ABSTRACT
This chapter describes the roles and responsibilities of parties involved in the decision-making process. In the case of non-compliance with a community sentence, in most jurisdictions there are at least three parties involved: direct supervisors, probation officers and judges. In the early release phase the main actors are parole officers, boards, prison governors and judges. Empirical research based on the use of vignettes, however, reveals the existence of further and less obvious actors, such as team coordinators for probation staff and public prosecutors. This contribution starts with describing two theoretical notions that were used to analyse the data deriving from the country chapters and vignettes: the constructionist approach and a serial conception of decision-making. It describes the different actors and possible layers of decision-making in breach processes and how they differ across the jurisdictions. Then it looks at how the different actors cooperate and communicate to produce decisions stemming from (perceived) non-compliance and how the role of the offender differs in different phases of the decision-making process and in the various jurisdictions. It also describes who can be identified as final decision-makers in the different jurisdictions and if these final decision-makers also have real power to decide and under what circumstances. Finally it pays attention to the aims and rationalities of the different actors, including the tensions and contradictions between them and emphasizes the importance of transparency and good communication between the actors to prevent these aims from working against each other.
