Life imprisonment and ageing of the convict population in the Republic of Serbia

Introduction of life imprisonment in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Serbia

The punishment of life imprisonment was introduced to criminal legislation of the Republic of Serbia as a substitute for imprisonment between 30 and 40 years after amendments and alterations of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia (hereinafter: CCRS), which were adopted on May 21st, 2019  and came into force on December 1st, 2019. Similarly, to the prison sentence, life imprisonment can be imposed only as the major penalty, and it is prescribed as an exception, along with a prison sentence for the most severe criminal offences and the most serious forms of severe criminal offences. There are situations in which this punishment cannot be imposed: if the perpetrator was under the age of 21 at the time of the commission of the criminal offence if the law prescribes that the punishment can be mitigated or if there are one or more grounds for the remittance of punishment. The person sentenced to life imprisonment can be released on parole after serving 27 years of imprisonment. Nevertheless, CCRS prescribes that in some more serious forms of 5 criminal offences, the court cannot release on parole the convicted person, regardless of the imposed punishment. These criminal offences are: 1) aggravated murder; 2) rape; 3) sexual intercourse with a helpless person; 4) sexual intercourse with a child; and 5) sexual intercourse through abuse of position. For all the aforementioned criminal offences, life imprisonment is prescribed alongside a prison sentence. Since the person on whom life imprisonment is imposed stays in prison for the rest of his/her life and having in mind the fact that, in some cases, this person cannot be released on parole, the introduction of this punishment has caused numerous discussions among scientists and experts in Serbia.

Potential consequences of life imprisonment on the ageing of the convict population in the Republic of Serbia

If we leave aside the arguments pro et contra the introduction of life imprisonment in the system of criminal legislation of the Republic of Serbia, there is no doubt that the future imposing of this sentence will lead to an increase in the number of elderly persons in the institutions for the enforcement of criminal sanctions. Namely, even if the persons sentenced to life imprisonment enter the penal institution as relatively young ones, they will stay in that institution for the rest of their lives. Even if the persons sentenced to life imprisonment were released on parole (for criminal offences where this possibility exists according to the provisions of CCRS), they would still be rather old at that time. Having in mind the fact that in Serbia the entire population is becoming much older, as well as the fact that the number of convicted persons over the age of 50 is also increasing, imposing life imprisonment can only be expected to additionally contribute to the ageing of the population of persons serving a prison sentence. For that reason, it is absolutely reasonable to tackle the issue of the treatment of elderly persons serving prison sentences that would guarantee the respect of their fundamental rights as well as their specific medical, psychological and social needs, with a special focus on the persons on whom the punishment of life imprisonment is imposed.

Picture_AB

Photography: Ana Batrićević

 

How to respond to the challenges of the ageing of the convict population in the context of life imprisonment in the Republic of Serbia?

As it has already been mentioned in the discussion about potential responses to the ageing of the convict population in Serbia, it should be decided whether to apply the approach that is based upon segregation (the separation of convicted persons of particular age from other convicted persons) or the standpoint that is grounded on inclusion (equal treatment and accommodation of elderly convicted persons with other convicts). On that occasion, it was highlighted that the most applicable solution would be the one that involves the adjustment of the premises, programmes, treatments, safety measures and employed persons in the institutions for the enforcement of criminal sanctions to the needs of elderly convicted persons. In that context, however, it is necessary to emphasize the specific characteristics of the convicted persons on whom life imprisonment is imposed (regardless of their age), as well as the gravity of criminal offences they committed and the potential safety risk that they might represent for both – prison staff and other convicts. In that sense, a question can be raised whether persons convicted of life sentences should be separated from other convicted persons, regardless of their age, not due to their age bud because of the aforementioned security risks. On the other hand, it is questionable whether the persons on whom life imprisonment has been imposed will represent the same security threat to their environment at the moment when they start serving the sentence (while still relatively young) and at the moment when they become much older. Accordingly, it seems that the most appropriate solution would be to treat each convicted person as an individual case, depending on his/her age and psycho-physical condition, after providing the conditions necessary for the normal life of all elderly convicted persons serving a prison sentence.

 

Ivana Stevanović and Ana Batrićević