Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Electronic Monitoring in Belgium: from a rehabilitative to a managerial approachBeyens, Kristel
Publication date:2016
Document Version:Other version
Link to publication
Citation for published version (APA):Beyens, K. (2016). Electronic Monitoring in Belgium: from a rehabilitative to a managerial approach. Paperpresented at 9th Annual Seminar , Dublin, Ireland.
General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portalTake down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.
Download date: 05. Dec. 2020
EM in Belgium: from a rehabilita4ve to a managerial
approach
Kristel Beyens Vrije Universiteit Brussel
DUBLIN ESC WG CS & M, 27 May 2016
Compara4ve research • Creativity and effectiveness in the use of
electronic monitoring as an alternative to imprisonment in EU member states (EU Action Grant, 2014 – 2016)
• Belgium (Beyens), The Netherlands (Boone), Germany (Dünkel), Scotland (McIvor and Graham), England and Wales (Hucklesby)
• Have a look at our webpage for the reports • h#p://emeu.leeds.ac.uk
2
Context of rising prison popula4on
3
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
EM : A story of growth
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Expansion, expansion,…
• Poli>cal appe>te for EM • EM as a panacea for peniten>ary problems
• Extending the scope of EM – Today: pre-‐trial, front-‐door, back-‐door, post-‐sentence
– Future : sentencing phase, mentally ill
• New techniques – RF, voice-‐verifica>on, GPS
5
From an integrated to a ‘cold’ stand alone measure 2000 – 2006
SUPERVISORY APPROACH
• Part of a rehabilita>ve peniten>ary strategy
• Strict selec>on and close supervision
• Integrated use
2006 – CONTROL APPROACH
• Solving the prison crisis – Cheap and quick –fix solu>on for prison overcrowding
• Pressure to increase poli>cal credibility
• Stand alone measure
6
GPS in pre-‐trial stage
• Since 2014 GPS as an alterna>ve for remand imprisonment
• GPS è real >me control • >< 24/7 at home • Stand alone measure • ! Inves>ga>on judge
7
RF for convicted persons: two-‐track policy
PS ≤ 3Y STAND ALONE USE CONTROL APPROACH
• Full replacement of PS • Quasi-‐automa>c
applica>on • ‘Encouraging’ policy • ! Electronic control • Diminishing role of JA • Li#le flexibility • Passive reintegra>on • Substanceless, retribu>ve
form of punishment
PS > 3 Y INTEGRATED USE
SUPERVISORY APPROACH • Between prison and
conditonal release • Individualised applica>on • Strict selec>on • ! Human supervision • Important role of JA • Flexibility • Ac*ve reintegra>on with
supervision
8
Discussion
• Expanding EM-‐system è managerial approach – Dominance of ‘systemic’ goal : output in stead of outcome driven (quan>ta>ve targets)
• Cuing costs through standardisa>on, less flexibility and less human interven>on
• î Social reports and consent of cohabitants • î Support >< complex and administra>ve form of punishment è reponsabilisa>on of EM-‐users for their own punishment
9
Costs
• Technology
• Mean total EM cost per day : 25€ – Proba>on supervision cost: 5€
• Total cost of one day in prison : 130€ – 200€
10
RF 4,37€/day Voice 5,56€/day
GPS 8,51€/day
Discussion
• Transferring the prison crisis to the EM-‐system – Organiza>onal problems, wai>ng lists, staff turn-‐over, absenteeism, ….
• Solving the penal crisis? • Reduc>on of prison popula>on?
11
Context of rising prison popula4on
12
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
EM : A story of growth
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
• Normalisa>on of technology and monitoring in society – Declining sensibili>es of ‘big brother’ aspect
• Quid privacy/involvement household members – Risk of downplaying the intrusive aspect of EM
• Fascina>on with and trust in technological innova>ons – ! Lower costs of GPS è risk of overuse – Poli>cians see the poten>als but not the dangers/risk – ‘plug and play’, biometric desks
14
Drivers of acceptance of EM
Conclusion • From a means to achieve rehabilita>ve goals to an end in
itself
• Transforma>on of rehabilita>on – ì responsabilisa>on of monitored persons and cohabitants – Diminishing and changing role of jus>ce assistants
• System needs versus user needs
• Minimal expecta>ons è îpuni>ve bite?
• Different uses serve different aims – Rehabilita>on, retribu>on, incapacita>on (?), protec>on of society (?)
15