(1) Preventing offenders who have been convicted once from committing a second offense
  The data suggests that special attention needs to be paid to recidivism prevention for those who have received their first conviction. Around 50% to 60% of recorded convictions were committed by offenders who did not have previous criminal records (see Chapter 3, Section 3). The belief is therefore that preventing further offenses being committed by such offenders could have a greater effect than general recidivism prevention for all offenders. Furthermore, because the criminal tendency of offenders increases as they commit further offenses, early intervention to aid the rehabilitation of first timers is important.
  In addition to this, with sexual offenders and persons who commit serious offenses like homicide, it is also necessary to take specialized measures to prevent not only the commission of further offenses in general but also the commission of the same type of offense again. To meet these requirements, the characteristics and other important elements which facilitate the commission of offenses need to be clarified by carrying out an appropriate risk/needs assessment and giving such offenders individualized treatment which focuses upon their specific risk factors.

(2) Recidivism prevention measures for young adult offenders and elderly offenders
  As mentioned earlier, the criminal tendency of young adult offenders (20-29 years old) is stronger than with other age group, with those in their early twenties (20-24 years old) in particular having the highest recidivism rate. For instance, about 40% of the repeat offenders who committed their first offense during the period from 1986 to 2005 were in their early twenties at the time of their first offense. About 40% of those who had committed their first offense at their early twenties subsequently committed repeat offenses, and their terms of recidivism tend to be relatively shorter. The Five Year Recidivism Rate of those who committed their first offenses in their early twenties is considerably higher than that of those in any other age group (see Chapter 3, Section 3 and Section 4, subsection 2).
  Furthermore, the ratio of first-time inmates in their early twenties who have a history of protective measures is significantly higher than those in other age groups, suggesting that many of them had not been rehabilitated even though they were given the chance of rehabilitation through probationary supervision and support.
  The belief is that intensive supervision and support needs to be provided to young adult offenders, especially those in their early twenties, based upon appropriate risk and needs assessments.
  On the other hand, recidivism prevention measures for elderly offenders are also important. As mentioned earlier, the Five Year Recidivism Rate of the elderly offenders is on a rising trend (see Chapter 3, Section 3), and in recent years, the ratio of elderly offenders among those classified as multiple repeat offenders has been rising rapidly (see Chapter 3, Section 4, Subsection 2). In establishing specialized recidivism prevention measures for elderly offenders, the focus needs to be on their short term of recidivism and the type of offenses that multiple elderly repeat offenders commit, such as theft and fraud.

(3) Necessity for development of recidivism prevention measures which correspond with the characteristics and type of offenses
  It is not appropriate to discuss recidivism prevention in general since criminal tendencies and the causes of crime vary depending on the offender and type of offense. In this article, the actual circumstances and attributes of recidivism were analyzed, such as the rate of recidivism and term of recidivism from the first offense to the second offense by type of offense. This resulted in the discovery that recidivism patterns are affected by the type of offense the offenders were convicted of, thus making it necessary to explore effective recidivism prevention measures that are in accordance with those differences.

 A. Theft, violations of the Stimulants Control Act, injury/assault
  A large number of theft, the Stimulants Control Act violations and injury/assault offenses were seen that followed their long term trend of being included in the ten most frequently committed offenses by year, based on criminal records (1950-2005), with those offenses also having been committed repeatedly and making up a high percentage of the total of all offenses (see Chapter 3, Section 1-3). In particular, in regard to theft and the Stimulants Control Act violations, with offenders who received their first conviction for these offenses, the recidivism rate in general is high, with the rate of committing the same offense repeatedly also being high, and the term of recidivism for those offenses is short. We therefore examine effective countermeasures for those offenses respectively in this section.

 (a) Theft
  Repeat theft offenders can be divided into offenders who commit theft professionally and offenders who repeatedly commit relatively minor forms of theft. From a statistical point of view, the latter make up the majority of those who repeat theft, so we here focus upon those types.
  Examining the trend in sentencing for offenders who have only repeated theft reveals that, in the beginning, suspension of execution of sentence was granted for around 90% of them. After being repeatedly convicted for theft, the sentences imposed become severer, such as no longer receiving suspension of execution of sentence and the term of imprisonment becoming longer (see Chapter 3, Section 4, 3). Regarding criminal history, many offenders who received a first conviction for committing theft have a previous history of disposition of trivial offenses by the police and suspension of prosecution. This means that they had had the chance to rehabilitate themselves in the community before being punished more severely by the courts but had not taken the opportunity, instead continuing to commit theft and were finally brought before the court and imprisoned.
  This fact suggests that the eligibility of theft offenders for suspension of prosecution and suspension of execution of sentence needs to be carefully considered based upon an assessment of their characteristics and the possibility of their recidivism in the future.
  With repeat theft offenders, the provisions for aggravated punishment for repeat offenses in the Penal Code and special acts should be fully made use of.
  In the treatment stage of the criminal justice system, such as institutional treatment in penal institutions and community-based treatment through probation/parole supervision, the need is for individualized treatment that meets the risk and needs factors of each offender to be carried out.
  More than 80% of sentenced inmates for theft admitted to penal institutions for their second (or further) time in 2006, were unemployed (with the overall offenders, about 70%; see Chapter 3, Section 4, subsection 4). The unemployment rate for parolees who terminated parole supervision was around 30% for overall parolees, while it was 80% or more for those who had had their parole revoked (see Chapter 3, Section 5). These facts strongly suggest that finding and maintaining employment for offenders who have committed theft is a vital issue in preventing recidivism.
  Because of this, the Ministry of Justice, with the cooperation of the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, implemented its “Comprehensive Job Assistance Scheme for Persons Released from Prison, etc.” in April, 2006. The scheme aims to provide employment support for prison inmates, inmates at juvenile training schools, probationers and parolees, and persons who are eligible to receive urgent assistance. In this scheme, penal institutions and probation offices nationwide provide a range of support and assistance, such as preparing for job applications through job and living skill training, and support for securing employment in cooperation with public employment security offices and employers, etc. In addition, penal institutions and probation offices exchange information on the families, residences and employment of inmates preparing to be released. In order to secure and maintain stable employment and daily lives, the Offenders Rehabilitation Act (2007) introduced new general conditions for probation/parole supervision that require probationers and parolees to report their job status and actual circumstances and attributes, including income, to probation officers and volunteer probation officers (see Chapter 5, Section 3 to 5).
  Also, while the rapid increase in the number of elderly multiple repeat offenders has become an issue recently, more than half of the elderly multiple repeat offenders committed theft, and they consist of more than 60% of the total elderly multiple repeat offenders together with those committed fraud (see Chapter 3 Section 4, 2). Since elderly offenders normally have greater obstacles in their rehabilitation when compared to younger offenders and also elderly multiple repeat offenders can face greater difficulties than regular elderly offenders, we should be keen on developing effective support and supervision measures for the prevention of their recidivism.

 (b) Stimulants Control Act violations
  Repeat Stimulants Control Act violators can also be divided into professional offenders who are on the supply side of producing, trafficking and smuggling illegal stimulants for profits, and offenders who are on the consumer side, developing drug dependencies or abusing stimulants.
  From a statistical point of view, the number of the former is small but they do cause a wide range of damage to society, and thus need to be severely punished to prevent recidivism. The vast majority of the Stimulants Control Act violators are the latter. Since they have developed chemical dependencies, it is hard to stop their drug abuse by simply punishing them.
  They are of a large number and make up a large number of those in prison in Japan. As mentioned earlier, the recidivism rate for those committing Stimulants Control Act violations is higher than for allover offenses (nearly 30%), and the term of recidivism is relatively short (two years or less accounted for nearly 50%) (see Chapter 3, Section 4).
  Examining the trend in sentencing for offenders who have only repeated Stimulants Control Act violations reveals that, similar to the theft, the sentences imposed become severer, such as no longer receiving suspension of execution of sentence and the term of imprisonment becoming longer (see Chapter 3, Section 4, 3). In regard with Stimulants Control Act violations, although suspension of prosecution is rarely granted, most of the repeat violators had had the chance to rehabilitate themselves in the community before being punished more severely by the courts but had not taken the opportunity, similar to theft. The eligibility of theft offenders for suspension of execution of sentence needs to be carefully considered based upon an assessment of their characteristics and the possibility of their recidivism in the future.
  With repeat Stimulants Control Act violators also, the provisions for aggravated punishment for repeat offenses in the Penal Code should be fully made use of, and effective treatment should be sought during the imprisonment term.
  To establish effective countermeasures against stimulants abusers and dependents, specialized treatment for drug abusers will need to be strengthened through custodial settings and community-based treatment. In this regard, as for institutional treatment, stimulants abuse prevention education and other specialized treatment have been provided at penal institutions nationwide based upon a categorized treatment scheme. In addition, a new form of treatment was introduced as part of special rehabilitation guidance in May 2006 that encourages abusers to refrain from abusing stimulants (see Part 2, Chapter 4, Section 4 and Part 3, Chapter 3, Section 3). Specialized treatment has also been provided through categorized treatment system in community-based treatment. In addition, a urine testing scheme started on a voluntary basis in April 2004 (see Part 3, Chapter 3, Section 3) and will be legally imposed as a special condition for probation/parole supervision requiring probationers and parolees to take urine or saliva tests regularly from June 2008. The provision of support and the understanding of abuser's families and guarantors are also important in reforming abusers, and to this end, family and guarantor group meetings have been held at some probation offices.

 (c) Injury/assault
  When we analyzed the relationship between the severity of punishment (sentencing) and the accumulated number of convictions of the same offense (injury or assault), we could not find a direct correlation between those, like with theft and the Stimulants Control Act violations. The reason for this is thought to be that the court takes into consideration the relationship between the victim and the offender, how the offense was committed (whether simple physical violence or with a weapon) and so forth, regarding the present cases. Computerized criminal records reveal that around 70% offenders who repeated injury or assault offences from six to ten times were sentenced to only a fine. The effectiveness of such penal sanction could be an issue.
  Attention will also need to be paid to carry out appropriate assessment of offenders who have committed injury or assault repeatedly. Since some of them later commit more serious violent offenses, such as injury causing death or homicide. Indeed, research on homicide recidivists reveals that many offenders who committed homicide twice have criminal histories of violent offenses, such as injury or assault. This suggests that early intervention in regard to offenders who have serious violent tendencies needs to be aimed at.

 B Repeat homicide
  Homicide was selected as a representative serious offense, although the recidivism rate of offenders whose first conviction was for homicide is low, in general. Especially, the rate at which homicide is repeatedly committed by the same offender is extremely low, being in the region of less than one percent. However, we also found a small number of offenders who repeated homicides, which cause great damages to society, and hence this issue is examined here based upon a special research on repeat homicide cases (see Chapter 4).
  As mentioned in Chapter 4, we found that there are significant similarities in many homicide cases committed for the first and second times regarding motives or causes of homicide, the relationship between offenders and victims, method of homicide and so on. The belief is that this fact can provide ideas for preventing homicide recidivism. Collecting information and analyzing the causes and characteristics of the case and offender thoroughly at the time of investigation, trial and treatment in regard to the first homicide, and then providing appropriately individualized treatment is believed to enable the prevention of some repeat homicide cases.
  Taking into account some characteristics and features of homicide recidivists, as mentioned in Chapter 4, Section 3, we could summarize that the following individualized treatments will have some impact on preventing their recidivism: (1) those unable to control their emotions should be given education or training that will improve their self-control; (2) the treatment provided should be an effective combination of several treatment programs and methods; (3) offenders involved in Boryokudan should be given treatment to encourage them to leave those groups; (4) offenders who committed homicide under the influence of alcohol should be provided with specialized treatment for alcoholic dependency and violence, and (5) offenders who have problems with interpersonal relationships should be provided with appropriate environmental adjustment together with improved interpersonal skills training.

 C Sexual offenses
  Research was also done on recidivism with sexual offenses, as it has drawn a great deal of attention from citizens over recent years (“sexual offenses” means rape, forcible indecency and rape at the scene of robbery, in this article).
  The research revealed that there are some offenders who pose a high risk of committing the same sexual offenses again, and there are some who do not, on the other hand. It is important to sort out the former type of offenders and to provide them with appropriate treatment which focuses on their characteristics.
   In this regard, the Ministry of Justice established a sexual offenders treatment program based upon programs in Canada and the UK and started implementation nationwide in 2006 in institutional and community-based settings. Penal institutions provide a specialized sexual offenders treatment program as part of their special guidance for rehabilitation, and probation offices also provide a community-based sexual offenders treatment program based upon a special condition of probation/parole supervision. Since the provision of seamless treatment from institutional settings to community-based settings is important in maintaining the effectiveness of sexual offender treatment, a close information exchange scheme was established to promote information exchange between penal institutions and probation offices (see Chapter 5, Section 2 to Section 4). There has already been much evidence accumulated throughout the world on the effectiveness of the sexual offender treatment program, but a special review on the effectiveness of such programs in Japan needs to be made in order to meet our own special needs.

(4) Improving and strengthening community-based treatment of offenders such as parole
  If the parole system is appropriately carried out, a smooth transition of offenders from institutional settings to community-based settings is to be realized and they can be provided with support for their rehabilitation in society. From this point of view, an overview of the current situation with the parole system was provided by analyzing computerized criminal records and statistical data on corrections and rehabilitation (see Chapter 3, Section 5).
  In general, the recidivism rate of parolees, including those who have committed serious offenses, is lower than that of offenders released from penal institutions on the completion of their term of sentence, with the term of recidivism of parolees also being longer, thus suggesting that the selection of parole candidates has been appropriately carried out by regional parole boards. However, as a certain number of parolees re-offended after their release, the need exists for ways of improving the selection standards of parole candidate more appropriately to be explored taking into consideration the multi-dimensional circumstances of inmates.
  Regarding the community-based treatment of parolees, the parole supervision period by probation offices is relatively short at five months on average. With offenders who have committed serious offense such as homicide, the parole supervision period is generally longer such as one year and two months, but the periods for the rest of the cases are much shorter than this at three to four months in general. Furthermore, there is no supervision and support for offenders released from penal institutions on expiration of their term of sentence.
  Effective measures therefore will need to be established to secure sufficient parole supervision periods along with a scheme for providing support to inmates released without parole.