ICCT-Veldhuis-Designing-Rehabilitation-Reintegration-Programmes-March-2012(1)

Designing Rehabilitation and
Reintegration Programmes for Violent
Extremist Offenders:
A Realist Approach
Tinka Veldhuis, MSc.
ICCT Research Paper
March 2012
Abstract
InthisResearchPaper,ICCT–TheHagueResearchFellowTinkaVeldhuismakesanargumentfora
Realistapproachtorehabilitationandreintegrationprogrammesforinmateswithaterroristor
extremistbackground.Accordingly,withintheRealistframework,itisstressedthattheoutcomesof
rehabilitationprogrammesshouldbeunderstoodasaproductofthepolicymechanismsandthe
contextinwhichtheyareimplemented.Tomaximisethelikelihoodofsuccessitisimportantto
makeexplicittheunderlyingassumptionsabouthowtheinterventionshould,giventheunique
context,contributetoachievingitsobjectives.Thispaperendeavourstohighlightsomeofthekey
questionsthatneedtobeansweredbeforeandduringtheimplementationofrehabilitationpolicies.

About the Author 
Ms.TinkaM.Veldhuis,MSc.isaResearchFellowattheClingendaelSecurityandConflictProgramme
(CSCP)oftheNetherlandsInstituteofInternationalRelations‘Clingendael’.Inaddition,sheisaPhD
CandidateandlecturerattheSociologyDepartmentoftheUniversityofGroningen.InherPHDthesis,
sheexaminesinternationalperspectivesondetentionandre‐integrationpoliciesforterrorists.Atthe
UniversityofGroningen,sheteachesanMAcourseonradicalisationandterrorism.Shewasactively
involvedintheproject`Radicalisation,RecruitmentandtheEUCounter‐RadicalisationStrategy’,which
waspartoftheSixthFrameworkProgrammeoftheEuropeanCommission.In2010,shewasinvolved
inevaluationresearchcommissionedbytheDutchMinistryofSecurityandJustice,toevaluateDutch
detentionpoliciesforterrorismoffenders.HerareasofinterestincludetheSociologyandPsychology
ofviolentextremism,de‐ andcounter‐radicalisation,(counter‐)terrorism,andcounter‐terrorism
evaluations.
About ICCT - The Hague
TheInternationalCentreforCounter‐Terrorism(ICCT)–TheHagueisanindependentknowledge
centrethatfocusesoninformationcreation,collationanddisseminationpertainingtothe
preventativeandinternationallegalaspectsofcounter‐terrorism.ThecoreofICCT’sworkcentreson
suchthemesasde‐ andcounter‐radicalisation,humanrights,impunity,theruleoflawand
communicationinrelationtocounter‐terrorism.Functioningasanucleuswithintheinternational
counter‐terrorismnetwork,ICCT–TheHagueendeavourstoconnectacademics,policymakersand
practitionersbyprovidingaplatformforproductivecollaboration,practicalresearch,exchangeof
expertiseandanalysisofrelevantscholarlyfindings.Byconnectingtheknowledgeofexpertstothe
issuesthatpolicymakersareconfrontedwith,ICCT–TheHaguecontributestothestrengtheningof
bothresearchandpolicy.Consequently,avenuestonewandinnovativesolutionsareidentified,
whichwillreinforcebothhumanrightsandsecurity.
Contact
ICCT–TheHague
KoninginJulianaplein10
P.O.Box13228
2501EE,TheHague
TheNetherlands
T+31(0)708009531
E[email protected]
Allpaperscanbedownloadedfreeofchargeatwww.icct.nl
StayuptodatewithICCT,followusonlineonFacebook,TwitterandLinkedIn
©ICCT–TheHague2012

1ICCT
–
TheHagueResearchPaper      TinkaVeldhuis
Introduction
In2010,theDirectorofNationalIntelligenceassessedthatanapproximate20%offormerGuantanamoBay
detaineesweresuspectedofreengaginginterroristorinsurgentactivities1,afigureconfirmedbytheObama
administration2.Elsewhere,similarconcernshavebeenraisedoverrecidivismratesamonginmateswitha
terroristorextremistbackground.3Indeed,prisonsareoftenseenasplaceswhereradicalideologiesfesterand
whereterroristmovementsseektorecruitnewmembersintotheirranks.Althoughaccuratefiguresonprison
radicalisationandrecidivism‐ratesamongviolentextremistoffendersareoftenlacking,4preventingpost‐release
radicalisationandterrorismisofcentralconcerntogovernmentsandauthoritiesaroundtheworld.
Asaresult,severalde‐radicalisationandrehabilitationprogrammesforviolentextremistshaveemerged
acrosstheglobeinthelastfewyears.Forexample,extensiveprogrammeshavebeenestablishedinSaudi‐Arabia,
Indonesia,Singapore,Colombia,andtheUnitedKingdom(UK),tonameafew.5Eachofthesecountrieshas
developeditsownapproachtopromotedesistanceofsomeformofpoliticalviolence.Whenanalysingand
comparingtheseprogrammes,onerunsintotheproblemthatalthoughtheprogrammesgenerallyseemto
includesimilarinterventions(e.g.educationandvocationaltraining,psychologicalandreligiouscounselling),they
actuallypursueabroadrangeofobjectives.Or,asHorganputsit:“Atpresent,thereisaflurryofactivity
worldwideaimedatwhatonthesurfaceappearstobeapursuitofsimilarobjective,butuponcloserinspection
revealsuchdiverseconceptualunderpinningsthattheycanonlyrealisticallybeunifiedintermsofpromoting
somekindofmoveawayfromterrorism.”6
Moreover,inmostcasestheunderlyingrationaleanddetailsoftheintervention–the‘programme
theory’–hasneverbeenexplicitlyformulatedortranslatedintotangibleblueprints.Moreoftenthannot,the
programmesseemtobedevelopedonthebasisofintuitionandimplicitassumptionsabouthowcertain
interventionscanachievespecificdesiredoutcomes–aprioriexplicationsoftheideasbehindtheseprogrammes
arerare.Hence,itoftenremainsunclearwhatobjectivessuchpoliciesexactlyaimtoachieveandhowthe
instrumentsaresupposedtocontributetoachievingtheseobjectives,letalonehowthesuccessofthesepolicies
canbeevaluated.Forexample,dotheseinitiativesaspiretotransformtheparticipantstopacifistcitizensby
targetingtheideologywhichlegitimisedviolenceinthefirstplace(‘de‐radicalisation’),ordothey‘merely’seekto
provideparticipantswithapackageoftoolsthatisbelievedtocurtailviolentbehaviour?Howdothesemeasures
tapintoexistingknowledgeaboutthecausesofviolentradicalisationandterroristbehaviour?Andaboveall,how
shouldweassesstheirimpactandeffectiveness?
Indeed,attemptstomeasuretheeffectoftheseprogrammesareconfrontedbysubstantialbarriersand
todatefewifanyrehabilitationinitiativeshavebeensubjectedtoin‐depthevaluation 7.However,for
governmentsandprisonauthoritiestoknowwhetherandhowinvestingintherehabilitationofviolentextremists
isworthwhileorawasteofresourcesrequiresaclearunderstandingofwhatthesepoliciesaimtoachieveand
how,andwhethertheysucceedindoingsoornot.
1DirectorofNationalIntelligence(2010).SummaryoftheReengagementofDetaineesformerlyheldatGuantanamoBay.Retreivedfrom
http://www.dni.gov/electronic_reading_room/120710_Summary_of_the_Reengagement_of_Detainees_Formerly_Held_at_Guantanamo_Bay_Cuba.pdf
2Joscelyn,T.(2010).GitmoRecidivismRateSoars.TheWeeklyStandard,December7.Retreivedfromhttps://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/gitmo‐
recidivism‐rate‐soars_521965.html
3Pluchinsky,D.A.(2008).GlobalJihadistrecidivism:Aredflag.StudiesinConflict&Terrorism,31,3:181‐200;Arianti,V.(2011).Jihadirecidivism:Thecaseof
Indonesia.Eurasiareview,February17.Retrievedfromhttp://www.eurasiareview.com/17022011‐jihadi‐recidivism‐the‐case‐of‐indonesia/
4Rappaport,A.,Veldhuis,T.M.,Guiora,A.N.HomelandSecurityandtheInmatePopulation:TheRiskandRealityofIslamicRadicalizationinPrison.InL.
Gideon(Ed.)SpecialNeedsofOffendersinCorrectionalInstitutions.ThousandOaks:SAGEPublishing(inpress).
5Neumann,P.(2010).PrisonsandTerrorism:Radicalisationandde‐radicalisationin15countries.London:TheInternationalCentrefortheStudyof
RadicalisationandPoliticalViolence.
6Horgan,J.(2008).Deradicalizationordisengagement?AProcessinNeedofClarityandaCounterterrorismInitiativeinNeedofEvaluation.Perspectiveson
Terrorism,2,4.
7Oneofthefirsteffortstoassesstheimpactofde‐radicalisationeffortsiscurrentlymadebyProf.ArieKruglanskiandcolleagues.Seeforexample
Kruglanski,A.W.,Gelfand,M.J.,&Gunaratna(inpress).Aspectsofderadicalization.InL.Rubin,R.Gunaratna,&J.A.Gerard(Eds.),TerroristRehabilitation
andcounter‐radicalization.London:Routledge.

2DesigningRehabilitationandReintegrationProgrammesforViolentExtremistOffenders:ARealistApproach
ItisinthiscontextthatthisICCTResearchPaperemphasisesthatrehabilitationprogrammesfor
offenderswithaterroristorextremistbackgroundshouldberootedinexplicit,unambiguouslyformulated
programmetheoriesthatshouldincludedetaileddescriptionsofthedifferentcomponentsoftheintervention
andexplicatehowtheyrelatetoeachother.Aboveall,thesetheoriesneedtodescribetheprimaryand
secondaryobjectives,thepolicyimplementationinstruments,andtheideasaboutexpectedcausalrelationships
andimpacts.
Specifically,thepolicybriefmakesanargumentforaRealistapproachasdevelopedbyPawsonand
Tilley8,whichisconcernedwiththeidentificationofpolicies’underlyingcausalmechanismsandthewayinwhich
theyfunctionacrosscontexts.Inotherwords,aRealistapproachaimstomovebeyondassessing´whetherthe
programmeworks´to´whytheprogramme(sometimes)works’and‘whyitworksdifferentlyindifferent
environments’,inordertoidentifywhatcanbedonetomaximisethechancesofsuccess.
Theobjectivesofthepaperaretwo‐fold.Firstly,itemphasisestheaddedvalueofaRealistframeworkin
ourthinkingaboutrehabilitationefforts,andhighlightssomeofthekeyquestionsthatpolicyofficials(andhence
programmetheories)needtoanswer,bothattheonsetoftheprogrammeandasitdevelopsandevolvesover
time.Secondly,indoingso,thepaperaimstoillustratethatprogrammetheoriesshouldbeforwardlookingand
sensitivetoindirectorinvisiblemechanisms,whichmightpotentiallyunderminetheprogramme’seffectivenessif
notdealtwithappropriately.Specifically,thepapershowsthatintherehabilitationofviolentextremists,
identifyingandpursuingtheprimaryobjectives(e.g.reducingrecidivism)isnotenough,asthereareseveral
factors(e.g.,stigmatisationandcriminogenicenvironments)thatcanseriouslyunderminetheintervention’s
impact.Explicitlyintegratingthetargetingofsuchdistortingfactorsassecondaryobjectivesintotheprogramme
theorycansubstantiallyimprovetheeffectivenessoftheoverallprogramme.
Afewtermsarerelevantforthediscussion.Here,rehabilitationisseenasapurposeful,planned
intervention,whichaimstochangecharacteristicsoftheoffender(attitudes,cognitiveskillsandprocesses,
personalityormentalhealth,andsocial,educationalorvocationalskills)thatarebelievedtobethecauseofthe
individual’scriminalbehaviour,withtheintentiontoreducethechancethattheindividualwillre‐offend.9
Moreover,reintegrationisunderstoodasasafetransitiontothecommunity,bywhichtheindividualproceedsto
livealaw‐abidinglifefollowinghisorherreleaseandacquiresattitudesandbehavioursthatgenerallyleadto
productivefunctioninginsociety.
Further,acleardistinctionmustbemadebetweendisengagementandde‐radicalisation,processesthat
canmanifestthemselvesatboththeindividualandcollectivelevel.10Disengagementdenotesabehavioural
changebywhichindividualsormovementsreduceorstopusingviolentmethods.Disengagementcanbepartially
anddoesnotnecessarilyimplyacompletemoveawayfromviolence.11Movementscoulddecidetoslightlyalter
theirtacticsandindividualscanchangetheirroleinthemovementtoamoreperipheralposition,without
denouncingviolencecompletelyorleavingthemovemententirely.Disengagementmayormaynotinvolvede‐
radicalisation,whichrequiresnotonlyachangeinbehaviourbutalsoachangeinbelief.De‐radicalisation,inturn,
isfundamentallyapsychologicalandcognitiveprocessbywhichtheindividualexperiencesafundamentalchange
inunderstandingandbelief.However,de‐radicalisationdoesnotnecessarilygohandinhandwith
disengagement.12Individualscangothroughapsychologicalprocessofrenouncingviolencewhilst,foranumber
ofreasons,remainingactiveintheviolentmovement.Forexample,socialpressure,fearofrevengeor
prosecutionandlackofalternativescaninhibittheindividualfrommovingawayfromviolence,evenifheorshe
8Pawson,R.&Tilley,N.(1997).RealisticEvaluation.London:SAGEPublications;Pawson,R.(2006).Evidence‐basedpolicy:Arealistperspective.London:
SAGEPublications.
9SeeCullen,F.T.,&Gendreau,P.(2000).Assessingcorrectionalrehabilitation:Policy,practice,andprospects(pp.109‐175).InJ.Horney(Ed.).National
InstituteofJusticecriminaljustice2000:Changesindecisionmakinganddiscretioninthecriminaljusticesystem.Washington,DC:DepartmentofJustice,
NationalInstituteofJustice,p.114.
10Bjørgo,T.andHorgan,J.(Eds.)(2009).LeavingTerrorismBehind:IndividualandCollectiveDisengagement.London:Routledge.
11Børgo&Horgan(2009);ChowdhuryFink,N.&Hearne,E.B.(2008).BeyondTerrorism:Deradicalizationanddisengagementfromviolentextremism.
InternationalPeaceInstitute.
12Børgo&Horgan(2009).

3ICCT
–
TheHagueResearchPaper      TinkaVeldhuis
mentallydisputesthemovement’sviolentstrategies.13Whendealingwithinmateswhohaveanextremist
background,rehabilitationprogrammescanincludeeffortsgearedtowardsbothde‐radicalisationand
disengagement,butingeneralpursuebroaderambitionstoprepareandassistindividualsinreturningpeacefully
tosocietyafterimprisonment.
Inthispaper,thefocusofanalysisisnarroweddowninseveralways.Tobeginwith,althoughtheissues
underdiscussionarerelevantforvariouscategories,including´regular´inmates,thepresentdiscussionfocuses
specificallyontwotypesofinmates:1)offenderswithaterroristbackground,i.e.thosewhohavebeensuspected
orconvictedofaterrorism‐relatedoffense,and2)inmateswhohavebeenradicalisedduringimprisonmentand
whohave,asaconsequenceofthat,beenrecognisedbytheauthoritiesasapotentialsecurityconcern.In
particular,thislattercategoryandtheissueofprisonradicalisationbringwithitauniquesetofproblemsand
challengesforpolicyofficials,includingconcernsaboutpreventingthespreadofviolentextremistideologies
amongtheinmatepopulation.However,heretheemphasisisonthemeasuresthatneedtobetakentotackle
relevantsecurityissuesthatarisewhenextremistinmatesarebeingreleased.
Also,thefocusisnotonthequestionwhetherandwhyspecialrehabilitationeffortsarerequiredfor
violentextremistoffenders.Validandlegitimatequestionscanbeaskedconcerningtheextenttowhichexisting
criminaljusticesystemsandrehabilitationprogrammesare–orarenot–sufficientlyequippedtodealwiththis
categoryofinmates.Yet,herethequestionisnotwhetherwerequire´new´programmesforviolentextremistsor
howtheseshoulddifferfrom´regular´programmes.Ratherwetakeastepbackandhighlightafewdilemmasand
concernsthatpolicyofficialsneedtoaddressbeforeanyprogrammecommences,irrespectiveofwhetherthey
areconfrontedwithgeneraloffendersorwithviolentextremists.Theimplicationisthatthispaperwilldraw
extensivelyonavailableknowledgeobtainedfrom´general´rehabilitationandreintegrationeffortsforprison
inmates.Thosepolicymakersresponsiblefordesigningarehabilitationprogrammesforviolentextremistsshould
decidewhetherandtowhatextenttheseinsightsareapplicabletotheirspecificanduniquesituation.
Neitherwillthispaperdealspecificallywiththevarietyofdifferentideologicalbackgrounds,likeextremist
right‐wing,left‐wing,religiousornationalistoffenders.CentraltotheRealistapproachisthenotionthatpolicies
andprogrammesaremostlikelytosucceediftheobjectivesaretailoredtothespecificcontextsandneedsofthe
individualsorgroupsinvolved.14Thispaperdoesnotaimtodisentanglethedifferentlayersofthesecontextsand
analysetheirimpacts,butitaimstoraisequestionsthatmighthelptomatchthecorrectinstrumentwiththe
accuratecontextandobjectives.
Lastlyitisimportanttoemphasisetheethicalsensitivityofthematterathand.Conceptslike
rehabilitation,violentextremism,de‐radicalisationandre‐integrationalsohaveapoliticalandnormative
connotation.Rehabilitationaimstopersuadeindividualstomakethe‘right’choicesandrefrainfrom‘wrong’
behaviour.However,whatis‘right’andwhatis‘wrong’dependsonones’societalandpoliticalpositionandis
usuallynotunequivocallyembraced.Afterall,oneman’sterroristisanotherman’sfreedomfighter,andwhois
perceivedasanextremistbysome–usuallygovernment–maybeseenasacredibleinterlocutorbyothers.This
notionhasafewimportantimplications.
Firstly,incraftingtheirresponsetoviolentextremism,governmentsandauthoritiesneedasknotonly
whetheranobjectiveorsolutionispractical,itisequallyimportanttoaskwhetheritisincompliancewith
internationallegalstandardsandethicalintermsofhumanrights.Oneofthecorevaluesofthedemocraticstate
isthatthegovernmentdoesnotaimtomanipulatetheindividual'smindsetandthatindividualfreedomof
thought,speechandreligionarerespected.Inthediscussionaboutde‐radicalisation,thismeansthatadelicate
balancehastobefoundbetweenattemptingtochangethecognitionsandattitudesthatpushedtheindividual
downthepathofviolence,whilstguaranteeingcoreindividualfreedoms.Ultimately,thiscouldevenmeanthat
13Ibid.;ChowdhuryFink&Hearne(2008).
14Pawson&Tilley(1997).