Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law

Defined as violence against a person on the basis of attributes such as race, nationality, religion, sex or disability, hate crimes have recently gained attention in German research with regard to right-wing extremism, particularly given the explosive rise of xenophobia in the country during the early nineties. Hate crimes are significant first because they are driven by an ideology of inequality and second, because they are aimed at characteristics of the victim which he or she cannot change or influence. It is foreigners, immigrants, as well as homeless people or homosexuals who are devaluated and rejected just because of their “so being” and their differentness. Perpetrators are usually male juveniles or young adults who commit their offences as part of their group activities.

In the last twenty years the increasing prevalence of xenophobic violence has been explored by numerous studies and has been accompanied by controversial debates in different scientific disciplines. However, until now right-wing extremism and xenophobic violence in the context of the penal system has not played a significant role in socio-scientific research. Therefore the main objective of this project is to analyse the impact of imprisonment on young men who have committed hate crimes. This study will focus particularly on changes in personal identity that occur while the perpetrator is incarcerated: such changes may concern self-perception, right-wing extremist beliefs, attachment to extremist groups, and violent tendencies. First of all, it is important to analyse whether the offence which is officially labelled as hate crime was actually driven by an ideology. If so, what do these right extremist patterns consist of and particularly which meaning they bear for the youth’s identities and self-perceptions? Furthermore the study addresses the function of penal sanctioning, as the most radical form of exclusion and both the internal (person-related) and external (institutional) conditions which may lead to a consolidation or renunciation of right-wing extremist belief patterns whilst incarceration. At this juncture it is essential to go beyond the descriptive level and to provide a differentiated analysis of interaction processes.

The criminological project is divided into the following two studies which place their emphasis on different research questions:

• Project description Right-Wing Extremism and the Juvenile Penal System – The Impact of Imprisonment on Right-Wing Extremist Attitudes of Violent Juvenile Offenders (Figen Özsöz)
• Project description Hate Crime - Prison Experience and its Impact on Self Concept and Identity of Juvenile Xenophobic Violent Criminals (Martin Brandenstein)

Concept and Methodology:

The dynamics of right-wing extremist belief patterns and behaviour within youth custodies are largely unknown. Consequently it is necessary to combine different methods. The study applies mainly qualitative interviews as well as standardized questionnaires to theoretically selected fields (e.g., personality, authoritarianism and self-concept, prisonization).

The study will be longitudinal (t1: detention begin; t2: 7 – 9 month later in the course of custody) and will consist of there different samples:
(a) detained hate crime offenders
(b) detained violent offenders
(c) xenophobic, violent juveniles without any experiences of imprisonment

The respective samples comprise exclusively German male adolescent between the age of 14 and 24. The sample size will be presumably 15 to 20 persons per each group. The study design is represented in a simplified form in the following Table 1:

Table 1: The study design of the project “Hate Crimes — The Impact of Imprisonment on Violent Juvenile Offenders”

Samples	Times of measurement
	t1 Detention begin (for E & KI)	t2 7-9 months later
Detained hate crime offenders (E)
Detained violent offenders (KI)
Xenophobic, violent juveniles (KA)

Status Report 2004 - 2006:

The initial phase of the study, from September 2004 through to the carrying out of the first interviews in October 2005, was used to organise the project and to obtain a deeper understanding of the topic at hand.

During the first quarter of the project phase relevant research literature was complied and the individual research questions were specified and elaborated upon. In addition, questionnaires and interview manuals were developed. The qualitative interviews refer to the juveniles’ biographical details and self perception, the criminal offences carried out, the duration of their detention, the experiences therein, the juveniles’ interaction with staff and fellow detainees, group conflicts, the social environment and the juveniles’ future prospects. In addition, standardised questionnaires covering social demographics, personality, attitudes to right-wing extremism, authoritarianism, prisonization, self perception, social support and personal goals were also implemented.

Parallel to the development of the survey instruments, suitable youth detention institutions as well as a number of different youth facilities (e.g., youth probation assistance, juvenile court assistance, youth centres) were contacted. At present a co-operative arrangement with 20 juvenile penal institutions exists in 12 German states. Over the course of the project discussions with persons from the juvenile detention system – particularly officials and psychologists – as well as sample interviews relating to the possible improvement of the survey instruments have been carried out. At the beginning of the data collection phase in August 2005 all co-operative partners were asked to be on the lookout for suitable study participants.

As of early October 2005 the study has been primarily dedicated to the continued acquisition and collation of data from the various juveniles and adolescents. The first of two survey waves began in November 2005 and continued through to the end of November 2006. For each of the study participants involved in the first survey a second series of data was (or will be) collected over the ensuing seven to nine months. This second survey wave partly overlaps with the first and is to be completed in May 2007.

As evident in Table 2, at the end of the first wave of data collection information concerning 37 juveniles and adolescents has been collected. These subjects have been divided into several groups: the “Experimental Group” (E) which incorporates 11 juveniles and adolescents who, at the time of the first survey wave, were imprisoned because of a hate based crime. The “Internal Control Group” (KI) includes ten youths who were imprisoned for a non-xenophobic violent act. The offenders in both groups have been detained for the first time. At the time of the initial questioning they had, on average, spent 7.4 weeks in detention. A further 16 juveniles and adolescents forming the “External Control Group”(KA) were also questioned. These are individuals who, although not in detention, have demonstrated violent xenophobic attitudes and violent tendencies. They have at no time been detained.

Table 2: Status of data collection 04.05.2007

Samples	Times of measurement
	t1 detention begin (for E & KI)	t2 7-9 months later
Detained hate crime offenders (E)	11	10
Detained violent offenders (KI)	10	9
Xenophobic, violent juveniles (KA)	16	6
Total sample	37	25

At present, 25 subjects have completed the second set of questioning. So far nobody has dropped out of the project – every subject who participated in the first wave of questioning has been available for the second.

The sample represents, as shown in Table 3 , the entire spectrum of age groups that fall within the range of youth delinquency - juveniles (14-17 years) adolescents (18-20 years) and young adults (21-24 years).

Table 3: Age structure of the sample (at the time of the initial questioning)

	Average age	MIN	MAX	SD	N
Detained hate crime offenders (E)	20.1	17	23	1.6	11
Detained violent offenders (KI)	20.6	17	23	2.0	10
Xenophobic, violent juveniles (KA)	18.4	15	24	2.4	16
Total sample	19.5	15	24	2.2	37

Notes: MIN= minimum age, MAX= maximum age, SD= standard deviation, N= number of subjects.

The average age of the total sample is 19.5 years, whereby the age span lies between 15 and 24. The groups within detention are on average around two years older than those who have not been arrested and detained. This corresponds with expectations, as juveniles only tend to be detained at a more advanced age. Thus, although the investigation is qualitative rather than representative, the age distribution of the sample ensures that the data is not distorted.

In conducting the interviews we were dependent on the goodwill of a number of intermediaries both within and outside of the juvenile detention facilities who helped with acquiring the study participants. The state-specific distribution of the participants should take this into account (see Table 4).

Table 4: Distribution of the sample in the various German states

	Total sample	Detained hate crime offenders	Detained violent offenders	Xenophobic, violent juveniles
Bavaria	5	3	2	-
Berlin	5	-	-	5
Brandenburg	9	4	4	1
Lower Saxony	3	1	1	1
North Rhine-Westphalia	3	-	-	3
Rhineland-Palatinate	4	-	-	4
Saxony-Anhalt	8	3	3	2

Seven German states (of 16) participated in the investigation. Brandenburg, Saxony-Anhalt and Lower Saxony contributed the largest number of participants to the study - more than half of the total sample (20 of 37). In Bavaria only detained juveniles could be interviewed. In Berlin, North Rhine-Westphalia and Rhineland-Palatinate only violent xenophobic juveniles (KA) could be questioned.

Intermediate Results:

Present results show that the majority of the arrested xenophobic juveniles examined in the project are indeed multiple offenders who have, alongside hate crime violence, committed a multiplicity of other typical youth crimes such as theft and assault (without a xenophobic background). Only a small number of those arrested can be classified as “ideological offenders” i.e., offenders who act out of pure ideological conviction. We suspect however, that many ideological offenders refused to participate in the study.

A uniform evaluation of the effect that being detained has on the offenders is not only difficult because of the different biographical and personality specific backgrounds of the young men, but also because of the various organisational and physical structures of the detention facilities, as well as the differences in the way they are managed by the staff (accommodation and handling) and the composition of the detainees. In some facilities young hate crime offenders are placed together, in others they are divided up. That said, in general young hate crime offenders are classified as a single group. As such, they often fall within the spotlight of the executive administration.

As is generally the case with young offenders, those interviewed also reported growing out of their early criminal activities and desired a “calmer and more mature” lifestyle. Some disassociated themselves from former “comrades”, often because they realised that loyalty towards them decreased once they were detained. For the vast majority of young hate crime offenders the desire to distance themselves from violence can be seen more as a product of age and maturity than as a direct result of detention.

The extent to which right-wing attitudes decrease over time also depends on the meaning the young offender’s group attached to violence. Some young offenders join such groups as they provide a conduit for violence. In these cases it is to be expected that the right-wing values will weaken over time, together with the propensity to violence. Whether experiences with foreign detainees lead to a reinforcement or abatement of xenophobic attitudes is something that can only be judged on an individual basis. Contact with other right-wing youths from the “outside” can also make leaving the scene more difficult.

From the intermediate results it to be concluded that detention based on the idea of “harm infliction” does not bring about the desired educational effect: the young offenders cannot be forced to break away from their actions. As is often the case with punishments designed to have an “instructive” element, such methods seem to reinforce defiant attitudes. In the case of young hate crime offenders, detention seems to be counterproductive in several respects: the offenders often become more subversive towards the state, being careful (once out of detention) to be less visible and to ensure that they don’t get “their hands dirty.” These subversive attitudes are brought about partly by the negative experiences that the youths had during the judicial process. They believe that due to their attitudes and beliefs they have been punished more severely than other offenders who have committed similar crimes. Moreover, they see the prison conditions as echoing the general inability and inadequacy of the state.

An interesting strategy of neutralisation is also adopted by some young offenders who are aware of the injustice, to a certain degree, that has been caused by their offences. They see their time in detention as having “paid” for their actions and that going beyond this is unnecessary.

The most positive influential factor for the development of hate crime detainees are close and stable relationships with family members and partners - provided of course that they themselves do not support and share anti-democratic, xenophobic, and racist attitudes.

Funding:

The project is funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG).