Photography: Ana Batrićević, Yard of District Prison in Belgrade, 2023.
Life of persons serving prison sentences is structured in its entirety by both legislative acts and by-laws thus a code of conduct which the convicts must adopt is completely defined. The code of conduct, prison life regulation norms and safety are the primary goals of a penal institution, and a correctional system bears the task of influencing a convict to refrain from future crimes by providing treatments. These are the reasons why any convict behaviour’s is to be assessed. The Reward and Punishment System is there to encourage a positive change in convicts, therefore making rewards and punishment closely related and intertwined, bearing a high priority in penal rehabilitation. In convict treatment, both reward and punishment represent the means of treatment without which the formal system wouldn’t achieve its purpose.
Punishment as a means of influence can only be applied in a situation when a breach of norms, safety and the code of conduct has taken place as defined in the Law on Execution of Criminal Sanctions, and punishments for disciplinary acts are there to serve both their prevention and repressive purpose.
Why do Convicts Commit Disciplinary Infractions?
To influence convicts not to commit disciplinary infractions, we need to comprehend the reasons for committing them in the first place. There are several explanations why convicts commit disciplinary infractions, and they need to be sought among the conditions of prison life, the prison characteristics, the convicts’ traits, and the flaws in prison management. Research has shown that disciplinary infraction predictors can be divided into personal and clinical traits of convicts and contextual predictors (dense prison population, high level of in-prison gang activities and high percentage of convicts in maximum security prisons or prison wards).
Normative Regulation in the Republic of Serbia
Law on Execution of Criminal Sanctions predicts milder or more severe disciplinary infractions of convicts that are subjected to disciplinary punishments in a procedure regulated by the law. The mildest disciplinary measure is a reprimand, and it is foreseen for both mild and more severe disciplinary infractions in situations when it suffices to just remind the convict about their behaviour. Two more disciplinary measures are issued for both mild and more severe disciplinary infractions, and those are loss of extended rights and benefits, as well as restriction or loss of mail privileges for three months. On the other hand, the law suggests two disciplinary measures that are to be issued for severe disciplinary infractions, and those are limitation or restriction of use of monetary funds within the prison for three months or being sent to solitary confinement during off-duty time or for the entire duration of day and night.
During the normative regulation of the disciplinary measures, the humane approach and convicts’ rights were taken into consideration. The Rulebook on Disciplinary Measures against Convicts predicts that the restriction or loss of mail privileges cannot be applied in the case of receiving hygienic products and that the restriction of the use of money does not apply to obtaining medicine, orthopaedic aids, necessary medical services, hygienic products, texting, phone calls or legal aid. Additionally, solitary confinement, which entails being removed from joined activities may be issued only under certain circumstances. To alleviate the negative effects of solitary confinement, it is regulated to last up to 15 or 30 days in a row when it comes to disciplinary infractions. Concerning the humane approach, a convict cannot spend more than six months in total in solitary confinement for the duration of one year.
Are Disciplinary Measures Effective in Convict Rehabilitation?
Despite the normative regulation of prison life, certain convicts do not abide by the code of conduct and commit disciplinary infractions. This is mostly the case for those showing no interest in treatment goals. Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that such behaviour can have a negative impact on rehabilitation of other convicts as well. To reduce the inadequate forms of behaviour, a penalty system is used in prisons. Still, we cannot but wonder if the disciplinary measures actually serve their purpose. With this in mind, we are going to look into certain disciplinary measures as well as potential issues that occur during their application.
Experience imposes a question of whether the application of restriction or loss of mail privileges allows space for misuse, as the punished convicts can reach their packages if they are addressed to other convicts. This way, by offering monetary compensation, physical protection, favours or by using threat and force, a convict that is subjected to this disciplinary measure may still obtain their package over another convict. Additionally, if a convict is under the limitation or restriction of monetary use, they still may obtain all the products over mail that is addressed to either them or another convict, instead of purchasing them in the prison cafeteria. This situation also may encourage the convict to obtain the desired goods by threatening or forcing another convict into buying it for them. Lastly, being sent to solitary confinement can be perceived by certain convicts as an opportunity to have repose and get temporarily isolated from other convicts and all the tensions that common sentence serving may entail.
If we analyse the disciplinary measures in our prisons, we can notice that no other disciplinary measure can be applied in certain cases, except for a reprimand the effectiveness of which is questionable. Our prison system sees large numbers of convicts who are of low socioeconomic status or maintain no contact with families or friends, therefore not receiving packages in the first place. For the same reason, as well as because they have no employment, certain convicts do not have money at their disposal, and the disciplinary measures of limitation and restriction of using the monetary funds cannot be issued to them. With all these in mind, it is clear that there are convicts who do not use the extended rights and benefits, consequently the said rights cannot be removed from them. We may also add the fact that solitary confinement is issued only under certain circumstances, and for the most severe disciplinary infractions at that, as well as the fact that a convict needs to go through a health check before being sent to solitary confinement, and it is not a rare case that this measure gets deemed inadequate for health reasons.
Opportunities for Change?
Even though disciplinary punishment of convicts bears a high priority in penal practice, it is clear that it leaves space for misuse and carries a potential for certain convicts to solidify their inadequate behaviour. However, this shouldn’t lead to rejecting punishment as a form of rehabilitation. In the current situation, we can say that disciplinary punishment of convicts reduces the effects of corrective and rehabilitation efforts and hinders the reintegration process instead of promoting corrections in one’s behaviour. The way forward should be to try to reduce the aforementioned flaws so that disciplinary punishment can fulfil its purpose. In addition to this, it is necessary to consider alternative models of reacting to the lack of discipline in prisons and see if preventive measures would be more effective.
Vera Petrović