SERA Preventing radicalisation in prisons -

P a g e | 9 ERASMUS+ N° 580247-EPP-1-2016-1-FR-EPPKA3-IPI-SOC-IN There were five participants on the programme. The evaluation results showed that there was a mixed impact of the programme. While the theoretical framework was good, the success rate was very poor. Two of the offenders left the Netherland to go to Syria. Both are believed to have died. Of the remaining three, one was believed never to have been radicalised, another had been de-radicalised and the last one had disengaged but was still radicalised. This puts the success rate to 1 out of 5. The evaluation pointed out to important factors that need to be addressed in programmes. Relationship between the various stakeholders needs to be seriously addressed especially that between the courts, the public prosecution and the probation services. The staff needed more training on extremism and management should be aware of the problems faced by staff and give their on-going support. Other potential problems that need to be address when creating such programmes included clear communication between all the key stakeholders (prison, probation, courts, police and public prosecution) and what is acceptable success in these programmes, as having a total success rate is impossible. As Schuurman and Bakker (2016) argued “a 100% success rate was not reasonable and that “with a process as complicated as the reintegration (violent) extremists, upsets are almost inevitable.” RESEARCH PROBLEMS Research in prison always proves problematic (Liebling, 1999). This is due to the secret nature of prisons and the reluctance of ministries, policy makers and prison management, to let researchers in. When prison research is combined with violent extremist offenders, that problems multiply. Not only is there a problem in defining concepts such as radicalisation, and recruitment on one hand, but trying to address the paradox of rehabilitation and reintegration on the other poses its own problems. Although there is a lot of pressure for this research, and researchers tend to address the research question, there is a lacunae of empirical results. Silke (2017) identified a number of issues that are require further attention. These are : 1. More attention is needed in identifying the social and psychological underpinnings in prison radicalisation. 2. Studies have failed to identify the variables that explain why people, living under the same conditions, do not all become radicalised. What are the intervening variables that stop radicalisation ? 3. Identifying individuals at risk is a must, however in order to do so, more research is needed to identify the psycho-social mechanisms at play that lead to radicalisation. 4. Disengagement from violence needs to be seriously examined. Although there is a growing body of literature that focuses on this, the academic community still needs to