Paying for crime is expensive

SINGAPORE VIEW

Politicians, lawmakers must rethink purpose of prison system and policies

EVEN as more countries are building bigger prisons, social scientists and criminologists are urging politicians and lawmakers to rethink failed policies and to downsize jails. . They have argued that prison growth does not prevent or reduce crime. . According to figures from the International Centre for Prison Studies, established by the School of Law, King's College in London, the Russian Federation ranks No 1 in Asia (excluding the Middle East) for having 599 people in jail out of every 100,000 of the national population. . Singapore, interestingly, ranks 5th, with 350 per 100,000 population. Malaysia is 17th with 141 per 100,000, and Nepal is the lowest on the table at 34th with 26 per 100,000. Outside Asia, the United States is the world's biggest prison-keeper — overshadowing even Russia with an imprisonment rate of 738 per 100,000 population as at mid-2005. .

Here in Singapore, many offences carry a mandatory jail sentence. Are we becoming a punitive nation? Does putting, for example, petty offenders in prison reduce the number of minor offences? What is the likelihood of a petty culprit committing another offence, such that it warrants sending them to prison to protect the community? Unless such offenders have an underlying personality disorder, imprisonment should be avoided. Invoke a jail sentence only for serious crimes, such as murderers, kidnappers, rapists and drug traffickers. Prison is not the panacea to solve criminality and criminal behaviour. There are other better alternatives to explore that would cost much less per person per year, compared to the cost of imprisonment.

Singapore is looking into such sentencing options. In the late '90s, a committee recommended community-based sentences, introducing or expanding the use of — among others — probation and home detention with electronic tagging. The latter has been widened over the years to include more inmates at the tail-end of their jail sentences, particularly minor and first-time offenders, allowing them to serve out their time at home. This lets them get employed, and ropes in the family and community in their rehabilitation.

To reduce crime, we need to understand criminals and criminal behaviours that have complex psychological and social causes. Punishment without rehabilitation is merely dealing temporarily with the symptoms, not addressing the root causes. A criminal in prison cannot stray for the period that he is incarcerated — but without rehabilitation, he simply returns to crime after his release. Moreover, it is an expensive exercise to keep people in prison for some offences when studies have shown that rehabilitation is a better alternative.

In Australia, it is estimated to cost over $40,000 per year to keep just one prisoner in prison. The cost in Singapore must be high, too. This money could well be used elsewhere. A heavy reliance on the imprisonment system in many countries has failed to stem the increasing crime rate. The relatively good news is that in Singapore, the latest crime statistics released this week showed that there were 15 per cent fewer crimes committed in the first half of the year, as compared to the same period last year — although serious crimes like murder and rape went up.

How to reduce crime while minimising mass incarceration? Lawmakers need to roll back some mandatory sentences. They must also give judges more sentencing discretion. First-time offenders (except in serious crimes) should be put on probation rather than jailed. And if imprisonment is the last resort, as soon as the prisoner is rehabilitated and remorseful, he should be paroled or released under the home detection scheme. Youth crimes deserve special mention. Again, the good news from the latest figures is that the number of teenagers arrested fell by about a third.

The new Chief Justice's initiative of setting up a new Community Court, with greater flexibility in sentencing options, is to be lauded. It has come at the right time, especially with recent disquiet from the public over harsh sentences meted out to people with mental disabilities. Recently, a 17-year-old girl who used counterfeit $50 notes to pay for taxi rides was sentenced by the newly-constituted Community Court to two years' probation and ordered to perform 240 hours of community work. Despite the seriousness of the offence, the judge took the right course in not jailing her.

Imprisonment could have a devastating effect on her future. Her offence was amateurish, she was not a "hardcore" criminal — but sending her to prison might just have turned her into one. As British politician, Douglas Hurd said: "Prison is an expensive way to make bad people worse." A rethink of the purposes of the prison system is important indeed.

The writer, a Singaporean, is a lawyer based in Perth.

Charles Tan
28 July 2006

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/133138.asp

home / Previous viewpoint