 Institutia supravegherii posteliberatorii: cazul Republicii Moldova [The institution of parole surveillance: Case study in Republic of Moldova]Alexandru Spoiala
Jurnalul de Studii Juridice, 2009, vol. 3-4, 69-85 Abstract: In our work we come from the idea that the inmates who pose the greatest risk to public safety (usually are denied parole) are simply released into community, while minor offenders or positive-oriented offenders, least in need of supervision, are released into community under the watchful eye of a parole official. Also, the biggest parts of prisoners are released after the execution of the entire term of incarceration only. They meet many difficulties on social reintegration after their release. In such conditions the risk of relapse is very high. In order to facilitate the social reintegration and to minimize the risk of relapse, we propose to establish the post-release supervision. The aims of this institution are following: crime (relapse) prevention and social reintegration. We examined also the legislation of France and of former Soviet Union, because it provides the institutions like post-release supervision. The first problem was: the length of post-release supervision must be included in the length of incarceration or the post-release supervision must begin after the entire term of deprivation was served. We do not see problems, from the legal point of view, to accept one of these options. However, at the end we conclude that will be better if the length of such supervision will begin after the entire term of deprivation was served. It is not necessary to put under control all released persons, only the person that served more then ten years and that committed a crime in the condition of dangerous relapse. The term of postrelease supervision must not exceed three years. In the same time, the probation adviser, in order to assure the individualization of control, will be able to lodge at trial the proposal to reduce this length.We also propose the obligations must be executed by released person, such as: the prohibition to appear in specified places; the prohibition to communicate with specified person; the prohibition to leave the home in specified hours; the prohibition to leave the home for more than three days without the notification of competent state body; to undergo a alcohol and/or drug treatment; to refrain from consumption of alcohol, narcotics or psychotropic substances; to be present at the competent state body; to present necessary information that will allow control the sources of the existence. These obligations will be disposed, entirely or partly, by the judicial court at the advice of prison probation services. The author suggests that this enumeration can be the subject of revision in order to assure the best performance of the supervision goals. Also were examined the sanctions for the missing to execute the obligations and others sides of this institution. This work ends with the conclusion that the supervision can be effective only if will be applied along with the assistance and the counseling from probation officer and community. Keywords: probation; supervision; rehabilitation; prison; release into community. (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:lum:rev4rl:v:3-4:y:2009:i::p:69-85 Access Statistics for this article More articles in Jurnalul de Studii Juridice from Editura Lumen, Department of Economics on Behalf of Petre Andrei University Iasi |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.