Minister’s disillusion with Prison System

By Dr D.Chandraratna
(SLAS ex-Deputy Commissioner for Probation)

The current Minister of State for the Prisons Anuradha Jayaratna has voiced his dismay at the prison as wasteful for its inability to achieve worthwhile results in the rehabilitation of prisoners. His focus was more on the neglect of training inmates in vocational trades as a tool in successfully integrating them with the family and the community. Sri Lankan prison and probation system were modelled on the British experiments after the Second world war (Criminal Justice Act 1948) and we prided ourselves with specialised institutions, correctional facilities for adults, children and youth, with individual treatment, training and aftercare with employment programmes upon return, claiming success with the graduates. Now the proportions have reversed with many reverting to crime after their release. The minister is disillusioned by the rising tide of crime and recidivism and his views are shared by many. There is no clear view of the goals of prisons and probation be it expiation or reformation and different systems are forced to select a practical goal after limited consideration of realities in the country.

The general conditions of prisons in the developing countries are appallingly low and even in the developed countries the systems have been allowed to stagnate. The United States in particular, has come in for trenchant criticism particularly, for the low social conscience and its (mis) treatment of coloured and the minorities. The research by criminologists and journalists have also played its part in exposing the inherent conflicts and contradictions of prison life. It is a popular view that prisoners should not be a burden on the community and a prison that partly pays for its own as well as puts back its inmates back to the community as responsible returnees is an attractive proposition. Our prisons were deliberately built to cater for useless work in solitude. Lack of space in our prisons for industrial work, the general unemployability of prisoners, issues of low skill, intelligence, false conduct norms and temperament are obvious negatives as well as the notion that prisoners do not deserve a good life and conditions unavailable to many outside. However, there is also no definitive evidence in many countries that work, training and good working conditions to suggest that schemes of vocational training alone have reduced rates of recidivism.

Our prisons systems are generally averse to catering to individual needs because cost and other factors militate against such. The requirements of security, order and control, militate against selective treatment and training of prisoners according to individual needs. The overriding responsibility is security, and the likelihood of absconding outweighs any argument for relaxed rehabilitation moves that may be suggested by professionals from inside or outside. The security personnel in prisons resent professional input from outside as impinging on their domain.

It was Mahatma Gandhi who said that a nation is judged by the manner it treats its animals and the same social conscience must apply to all mankind. That prisons are meant to rehabilitate prisoners may serve at least one good purpose and that it is bringing us back to basic issues of decency and humanity. The majority of prisoners should not struggle in neglected prison cells for our social conscience demands that we act to mitigate the misery of men. The problems of prisons cannot be considered in isolation from the rising rate of crime in our society. In times of economic crises as we are facing now, crime rates will invariably rise and with it the anger and fear in the community with the temptation to turn our backs on the welfare and needs of the guilty. As a society we should not fall victim to such temptation.