Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia
Received date: January 19, 2017; Accepted date: February 20, 2017; Published date: February 27, 2017
Citation: Sukabdi ZA (2017) Psychological Rehabilitation for Ideology-Based Terrorism Offenders. Int J Neurorehabilitation 4:247. doi: 10.4172/2376-0281.1000247
Copyright: © 2017 Sukabdi ZA. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Visit for more related articles at International Journal of Neurorehabilitation
Psychological rehabilitation to religious terrorism offenders consists of efforts to reestablish human capacity and function in society, restore for a good condition, achieve self-efficacy, and be able to re-integrate into society. It focuses on character building and well-being of violent offenders, in order to have more peaceful state of mind and favorable attitudes to society. Practically, there are two types of rehabilitation to terrorism offenders, exclusiveness and inclusiveness, which can be combined in performing psychological rehabilitation. This paper explains steps in rehabilitating religious terrorism offenders, psychological treatment process, and behavioral transformation seen in religious terrorism offenders. There are ten steps in rehabilitating religious terrorism offenders and five phases of psychological treatment process. In terms of behavioral transformation, religious terrorism offenders experience two kinds of process namely natural and designed behavioral transformation.
Religious terrorism; Rehabilitation; Transformation; Behavior modification; Observed changes; Exclusiveness; Inclusiveness.
As a mean to re-establish human capacity and human function in society, rehabilitation is related to an effort to restore for a good condition, including restoring function and re-integrating to communities [1,2]. Psychological rehabilitation of terrorism offenders focuses on character building and well-being, in order to have more peaceful state of mind and favorable attitude to successfully contribute to society . Orientation of psychological development activities is giving opportunity to offenders to transform into a more positive individuals .
Practically, there are two types of rehabilitation to terrorism offenders. The first includes isolation techniques (‘exclusiveness’), which would isolate terrorism offenders in some special circumstances [4,5]. The fundamental reason for exclusiveness is related to the prevention of the spread of ideology that justifies violence. The use of sacred texts to justify violence [6,7] and the wide range of terrorism network are seen to be hazardous [8,9]. The second type of rehabilitation is related to allowing terrorism offenders to blend or meet with general criminal inmates or visitors (e.g. family) under certain circumstances (“inclusiveness”), in order to encounter Humans Rights concern . Both exclusiveness and inclusiveness include counseling session, assistance (e.g. programs for family), exposure to new learning experiences, dialogues with several favorable source persons and empowerment facilitation .
To address whether inclusiveness and exclusiveness is the best application in rehabilitating the psychology of terrorism offenders, this research will examine steps in rehabilitating religious terrorism offenders, psychological transformation process and observed positive behavioral changes in religious terrorism offenders. The study aims to figure out the effective implementations of inclusiveness and exclusiveness on religious terrorism offenders at prisons. As the discussion about rehabilitating terrorism offenders will always be linked to the motivation of terrorism, this study will review motives of religious terrorism offenders, causes of religious terrorism, and shared process of psychological transformation within religious terrorism offenders.
Many studies indicate that terrorism based on religious ideology involves religious people [11-14] and strongly relate to religious fundamentalism [15,16]. Horgan  describes a complex process of people’s involvement in terrorism into three following phases: (1) joining the terrorist group, (2) staying within the terrorist group, and (3) exiting, quitting or disengaging from the terrorist group. Some scholars suggest that what motivates terrorism offenders varies according to the level and role in a terrorist organization or network held [18,19]. Accordingly, leaders or inner-circle members in a terrorist group or network may have different motives, targets and strategies from those of rank-file members or field offenders.
A study in Indonesia by Mufid et al.  points out three roles of religious militants: (1) leaders or ideologues (9.1 percent), who create ideas and concepts, (2) middle management or organizers (10 percent), who frequently act as strategist/technocrat, recruiter, trainer/dispatcher, supplier/armorer, and (3) followers (80.9 percent), who become foot soldier/action perpetrator, technician, researcher/ surveyor/errand runner, transporter and sympathizer/fellow traveler. Further, there are a number of psychological factors that motivate individuals to be involved in terrorist acts according to Mufid et al. . The factors can be classified into six motives: (1) Religious-ideological, that is to establish ideals of religion-based government or society (the establishment of dawlah Islamiyah or the implementation of shari’ah) where violent or terrorist acts are considered as legitimate means to achieve these ideals, (2) Solidarity-driven, that is to express empathy or help fellow believers, especially when they are threatened or become victims in a conflict situation, (3) Revenge-seeking, that is to join in terrorist acts as an attempt to retaliate against the enemies for losses (lives or property) experienced by the offenders or their family, (4) Separatist, that is to achieve a political goal of establishing a separate state, (5) Mob mentality, that is to spontaneously participate in violent or terrorist acts without having any clear reasons, other than to follow others in such acts, and (6) Situational, that is to be involved in terrorist acts by forced.
Note: n for each group are respectively 10 (leader), 11 (middle management) and 89 (follower).
Source: Mufid et al. .
Table 1: Roles and motives of terrorism offenders in Indonesia.
Mufid et al.  proves that related to the association of roles and motives, religious-ideological psychological motives appear in all roles or layers of religious terrorism offenders. Moreover, solidarity-driven is shown in the organizers and followers. Whereas, revenge-seeking motives, mob mentality and separatist motives are seen in the followers. Lastly, situational motive is seen in the leaders and followers. The Table 1 describes the roles and motives of terrorism offenders in Indonesia.
In terms of causes of terrorism, Bjorgo put causes of terrorism on several levels, which “some distantly related and others closely related to terrorism” . Levels of these causes include: (1) Structural causes, consisting of macro factors such as demographic unbalance, globalization, rapid modernization, transitional societies, rising individualism featured with deprivation and atomization, relative deprivation, class structure, and international inequalities (between Muslim and non-Muslim countries), and others. As causes of terrorism, these structural causes affect the lives of people through a process that might or might not be comprehended. But terrorist leaders are able to formulate these structural causes in simple terminologies which are easily understood by their followers; (2) Facilitating or accelerating causes, which make terrorism interesting and possible, but are not the main drivers. Modern news media, communication technology, transportation technology, weapon technology, weak control of the state over territory and others make methods and techniques of terrorism possible and easy, even though these factors could not be considered as the main drivers of terrorism; (3) Motivational causes are causes that motivate action, such as actual grievances experienced at the individual level. These motivational causes can be considered as symptoms of more fundamental causes; (4) Triggering causes, which are seen as the direct trigger of terrorist acts, such as provocative events, political turmoil, excessive action of the enemies or incidences that require retaliation . Related to radicalism and terrorism in Central Asia specifically, Mihalka  notes that the never-ending poverty, increasing inequality (nationally, regionally and across ethnic lines), rampant corruption and arbitrary nature of the governments in Central Asia as structural factors that lead to crisis in the region and spur recruitment into radical groups. In the context of terrorism in Indonesia, economic factor (e.g. poverty and social inequality) as a single variable is inadequate to be considered as structural factor that cause the rise of terrorism. Instead, a combination of structural factors at the global, national and sub national levels could be considered significant for the rise of terrorism in Indonesia .
Related to the cause of religious radicalism leading to terrorism in the largest Muslim population, Sukabdi  held interviews with a number of eminent religious scholars and figures in Indonesia to understand psychological transformation explaining how religious people turn to violence. The study shows that although religion is identified with the purpose of achieving both physical and spiritual well-being, as well as material and mental well-being, its expression in social level might lead to disputes and conflicts among societal members. In a context of society, faith can lead to radicalism when its variety of practices is compared with norms agreed by society . Further, the study shows that religious people could turn to violence because faith has expressions condensed in four levels which at times might contradict due to the presence of others with dissimilar expressions. The four levels of expressions of faith are (Figure 1): 1. Private level, where faith is expressed at individual level; 2. Communal level, where faith is expressed in family, neighborhood, place of worship, and close friends; 3. Public or social level, where faith is expressed at public domain with the presence of other religious believers, certain religious topics become sensitive issues to be discussed, and “a universal goodness” becomes a question (e.g. in electing appropriate leaders for society, in building appropriate rules for community, and in building shared public facilities); 4. State level, where faith is expressed at the domain of the state, such as in constitutions and policies (e.g. sharia law) . The study reveals that religious people could have different opinions and beliefs on the appropriate level to express faith and this could create conflicts among believers. Moreover, a set of traditional societal norms and values could play role as an element of dispute or a component of coherence .
Rehabilitation of religious terrorism offenders in Indonesia is defined as
“All type of efforts, through cooperation of various entities, whether in social, psychology, education, economic, culture, human resources or other related fields, into a continuous process, which aims to rehabilitate terrorism inmates so they are able to be back in society as a holistic individual both mentally, emotionally, economically, and socially, so as to achieve self-sufficiency, productive and useful to the state and society” .
Rambo  describes that it is possible for religious individuals to alter beliefs or experience ideology adjustment. The critical steps for this alteration are: 1. Context, 2. Crisis, 3. Quest, 4. Encounter, 5. Interaction, 6. Commitment and 7. Consequences. The steps were examined to more than 300 participants. In Indonesia, two types of psychological techniques to transform the offenders’ behavior are suggested: peripheral routes and central routes. Peripheral routes focus on developing quality of education, socioeconomic, and internal locus of control, whereas central routes focus on interpretations of sacred texts . This is supported by Hwang’s  study that found five shared pushes for disengagement from violence within Indonesian religious terrorism actors: pronounced disillusionment with bombing and other factors (e.g. roles, mindsets, ideology); development of relationship with those outside the jihadi circles; change of priorities; law enforcement soft approaches; and cost benefit analysis. Other studies about quitting illegal group (e.g. cults, gangs) also reveal that the presence of negative emotions (e.g. worries, fear, tired) associated with violence in group  and illegal activity performed by group  become predictors of members’ transformation and quitting the group.
The research will collect opinions from rehabilitators in terrorism field and former terrorism perpetrators about the best steps in rehabilitating religious terrorism offenders at prisons, internal psychological transformation in religious terrorism offenders occurred during treatment at prisons, and common observable positive changes in offenders’ behavior that indicate their learning process. It will be a grounded study to define steps in rehabilitating ideology-based terrorism offenders. The research consists of two separate studies which explore rehabilitators’ point of views in the first study and former offenders’ in the second one. The major questions to address in this research are: What are the best steps in rehabilitating religious terrorism offenders at prisons? How is former offenders’ internal psychological transformation occurred during treatment at prisons? Are there common observable positive changes in offenders’ behavior that show their learning process? And under what circumstances exclusiveness and inclusiveness function effectively at prisons for religious terrorism offenders?
A total of twenty terrorism rehabilitators at prisons in Indonesia between the age of 33 and 65 (mean: 42) and eighteen former terrorism offenders between the age of 45 and 58 (mean: 47) participated in this research. The participants of Study One (12 females, 8 males) were rehabilitators who had been handling terrorism cases in Indonesia for at least a year. 14 were graduated from the national correctional academy and 6 were from faculty of psychology who were trained in correctional center.
The participants of Study Two (all males) were Jamaah Islamiyah members and its affiliates (e.g. Al Qaeda, Jamaah Ansharut Tauhid) who were initially recruited at schools and camps, and used to pledge allegiance to movement figures such as Abu Bakar Bashir. Among these participants, ten were former prisoners charged with terrorism case in Indonesia, two were Malaysian ISA (Internal Security Act) former prisoners, four were former foreign fighters who had been released by law enforcement, and two were religious figures who were respected and recommended by 80% of former prisoners and acted as motivators in religious movement. They were graduated from junior high school (15), senior high school (2), and college (1) with no steady employment. The former offenders in Study Two came from different roles and involvement in terror actions, ranging from varied social hierarchy in their groups’ structures (from low-ranked technical level to high-ranked).
The names of former offenders to be involved as participants in Study Two were recommended by rehabilitators in Study One and law enforcement due to their reputation as change agents who succeeded in transforming people to disengage from violence and criminal activities. These participants practiced religious rituals and held on to their Islamic identity and culture shown in their daily life style (e.g. eating with right hand, wearing Islamic outfit, avoiding staring at eyes and handshake with women).
Procedure and material
This research consisted of two studies. Study One involved rehabilitators as participants who were facilitators or mentors of offenders , whereas Study Two involved former offenders as participants. Data of both studies were collected through two semistructured Focused Group Discussions (FGDs). FGD for rehabilitators was conducted at a correction center in Jakarta, whereas the FGD for former terrorism offenders was conducted at a restaurant in the same city. FGDs for two studies were held informally without recording due to sensitivity of issue of terrorism. In Study One, a two-hour FGD with rehabilitators as participants was held to discuss about: 1. Steps in prison rehabilitation, 2. Systematic common observable positive behavior changes, and 3. effectiveness of exclusiveness and inclusiveness at prisons. Furthermore, in Study Two, a two-hour FGD was also conducted with former offenders as participants to discuss about: 1. Internal psychological transformation during treatment at prisons, 2. Systematic common observable positive behavior changes, and 3. Effectiveness of exclusiveness and inclusiveness at prisons. FGDs were performed by a forensic psychologist who also acts as the author of this research.
FGD session with former offenders was conducted in traditional religious custom in order to build trust between researcher and participants. It used both Indonesian and Arabic terms to reach understanding of all parties. Questions and probes were listed to direct the FGD (Form 1 and Form 2). Seven steps of ideology conversion brought by Rambo  were also presented to stimulate the discussion. However, FGD guideline was not strictly applied in Study Two with former terrorism offenders in consideration of participants’ convenience. During FGDs, participants in both studies were open in answering questions. A small debate among rehabilitators in Study One occurred when discussing about ideal versus practical steps in rehabilitating offenders. The debate was related to situation of prison overcrowding as well as human rights issue. The researcher put down some notes during all FGDs (Study One and Study Two).
FGD Guideline for Rehabilitators
|1||In your opinion, what are things that need to be done at prisons to rehabilitate religious terrorism offenders. Can you put them in order? Do you have any suggestion about proper development methods for ideology-based terrorism offenders based on their motives?|
|2||Here are steps of conversion theory brought by Rambo . Is there a common observable positive change in offenders’ behavior showing their learning during rehabilitation? Can they be related to these steps by Rambo ? Can you put them in order based on your practices?|
|3||Under what circumstances exclusiveness and inclusiveness function effectively at prisons for ideology-based terrorism offenders?|
|1||Along with your own experience and observation towards your friends in the network, can you explain any internal psychological transformation that may be subjective happened to you and other terrorism convicts while at prisons?|
|2||Here are steps of conversion theory brought by Rambo . Is there a common observable positive change in convicts’ behavior showing their learning after imprisoned? Can they be related to these steps by Rambo ? Can you put them in order based on your observation?|
|3||Under what circumstances exclusiveness and inclusiveness function effectively at prisons for religious terrorism offenders?|
FGD Guideline for Former Offenders
Both Study One and Study Two in this grounded research used qualitative thematic analysis on participants’ answers. These themes included: steps in prison rehabilitation, internal psychological transformation during treatment at prisons, systematic common observable behavior changes, exclusiveness and inclusiveness. Simple quantitative analysis is also performed to find the percentages of participants raising and agreeing to particular terms. Participants’ answers and consensus were presented and pooled in matrices during discussions (Study One and Study Two) and reviewed promptly by participants to define steps in prison rehabilitation, internal psychological transformation at prisons, systematic common observable behavior changes, and effectiveness of inclusiveness and exclusiveness at prisons. Firstly, on “steps in prison rehabilitation” theme, all participants’ ideas for prison rehabilitation were put in a table followed by the flow agreed upon by all participants. The participants’ opinions about the proper development methods for religious terrorism offenders based on offenders’ motives were also probed and tabulated in matrices. Secondly, on “internal psychological transformation during at prisons” consent about internal psychological process of terrorism offenders was put in a flowchart with a description about the number of participants who agreed on the elements of process. Thirdly, on “systematic observable positive behavioral changes”, all participants’ ideas for common observable behavior changes were put in a table followed by consent about the process with a description about numbers of participants. Lastly, on “effectiveness of exclusiveness and inclusiveness at prisons”, all participants’ opinions about benefits and weaknesses of exclusiveness and inclusiveness were put in a table followed by a consent about potential circumstances in which each technique could be applied.
Steps in rehabilitating religious terrorism offenders at prisons
The study reveals several activities in rehabilitating ideologybased terrorism clients. During discussion in Study One, rehabilitators suggested activities which include pre-assessment on roles, motives, and background of offenders (100%), assessment on offenders’ behavior during rehabilitation (100%), planned program implementation (100%), placement and planning (90%), setting objectives of rehabilitation (55%), setting parameters of rehabilitation (50%), collecting recommendation for future rehabilitation programs (50%), conducting post assessment on offenders’ behavior and attitude (20%), evaluation by experts related to strategies and methods (15%) and review and change of approach (15%) (Table 2).
When probed to identify best steps in rehabilitation, rehabilitators suggested sequential activities: 1. Setting objectives of rehabilitation (suggested by 100% of participants) which is provided by authorities, 2. Setting parameters of rehabilitation (100%) which is expected to meet the goals of community or local wisdom, human rights concern and realistic point of view, 3. Pre-assessment on roles, motives, and background (80%) which presumably supplied by law enforcement due to resourcefulness, 4. Planning and placement (95%) which take into consideration exclusiveness and inclusiveness, 5. Rehabilitation process or program implementation (95%), which is expected to be tactical yet flexible, 6. Assessment during rehabilitation (70%), to be performed by a third party, 7. Reviews and changes of approaches (100%) with the goal of meeting the initial objectives, 8. Post-assessment (90%), performed by a third party, 9. Evaluation by experts (95%) which may involve academic institution, 10. Recommendation for future intervention/ activities (100%) and may involve the authorities (Table 3).
The findings in Study One also expose the practicability of best practices during rehabilitation. The concern about some complications and limited resources such as prison volume, time, human capacity and financial issue were raised regarding rehabilitation. In reality, due to limited resource, all rehabilitators agreed on the minimum steps to be taken in rehabilitation which are as follows: setting objectives of rehabilitation, parameters of rehabilitation, pre-assessment, planning and placement, program implementation and evaluation and recommendation (Table 4).
|Proposed Activities||Percentage of rehabilitators (N=20)|
|Evaluation by experts||15|
|Reviews and changes of approaches||15|
|Parameters of rehabilitation||50|
|Recommendation (for future programs)||50|
|Objectives of rehabilitation||55|
|Placement and planning||90|
|Client pre-assessment (roles, motives, and background)||100|
|Assessment during rehabilitation||100|
Table 2: Proposed activities in rehabilitating ideology-based terrorism offenders.
|No||Activities||Percentage of rehabilitators
|I||Objectives of rehabilitation||100|
|II||Parameters of rehabilitation||100|
|III||Client pre-assessment (roles, motives and background)||80|
|IV||Planning and placement||95|
|V||Rehabilitation process (program implementation)||95|
|VI||Assessment during rehabilitation||70|
|VII||Reviews and changes of approaches||100|
|IX||Evaluation by experts||95|
|X||Recommendation (for future programs)||100|
Table 3: Best steps proposed in rehabilitating ideology-based terrorism offenders.
|Sequences||Activities||Percentage of rehabilitators(N=20)|
|I||Objectives of rehabilitation||100|
|II||Parameters of rehabilitation||100|
|IV||Planning and placement||100|
|V||Rehabilitation process (program implementation)||100|
|VI||Evaluation and recommendation||100|
Table 4: Shortened steps in rehabilitating ideology-based terrorism offenders.
|Motives||Ideological-religious||Religious dialogue, Advocacy||Religious dialogue, Advocacy||Religious education, Advocacy|
|Communal solidarity||Advocacy||Empowerment, Advocacy||Empowerment, Advocacy|
|Mob mentality||Advocacy||Advocacy||Empowerment, Advocacy|
|The methods can be modified in each role and motive if there is evidence that the perpetrator show unfavorable behavior. Continuous assessments by terrorism experts or a third party are recommended|
No. of rehabilitators=20.
Table 5: Development methods for ideology-based terrorism offenders by motives and roles.
In terms of self-development methods for offenders, participants of Study One explained that the method used for offenders can be adjusted based on motive and role, as seen in Table 5. Religious dialogue is proposed in rehabilitating leader and middle management clients who have ideological-religious motives, whereas advocacy or assistance such as encouragement to change is proposed to be applied to all motives and roles. Moreover, empowerment is suggested to be applied to middle management clients who have social or solidarity motive and also to followers who have solidarity motive, blunt obedience (mob mentality) and separatism drive. The participants agreed on the importance of providing religious education to followers, and counseling to followers who have revenge and insecurity or situational motives. It is also important to provide leader clients with personal counseling by senior rehabilitators when special circumstance occurs such as when social pressure, insecurity, or anxiety is present. In terms of responsiveness, participants agreed that methods in rehabilitating can be modified for each role and motive when there is evidence that the clients still support or manage terror activities outside of prisons. Therefore, participants recommended continuous assessments of clients by behavioral terrorism experts or a third party.
Psychological transformation during treatment at prisons
Study Two exposes psychological transformation reported by former terrorism offenders referring to their personal experience and observation towards groups inside prisons. From a total of 18 former offenders, most offenders suggested on the presence of five phases of internal psychological change which is put in matrices during discussion. The following five phases are: searching for meaning and purpose of life linked to belief system (reported by 100% of offenders), self-exploration, review on strategies, tools, and behavior in relation to social context (e.g. self-introspection, self-criticism) (100%), selfconfidence and self-reliance (89%), achievement that is acknowledged in broader context and society (78%) and accepting feedback regarding changes and self-improvement (72%).
Systematic observed positive behavioral changes
Alongside internal psychological transformation, observable positive behavioral changes as the result of learning during designed rehabilitation are identified in Study One. Rehabilitators reported modification of behaviors at prisons such as observable self-criticism or quest (reported by 50% participants), observed confusion and crisis to favorable changes (85%), new commitment to detach from violence (90%), encounter or denounce violence on mass media (95%), observable readiness for coexistence and context awareness (95%), observable acceptance to consequences which includes observed persistence, stress tolerance and endurance against intimidation from previous network (95%) and cooperativeness and interaction with out-group (100%) (Tables 6-8). Furthermore, rehabilitators put the following observable behavior in sequence: 1. Context (agreed by 100% participants) which is related to childhood, educational, social, and family background, 2. Crisis (80%), which could occur simultaneously with 3. Quest (75%) and 4. Encounter (75%), 5. Interact (70%) which could happen together with 6. Commitment (70%) and lastly 7. Consequences (85%) which become a new context of change. Rehabilitators also explained denial and forgetting mechanism could intervene with the process of psychological rehabilitation. They suggested the presence of trust between counselor and client, as well as counselor’s genuineness, to gain successful holistic rehabilitation process (Figure 2).
|Phases||Percentage of participants raising the phase
|I. Searching for meaning and purpose of life||100|
|II.Self-exploration to match with social context (e.g. self-II.I.introspection, self-criticism)||100|
|VI. Accepting feedback and self-improvement||72|
Table 6: Internal psychological transformation of former terrorism offenders.
|Observed changes||Percentage of rehabilitators reporting
|Commitment (to detach from violence)||90|
|Encounter (denounce violence)||95|
|Context (social openness before and after programs)||95|
|Consequences (stress tolerance and endurance to negative feedbacks)||95|
Table 7: Terrorism offender’s observed positive changes in designed treatment.
In Study Two, former offenders reported observable changes of inmates’ behaviors such as accomplishment/product creation (reported by 56% of participants), peace message/encounter to violence in interfaith dialogues (61%), statements of self-introspection and selfquestioning leading to a more favorable attitude (83%), crisis and problem leading to self-exploration (94%), and constructive changes in attitudes before and after treatment (100%) (Table 9). Former offenders also put observable behaviors in order of: 1. Context (100% participants) including childhood, educational background, and exposure, 2. Crisis (83%) concurrently with 3. Quest (56%), 4. Encountering violence and showing more favorable attitudes and behavior (94%) which may occasionally occur during the third phase or even the last phase before released from prison, and 5. accomplishment (94%) which can occur simultaneously in previous phases.
|No.||Observed Changes||Percentage of rehabilitators
|I||Context||100||Childhood, educational, social and family background|
|II||Crisis||80||Crisis-Quest-Encounter could occur concurrently|
|III||Quest||75||Crisis-Quest-Encounter could occur concurrently|
|IV||Encounter||75||Crisis-Quest-Encounter could occur concurrently|
|V||Interact (cooperativeness)||70||Interact-Commitment could occur in once|
|VI||Commitment||70||Interact-Commitment could occur in once|
|VII||Consequences||85||Consequences become a new context|
Table 8: Systematic of terrorism offender’s observed positive changes in designed treatment.
|Observed changes||Percentage of former offenders reporting (N=18)|
|Context (old and new context)||100|
Table 9: Terrorism offender’s observed positive changes reported by former offenders.
Effectiveness of exclusiveness and inclusiveness at prisons
Both Study One and Study Two explore effectiveness of exclusiveness and inclusiveness in rehabilitating terrorism offenders. The aspects to be considered by participants in assessing effectiveness are violence, ideology, wellbeing, assessment feasibility, motivation to future terrorism act, capability to conduct terrorism act, and efficiency. Exclusiveness or isolating terrorism inmates at prison is agreed to have the following advantages: limiting the spread of violent behavior (reported by 90% of rehabilitators and 50% of former offenders), limiting potential for riot (85% rehabilitators, 44% former offenders), limiting the spread of violent ideology (90% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders), increasing prisoners’ sense of privacy (53% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders), allowing individual treatment to each prisoner (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders), improving private development program to prisoners (90% rehabilitators, 44% former offenders), increasing emotional stability of prison officers (85% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders), helping prison officers to concentrate in developing prisoners’ positive potential (90% rehabilitators), increasing prison officers’ mental and physical health (90% rehabilitators), increasing prison officers’ confidence (85% rehabilitators), helping assessors to focus on risk validation (90% rehabilitators), limiting potential recruitment of violent movement at prison (90% rehabilitators, 28% former offenders), reducing risks of transferring violent capability at prison (90% rehabilitators, 17% former offenders), and reducing immaterial cost such as potential vandalism or anarchy (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders). However, it has several disadvantages such as increasing prejudice outside prisons (15% rehabilitators, 83% former offenders), increasing potential violent provocative movement outside prisons (15% rehabilitators, 33% former offenders), increasing spread of violent propaganda outside prisons (85% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), increasing potential neglect for offenders’ basic need for social support (15% rehabilitators, 89% former offenders), limiting prison officers’ exposure to difficult terrorism cases (15% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders), increasing potential recruitment of violent movement outside prisons (20% rehabilitators, 89% former offenders), and increasing costs on prison management and buildings (80% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders). Further, advantages and disadvantages of inclusiveness at prisons is agreed to be the reverse of exclusiveness (Tables 10-12).
|No.||Observed changes||Percentage of former offenders
Table 10: Systematic behavioral changes in terrorism offenders.
|Violence||Limiting spread of violent behavior at prisons (90% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders)||Increasing prejudice outside prisons (15% rehabilitators, 83% former offenders)|
|Limiting potential riot at prisons (85% rehabilitators, 44% former offenders)||Increasing potential violent provocative movement outside prisons (15% rehabilitators, 33% former offenders)|
|Violent ideology||Limiting spread of violent ideology at prisons (90% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders)||Increasing spread of violent propaganda outside prisons (85% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders)|
|Prisoners’ well-being||Increasing prisoners’ sense of privacy (53% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)||Increasing potential neglects for offenders’ need for social support (15% rehabilitators, 89% former offenders)|
|Allowing individual treatment to each prisoner (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)||-|
|Improving private development program to prisoners (90% rehabilitators, 44% former offenders)||-|
|Prison officer’s well-being||Increasing emotional stability of prison officers (85% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)||-|
|Helping prison officers to concentrate in developing prisoners’ positive potential (90% rehabilitators)||Limiting prison officers’ exposure to difficult terrorism cases (15% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)|
|Increasing prison officers’ mental and physical health (90% rehabilitators)||-|
|Increasing prison officers’ confidence (85% rehabilitators)||-|
|Assessment||Helping assessors to focus on risk validation (90% rehabilitators)||-|
|Motivation to terrorism||Limiting potential recruitment of violent movement at prisons (90% rehabilitators, 28% former offenders)||Increasing potential recruitment of violent movement outside prisons (20% rehabilitators, 89% former offenders)|
|Capability to terrorism||Reducing risks in violent capability being transferred at prison (90% rehabilitators, 17% former offenders)||-|
|Efficiency||Reducing immaterial cost such as potential vandalism, chaos, and so on (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)||Increasing costs on prison management and buildings (80% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders)|
No. of rehabilitators=20; Former offenders=18.
Table 11: Strengths and weaknesses of prison exclusiveness.
|Violence||Reducing prejudice outside prisons toward prisons authorities (20% rehabilitators, 83% former offenders)||Increasing tension leading to violence at prisons (90% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders)|
|Reducing potential violent provocative movement outside prisons (20% rehabilitators, 89% former offenders)||Increasing level of potential riot at prisons (70% rehabilitators, 28% former offenders)|
|Violent ideology||Reducing spread of violent propaganda outside prisons (20% rehabilitators, 83% former offenders)||Furthering spread of violent ideology at prisons (90% rehabilitators, 44% former offenders)|
|-||Increasing prison officers’ vulnerability to recruitment (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)|
|Prisoners’ well-being||Increasing social support for offenders (65% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders)||Opposing prisoners’ privacy (65% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)|
|Increasing emotional support for offenders (70% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders)||Inhibiting private assistance to prisoners (80% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)|
|Increasing emotional support for offenders (50% rehabilitators, 89% former offenders)||Exposing tailor-made individual development program to prisoners (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)|
|Prison officers’ well-being||-||Risking prison officers’ emotional stability (85% rehabilitators, 17% former offenders)|
|Allowing prison officers’ exposure to thought-provoking terrorism cases (5% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)||Distracting prison officers in developing prisoners’ positive potential (90% rehabilitators)|
|-||Jeopardizing prison officers’ mental and physical health (85% rehabilitators)|
|Assessment||-||Deterring assessors to focus on risk validation (65% rehabilitators)|
|Motivation to terrorism||-||Increasing potential recruitment of violent movement at prisons (90% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders)|
|Capability to terrorism||-||Encouraging transfer of knowledge and capability of terrorism inside prison (95% rehabilitators, 11% former offenders)|
|Efficiency||No cost for prison physical layout (70% rehabilitators, 50% former offenders)||Increasing potential intangible cost (e.g. tension at prisons) (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders)|
N of rehabilitators=20, former offenders=18 .
Table 12: Strengths and weaknesses of prison inclusiveness.
The findings of Study One and Study Two recommend circumstances where exclusiveness is best to be applied. Exclusiveness at prison is effective for terrorism offenders who are driven by power motives (proposed by 95% of rehabilitators), identified to have high capacity in recruiting, technical, Chemical-Biological-Radioactive- Nuclear capability and military (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders), fill high-rank position in violent network structure (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders), play a role as commander in violent group structure (90% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders), play a role as organizer or middle manager (90% rehabilitators, 11% former offenders), play a role as recruiter (90% rehabilitators, 11% former offenders) or are involved with to global violent group (85% rehabilitators, 6% former offenders) (Table 13). On the other hand, inclusiveness is seen to be effective to offenders who have favorable level of emotional stability (90% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), admit mistakes (90% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), show favorable attitudes and cooperativeness (90% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), express openness and tolerance to other believers or out-group (90% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), show willingness to attend self-development programs (90% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), request to join rehabilitation program (90% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), fill low-rank position in violent network structure (53% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), were dominantly driven by social, situational (e.g. insecurity, threaten, broken home, trapped) and financial motives when involved with terrorism act (53% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders), have no connection with global violent group (90% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders) or have low capability to conduct terrorism act (85% rehabilitators, 94% former offenders) (Table 14).
This research has described steps in rehabilitating ideology-based terrorism offenders at prisons based on first-hand experience of rehabilitators in the field. As a grounded theory it explores internal psychological transformation of religious terrorism offenders taking place during treatment and common observable behavioral changes seen during treatment. The research provides former religious terrorism offenders’ viewpoint combined with rehabilitators’ to understand the different perspectives.
The research findings on steps in rehabilitating religious terrorism offenders and systematic behavioral changes support findings in previous study on terrorism offenders’ rehabilitation in Indonesia which emphasize on sustainable long-term technique and structure of phases . The findings also support theories on change management or learning: unfreezing, change freezing , and counseling and its process [30-33] which emphasize on stages such as relationship building, assessment, goal setting, intervention and termination. Further, the findings on rehabilitation steps prove a gap between ideal and pragmatic circumstances perceived by rehabilitators of terrorism offenders which need to be addressed to reach effective behavioral transformation process. The findings indicate rehabilitators’ difficulties in conducting multiple tasks of transforming and assessing offenders’ behavior simultaneously.
The findings on phases of psychological transformation and systematic behavioral changes in this research take into account former terrorism offenders’ observation towards self and other offenders. Hence, former terrorism offenders’ observation and consciousness to self and others [26,34] are valued to understand the mechanism of psychological transformation during treatment at prisons. As active agents, former offenders are asked to review and report their own personal experience to provide involvement for future improvement in rehabilitation efforts. This is in line with andragogy principle [35,36] as in to put former offender to be reliable individuals to set up goals for learning process at prisons.
|Â? No.||Circumstances for prison exclusiveness||Percentage of rehabilitators proposing (N=20)||Percentage of former offenders proposing (N=18)|
|1||Power motives involved||95||0|
|2||High capability involved (in recruiting, technical, Chemical-Biological-Radioactive-Nuclear capability, and military)||90||6|
|3||High-ranked type of offenders in violent network structure||90||6|
|4||For subjects with role as commanders in violent group structure||90||6|
|5||Subjects as organizers or middle managers in violent network||90||11|
|6||Subjects as recruiters (in role)||90||11|
|7||Cases of terrorism with link to international/global violent group||85||6|
Table 13: Circumstances for prison exclusiveness.
|No.||Circumstances for prison inclusiveness||Percentage of rehabilitators proposing
|Percentage of former offenders proposing
|1||For subjects with favorable level of emotional stability||90||94|
|2||For subjects who admit mistakes||90||94|
|3||For subjects who are cooperative||90||94|
|4||For subjects who show openness/tolerance to other believers||90||94|
|5||For subjects who are willing to attend self-development programs||90||94|
|6||For subjects who join rehabilitation program||90||94|
|7||For subjects as followers in violent network structure||53||94|
|8||Cases with social motives domination||53||94|
|9||Cases with economy/financial motives domination||53||94|
|10||Cases with situational motives (e.g. insecurity, threaten, broken home, trapped) domination||53||94|
|11||Cases of local riot (not globally)||90||94|
|12||Low capability involved||85||94|
Table 14: Circumstances for prison inclusiveness.
In terms of prison exclusiveness and inclusiveness, this research explores circumstances in which exclusiveness and inclusiveness work effectively. The findings provide critical contribution for wideranging incongruities among human rights concern, risk valuation, and educational apprehension. Moreover, the research shows that higher percentage of rehabilitators suggests exclusiveness than inclusiveness, whereas higher percentage of former offenders suggests inclusiveness. This could lead to advance research on cultural approach to terrorism offenders’ rehabilitation in Indonesia. Further researches on cost management in prison exclusiveness and inclusiveness, social and psychological criminogenic risk factors, behavior indicators and protection on risk assessment, and responsiveness to needs of former terrorism offenders are also recommended to comprehend cultural context as well as preeminent model for rehabilitation of religious terrorism offenders in Indonesia.