Prison reform is any change made to either improve the lives of people living inside of prisons, the lives of people impacted by crimes, or improve the effectiveness of incarceration by lowering recidivism rates. Iterations of prisons have existed since time immemorial, with different cultures using a variety of methods to punish those who are seen as having done wrong by the society’s standards. As long as these forms of punishment have existed, so has prison reform history. For much of history, the prison acted as a temporary holding place for people who would soon go to trial, be physically punished, killed, or exiled. In 1215, King John of England signed into law that any prisoner must go through a trial before being incarcerated.
The beginning of the kind of prison, where people were charged with a sentence and expected to rehabilitate within the walls of the prison, emerged in England in the 19th century. The Prison Reform Movement of the late 19th & early 20th centuries was a part of the progressive era that occurred in the United States due to increasing industrialization, population, and poverty. Reforms during this era included the introduction of probation and parole and the termination of chain gangs and, in some states, prison labor.
Many analysts experience that one of the primary goals of prisons is to reintegrate convicts into society. A modern-day jail has capabilities of custody, care, control, correction, cure and integration to community. These principles have become the custom in most prison systems in the developed world. Prisons now are called correctional facilities and their stated aim is to reintegrate the person into society.
Retribution in criminal justice has played a major role in the use of punishment as a form of case resolution.
Imprisonment of an individual has a direct bearing on human rights as well as overall peace of any society. The philosophy behind punishment is the reformation and re-integration of the offender instead of inflicting pain and torment.
There are three main theories of punishment system i.e. Retributive, Utilitarian & Restorative. Retributive justice is defined as a form of justice that is committed to give wrongdoers punishments that are proportionate to their crimes. Retribution, meaning ”repayment”, comes from the Old French retribution, retribucion and also directly from the Latin retibutionem meaning ”recompense, repayment”. It is the belief that individuals should receive what they deserve according to their actions. Retribution in criminal justice has played a major role in the use of punishment as a form of case resolution. The proponents of this theory argued that punishment by coercion of force is key in establishing justice and effectively punishing criminals in order to prevent future crimes.
Utilitarian Rationale strives to punish criminals to discourage, or “deter,” future crimes. Utilitarian’s realize that a crime-free society does not exist, but they attempt to perpetrate only as much punishment as is essential to avoid future crimes. The utilitarian theory is “consequentialist” in nature. It insists that punishment has concerns for both the offender and society and holds that the total positive gains by the punishment should surpass the entire evil.
Restorative Rationale focuses primarily on revamping the damage initiated by the wrongful act and reinstating, as much as possible, the welfare of all those involved. It imitates a more relational theory of justice as it stresses the reinstatement of esteem, impartiality, and self-respect to the associations affected by offenders. Restorative justice is called ‘restorative’ because it works with the restorative procedures, that is, procedures that restore action, ownership and decision-making power to those affected by the hurtful event – victims, lawbreakers, their followers and the wider community. Furthermore, restorative justice is also stranded in feminist social theory, based on the relational nature of human beings and an understanding of the self as established in and through relationships with others.
Pakistan inherited an outdated prison system from the British colonial regime in India and it hasn’t changed much in over 200 years. Even today, the Prisons Act 1894 and the Prisoners Act 1900 are the main laws governing prisons and prisoners in Pakistan. One can argue that our punishment system is structurally geared to follow retributive rationale of penology with safe custody and strict discipline as its core objective. This penal philosophy, currently being administered in Pakistan, conceives imprisonment as an end in itself and all other issues appear to be revolving around this type of incarceration mindset.
Similarly, we inherited a corrupt and dysfunctional prison system which is considered to be overpopulated, understaffed, and poorly managed. It is debated quite strongly that such a prison system is a fertile ground for criminality and militancy and breeds recidivism. Some critics opine that such a system of prisons protects the powerful and victimizes the under privileged.
The Prisons Act of 1894 serves as the primary legislative instrument governing prison administration, which deals with maintenance of prisons, and officers’ conduct, duties of prison staff, admission, removal and discharge of prisoners, their discipline, work, prison offences and punishments. The Prisoner’s Act of 1900 provides the legal framework for prison functions such as execution of sentences, transferring prisoners from one prison to another, discharging prisoners and their attendance in court. Pakistan Prison Rules, 1978 (Jail Manual) lays out the rules for the day-to-day superintendence and management of prisons featuring 50 chapters and 1250 rules. After 18th Constitutional Amendment, subject of Prison management has remained prerogative of provinces. However, at federal Level, Juvenile Justice System Act 2018 was enacted in line with international standards such as Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) principles of the best interest of Children, Beijing Rules 1985 and Tokyo Principles on non-custodial measures of treatment as introducing diversion mechanisms of community probation and service.
The organizational framework for the prison management system in Pakistan cuts across a similarity in all provinces. Although the panoply of legislation mentioned in the preceding paragraph lays down in various forms, the structure, mandate, procedures, rules, and administration of the prison system, yet, currently, Pakistan Prison Rules 1978 commonly known as the Jail Manual, forms the bed rock of the organizational framework of the Prison Management in Pakistan. This manual is all encompassing and ranging from powers of the Inspector general Prisons (the highest administrative office) to keeping different registers in a prison, provide a complete framework in this regard. Developed and then notified over four decades ago, the critics argue for their revision and review so that the same are brought in conformity with the international standards of prison management in vogue globally.
Even today, the Prisons Act 1894 and the Prisoners Act 1900 are the main laws which govern prisons and prisoners in Pakistan. In 1919, the British Government in India constituted a committee led by Sir Alexander Cardew in order to explore the new theories of crime and punishment and propose reforms. The result was a report with 584 recommendations on prison administration. The committee stated that the negative effects on prison governance still persisted in 1919 and has failed so far to regard the prisoners as an individual and has conceived of him rather as a unit in the jail administrative machinery. Unfortunately, the recommendations were never implemented due to outbreak of the Second World War.
To be concluded
Ommama Usman is Public Administration undergrad at Lahore College for Women University (LCWU). Saud Bin Ahsen works at public policy think tank.