Abstract
In the article, some countries’ experience in organizing professional training and activities of probation officers has been analyzed. Based on comparative analysis of activities of the Probation Institute abroad, it has been determined that probation service has different functional and organizational features in individual countries. For instance, probation service in different countries is subordinate to different agencies. Thus, probation service in Great Britain, Denmark, Japan, Finland, Norway, Latvia, the Czech Republic and Estonia is under the control of the Ministry of Justice; in the USA, Germany, Hungary, it is subordinate to the judiciary; in the Netherlands – public prosecutor’s office; in Sweden – prison authorities; in Singapore, probation service is under the guidance of the Ministry of Community Development and Sports. Another difference consists in the fact that in some countries the law defines probation as punishment (Sweden, Finland, Latvia), whereas in other countries it refers to some criminal measures (Great Britain), exemption from punishment (Estonia) or is not determined at all (the USA). Despite the differences, the goals and means of achieving them in each probation service are similar in the context of criminal law. The approaches to professional training of probation officers have been analyzed and relevant conclusions have been drawn regarding organization of probation officers’ professional training in Ukraine. In particular, work with offenders should be performed by highly qualified specialists who have a degree and who have passed specialized training courses in educational institutions subordinate to probation authorities. It is important that the content of probation officers’ professional training should be constantly updated, taking into account new approaches and methods of working with convicts, which are recognized as effective.
Available Cosmos: Geoinformation Technologies for Schoolchildren
