training activities and needs assessment: analysis of ...€¦ · training activities and needs...

Training Activities and Needs

Assessment:

Analysis of France, Italy, Romania,

Spain, and the United Kingdom

PRISM is a project co-financed by the Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme of the European Union

2

Disclaimer

This report has been produced with the financial support of the Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme of the European Commission.

The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the authors and can in no

way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or the organizations with which the authors are affiliated.

Contents of this publication may be quoted or reproduced, provided that the source

of information is acknowledged. The authors are not responsible for the use that might be made of the information contained in this report.

UNICRI would like to receive a copy of the document in which this publication is

used or quoted.

The designation employed and presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its

authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

3

Acknowledgements

This report was prepared by Arthur Brocato of the Emerging Crimes Unit of UNICRI, coordinated by Vittoria Luda di Cortemiglia. UNICRI would like to particularly thank the partners of the PRISM Project and the participants and trainers of the national

training seminars for law enforcement and legal professionals for their active contributions to this endeavour.


4

Table of Contents

List of Major Acronyms ..................................................................................................5

Introduction ...................................................................................................................6

Methodology and Training Seminar Data......................................................................6

Evaluation of Training Needs: France ..........................................................................12

Evaluation of Training Needs: Italy ..............................................................................13

Evaluation of Training Needs: Romania.......................................................................14

Evaluation of Training Needs: Spain ............................................................................15

Evaluation of Training Needs: United Kingdom...........................................................16

Comparative Aspects and Cross-cutting Issues ...........................................................17

Conclusions ..................................................................................................................18

Annex 1: Example Training Seminar Evaluation Form .................................................19

Annex 2: Training Seminar Agendas ............................................................................21

5

List of Major Acronyms

ARCI Associazione Ricreativa e Culturale Italiana

CST Community Security Trust DIGOS Divisione investigazioni generali ed operazioni speciali

ECRI European Commission against Racism and Intolerance EU European Union IGPR Inspectoratului General al Poliției Române

IPJ ILFOV Inspectoratul de poliție județean ILFOV

ISGI-CNR Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali del Consiglio Nazionale delle

Ricerche LEA Law Enforcement Agency NGO Non-Governmental Organization ODIHR OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights OSCAD Osservatorio per la Sicurezza Contro gli Atti Discriminatori OSCE Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe PRISM Preventing, Redressing and Inhibiting hate Speech in new Media ROS Raggruppamento Operativo Speciale ROTA Race on the Agenda SSCC Somali Senior Citizens Club TAHCLE Training Against Hate Crimes for Law Enforcement UK The United Kingdom UNAR Ufficio Nazionale Anti-discriminazioni Razziali UNICRI United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute

6

Introduction

The purpose of this report serves to outline the training activities for law enforcement and legal professionals carried out in Workstream 3 of the PRISM Project, while also highlighting the future training needs of the project’s five focus countries, namely France, Italy, Romania, Spain, and the UK. A series of five training courses were held, one in each of the focus countries, from October 2015 until May 2016. This training component of PRISM functioned as a basis for providing stakeholders with information on PRISM’s overall goals, and the research on legal frameworks and procedures conducted at the national and international levels within Workstream 1. Additionally, tailored, country-specific information on legal and practical means to counter hate crime and hate speech was presented by expert trainers, and, moreover, the courses offered an interactive space through which participants, could exchange views and best practices, while simultaneously creating contact networks at the national level for tackling hate crime in the future. This report serves to present data from the various seminars held, elaborate upon the methodology used to assess national training needs, and highlight the feedback given by the trainers and participants of the courses with regard to national training needs and proposed activities for the future. As a conclusion, deriving from the data received, the report highlights some of the major areas that need to be addressed across PRISM’s focus countries as hate speech continues to evolve as a serious issue.

Methodology and Training Seminar Data

As regards the methodology used for compiling this training needs assessment, UNICRI utilized various sources of information obtained and developed within the scope of work of the PRISM Project. These include material extracted from the five individual In-depth Country Studies on Hate crime and Hate speech in France, Italy,

Romania, Spain, and the UK, produced within the framework of PRISM’s Workstream 1, and direct feedback received from the trainers and participants involved in each of the five PRISM training seminars for law enforcement and legal professionals, taking place in each of the project’s focus countries between October 2015 and May 2016. Full copies of the five in-depth country studies and the comparative analysis, along with the report entitled, Repression of Hate Speech: Its Foundations in International

and European law, are available for download at: http://unicri.it/special_topics/hate_crimes/ In the case of the training seminars, which recorded attendance levels of 12-35 participants depending on the country, attendees were asked a series of questions on their initial registration forms aimed at assessing their views regarding the topics within the fields of hate crime and hate speech that they as practitioners believe need particular attention, along with those that they believe do not need to be covered. The questions were as follows:

7

Please list any specific advice, information, or skills that you would like to receive

from this training?

Which types of advice, information, or skills do you not need, or not want to

receive, from this training?

Do you have a particular question concerning hate speech online that you would

like to see addressed in the training?

Following the conclusion of the training course in each of the focus countries, participants were again asked to provide feedback, this time via the completion of a training evaluation form, which posed questions concerning the content of the course, its strengths and weaknesses, and included a section where participants could make further suggestions and provide additional information.1 Responses to this questionnaire aided UNICRI and its partners in PRISM in identifying trends and gaps in training at the national level. An example of the typical training agenda can be found in the annex of this document. The answers provided by the participants to the three abovementioned questions allowed the trainers and organizers to adjust the content discussed. Finally, the trainers themselves were presented with a short questionnaire where they were asked to give responses to three core questions, in additional to outlining the tools they planned to use in the course of their training activities: 1). According to your experience as trainer, which are the most important areas to

be addressed as relates hate crime and hate speech in a training seminar for

practitioners (law enforcement authorities and legal professionals) in your

country?

2). Please list the major topics that you have covered when carrying out training

sessions in your country over the past 3 years. Do you believe that these, or other

issues, should be covered to a greater extent?

3). In your experience, how would you rate the effectiveness of trainings on hate

crime and hate speech? Are certain sectors more responsive than others to

addressing this topic (please indicate level of responsiveness on a scale from 1 to

5)?

- Law enforcement agencies 1 2 3 4 5

- Legal professionals 1 2 3 4 5

- NGO 1 2 3 4 5

- The private sector 1 2 3 4 5

- The general public 1 2 3 4 5

1 An example of this evaluation form is provided in the annex of this report.

8

These questions targeted the core training needs of PRISM’s focus countries from the points of view of experts in the field of hate crime and hate speech, and were instrumental in crafting this analysis.

Training Seminar Data Information on each of the training seminars held in the PRISM focus countries is listed below:2

Italy, 27-29 October 2016 27 October 2016: 9:30-13:30; 14:30-17:00 28 October 2016: 10:00-13:30; 14:30-17:00 29 October 2016: 9:30-13:30 Venue: Centro Nazionale delle Ricerche, via Dei Taurini 19 – Roma (IT)

Total Attendees: 51 (37 External Participants) Law Enforcement: 18 (Carabinieri: 6 ; Polizia di Stato / OSCAD: 12 ; Private Investigator at JDPROF Srl: 1) Legal Sector: 7 (Lawyer at Segretario Ami Bari: 1 ; Private Legal Practitioners: 4 ; Lawyer at Legal Grounds Studio Legale: 1 ; Lawyer at Associazione 21 Luglio: 1) Civil Society: 9 ( ARCI: 4 ; ANCI: 1 ; Amnesty International: 1 ; Il Razzismo è una brutta storia: 1 ; Associazione Viandando: 1 ; LSGL: 1) Higher Education: 3 (Luiss Guido Carli: 1 ; Centro Studi e Ricerche IDOS: 1 ; Università Roma Tre: 1)

Trainers:

Dott. Fabio Marcelli - Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali (ISGI-CNR) Vice Quest. Agg. Stefano Chirico – Segreteria dell'Osservatorio per la Sicurezza Contro gli Atti Discriminatori (OSCAD), Polizia di Stato Cap. Raffaello Imbalzano – Raggruppamento Operativo Speciale (ROS), Arma dei Carabinieri

2 Each of the agendas for the five training seminars are provided in the annex of this report in order to

shed light on the specific issues and topics discussed.

9

Vice Quest. Agg. Rosaria Maida – Questura di Palermo Squadra Mobile, Polizia di Stato Ten. Col. Giorgio Manzi – Scuola Ufficiali, Arma dei Carabinieri Sost. Comm. Roberto Marini – Questura di Roma, Divisione investigazioni generali ed operazioni speciali (Digos), Polizia di Stato Vice Quest. Agg. Barbara Strappato – Direzione Centrale per la Polizia Stradale, Ferroviaria, delle Comunicazioni e per i Reparti Speciali della Polizia di Stato – Polizia Postale e delle Comunicazioni Prof. Mauro Valeri – Ufficio Nazionale Anti-discriminazioni Razziali (UNAR)

Staff:

Elena D’Angelo – UNICRI Cristina Nardelli – UNICRI Prof. Giuseppe Palmisano – Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali (ISGI-CNR) Rosita Forastiero - Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali (ISGI-CNR) Carla Scaramella - Associazione ARCI (PRISM Project Coordinator)

Spain, 18-20 January 2016 18 January: 15.30-18:30 19 January: 10:00-14:00; 15:00-17:00 20 January: 10:00-14:00; 15:00-17:00 Venue: Universitat de Barcelona, C./ Montalegre 6, 08001 Barcelona (ES) Total Attendees: 23 (19 External Participants) Law Enforcement: 16 (Guardia Civil: 3 ; Policia de la Generalitat: 9 ; Ayuntamento de Sabadell: 1 ; Guardia Urbana de Barcelona: 1 ; Ayuntamiento Vilassar de Mar: 1 ; Ayuntamento de Sant Vincenc dels Horts: 1) Prosecutors: 3 (Fiscalía Provincial de Barcelona: 1 ; Fiscalía de Area Vilanova i La Geltrù: 1 ; Fiscalía de Area Vilanova-Gavà: 1) Trainers and Staff:

10

David Martín Suboficial y Responsable del Equipo de Gestión de la Diversidad Policía Local de Fuenlabrada

Sara Giménez Abogada y Directora del Dept. Igualdad y Discriminación

La Fundación Secretariado Gitano

Olga Jubany Director: European Social Research Unit Universitat de Barcelona

Arthur Brocato PRISM Project Officer UNICRI

Romania, 22-24 March 2016

22 March: 10:00-13:30; 14:30-17:00 23 March: 10:00-13:30; 14:30-17:00 24 March: 9:30-13:30 Venue: Casa Națiunilor Unite (UN House), B-dul. Primăverii nr. 48A, București, România

Total Attendees: 17 (14 External Participants) Law Enforcement: 11 (I.G.P.R.: 4 ; I.P.J. Ilfov: 1 ; Directia Generala de Politie a Municipiului Bucuresti: 2 ; Inspectoratul General al Jandarmeriei Române: 3 ; Insperctorat de Politie Judet Prahova: 1) Legal Sector: 2 (Consiliul National pentru Combaterea Discriminarii: 2) Civil Society: 1 (International Organization for Migration: 1) Trainers and Staff:

Costica-Marian Mandache Executive Director Romani CRISS

Mirela Duduman Ofiţer poliţie / Inspectorul I.G.P.R.

Arthur Brocato PRISM Project Officer UNICRI

France, 13-15 April 2016 13 April: 9:30-13:00; 14:00-17:00 14 April: 10:30-12:30; 13:30-17:30 15 April: 10:00-13:00 Venue: La Ligue des Droits de l’Homme, 138 Rue Marcadet – Paris (FR)

Total Attendees: 14 (9 External Participants)

Law Enforcement: 2 (DCPJ / SDLC / OCLCTIC / Internet Section: 2)

11

Legal Sector: 3 (Amnesty International: 1 ; private practitioner: 1 ; UNICEF: 1) Civil Society: 3 (Amnesty International/Psychology: 1 ; NGO Infojeunesse : 1 ; MRAP : 1) Higher Education: 1 (Institution Universitè Catho Lyon 2: 1) Trainers and Staff:

London, 10-12 May 2016

10 May: 10:00-13:30; 14:30-17:00 11 May: 10:00-13:30; 14:30-17:00 12 May: 9:30-13:30 Venue: Resource for London, 356 Holloway Road, London, N7 6PA (UK)

Total Attendees: 22 (17 External Participants)

Law Enforcement: 5 (The Metropolitan Police: 3 ; Hampshire Constabulary: 2) Civil Society: 12 (Association of Panel Members: 1 ; The Traveller Movement: 2 ; Witness Confident: 1 ; 17-24-30 No To Hate Crime Campaign: 1 ; CST: 1 ; SSCC: 1 ; Youmanity: 1 ; Vivarta: 1 ; G4S Risk Consulting: 1 ; REDRESS: 2) Trainers and staff:

Mr. Asif Sadiq Head of Equality & Inclusion City of London police

Dr. Nikolaos Theodorakis Lecturer and Fellow University of Oxford

Ms. Poornima Karunacadacharan Senior Policy Officer Race on the Agends (Rota)

Ms. Roxana Preotescu PRISM Project Officer Race on the Agends (Rota)

Frédérique Ast Conseillère juridique anti-discrimination Défenseur des Droits

Olivier Robidou Chef du groupe presse de la Brigade de la Répression de la Délinquance contre la Personne

Direction Régionale de la Police Judiciaire

Elise Vermeersch

Chargée de projets UNICRI

Melanie Schoger

Chargée de projets Europe La Ligue de L'Enseignement

Eve-Laure Gay Chargée de projets Europe La Ligue de L'Enseignement

12

Mr. Arthur Brocato PRISM Project Officer UNICRI

The next sections cover the training needs for France, Italy, Romania, Spain, and the UK, while the final section offers a set of conclusions for moving forward in addressing the training needs associated with hate-based crime across the broader spectrum of these focus countries, and attempts to identify trends that can be identified with respect to training for Europe as a whole.

Evaluation of Training Needs: France

As outlined in the In-Depth Country Report for France, the French legal system has been highly effective in addressing the issue of hate speech. However, the main obstacle to its effectiveness concerns issues pertaining to the international sphere and how to concretely mitigate hate speech online when offences span multiple national jurisdictions. This is particularly true for cases involving social networks. For this reason, having a clear understanding of regional and international legal frameworks, in additional to the national one, is a key issue for French stakeholders seeking to increase their knowledge and practical capabilities in this area. Bolstering training on international aspects as a key component in any seminar or learning exercise will help participants to utilize existing international protocols and mechanisms to address emerging hate speech challenges affecting multiple states, while also providing a basis for stakeholders to propose and develop new guidelines in this area. Training Feedback:

Regarding the comments made by the course trainer, Ms. Frédérique Ast, she stated that: “Besides the issues of hate speech and hate crime, it may be interesting to add

the issue of non-discrimination law. The topics are highly interrelated. Even if I have

dedicated one chapter to ethnic profiling and have also mentioned specific

discrimination cases (e.g. on religious signs or else), that was marginal.”

From the point of view of the course participants, the following major issues were mentioned for strengthening future training initiatives: Gaining a perspective on hate speech from a magistrate, IT professional, or social media expert (law enforcement and legal speakers were present) Developing a list of websites known for hosting hate speech Several participants mentioned the importance to train judges, not only LEAs. As for the strengths of the training, participants specifically mentioned:

• Legal soundness of the learning;

13

• The international scope with consequences for national law;

• Practical aspects (court judgements);

• The legal basis and court case examples;

• The quality of speakers.

Evaluation of Training Needs: Italy

For Italy, one of the major legislative issues that remains pertains to the country’s need to ratify the Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime, which concerns the criminalisation of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through computer systems. As in the case of France, while the national legislative framework appears strong, increased training of practitioners is needed. An array of various initiatives have been realised with respect to training law enforcement officers on the issue of hate-based crime, including the TAHCLE (Training Against Hate Crimes for Law Enforcement) programme carried out with the support of OSCE-ODIHR and focusing on Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, and multiple initiatives coordinated by OSCAD to address LGBT discrimination and bias against the Roma community, to name a few. Additionally, highly specialized units have been developed within Italian law enforcement agencies to address hate crime issues. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) has recommended that Italian authorities strengthen their efforts to provide teachers with training on intercultural education and the human rights dimension of civic education. Moreover, the network of Italian associations on racial discrimination has recommended creating a programme for the judiciary to ensure a clear and consistent understanding of the forms and thresholds of hate speech under international law.3 One of the Italian contributors (UNAR) to the research being carried out in WS1 has also suggested that specific funding be allocated for training activities or other forms of communication through the Internet, television, press, and so on. Training Feedback:

Feedback from trainers:

• There is a need to involve prosecutors in similar training events, such as the ones held in PRISM.

3 For more information on these, and other initiatives, please see: Italy: In-depth Country Study on

Hate Crime and Hate Speech conducted within the Framework of the PRISM Project, available at: http://unicri.it/special_topics/hate_crimes/

14

• There is a good level of commitment from the LEAs, highlighted by the fact that representatives from all of the different LEAs in Italy (OSCAD; Polizia Postale, Carabinieri etc.) are involved on different levels in the fight against hate crime. Moreover, each of these LEAs took part to the PRISM seminar, both as trainers and trainees.

• More training is needed on the International and European foundations for hate crime repression.

Regarding the sectors most responsive to hate crime training courses in Italy, Dr. Marcelli rated, on a scale from 1 to 5, LEAs the highest (5), followed by legal professionals (3), NGOs (2), the general public (2), and, lastly, the private sector (1). Feedback from participants:

• Several participants would have liked to have more time for the training, as they felt that the time given was not enough to properly and exhaustively discuss the topic;

• A majority of participants suggested to include teachers, community associations, more elements from civil society at large (citizens, students), social workers and judges in the training course.

• They felt that while the seminar had a large number of law enforcement officials, the training event could have been presented to a wider audience (suggestions included formulating local and open trainings in cooperation with associations or schools).

• Some participants suggested having a deeper focus on prevention and offering more information on national legislation.

Evaluation of Training Needs: Romania

Based on PRISM’s initial research for the Romanian In-depth country study, deficiencies were noted with respect to the level of awareness and training for judicial officials and members of law enforcement concerning hate speech. As a concrete issue, the report noted that judges tend not to punish offenders who make discriminatory public statements, effectively removing deterrents against propagating hate speech.

Moreover, with regard to the legal framework, ECRI has pointed out that the high incidence of hate speech in traditional media, as well as on the Internet, requires adequate criminalization, in addition to the actions of redress provided by the Anti-discrimination and Audiovisual Laws.

The need for more training, particularly for judicial officials and other stakeholders was echoed by the trainers and participants of the PRISM training seminar.

15

Trainers stressed that stakeholders in any training on this issue should be better informed regarding the laws in place, while also being familiarized with practical case studies. Participants should also be introduced to solutions from a variety on contexts from which they can draw upon to solve issues present in the Romanian context. In future activities, one of the trainers also stressed the need to include more stakeholders in single training events, including psychologists, judges, prosecutors, and journalists. Both trainers ranked the private sector lowest with regard to its responsiveness to training courses on hate crime and hate speech issues in Romania, while they believed that NGOs maintained the highest level on this issue. In future training events, participants stressed the need to include more:

• Local, practical examples of hate speech, particularly in the Romanian context;

• Involvement from the country’s education ministry;

• Involvement of religious figures / community influencers.

Evaluation of Training Needs: Spain

Entities such as the Council for the promotion of Equal Treatment of all Persons without Discrimination on the Grounds of Racial or Ethnic Origin and the Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia (Observatorio Español del Racismo y la Xenofobia), among others, carry out training for key stakeholders in the field of hate crime and discrimination. However, as pointed out in the in-depth country report for Spain, training and awareness on anti-discrimination law remain key issues for tackling hate-based crime in the Spanish context. This concerns awareness for legal operators, the media, politicians and a large part of the general public. ECRI has particularly stressed the need for further training for judges and all involved actors in the judicial process. The creation of the office of a Special Prosecutor that is responsible for the task of liaising with the Legal Studies Centre of the Ministry of Justice for the coordination of the basic training of prosecutors in relation to the investigation of crimes committed through the Internet is a welcome first step. Moreover, the Ministry of Interior has developed a specific Protocol for Police Forces in order to make sure that any hate-motivated crime is registered as such. Additionally, with respect to the general public, the Institute of Women and Equal Opportunities (under the Ministry of Health) finances the Assistance Service for Victims of Racial or Ethnic Discrimination, which has been implemented by a network of specialized NGOs in order to reach out to the people in the most vulnerable situations and to assure the provision of independent advice. The

16

Institute has also been working on a Practical Guide for citizens and practitioners for synthesizing basic information on discrimination and hate crime. Training Feedback:

The trainers of the PRISM seminar in Barcelona noted the following key areas with regard to the training needs of the country:

• Developing an understanding the concept of hate crime and descriptions of vulnerable groups;

• Increasing knowledge of the victim context;

• Awareness of legislation and its application;

• Knowledge of effective mechanisms to fight these issues;

• Forging better coordination between NGOs and other professional entities. Both trainers saw the general public as having the lowest level of responsiveness to training with respect to hate crime, while NGOs had the highest level in their opinions. For future training events, participants generally advocated having:

• More trainers in order to gain numerous points of view;

• A stronger focus on real world law enforcement operations;

• A focus on guidelines available,

• A presentation concerning police performance in this area;

• More practical examples, and more time to focus on specific themes;

• A judge or prosecutor as an additional trainer;

• A more in-depth view on how Spain fits into the global context regarding this issue;

• Coverage of more online aspects;

• A greater focus on victim groups;

• Increased participation from prosecutors;

• A longer training in general.

Evaluation of Training Needs: United Kingdom

As discussed in the in-depth country report: “The UK maintains a relatively strong

legal framework and set of mechanisms for tackling discrimination, hate speech, and

hate crime. The consolidation of various anti-discrimination laws to create the

Equality Act 2010 effectively centralized and made accessible comprehensive

legislation on discrimination.

Northern Ireland as well, through the enactment of the Northern Ireland Act (1998),

17

Race Relations (Northern Ireland) Order (1997), and Public Order (Northern Ireland)

Order (1987), among others, have also contributed in the country having a strong

legal framework in place to deal with hate-based and discriminatory incidents.”

Adherence to international protocols and a lack of awareness among stakeholders, in addition to hurdles faced by victims in accurately reporting hate crime, remain as major issues for the UK to address. Training Feedback:

Within the framework of the UK training seminar, the trainers mentioned the following areas and topics as being necessary for stakeholders to improve their capacity for tackling hate crime related incidents:

• Understanding the conceptual issues, definitions, and case law;

• Developing a hands-on approach on how to report and prevent hate crime, with role playing being a useful tool;

• Victim experiences are important;

• Engagement between law enforcement and legal actors is paramount;

• There is a need to address/discuss barriers to reporting. The private sector was again ranked by the trainers as having the lowest level of responsiveness in this field, while NGOs were deemed to have the highest. Legal professionals also ranked high among the trainers. From the point of view of the participants, future training events could additionally incorporate the following elements:

• Address more bias areas, specifically disability / alternative subcultures;

• The detailed description of the Anti-Defamation’s Hate pyramid useful, should be included in any training events;

• Mixed agency interaction was great, useful for future initiatives / building relationships;

• More focus on investigations, operations, and practical aspects;

• Lend a deeper focus to UK law;

• Involve social media firms and policymakers

• Foster development at the group level; promote the development of a campaign as next step;

• Freedom of expression vs hate speech debate is important to expand upon, and extra time was requested when addressing this issue in the future.

Comparative Aspects and Cross-cutting Issues

As a result of the training seminars held, a number of cross-cutting issues emerged that seem to affect each of the countries involved. Firstly, the need for training

18

judges emerged as a major topic of discussion at many of the events, and was mentioned at all seminars in come capacity. Additionally, the issue of reporting, including how to report hate crime and clearly convey information to the general public was also a topic of concern. Moreover, understanding the legal frameworks in place, both at the national and international levels, was an area of interest for many of the course attendees. Each state varies with reference to the legal frameworks in place and the international protocols to which they adhere; however, the development of a streamlined, easily understandable national fact sheet for practitioners and the general public that explains national frameworks to combat hate crime could be a useful tool for future projects. Finally, awareness remains as a major issue for all sectors, particularly the private sector and general public. As a next step, future initiatives should foster increased cooperation among the private sector, namely social media companies, journalists, policymakers, educators, and psychologists, in additional to law enforcement, legal professionals, academics, and NGOs. Cooperation of this kind can lead to the creation of multi-sectorial national bodies to address hate crime and hate speech issues, the development of well-funded and properly balanced public awareness campaigns, and the formulation of guidelines and strengthened legislation at the national level.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the five training seminars held for law enforcement and legal professionals brought together not only key stakeholders from these fields, but also allowed for the participation of actors from civil society, academia, and international institutions. The information gathered from these events, along with the data obtained from the in-depth country reports, provided a basis for evaluating the training needs of stakeholders in PRISM’s five focus countries, while also shedding light on common trends that could be beneficial for other European countries. Participants in each of the seminars held agreed that hate speech needs to be tackled via a comprehensive approach, and the high level of momentum expressed for addressing this issue should be harnessed to foster positive change in a rapidly emerging field of criminality that has a wide impact on social cohesion and prosperity.

19

Annex 1: Example Training Seminar Evaluation Form

PRISM - Preventing, Redressing and Inhibiting hate Speech in new Media

Seminar for Law Enforcement and Legal Professionals London, 10-12 May 2016

Participant Evaluation Form

Please take a moment to answer the following questions. Your comments are an

important contribution and will help us improve the content, methodology and general

organization of training in the future. All of your responses will be taken into

consideration for future training programs. This evaluation is divided into three key

categories: Presentation, Content and Impact. Please rate each indicator using the

following system: 1=Poor, 2=Below Average, 3=Average, 4=Good, 5=Excellent.

Presentation Indicators

1. Clearly and engagingly presented 1 2 3 4 5

2. Timing and pacing were appropriate for the audience 1 2 3 4 5

3. Participants had sufficient opportunities to discuss and become

involved 1 2 3 4 5

4. Activities were relevant and engaging 1 2 3 4 5

5. Effective use of visual aids (flip chart, PowerPoint, DVD, diagrams, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5

Content Indicators

6. Content was well organized 1 2 3 4 5

7. Content was relevant and useful 1 2 3 4 5

8. Material was clear and appropriate for the audience 1 2 3 4 5

9. Material was supported with helpful examples, definitions and/or data 1 2 3 4 5

Impact Indicators

10. Learning took place 1 2 3 4 5

11. Anticipated results / goals were achieved 1 2 3 4 5

12. Material will be personally helpful 1 2 3 4 5

13. Participation was a worthwhile use of my time 1 2 3 4 5

14. Presentation offered new insights and/or knowledge 1 2 3 4 5

Comments

2. Please complete the following sentences regarding the training that you just received:

In my daily work I will have difficulties in applying……………………………………………

The course might have been more efficient if…………………………………………………..

20

I thought that……………………………………………………..was a useful learning tool.

3. Please elaborate upon the following questions:

Do you think that you will perform differently in your practice as a result of

participating in this training, why?

What do you feel were the strengths of this training?

What do you feel were the weaknesses of this training?

How can we improve this training?

Do you think that the overall objective of the course was achieved?

Do you have any other comments, suggestions, or information?

Thank you very much for your contribution!

21

Annex 2: Training Seminar Agendas


Seminario per forze dell’ordine e giuristi 27-29 Ottobre 2015

Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali (ISGI-CNR), via Dei Taurini 19 – Roma Aula Piano Terra

Agenda Martedì, 27 Ottobre

9:30 – 13:30 (pausa caffè 11:15-11:30)

• Registrazione partecipanti

• Discorso di apertura e benvenuto

• Presentazione del progetto PRISM, approccio, contenuti del training

• Definizione dei concetti principali: discriminazione diretta/indiretta, molestia, razzismo, crimini d’odio, discorso d’odio online

Pausa Pranzo

14:30 – 17:00

• Inquadramento legale a livello internazionale ed europeo

• Inquadramento legale a livello nazionale in Italia ed efficacia degli strumenti legislativi

• Procedure legislative e giurisprudenza a livello europeo e nazionale

Mercoledì, 28 Ottobre

10:00 – 13:30 (pausa caffè 11:30-11:45)

• Discorsi d’odio vs libertà d’espressione

• Come indagare e denunciare casi di crimini o discorsi d’odio Pausa Pranzo

14:30 – 17:00

• Focus sul razzismo in Italia oggi

• Profilazione etnica: pro e contro

Giovedì, 29 Ottobre

9:30 – 13:30 (pausa caffè 11:30-11:45)

• L’approccio alle vittime

• La collaborazione con i social media nelle indagini sui discorsi d'odio

• Auto-valutazione finale e valutazione del seminario

• Conclusioni


22

Lista dei Relatori: Dott. Fabio Marcelli - Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali (ISGI-CNR) Vice Quest. Agg. Stefano Chirico – Segreteria dell'Osservatorio per la Sicurezza Contro gli Atti Discriminatori (OSCAD), Polizia di Stato Cap. Raffaello Imbalzano – Raggruppamento Operativo Speciale (ROS), Arma dei Carabinieri Vice Quest. Agg. Rosaria Maida – Questura di Palermo Squadra Mobile, Polizia di Stato Ten. Col. Giorgio Manzi – Scuola Ufficiali, Arma dei Carabinieri Sost. Comm. Roberto Marini – Questura di Roma, Divisione investigazioni generali ed operazioni speciali (Digos), Polizia di Stato Vice Quest. Agg. Barbara Strappato – Direzione Centrale per la Polizia Stradale, Ferroviaria, delle Comunicazioni e per i Reparti Speciali della Polizia di Stato – Polizia Postale e delle Comunicazioni Prof. Mauro Valeri – Ufficio Nazionale Anti-discriminazioni Razziali (UNAR) Organizzatori / Opening: Elena D’Angelo – Istituto delle Nazioni Unite di Ricerca sul Crimine e la Giustizia Penale (UNICRI) Cristina Nardelli – Istituto delle Nazioni Unite di Ricerca sul Crimine e la Giustizia Penale (UNICRI) Prof. Giuseppe Palmisano – Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali (Direttore ISGI-CNR) Rosita Forastiero - Istituto di Studi Giuridici Internazionali (ISGI-CNR) Carla Scaramella - Associazione ARCI (Coordinatore progetto PRISM)


23


Seminario para policías y juristas 18-20 de enero de 2016

Universidad de Barcelona, C./ Montalegre 6, 08001 Barcelona (ES)

Programa

Lunes, 18 de enero – Sala de Juntes

15:30 – 18:30 (pausa café 17:00)

• Discurso de apertura y bienvenida

• Presentación del proyecto PRISM, enfoque y contenido de la formación

• Definición de los conceptos principales: discriminación directa / indirecta, diversidad social, delitos de odio, discurso del odio online

Martes, 19 de enero – Aula 222

10:00 – 14:00 (pausa café 11:30)

• Gestión policial de la diversidad social y racismo en España

• Legislación española e internacional y principales recomendaciones y resoluciones internacionales discriminación y delitos de odio: ONU, OSCE-ODDHIR, Unión Europea (FRA) y Consejo de Europa (ECRI)

Pausa Comida

15:00 – 17:00

• Discurso de odio punible. Límites a la libertad de expresión y a la libertad ideológica o de conciencia

Miercoles, 20 de enero – Aula 222

10:00 – 14:00 (pausa café 12:00)

• Identificaciónes policiales y perfil etnico. Estereotipos

• Discriminación y delitos de odio - La importancia de las víctimas

• La colaboración con los social media en la investigación sobre discurso del odio

• Principales problemas que impiden o condicionan la efectiva investigación y persecución de delitos de odio y discriminación

Pausa Comida

15:00 – 17:00

• Pautas para la investigación y enjuiciamiento de delitos de odio y discriminación

• Evaluación del seminario

• Conclusiones

Los ponentes son Sra. Sara Giménez Giménez, Abogada y Directora del Departamento de Igualdad y Discriminación a La Fundación Secretariado Gitano; Sr. David Martín Abánades, Suboficial de la Policía

Local de Fuenlabrada y Responsable del Equipo de Gestión de la Diversidad; y Dr. Olga Jubany, Directora de La Unidad de Investigación Social Europea a la Universitat de Barcelona.


24

PRISM – Prevenire, Redresare și Inhibare a discursului instigator la ură în noua

mass-media Seminar de formare a autorităților responsabile de aplicarea legii și a profesioniștilor

din domeniul juridic

Casa Națiunilor Unite, B-dul. Primăverii nr. 48A, București, România

22 – 24 Martie 2016

Traineri: Mirela DUDUMAN (I.G.P.R.), Marian MANDACHE (Romani CRISS)

Agendă

Marți, 22 Martie 10:00 – 13:30 ( pauză de cafea la 11:30)

• Deschiderea seminarului și introducerea sesiunii de training - Arthur BROCATO, UNICRI

• Prezentarea proiectului PRISM - Angela SIMA, Fundația Dezvoltarea Popoarelor

• Prezentarea situației curente privind combaterea discriminării în România- Bogdan BALDOVIN, Consiliul Național de Combatere a Discriminării

• Definițiile conceptelor principale: discriminarea directă/indirectă, rasismul, infracțiunile inspirate de ură, discursul instigator la ură din domeniul online

Pauză de prânz 14:30 – 17:00

• Cadrul legal la nivel european/internațional

• Cadrul legal la nivel național în România și eficiența lui

• Procedurile legale și jurisprudența în U.E. și în România

Miercuri, 23 Martie

10:00 – 13:30 (pauză de cafea la 11:30)

• În prim plan: rasismul în România de astăzi

• În prim plan: discursul instigator la ură versus libertatea de exprimare Pauză de prânz 14:30 – 17:00

• Cum să se cerceteze și raporteze discursul instigator la ură și infracțiunile inspirate de ură

• Constituirea profilurilor etnice: pro și contra Joi, 24 Martie

9:30 – 13:00/30 (pauză de cafea la 11:00)

• Cum să abordăm victimele

• Pașii de urmat pentru a raporta cazurile de discurs instigator la ură pe rețelele de socializare

• Auto-evaluare finală și evaluarea seminarului de training

• Concluzii

PRISM este un proiect co-finanțat de Programul pentru Drepturile cetățenești și fundamentale din

cadrul Uniunii Europene.

25


Atelier de formation pour les autorités policières et les professionnels du droit 13-15 Avril 2016

La Ligue des Droits de l’Homme, 138 Rue Marcadet - Paris

Agenda Mercredi 13 Avril

09h30 – 13h00 (coffee break à 11h30)

• Discours d‘ouverture et de bienvenue

• Presentation du projet PRISM, approche et contenu de la formation

Introduction générale:

• Définition générique des principaux concepts : racisme, discrimination, crime de haine, Discours de haine etc.

• Enjeux de la lutte contre le racisme, la discrimination, les crimes et les discours haineux

• La haine en chiffres

• Pourquoi les crimes de haine sont-ils des crimes différents ?

• Documentaires et etude de cas Pause déjeuner

14h00 – 17h00 Crimes Haineux

• Cadre juridique international et européen (Décision-cadre 2008/913/JAI du Conseil sur la lutte contre certaines formes et manifestations de racisme et de xénophobie au moyen du droit pénal, CERD, Convention d'Istanbul)

• Obligations positives des Etats : mesures préventives, répressives, mesures d’enquête (jurisprudence de la CEDH, de la CEDAW etc.)

• Cadre juridique français (articles 132-76 et 77 du Code pénal, cas des infractions commises contre les personnes vulnérables)

• Grille d’analyse pour reconnaître les crimes de haine : les indicateurs de la haine

Profilage Ethnique et Controles D’Identite au Facies: droit international, comparé et français Jeudi 14 Avril


• Comment coopérer avec les réseaux sociaux dans les enquêtes pour crime haineux

• Comment enquêter et rapporter les crimes et discours haineux Pause déjeuner

13h30 – 17h30 Discours de Haine

Introduction à la question du discours haineux (définition, justification de la répression) • Cadre juridique international et européen des crimes haineux (Décision-cadre 2008/913/JAI, Pacte sur les droits civils et politiques, CERD, CEDH etc.) • Focus sur la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme : liberté d’expression/discours de haine ; respect des convictions religieuse/liberté d’expression etc.

26

• Droit français : cadre juridique (loi du 29 juillet 1881 sur la presse etc.) et illustrations jurisprudentielles : discours de haine/humour (affaires Dieudonné), discours de haine/caricatures (Charlie Hebdo), affaires Taubira, Le Pen etc.

Vendredi 15 Avril


• Etude de cas

• Auto-évaluation et évaluation de la formation

• Remarques finales

Formateur: Dr. Frédérique Ast, conseillère juridique anti-discrimination auprès du Défenseur des Droits Intervention spéciale: Capitaine Olivier Robidou, Chef du groupe presse de la Brigade de la Répression de la Délinquance contre la Personne, Direction Régionale de la Police Judiciaire


27


Training workshop for law enforcement authorities and legal professionals Resource for London, 356 Holloway Road, London, N7 6PA

10 – 12 May 2016

Trainers: Sgt. Asif Sadiq, Head of Equality & Inclusion – City of London Police Dr. Nikolaos Theodorakis, Lecturer & Fellow – University of Oxford Special Interventions:

Mr. Arthur Brocato, Project Officer – UNICRI Ms. Poornima Karunacadacharan, Senior Policy Officer – Rota Inspector Scott Johnson – Hampshire Constabulary Mr. Matthew Hale – Witness Confident

Agenda Tuesday, 10 May

10:00 – 13:30 (coffee break at 11:30)

• Opening and welcome remarks

• Presentation of PRISM and approach/contents of training

• Definition of main concepts: direct/indirect discrimination, racism, hate crime, online hate speech

Lunch Break

14:30 – 17:00

• Legal framework at the International / European level

• Legal framework at the national level in the UK and its effectiveness

• Legal Procedures and Case law in the EU and the UK

Wednesday, 11 May

10:00 – 13:30 (coffee break at 11:30)

• In focus: racism in the UK today

• In focus: hate speech vs. freedom of speech Lunch Break 14:30 – 17:00

• How to investigate and report hate crime and hate speech • The Issue of Ethnic profiling

Thursday, 12 May

9:30 – 13:00 (coffee break at 11:00)

• How to approach the victims

• Steps to report online hate speech on social media

• Final self-evaluation and evaluation of the training seminar

• Concluding Remarks


training activities and needs assessment: analysis of ...€¦ · training activities and needs...

Documents