Probation Measures and Alternative Sanctions in Europe: From the 1964 Convention to the 2008 Framework Decision

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 134-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suliane Neveu
2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Morgenstern

The article addresses the question how far European initiatives on Community Sanctions and Measures as well as the attitude towards them and their implementation by the Member States reflect “the punitive turn” or rather show a tendency to “resist punitiveness” in European penal policies. After presenting the Council of Europe's European Rules on Community Sanctions and Measures (ER CSM) of 1992 its provision regarding the co-operation and consent of the offender is considered in more detail. The change of penal climate in the Member States and its reflection by the update of the ER CSM in 2000 is described then, using the example of sanctions of indeterminate duration and Electronic Monitoring. Finally, the European Union's Framework Decision on the supervision of probation measures and alternative sanctions (adopted 2008) and possible obstacles with regard to its implementation are introduced briefly.


1988 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald R. Wheeler ◽  
Rodney V. Hissong

Proponents of mandatory jail laws contend that alternative sanctions such as probation and fines have failed to modify behavior of those convicted of drunk driving (DWI). In order to test this proposition, we evaluated the effects of probation, fines, and jail sentences on DWI recidivism of a randomly selected DWI population at risk for 36 months. Utilizing survival time statistical analysis, the findings showed no significant differences in outcome among sanctions. As predicted, persons with a DWI history recidivated significantly sooner than first offenders. We conclude by advocating a policy of alternative sanctions to incarceration for drunk drivers.


Temida ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alenka Selih

The paper presents the ways of introducing both material and procedural alternative measures into the criminal justice system of Slovenia from the beginning of 1990s, particularly into the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1995 (with the further amendments). That relates to both adult and juvenile offenders. Regarding implementation, the author emphasizes characteristics of the implementation of both groups of institutions; pays attention to the fact that procedural institutions are more important for prosecution of minor criminal offences; points out the importance of the personal factor that contributes to the implementation of new provisions; and gives an overview of the first experiment in the Slovenian judiciary related to that. The author gives an analysis of problems dealt with in the Slovenian doctrine and judicial practice in connection with alternative ways of proceeding; she points out, in particular, the imperfections of legal solutions; the unclear competences in implementation of alternative sanctions and problems resulting from such a situation.


Author(s):  
Maria Ulfah

Community service order is one of the alternative sanctions from short-term imprisonment and light fines as regulated in Article 65, Article 82, and Article 85 of the Draft of Indonesia Criminal Code on the September 2019 (RUU KUHP). Community service order is expected to be the one solution for the overcrowded state of Correctional Institutions in Indonesia due to the large number of articles with imprisonment. Community service order as a new criminal sanction in the future requires further arrangements that can support its implementation in the future and it is possible that several challenges arise in its implementation. The contents of further regulations related to community service order in this research are explored through general guidelines in the international law, namely the Tokyo Rules (UN General Assembly Resolution Number 45/110). This research uses qualitative research with normative juridical research methods in the form of analytical descriptive. The result of this study is twenty-two provisions in the Tokyo Rules can be used as a guide in determining the contents of further regulations related community service order. In addition, the factors can become challenges must be carefully considered by legal policy makers so that they are minimized in the implementation of community service order in the future. Pidana kerja sosial adalah salah satu sanksi alternatif dari pidana penjara jangka waktu pendek maupun sanksi pidana denda ringan yang diatur dalam Pasal 65, Pasal 82, dan Pasal 85 Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana September 2019 (RUU KUHP). Pidana kerja sosial diharapkan menjadi salah satu solusi dari keadaan overcrowded Lembaga Pemasyarakatan di Indonesia akibat banyaknya pasal dengan sanksi pidana penjara. Pidana kerja sosial sebagai sanksi pidana baru di masa mendatang membutuhkan pengaturan lebih lanjut yang dapat mendukung implementasinya di masa mendatang dan dimungkinkan muncul beberapa tantangan dalam implementasinya. Isi dalam pengaturan lebih lanjut terkait pidana kerja sosial dalam penelitian ini dapat digali melalui pedoman umum dalam dunia internasional yakni Tokyo Rules (Resolusi Majelis Umum PBB Nomor 45/110). Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian kualitatif dengan metode penelitian yuridis normatif berbentuk deksriptif analitis. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah adanya dua puluh dua ketentuan dalam Tokyo Rules yang dapat menjadi panduan dalam menentukan isi pengaturan lebih lanjut terkait pidana kerja sosial. Selain itu, faktor-faktor yang dapat menjadi tantangan harus dipikirkan secara matang oleh pembuat kebijakan hukum agar terminimalisir dalam pelaksanaan pidana kerja sosial di masa mendatang.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document