ON REFORMING THE PENAL SYSTEM
Program of Chief Penal Board, RF Ministry of Justice*
The draft Conception on reforming the penal system of the RF
Ministry of Justice envisages the following lines of change:
- correcting the state’s criminal policy; expanding the grounds for applying
penalties and measures of restraint alternative to imprisonment or custody;
- further delineation of jurisdiction between federal bodies and the subjects
of the Russian Federation in matters of administering and ensuring the
functioning of the penal system’s institutions;
- changing the structure of penal institutions, going over to serving
sentences by different categories of convicts in a single institution with their
separate maintenance, depending on number of convictions and danger to public
safety; this would curtail massive convict transfer across the country, slashing
the Chief Penal Board’s transportation expenses, would allow convicts to serve
prison terms in the area of their residence or conviction;
- training personnel with a new mentality, highly professional and willing to
work in this field of activity, capable of a positive attitude to the
requirements of international standards of treating convicts;
- further humanizing the criminal, criminal-procedural and penal legislation;
creating conditions and penal regulations providing for the social and legal
protection of convicts, suspects, and defenders in criminal proceedings,
ensuring their constitutional rights to personal safety, to protection of health
and property, to education;
- restructuring and reforming the penal system’s industrial sector.
Correction of criminal policy should be carried out along the
following lines:
1. Discarding the unjustifiably wide use of custody as a measure of
restraint.
Every year every fourth person is released from custody in
pre-trial detention centres before trial (some 125 thousand people). Applying
other remedies to such persons, would reduce also the number of prison
sentences, since in regard of defenders who had been in custody during
preliminary investigation, the courts, as a rule, mete out the penalty of
imprisonment.
It is necessary to substantially expand the list and
practical application of remedies alternative to custody: bail, suretyship,
house arrest and other. Putting in custody during preliminary investigation
should be applied mainly to offenders who commit grave and especially grave
crimes. In regard to suspects and defenders who commit crimes of little and
medium gravity detention should be used in exceptional cases with special
proviso in the law.
2. Slashing the terms of those in the custody of
investigatory bodies and the courts.
At present such terms are unjustifiably extended, while the
courts are generally unrestricted in sentencing. As a result, from the moment of
arrest to the verdict at trial, a person may spend in custody many years (at
times up to 5-6 years). It is essential to limit substantially the time of
detention of defendants during preliminary investigation and trial. Changing
remedies of restraint from detention to other kinds puts no time limits on the
period of preliminary investigation and trial, which may be of any length.
3. Extending the use of remedies alternative to
imprisonment.
The 1996 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation postponed to
the year 2001 the application of such penalties as compulsory labour, arrest and
restriction of liberty. Even after 2001 their application seems impossible,
since the necessary resources are lacking. In this connection the introduction
of these new kinds of remedies should be postponed till 2009.
Fines are used as a punishment to a limited degree because of
the impoverishment of the bulk of the population. Also very seldom used by the
courts is corrective labour because of unemployment. In nearly every third case
sentences to this kind of punishment are not executed in reality.
Other kinds of penalties also prove of little effect. And it
is precisely for this reason that the courts unjustifiably frequently resort to
the penalty of imprisonment.
Punishment in the form of sending convicts to
settlement-colonies — institutions of a semi-open type, may become an
alternative to real imprisonment. Lists of the kinds and categories of people,
who may be sentenced to such a penalty, should be extended. This could be done
by restoring the settlement-colonies which formerly existed for offenders who
had committed intentional offences of little and medium gravity and sentenced to
terms of punishment under 5 years. Besides, it is proposed to send to such
settlement-colonies those who commit offences of neglect, irrespective of length
of term.
In the prevailing circumstances, such a penalty as
confiscation of property should be used to the utmost, but changing it in
character, content and grounds for application. First of all, this remedy should
be transferred from the category of additional, to that of principal and
additional. Confiscation of part or all property should be used not only in
cases when it is directly stipulated under the law, but as an alternative to
imprisonment as well.
4. Expanding the grounds and ways of using various kinds of
early release from serving a sentence.
Among other proposals, it is suggested to curtail the
duration of the actually served prison time, required for submitting a case for
a convict’s conditional early release (instead of three fourths – two
thirds, instead of two thirds – half, instead of half – a third of the
term), to submit for early release of women having young children up to 12 years
of age (at present — up to 8 years). All this will help to shorten the stay of
convicts in corrective institutions.
The suggested remedies will make possible a considerable
reduction of the number of detainees in pre-trial detention centres and guarded
corrective institutions. The Chief Penal Board estimates that the introduction
of remedies suggested only in clauses 1 and 2, would reduce the population of
pre-trial detention centres by 80-100 thous. people; adding to this those
released from these centers before trial, will bring the reduction to more than
200 thous. a year.
