punishment across europe. prison and probation challenges. natalia delgrande

1

Prison and Probation Challenges

Punishment across Europe

Natalia Delgrande, part-time lecturer & research associate School of Criminal Sciences, University of Lausanne, Switzerland

VIII Annual Conference of Legal Assessment in Prisons (Compartim Knowledge Manadgment Programme of Department of Justice in Catalonia)

Barcelona, October, 1st, 2014

Avís legalAquesta obra està subjecta a una llicència Reconeixement 3.0 de Creative Commons. Se'n permet la reproducció, la distribució, la comunicació del material sempre que se citi l’autoria del material i el Centre d’Estudis Jurídics i Formació Especialitzada (Departament de Justícia) i no se'n faci un ús comercial ni es transformi per generar obres derivades. La llicència Reconeixement–No comercial–Sense obres derivades es pot consultar a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/deed.ca .

Contents

1. Introduction (SPACE project)

2. Current situation in Prison and Probation

3. Evolution…

4. Prison versus Probation: what alternatives?

5. Probation… or “alternatives” to Probation?

6. Conclusion (avenues for reflection…)

3

1. Introduction (SPACE project)

PROJECT

1. CoE tool for practice and research

2. GOAL: Long-time series & target an.

3. BASIS: Strong methodological background

NETWORK

1. National Prison and Probation administrations

2. Researchers3. National &

International organisations

RESEARCH

1. R&D: validity of the raw-data

2. Update of the definitions

3. Comparability4. Indicators

PRACTICE

1. Professional toolbox for reforms

2. Annual [internal] reports

3. Projections4. …

4

2.1 Prison 2.2 Probation

5

2.1 Current situation in Prison [2012]

RUS

TUR

ESP

UKR

FRA

FIN

SWE

DEU

ITA

POL

NOR

BLR

ROU

ISL

BGR

GRC

PRT

IRL

AZE

CZE

SRB

AUT HUN

LVA

LTU

GEO

BIH

SVK

HRV

EST

UK:ENG&WAL

CHE

BEL

NLD

ALB

ARM

MKD

SVN

UK:SCO

MDA

DNK

MNE

UK:NIR

CYP

LUX

AND

MLT

LIE

SMRMCO

PRISON POPULATIONPER 100,000 INHABITANTS

1ST SEPTEMBER 2012

Less than 100

From 100 to less than 150



250 and over

Data not supplied

Not a CoE Member State

HIGHEST Prison Pop. Rates (more than 200 inmates per 100,000 inhabitants):

MEDIAN European Prison Population Rate

126 inmates per 100,000 inhab.

1. Georgia=5162. Russia=5023. Lithuania=3344. Ukraine=3335. Latvia=3036. Estonia=2587. Azerbaijan=2288. Poland=2189. Czech Rep.=21610. Slovak Rep.=205

6


Occupancy: 98 inmates per 100 places in custody

Length: 9 months spent in custody during 2011

Price: 103 € per inmate/day in 2011

7

2.1 The most recent situation in EU Prisons [2014]

PPR in 2012

PPR in 2014

Decrease

8


PPR in the EU member states decreased between Sept. 2012 and Jan. 2014. But…

1. …without constitutive raw-data impossible to make any target analysis;

2. …the period is definitively too short to rely any policy change;

3. …there is a risk of over-interpretation of presumed positive actions…

9

2.2 Current situation in Probation [2012]

RUS

TUR

ESP

UKR

FRA

FIN

SWE

DEU

ITA

POL

NOR

BLR

ROU

ISL

BGR

GRC

PRT

IRL

AZE

CZE

SRB

AUT HUN

LVA

LTU

GEO

BIH

SVK

HRV

EST

UK:ENG&WAL

CHE

BEL

NLD

ALB

ARM

MKD

SVN

UK:SCO

MDA

DNK

MNE

UK:NIR

CYP

LUX

AND

MLT

LIE

SMRMCO

PROBATION POPULATIONPER 100,000 INHABITANTS

1ST SEPTEMBER 2012

Less than 100





300 and over

Data not supplied


HIGHEST Prob. Pop. Rates (more than 300 probationers per 100,000 inhab.):

MEDIAN European Probation Population Rate

176 persons per 100,000 inhab.

1. Turkey=8302. Georgia=7363. Estonia=5294. Poland=5245. Belgium=3526. Russia=3267. Czech Rep.=[321]

10

2.2 Current situation in Probation [2012]

Underrepresented

Overrepresented

Overrepresented

JUVENILES*

FEMALES*

FOREIGNERS*

sss

(*median values)

11

3.1 Prison 3.2 Probation

12

3.1 Prison trends [2000-2012]

MEDIAN = +1.4%/annuallyAVERAGE = +1.5%/annually

Among EU countries, 1/4 are continuously reducing Prison Population Rates.

ANNUAL AVERAGE

VARIATION[AAV]

13

3.2 Probation trends [2001-2012]On the basis of the example of Community Service

RUS

TUR

ESP

UKR

FRA

FIN

SWE

DEU

ITA

POL

NOR

BLR

ROU

ISL

BGR

GRC

PRT

IRL

AZE

CZE

SRB

AUT HUN

LVA

LTU

GEO

BIH

SVK

HRV

EST

UK:ENG&WAL

CHE

BEL

NLD

ALB

ARM

MKD

SVN

UK:SCO

MDA

DNK

MNE

UK:NIR

CYP

LUX

AND

MLT

LIE

SMRMCO


FLOW DURING 2001

CS does not exist

No data available

Less than 20



100 and over

Not a CoE Member StateRUS

TUR

ESP

UKR

FRA

FIN

SWE

DEU

ITA

POL

NOR

BLR

ROU

ISL

BGR

GRC

PRT

IRL

AZE

CZE

SRB

AUT HUN

LVA

LTU

GEO

BIH

SVK

HRV

EST

UK:ENG&WAL

CHE

BEL

NLD

ALB

ARM

MKD

SVN

UK:SCO

MDA

DNK

MNE

UK:NIR

CYP

LUX

AND

MLT

LIE

SMRMCO


FLOW DURING 2009

CS does not exist

No data available

Less than 20




150 and over


RUS

TUR

ESP

UKR

FRA

FIN

SWE

DEU

ITA

POL

NOR

BLR

ROU

ISL

BGR

GRC

PRT

IRL

AZE

CZE

SRB

AUT HUN

LVA

LTU

GEO

BIH

SVK

HRV

EST

UK:ENG&WAL

CHE

BEL

NLD

ALB

ARM

MKD

SVN

UK:SCO

MDA

DNK

MNE

UK:NIR

CYP

LUX

AND

MLT

LIE

SMRMCO


FLOW DURING 2012

CS does not exist

No data available

Less than 20






300 and over


14

4.1 Background 4.2 Alternatives? 4.3 Challenges

15

4.1 Background

ss

Rate of persons under CSM per 100,000 inh., 2012

Prison Population Rate per 100,000 inh., 2012

Countries with a high prison population tend to have the highest total judicialized populations.

Almost ¾ of the EU countries increased their PPR [2000-2012] and reached highest CSM rates [more than 300].

Among the countries that reduced their PPR (8), there are only Estonia and Latvia that had high CSM rates [more than 200] in 2012.

16

4.2 Alternatives?Recommendations: pre-trial detention

use of alternatives

46%46%2010 2012201137%

Yes

No YesNo

YesNo

No data

No data

No data

17

4.2 Alternatives? Special case: Foreigners

1. Increase of the proportion of foreign inmates in

custody [2000-2012]: +2%/annually

2. In 2012, about 40% of all non-national prisoners

across EU countries were EU-citizens

Framework Decisions [FD] on the transfer of prisoners and on probation are not fully implemented

18

4.2 Alternatives? Short sentences

How many under alternatives…?

19

4.3 Challenges

20

5.1 Do we need it? 5.2 Example…

21

5.1 Do we need it?

1. Probation became part of the CJS

2. The misuse of the “fashionable” practices contributes to the net-widening effect

3. Sometimes, the criminal stigma persists

4. At the implementation level… “we cannot change the law but we can apply it in a different way” (specialised educator)

22

5.2 Example…of misuse

Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)4 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on electronic monitoring

“SCOPE:

• […] It is also intended to bring to the attention of national authorities that particular care needs to be taken when using electronic monitoring not to undermine or replace the building of constructive professional relationships with suspects and offenders by competent staff dealing with them in the community […]”

“STAFF:

• 5. Staff entrusted with the imposition or execution of electronic monitoring shall be regularly updated and trained on the handling, use and impact of the equipment on the persons concerned.

• 6. Staff shall be trained to install and uninstall technology and provide technical assistance and support in order to ensure the efficient and accurate functioning of the equipment.”

Victim Marie: 19 y. old womanPerpetrator’s ex-girlfriend

Perpetrator Claude D.: 40 y. old man

Facts Mai, 2013: Sequestrated, raped, and murdered Marie

Prior criminal record

Jan., 1998: Sequestration, rape, and murder of his ex-girlfriend

EM End of the 20 years’ prison sentence at 2/3 of his sentence home arrest with EM (ankle bracelet without GPS)

Risk Among 10 most dangerous offenders in Switzerland (psychopathic personality)

23

DEU & CHE:

New forms of penal sanctions [measures]. Enforcement in “appropriate” institutions

1.Socio-therapeutic institutions (sometimes private & fully extra-judicial) together with voluntary placements…

2.Centres for drug and alcohol addicts…

5.2 Example…of [promising] use

24

5.2 Example…of [promising] use

CJ: penal measure

(sentence imposed)

0

FEEDBACK social

inclusion

Final

Extra-penal institutions

2.1

ENFORCEMENT Execution

authority: start point of the

network

1

Judicial partnership (not control)

cPro-social desinstitu alisation

a

If needed: custodial network

2.2

Education +

treatment

b

25

Conclusion

STATISTICAL conditions:1. (Formal) rules of the collection and production of statistics

2. (Informal) application of these rules

LEGAL conditions:1. (Formal) differences between legislation and legal process

2. (Informal) differences relating to their application

IMPLEMENTATION conditions:1. Reliability on the network level (legal, implementation, results)

2. Likelihood of detection of specific cases

3. Reporting propensities between services concerned , etc.

(Based on Westfelt & Estrada, 2005)

26

Conclusion

Alternatives… Yes! But alternatives to what?...New persons new Probation statistics……but how many of them are under alternatives to custody?

National and international projections… do they follow the same trend?

1. CoE recommendations go in the line with the reduction of the use of custody by… implementing alternatives.

2. In some European countries, the national figures show the increase in both, prison and probation populations.

3. New forms of CSM: is there always a need of something new? meta-analyses are not unanimous…

27

Thank you for your attention!

…or…

www.unil.ch/space

[email protected]

http://www.unil.ch/space

mailto:[email protected]