Favoring Crime Desistance and Social (Re)Integration of Offenders Through Intersectoral Partnerships

Author(s):  
Natacha Brunelle ◽  
Julie Carpentier ◽  
Sylvie Hamel ◽  
Isabelle F. Dufour ◽  
Jocelyn Gadbois

The purpose of this chapter is to show the importance of intersectorality in partnerships to successfully understand and influence the processes of crime desistance and of social and community (re)integration of people subject to judicial control. It begins with an outline of the “what works” and “how it works” movements and provides tools to help understand such notions as crime desistance, (re)integration, trajectories, and intersectorality. After describing the objectives of the (RÉ)SO 16-35 partnered research project, the authors present various intersectoral collaborative initiatives in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada and indicate what, according to the literature, contributed to their development. The chapter concludes with the identification of two central principles in the development of intersectoral partnerships aiming to favor crime desistance and social and community (re)integration trajectories: a culture of dialogue must be instilled, and the initial objective of the project must be kept in mind.

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Rehana Cassim

Abstract Section 162 of the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008 empowers courts to declare directors delinquent and hence to disqualify them from office. This article compares the judicial disqualification of directors under this section with the equivalent provisions in the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America, which have all influenced the South African act. The article compares the classes of persons who have locus standi to apply to court to disqualify a director from holding office, as well as the grounds for the judicial disqualification of a director, the duration of the disqualification, the application of a prescription period and the discretion conferred on courts to disqualify directors from office. It contends that, in empowering courts to disqualify directors from holding office, section 162 of the South African Companies Act goes too far in certain respects.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document