DOCSLIB.ORG

The Rehabilitation and Reintegration Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

GLOBAL PRISON TRENDS 2018 SPECIAL FOCUS Pull-out section The rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders in the era of sustainable development Global Prison Trends 2018 Penal Reform International The Thailand Institute of Justice (PRI) is an independent (TIJ) is a public organisation This document is co-published and non-governmental organisation established by the Government produced with financial assistance that develops and promotes of Thailand in 2011 and officially from the Thailand Institute of Justice fair, effective and proportionate recognised by the United Nations (TIJ). It is the fourth edition of Penal responses to criminal justice Office on Drugs and Crime as Reform International’s Global Prison problems worldwide. the latest member of the United Trends series. Nations Crime Prevention and We promote alternatives to prison that This report was authored by Criminal Justice Programme support the rehabilitation of offenders, Olivia Rope and Frances Sheahan. Network Institutes in 2016. and promote the right of detainees Penal Reform International to fair and humane treatment. We One of the primary objectives of (PRI) would also like to thank campaign for the prevention of torture the TIJ is to promote and support Harvey Slade for his contribution and the abolition of the death penalty, the implementation of the United to the report, as well as Javier and we work to ensure just and Nations Rules for the Treatment of Sagredo and Phiset Sa-ardyen appropriate responses to children and Women Prisoners and Non-custodial (TIJ) for contributing to the Special women who come into contact with Measures for Women Offenders Focus section. The authors the law. (the Bangkok Rules). drew on information provided by contributors to PRI’s expert We currently have programmes in In addition, the TIJ strives to serve as guest blog series available at the Middle East and North Africa, a bridge that transports global ideas www.penalreform.org/blog and Central Asia, the South Caucasus to local practices with an emphasis information kindly provided by and Sub-Saharan Africa, and work on fundamental issues including partner organisations. The report with partners in South Asia. interconnections between the rule was edited by Martha Crowley. of law and sustainable development, To receive our monthly e-newsletter, human rights, peace and security. Its contents are the sole please sign up at responsibility of PRI. www.penalreform.org/keep-informed. For more information, please visit www.tijthailand.org This publication may be freely Penal Reform International reviewed, abstracted, reproduced Head Office Thailand Institute of Justice and translated, in part or in 1 Ardleigh Road GPF Building 15th–16th Floor whole, but not for sale or for use London N1 4HS Witthayu Road, Pathum Wan in conjunction with commercial United Kingdom Bangkok 10330 purposes. Any changes to the text of Thailand this publication must be approved by +44 (0) 207 923 0946 PRI. Due credit must be given to PRI, Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] the TIJ and to this publication. Twitter: @PenalReformInt www.tijthailand.org Facebook: @penalreforminternational Enquiries should be addressed to [email protected]. www.penalreform.org ISBN: 978-1-909521-60-5 First published in May 2018. © Penal Reform International 2018 Graphic design by Alex Valy. (www.alexvalydesign.co.uk) Cover photo © Karla Nur 2014. CONTENTS Contents Foreword 5 Introduction 6 1. Crime and imprisonment 7 Crime rates and the use of imprisonment 7 Prison overcrowding 8 2. Trends in the use of imprisonment 10 Pre-trial justice 10 Pre-trial detention 11 Sentencing 11 Life imprisonment 12 Death penalty 13 Drugs and imprisonment 14 3. Prison populations 16 Women 16 Children 18 Elderly people 19 Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people 20 People with disabilities 21 4. Prison management 22 Security and violence 22 Prison staff 23 Health 25 Solitary confinement 26 Contact with the outside world 27 Rehabilitation and reintegration 28 Violent extremism in prison 28 Fragile and conflict-affected states 31 Corruption in prison 32 5. Role and use of technologies 33 6. Alternatives to imprisonment 36 25 Key recommendations 39 Endnotes 41 CENTREFOLD Special Focus 2018 (pull-out section) The rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders in the era of sustainable development Penal Reform International and Thailand Institute of Justice | Global Prison Trends 2018 | 3 FOREWORD [The] trend of over-incarceration and punishment of people who use drugs is seen on every continent © Oliver de Ros, 2017 4 | Penal Reform International and Thailand Institute of Justice | Global Prison Trends 2018 FOREWORD Foreword Every year, Global Prison Trends This trend of over-incarceration and we call for these commitments to by Penal Reform International (in punishment of people who use drugs be implemented, taking account of collaboration with the Thailand Institute is seen on every continent. The deep the fact that over-incarceration as of Justice) provides us with a global impact it has on prison systems a result of out-of-date drug policies view on the state of prisons. And, and on people in prison and their stalls progress on implementing the every year, this report is, unfortunately, communities has sparked the current Sustainable Development Goals, hardly a surprise – we read about global debate on drug policy reform. In notably for Goal 3 on health, Goal the degrading conditions in which recent years, more and more countries 5 on gender equality, Goal 10 on people are imprisoned, and about have been introducing amendments reducing inequality, and Goal 16 on their growing number. Yet the level to their drug laws; for example, by peaceful societies. of crime in most societies is constantly decriminalising the use of drugs Drug policies need reforms, and there decreasing. The question that remains in Norway and Colombia, and by are two urgent ones to enact. First, we unanswered, therefore, is why our replacing prison terms with monetary need to accept that behaviours and societies focus their response to fines in Ghana and Tunisia or with actions of others that are not aligned unlawful behaviours so often on community service, as envisaged with our own moral perspectives do prison? Where is the proportionality in Senegal. Other countries have not need to be turned into criminal in sentencing when we punish non- gone even further. Ecuador gave an offences. Second, we need to violent offences with lengthy prison amnesty to drug couriers and released introduce proportionate sentencing sentences? Is this the only response thousands of prisoners. Countries and alternatives to imprisonment for we can offer? that have traditionally adopted harsh minor drug supply-related offences. stances on drugs, such as Malaysia The chapter on drugs and This will ease pressure on prison and Iran, are reviewing their death imprisonment in this report highlights systems so that they can fulfil their penalty policies for drug offences, that a high number of prisons in the purpose as set down in the UN Nelson and removing people from death row. world are overcrowded due to the Mandela Rules: to play a rehabilitative incarceration of people for drug-related These changes and reforms are role and focus on social reintegration, offences, in particular non-violent being discussed and implemented and to distance from the criminal offences involving use and possession in a global environment that remains justice system those who should not for personal use. This directly highly stigmatising, where drugs are be subject to it, including people who reflects our contemporary addiction still considered ‘evil’ and prohibition use drugs. to punishment and showcases the approaches prevail. They are therefore Rt Hon Helen Clark disproportionality of punishment in born out of a real need – the need for relation to the offence. The use of societies to stop exposing their citizens Member of the Global Commission on harsh prison sentences for people to greater risks from arrests related to Drug Policy; Former Prime Minister of New Zealand, 1999–2008; Former Administrator who use drugs or for those who play drug use than come from the act of of the United Nations Development a minor role in the drug trade also using drugs. Programme (UNDP), 2009–2017. shows the inefficiency, limitations and The need for reforms was also perverse effects of current drug control highlighted at the UN General policies. Not only are punishment Assembly Special Session on Drugs and incarceration becoming the sole held in 2016. In their decisions there, instruments used to enforce the law, member states called for more but also they are serving to implement proportionate sentencing and for moral norms which have no link with alternatives to incarceration. At the the reality of the offence that they are Global Commission on Drug Policy, supposed to punish. Penal Reform International and Thailand Institute of Justice | Global Prison Trends 2018 | 5 INTRODUCTION Introduction Global Prison Trends 2018 is the fourth All of these factors have contributed In addition to chapters on edition in Penal Reform International’s to prison overcrowding at crisis levels, sentencing, prison populations, annual series, published in collaboration and although some countries have prison management, the role and with the Thailand Institute of Justice. made efforts to reduce their prison use of technologies and alternatives The report analyses trends in criminal populations, many have resorted to to imprisonment, this year’s report justice and the use of imprisonment unsustainable ‘quick fixes’ such as takes a closer look at pre-trial justice and, as in previous years, these show amnesties or building new prisons. issues. Part two covers developments that while overall crime rates around in safeguarding rights for people Criminal justice policies affect nearly the world have declined, the number arrested and suspected of a criminal every aspect of the 2030 Sustainable of people in prison on any given day offence, as well as new research on Development Goals (SDGs), including is rising.
Recommended publications
  • Veterans in State and Federal Prison, 2004

    Veterans in State and Federal Prison, 2004

    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report May 2007, NCJ 217199 Veterans in State and Federal Prison, 2004 By Margaret E. Noonan Percent of prisoners reporting prior military service BJS Statistician continues to decline and Christopher J. Mumola BJS Policy Analyst Percent of prisoners 25% The percentage of veterans among State and Federal Federal prisoners has steadily declined over the past three decades, 20% according to national surveys of prison inmates conducted State by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). In 2004,10% of 15% State prisoners reported prior service in the U.S. Armed Forces, down from 12% in 1997 and 20% in 1986. Since 10% BJS began surveying Federal prisoners in 1991, they have 5% shown the same decline over a shorter period. Overall, an estimated 140,000 veterans were held in the Nation’s 0% prisons in 2004, down from 153,100 in 2000. 1986 1991 1997 2004 The majority of veterans in State (54%) and Federal (64%) prison served during a wartime period, but a much lower percentage reported seeing combat duty (20% of State Veterans had shorter criminal records than nonveterans in prisoners, 26% of Federal). Vietnam War-era veterans were State prison, but reported longer prison sentences and the most common wartime veterans in both State (36%) and expected to serve more time in prison than nonveterans. Federal (39%) prison. Veterans of the Iraq-Afghanistan eras Nearly a third of veterans and a quarter of nonveterans comprised 4% of veterans in both State and Federal prison.
  • Aging in Prison a Human Rights Problem We Must Fix

    Aging in Prison a Human Rights Problem We Must Fix

    Aging in prison A human rights problem we must fix Photo: Nikki Khan THE AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE Prison Watch Project Developed by Mary Ann Cool, Bonnie Kerness, Jehanne Henry, Jean Ross, Esq., AFSC student interns Kelsey Wimmershoff and Rachel Frome, and those people inside who gave this issue voice and vision 1 Table of contents 1. Overview 3 2. Testimonials 6 3. Preliminary recommendations for New Jersey 11 4. Acknowledgements 13 2 Overview The population of elderly prisoners is on the rise The number and percentage of elderly prisoners in the United States has grown dramatically in past decades. In the year 2000, prisoners age 55 and older accounted for 3 percent of the prison population. Today, they are about 16 percent of that population. Between 2007 and 2010, the number of prisoners age 65 and older increased by an alarming 63 percent, compared to a 0.7 percent increase of the overall prison population. At this rate, prisoners 55 and older will approach one-third of the total prison population by the year 2030.1 What accounts for this rise in the number of elderly prisoners? The rise in the number of older people in prisons does not reflect an increased crime rate among this population. Rather, the driving force for this phenomenon has been the “tough on crime” policies adopted throughout the prison system, from sentencing through parole. In recent decades, state and federal legislators have increased the lengths of sentences through mandatory minimums and three- strikes laws, increased the number of crimes punished with life and life-without-parole and made some crimes ineligible for parole.
  • Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders

    Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders

    Introductory Handbook on The Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES Cover photo: © Rafael Olivares, Dirección General de Centros Penales de El Salvador. UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Vienna Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK SERIES UNITED NATIONS Vienna, 2018 © United Nations, December 2018. All rights reserved. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Publishing production: English, Publishing and Library Section, United Nations Office at Vienna. Preface The first version of the Introductory Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders, published in 2012, was prepared for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) by Vivienne Chin, Associate of the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Canada, and Yvon Dandurand, crimi- nologist at the University of the Fraser Valley, Canada. The initial draft of the first version of the Handbook was reviewed and discussed during an expert group meeting held in Vienna on 16 and 17 November 2011.Valuable suggestions and contributions were made by the following experts at that meeting: Charles Robert Allen, Ibrahim Hasan Almarooqi, Sultan Mohamed Alniyadi, Tomris Atabay, Karin Bruckmüller, Elias Carranza, Elinor Wanyama Chemonges, Kimmett Edgar, Aida Escobar, Angela Evans, José Filho, Isabel Hight, Andrea King-Wessels, Rita Susana Maxera, Marina Menezes, Hugo Morales, Omar Nashabe, Michael Platzer, Roberto Santana, Guy Schmit, Victoria Sergeyeva, Zhang Xiaohua and Zhao Linna.
  • Aging of the State Prison Population, 1993–2013 E

    Aging of the State Prison Population, 1993–2013 E

    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics MAY 2016 Special Report NCJ 248766 Aging of the State Prison Population, 1993–2013 E. Ann Carson, Ph.D., BJS Statistician, and William J. Sabol, Ph.D., former BJS Director he number of prisoners sentenced to more than FIGURE 1 1 year under the jurisdiction of state correctional Sentenced state prisoners, by age, December 31, 1993, 2003, authorities increased 55% over the past two decades, and 2013 Tfrom 857,700 in 1993 to 1,325,300 in 2013. During the same period, the number of state prisoners age 55 or older Sentenced state prisoners increased 400%, from 3% of the total state prison population 1,000,000 in 1993 to 10% in 2013 (figure 1). Between 1993 and 2003, 800,000 the majority of the growth occurred among prisoners 39 or younger ages 40 to 54, while the number of those age 55 or older 600,000 increased faster from 2003 to 2013. In 1993, the median age 40–54 of prisoners was 30; by 2013, the median age was 36. The 400,000 changing age structure in the U.S. state prison population 200,000 has implications for the future management and care 55 or older of inmates. 0 1993 2003 2013 Two factors contributed to the aging of state prisoners Year between 1993 and 2013: (1) a greater proportion of Note: Based on prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year under the jurisdiction prisoners were sentenced to, and serving longer periods of state correctional authorities.
  • Lauri Love -V- the Government of the United States of America & Liberty

    Lauri Love -V- the Government of the United States of America & Liberty

    Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 172 (Admin) Case No: CO/5994/2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 05/02/2018 Before: THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORD BURNETT OF MALDON THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE OUSELEY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between: LAURI LOVE Appellant - and - THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES Respondent OF AMERICA - and - LIBERTY Interested Party - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MR EDWARD FITZGERALD QC AND MR BEN COOPER (instructed by KAIM TODNER SOLICITORS LTD) for the Appellant MR PETER CALDWELL (instructed by CPS EXTRADITION UNIT) for the Respondent MR ALEX BAILIN QC AND MR AARON WATKINS (instructed by LIBERTY) for the Interested Party Hearing dates: 29 and 30 November 2017 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Approved Judgment Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. Love v USA THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE AND MR JUSTICE OUSELEY : 1. This is the judgment of the Court. 2. Lauri Love appeals against the decision of District Judge Tempia, sitting at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 16 September 2016, to send his case to the Secretary of State for the Home Department for her decision whether to order his extradition to the United States of America, under Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003 [“the 2003 Act”]. The USA is a category 2 territory under that Act. On 14 November 2016, the Home Secretary ordered his extradition. 3. The principal
  • Conjugal Visits in Prisons Discourse: Is It Even an Offender Rehabilitation Option in Africa? Samson C

    Conjugal Visits in Prisons Discourse: Is It Even an Offender Rehabilitation Option in Africa? Samson C

    ISSN: 2581-3358 Volume 8, Issue 1, pp. 67-76, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21467/ajss.8.1.67-76 REVIEW ARTICLE Conjugal Visits in Prisons Discourse: Is it Even an Offender Rehabilitation Option in Africa? Samson C. R. KAJAWO Malawi Prison Staff Training College *Corresponding author email: [email protected] Received: 29 December 2020 / Accepted: 09 March 2021 / Published: 22 March 2021 ABSTRACT Conjugal rights issue in prisons is indeed an old debate. This article reviewed the literature on the genesis of prisoners’ conjugal visits programme, its global prevalence and the scholarly debate for and against its provision to understand if it can be a rehabilitation option in African countries’ prisons. It has been noted that conjugal visits programme was haphazardly started in the 1900s in Mississippi before becoming an official programme in 1989. Though they were discontinued later in 2014 in Mississippi, conjugal visits are still provided in many penitentiary facilities in America, Europe, Asia and Africa. Studies have revealed that conjugal visits are capable of reducing the problems of homosexuality, sexual assaults and physical violence in prisons. It has also been observed that, apart from the fact that denial of conjugal rights to the prisoners’ spouse could be a form of punishment to innocent victims, conjugal visits can be incentives for good prisoners’ behaviour and rehabilitation in prisons. However, apart from the fact the programme is likely to be expensive and costly to African countries whom their general strife is prisoners’ overcrowding, most of the arguments against conjugal visits are moral-based such as that the programme is likely to perpetrate one-parent family system and is prone to abuse by both prisoners and prison staff.
  • USA -V- Julian Assange Judgment

    USA -V- Julian Assange Judgment

    JUDICIARY OF ENGLAND AND WALES District Judge (Magistrates’ Court) Vanessa Baraitser In the Westminster Magistrates’ Court Between: THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Requesting State -v- JULIAN PAUL ASSANGE Requested Person INDEX Page A. Introduction 2 a. The Request 2 b. Procedural History (US) 3 c. Procedural History (UK) 4 B. The Conduct 5 a. Second Superseding Indictment 5 b. Alleged Conduct 9 c. The Evidence 15 C. Issues Raised 15 D. The US-UK Treaty 16 E. Initial Stages of the Extradition Hearing 25 a. Section 78(2) 25 b. Section 78(4) 26 I. Section 78(4)(a) 26 II. Section 78(4)(b) 26 i. Section 137(3)(a): The Conduct 27 ii. Section 137(3)(b): Dual Criminality 27 1 The first strand (count 2) 33 The second strand (counts 3-14,1,18) and Article 10 34 The third strand (counts 15-17, 1) and Article 10 43 The right to truth/ Necessity 50 iii. Section 137(3)(c): maximum sentence requirement 53 F. Bars to Extradition 53 a. Section 81 (Extraneous Considerations) 53 I. Section 81(a) 55 II. Section 81(b) 69 b. Section 82 (Passage of Time) 71 G. Human Rights 76 a. Article 6 84 b. Article 7 82 c. Article 10 88 H. Health – Section 91 92 a. Prison Conditions 93 I. Pre-Trial 93 II. Post-Trial 98 b. Psychiatric Evidence 101 I. The defence medical evidence 101 II. The US medical evidence 105 III. Findings on the medical evidence 108 c. The Turner Criteria 111 I.
  • 1 in the Westminster Magistrates' Court Between

    1 in the Westminster Magistrates' Court Between

    IN THE WESTMINSTER MAGISTRATES’ COURT B E T W E E N: GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Requesting State v JULIAN ASSANGE Defendant _________________________________ DEFENCE SUBMISSIONS: PART ONE _________________________________ ** All references are to the Defence Core Bundle unless otherwise stated 1. Introduction 1.1. These Defence Submissions are in two parts. In Part 1, we provide an overall summary of the case and briefly set out Mr Assange’s position on each of the grounds of abuse, including the Treaty point, and each of the statutory bars. This updates and refines the defence opening; responds to issues raised at the February hearing about the Treaty point and develops the Article 3 and Section 91 argument in more detail. In Part 2 (a separate document) we set out in full the interlinked arguments on Zakrzewski abuse, Article 7 and Article 10, and the related dual criminality point that no extradition crime is made out. That is because these points require amplification from the earlier submissions. 1.2. In these submissions we first summarise the history of this case to demonstrate that the prosecution is not motivated by genuine concerns for criminal justice but by politics. 1 1.3. We next address the three ways in which these proceedings constitute an abuse of process, in the following three separate but overlapping categories: (i) First, the request seeks extradition for what is a classic “political offence”. Extradition for a political offence is expressly prohibited by Article 4(1) of the Anglo-US Extradition Treaty. Therefore, it constitutes an abuse of this Court’s process to require this Court to extradite on the basis of the Anglo-US Treaty in breach of the Treaty’s express provisions.
  • Older Men in Prison : Emotional, Social, and Physical Health Characteristics

    Older Men in Prison : Emotional, Social, and Physical Health Characteristics

    OLDER MEN IN PRISON: EMOTIONAL, SOCIALl AND PHYSICAL HEALTH CHARACTERISTICS Elaine Marie Gallagher B.Sc.N., University of Windsor, 196' M.Sc., Duke University, 1976 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY by Special Arrangements @~laine Marie Gallagher SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY March, 1988 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Elaine Marie Gallagher Degree: .?h. D. Interdisciplinary Studies Title of thesis: Emotional, Social and Physical Health Needs of Older Men in Prison. Examining Committee: Chairman: Dr. Bruce Clayman Dean of Graduate Studies Senior Supervisor: Dr. Gloria Gutman , -,,r LC.- Director Gerontology Center and Program Dr. Ellen Gee . ., Assistant Professor, Sociology Dr. Margaret Jackson I - Assistant Professor, Criminology External Examiners Dr. Real Prefontaine _- J Director, Treatment Services and Regional Health Care, Correctional Services of Canada Dr. Cathleen Burnett - - P.ssistant Professor, Sociology - P.dministration of Justice Program, University of Missouri-Kansas City PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Simon Fraser Unlverslty the right to lend my thesis, proJect or extended essay (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or In response to a request from the I ibrary of any other university, or other educatlonal institution, on its own behalf or for one of Its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies.
  • Marital Relationships of Prisoners in Twenty-Eight Countries Ruth Shonle Cavan

    Marital Relationships of Prisoners in Twenty-Eight Countries Ruth Shonle Cavan

    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 49 | Issue 2 Article 5 1958 Marital Relationships of Prisoners in Twenty-Eight Countries Ruth Shonle Cavan Eugene S. Zemans Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Ruth Shonle Cavan, Eugene S. Zemans, Marital Relationships of Prisoners in Twenty-Eight Countries, 49 J. Crim. L. Criminology & Police Sci. 133 (1958-1959) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. MARITAL RELATIONSHIPS OF PRISONERS IN TWENTY-EIGHT COUNTRIES RUTH SHONLE CAVAN AND EUGENE S. ZEMANS Mrs. Ruth Shonle Cavan is Professor of Sociology in Rockford College, Rockford, Illinois. Mr. Eugene Zemans i Executive Director of John Howard Association in Chicago. "Marital Relationships of Prisoners," under their joint authorship, was published in our last number, 49, 1, at pages 50-57-EDTOm. Imprisonment deprives the prisoner of many especially in minimum security institutions, but civilian rights and privileges in addition to his always on the congregate level with supervision. liberty. One deprivation is the loss of close personal Only one prison permits home leaves to selected contacts with his spouse. Another article discusses prisoners as part of its regular program for family theways in which marital relationships are handled contacts. (For further details, see the article in prisons in the United States.' The present referred to in footnote 1.) article surveys the policies and practices in 28 The point of view stated in the United States other countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the report applies to the present discussion also.
  • USA V Lauri Love Judgment

    USA V Lauri Love Judgment

    JUDICIARY OF ENGLAND AND WALES The Government of the United States of America Requesting Judicial Authority v Lauri Love Requested Person Judge N Tempia In the Westminster Magistrates’ Court Advocates: Mr P Caldwell – Judicial Authority Mr B Cooper – Requested Person APPLICATION AND BACKGROUND 1. This is an application by the Government of the United States of America for the extradition of the requested person, Lauri Love, (dob: 14.12.1984) a United Kingdom citizen, who is accused of unlawfully accessing computers used by United States Federal Agencies and private companies and misusing the data he unlawfully obtained. 2. The United States of America is a Category 2 territory. Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003 (the Act) applies. 1 3. The criminal proceedings in the US have been commenced in three judicial districts, the Southern District of New York, the District of New Jersey and the Eastern District of Virginia. These proceedings are referred to within a Diplomatic Note from the United States dated 6th July 2015. The material relating to each of the judicial districts was separately certified by the Secretary of State on 7th July 2015 and these proceedings are treated as a single request. The bundle contains the warrants for Mr Love’s arrest in the three districts and were issued by the Southern District of New York on 21st February 2015, District of New Jersey on 23rd March 2015 and Eastern District of Virginia on 21st May 2015. 4. Following certification a warrant was issued for Mr Love’s arrest. Mr Love was arrested on 15th July 2015 and appeared at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on the same day.
  • Conjugal Visits in the Context of Incarceration of Women and Girls in the State of Bahia, Brazil: Permissions, Prohibitions and (In)Visibilities

    Conjugal Visits in the Context of Incarceration of Women and Girls in the State of Bahia, Brazil: Permissions, Prohibitions and (In)Visibilities

    Conjugal Visits in the Context of Incarceration of Women and Girls in the State of Bahia, Brazil: Permissions, Prohibitions and (In)Visibilities OÑATI SOCIO-LEGAL SERIES, VOLUME 10, ISSUE 2 (2020), 415-441: EL GÉNERO DE LOS SISTEMAS PENALES JUVENILES: DEBATES NECESARIOS DOI LINK: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.35295/OSLS.IISL/0000-0000-0000-1052 RECEIVED 01 FEBRUARY 2019, ACCEPTED 13 MAY 2019 NATASHA MARIA WANGEN KRAHN∗ JALUSA SILVA DE ARRUDA∗ JUSSARA CARNEIRO COSTA∗ Abstract This article analyzes the guarantee of the right to conjugal visits in contexts of incarceration for women and adolescent girls in a prison and in a socio-educational incarceration institution in the state of Bahia (Brazil). As exploratory research, the objective of this article is to understand how the right to conjugal visits is guaranteed (or not), the perceptions about this right, the difficulties for its fulfillment and the intersections with strategies of body control and sexuality of adult women and adolescents who are deprived of their liberty. Based on data obtained from literature review, documentary analysis and interviews with part of the staff at the incarceration institutions, it is possible to grasp the perceptions about the right to conjugal visitation by incarcerated women and adolescent girls, and the peculiarities of its implementation given gender specificities. We would like to thank the directors of the women’s prison and of the Foundation for the Rights of the Child and Adolescent of the State of Bahia for giving authorization to conduct this research, as well as the interviewed staff of the institutions for their time and willingness to share their experience and perspectives.