY-BASED CRIME PREVENTION

Instead of targeting individuals, targets areas where the risks of becoming involved in crime or
being victimized are high. This includes areas with high levels of deprivation, both in terms of
infrastructure, services and wealth, or lack of community cohesion. This can include slums and
informal settlements, or inner-city or suburban housing projects, often areas with a concentration
of economic and social problems.

Community crime prevention often involves the active participation of local residents and
organizations in those communities and neighborhoods. They may be involved in identifying local
priorities as well as implementing responses. The term ―community can refer to small
neighborhoods, areas within a city, or small villages or towns, or in some cases groups of citizens
with particular concerns.

According to paragraph 6 (b) of the Guidelines for the Prevention of Crime, such programs aim to
―Change the conditions in neighborhoods that influence offending, victimization and the
insecurity that results from crime by building on the initiatives, expertise and commitment of
community members.
SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION

Covers approaches that aim to reduce the opportunities for people to commit crimes, to increase
the risks and costs of being caught and to minimize the benefits According to paragraph 6 (c) of
the Guidelines for the Prevention of Crime, such approaches help ―Prevent the occurrence of
crimes by reducing opportunities, increasing risks of being apprehended and minimizing benefits,
including through environmental design, and by providing assistance and information to potential
and actual victims.

REINTEGRATION PROGRAMMERS.

Crime prevention through reintegration refers to all programmes that work with children, young
people or adults already involved in the criminal justice system, including those in custody and
returning to the community. According to paragraph 6 (d) of the Guidelines for the Prevention of
Crime, it is important to ―Prevent recidivism by assisting in the social reintegration of offenders
and other preventive mechanisms.

RELATIONS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND CRIME PREVENTION

To tackle crime effectively, communities need to be consulted on the problems they face and how
to tackle them. Involving the public presents challenges as well as opportunities, but can lead to
greater trust in the criminal justice system. An increasing number of States have been adopting
evidence-based, consultative and participatory approaches to preventing and reducing crime. They
involve all sectors of society, including non-governmental organizations, academia and the private
sector. The police in particular have a key role to play in working with the public and communities
to prevent and control crime, through community-oriented policing and similar approaches that
encourage consultative and collaborative arrangements between police and citizens. Furthermore,
courts play an important role through restorative justice. Prosecutors contribute to the prevention
of crime by considering alternatives to prosecution, and legal aid providers, pro-bono lawyers and
volunteers all assist with access to justice for those without the means to pay for a defense lawyer.

Community participation in crime prevention and criminal justice involves the active cooperation
of local residents and organizations and has a long history of accomplishments in many countries
around the world. Governments are increasingly partnering with communities and civil society
organizations to prevent crime and violence because of their knowledge of local problems and
capacity to reach out to vulnerable, at-risk segments of society. In fact, community involvement
has become an essential component of crime prevention in all kinds of partnerships involving
municipalities, the police, schools, health and social services, and the private sector.

Communities can get involved in the treatment, rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders
through programmes under which offenders are conditionally released or after they re-enter
society. Prison overcrowding is a problem for many countries and there are high reoffending rates
worldwide, so policies and measures for the social reintegration and rehabilitation of offenders are
crucial. Partnerships and cooperation with communities, the business sector and non-
governmental organizations to employ ex-prisoners are critical for reducing reoffending and for
assisting with their social reintegration.

Community policing seeks to change the relationship between police and the community through
dialogue. To be effective, it needs to respond to the specific needs of the most at-risk groups, such
as women, young people, elderly people, ethnic minorities, migrants, displaced people and
refugees. Approaches include foot patrols, neighborhood police, consultative councils, police
lectures at schools and universities, and specialized activities bringing together the police and the
community, especially young people. Women‘s police stations or gender desks have been set up
in some countries to improve the police response to the unique needs of women victims and
witnesses of crime. The provision of legal services is also of utmost importance as an essential
element in a fair, humane and efficient criminal justice system based on the rule of law. In many
countries, the growing number of community-based groups providing different types of legal
services has helped to extend the reach of legal aid. In recent years, there has been growing
recognition of the role of paralegals, especially where the number of lawyers is not sufficient for
the population. They inform suspects and prisoners of their rights and help them navigate the
criminal justice system, making it more accessible to the general public.

Media professionals can contribute to a better understanding of the economic and social roots of
crime, educating the public on crime prevention strategies and on how to recognize and address
risk factors. However, the media may also negatively influence perceptions of crime. Biased or
inaccurate reporting may not explain the underlying causes. If the media over represents violent
behavior in a community, this may contribute to citizens demanding tougher measures.
Social media tools are increasingly being used to engage the public in crime prevention and
criminal justice activities and are likely to be even more predominant in the future. They offer
enormous potential for positive change, but also present challenges to security and justice.

Rapidly developing information and communication technology has radically affected the way
people live work and interact. Law enforcement agencies around the world have joined the
dialogue, using social media platforms to strengthen relationships with communities and to
communicate with the public for investigative purposes. It has become common for law
enforcement to use public social media posts about a crime that has occurred or is occurring to
obtain direct, first-hand information for an investigation.

Lastly, victims of crime can hold offenders accountable for their actions, be involved in
determining appropriate responses to crime, help to strengthen the rule of law and the
accountability of criminal justice systems, and ultimately achieve reconciliation. Communicating
the experiences of victims through channels such as victimization surveys, victim impact panels
and restorative justice mechanisms can also strengthen crime prevention and criminal justice.

The protection of victims and witnesses of crime is vital, too. They are often intimidated,
physically threatened and on occasion killed. To have more effective criminal justice systems,
victims and witness protection programmes need to be strengthened.

CONCLUSION

The legislature as one of the fundamental pillars of democratic governance is tasked with
transforming policies and frameworks into laws via the processes of enactment, repeals, revision
and regulation, but the legislature across all tiers of government in Somalia has failed especially
in the area of engendering appropriate and functioning criminal justice legislations. Clumsy
legislative processes and procedure, inadequate experience in technical areas such as policy
reform, appropriation procedures and processes, corruption, political and social differences all
combine to impede legislature in Somalia in creating criminal policies that work expeditiously.
The political elites have benefited from the delay in the administration of justice by exploiting
weaknesses in the system to delay or frustrate their trials. The tale of the criminal justice system
is one of a system that lacks the capacity and the will to conclude trials involving rich and
politically connected individuals while conversely increasing the number of indigent people held
without trial in the prisons. The role and importance of judicial institutions anywhere in the world,
but also in Somalia, is a crucial importance in combating and preventing crime. Police, prosecutors
and courts are state institutions which must play their constitutional role in the performance of
duties and responsibilities for which they are called and established. Note that so far these
institutions of justice in Somalia, based on the statistics and reports monitoring relevant institutions
and organizations, have managed to do enough to fight and prevent crime. An effective criminal
justice system is fundamental to democratic governance and the rule of law. Democracy functions
as a system with formal and informal institutional interrelated mechanisms serving the purpose of
translating social preferences into public policies. Criminal justice, because it addresses behavioral
issues, must be dynamic, proactive and culturally relevant. Therefore there is the need for an active
collaboration of all tiers and organs of governments in Somalia in order to formulate a coherent
and geological policy that countenances the input of all sectors in the criminal justice value chain.
Overall the Criminal Justice System in Somalia is in abysmal condition. All the component of
Criminal Justice System i.e. Police, Prosecution, correction & Judiciary needs reforms. Especially
the outdated and colonial era Police Department needs urgent attention of policy makers.

RECOMMENDATION

 Public control over the judiciary should be strengthened. To ensure greater transparency,
States should introduce full trial records (verbatim court recording), publish court decisions
create open databases of court decisions. Public access to open court proceedings should
not be restricted. Also, Public confidence in the criminal justice system should be
strengthened by carrying out broader human rights education programs. Professional
training of judges, police, investigators and prosecutors should be strengthened.
Specialized training of newly appointed judges to prepare them for their positions should
be organized. Also building the trust and relationship among criminal justice system
institutions is required in order to strengthen collaboration between court, prosecution,
correction, police, advocates and people who want justice.
 Making police more efficient: Corruption seems to have become institutionalized by
policemen at check points where they collect money unashamedly in the full glare of
passengers and other road users. Every checkpoint becomes by itself a toll gate, especially
for commercial vehicles, but with the difference that the proceeds went into the private
pockets of the policemen. It was found out through the study that corruption in the Somalia
police is not confined to dealings with members of the public. Some policemen during the
course of the interviews complained that they had to bribe to get their uniforms to be issued
with working riffles, to be posted to lucrative check points or to obtain barrack
accommodation.
 Civic education and public awareness are the most important instrument to fight corruption
and it should be discovered how anti-corruption education can be strengthened and
integrated into other disciplines, including human rights education, nondiscrimination,
participation, transparency and accountability and also to add the curriculum of university
class and education strategies.
 Strengthen the criminal justice system and restricted more transparent work of relevant
institutions could play vital role in the fight against corruption: punishment, Simplifications
of procedures, explored how anti-corruption, the prevalence of corruption, human rights
and interactions between public and government can curbed and decrease the corruption.
 The Somalia government to establish and strengthen law enforcement institutions that
encourages participations community members, social groups and business communities
to identify crime trends and educated in prevention strategies. The government of Somalia
should create employment opportunities for youth in order to fight crime and criminal
activities within the city and the country at large.
 The government of Somalia should establish policies that can help in minimizing crime in
the country. Increase physical infrastructures and social development that encourages
economic growth. Encourage education through sponsorships scholarships and partnership
with international educational bodies.
 Government should have preventive measures to aid in fighting crime in the county. And
here should be a body or commission in charge of crime prevention and other crime related
activities to help reduce crime in the country.
REFERENCES

An`i~, A., Gaber, M. (2004). Prohibition in Approaching a Certain Place or Person. In Meko, G.,
Pagon, M., Bojan Dobov{ek (Eds.). Policing in Central and Eastern Europe – Dilemmas of
Contemporary Criminal Justice. Ljubljana, Faculty of Criminal Justice, University of Maribor.

Areh, I., Umek, P. (2004). Personal Characteristics and Validity of Eyewitness Testimony. In
Meko, G., Pagon, M., Bojan Dobov{ek (Eds.). Policing in Central and Eastern Europe –Dilemmas
of Contemporary Criminal Justice. Ljubljana, Faculty of Criminal Justice, University of Maribor.

Bartholomew, T., Carvalho, T, James, M. (2004). Preliminary Evaluation of the Implementation

of the Problem Solving Training and Offence Behaviour Program in Community Corrections and

Prisons across Victoria, Australia. In Meko, G., Pagon, M.

Bojan Dobov{ek (Eds.). Policing in Central and Eastern Europe – Dilemmas of Contemporary

Criminal Justice. Ljubljana, Faculty of Criminal Justice, University of Maribor. Beccaria, C.

(1975). An Essay on Crimes and Punishment. Translated by H. Paolucci. Indianapolis, Bobbs
Merrill.

Beccaria, C. (2002). O zlo~inih in kaznih. Ljubljana, Pravna fakulteta in Cankarjeva zalo`ba.

Beli~, I., Pur, A. (2004). Neural Network for the Fast Gaussian distribution Test. In Meko, G.,
Pagon, M., Bojan Dobovek (Eds.). Policing in Central and Eastern Europe – Dilemmas of
Contemporary Criminal Justice. Ljubljana, Faculty of Criminal Justice, University of Maribor.

Bjorgo, T. (2004). Hate Crime or Gang Conflict? Violence between Youth Groups in a Norwegian
City. In Me{ko, G., Pagon, M., Bojan Dobov{ek (Eds.). Policing in Central and Eastern Europe –
Dilemmas of Contemporary Criminal Justice. Ljubljana, Faculty of Criminal Justice, University
of Maribor.

Bernard, T. J., & Engel, R. S. (2001). Conceptualizing criminal justice theory. Justice Quarterly,

18, 1 – 30.

Bertalanffy, L. V. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New

York7 George Braziller, Inc.
Bertalanffy, L. V. (1975). Perspectives on general system theory: Scientific-philosophical studies.
New York7 George Braziller, Inc.

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York7 John Wiley and Sons. Bowler, T.
D. (1981). General systems thinking: Its scope and applicability. New York7 Elsevier North
Holland, Inc.

Cadwallader, M. L. (1968). The cybernetic analysis of change in complex social organizations.

In W. Buckley (Ed.), Modern systems research for the behavioral scientist (pp. 437 – 440).
Chicago7 Aldine Publishing Company. Churchman, C. W. (1971). The design of inquiring
systems. New York7 Basic Books.

Cole, G. F. (1970). The decision to prosecute. Law and Society Review, 4, 313 – 343.