The final report of the review of independent punishment is The most significant improvement of punishment and punishment proposed In England And Wales Since the 1990s.
Review under the chairmanship of former orthodox justice secretary David GaukAsks for several changes to address the congestion crisis in jails. These include using low and low gel punishment, increase the opportunity of early release based on good behavior, and more use of community sentences.
The government has already accepted most of the recommendations in principle, although many will require laws to make them effective. The Justice Secretary, Shabana Mahmood has said that the most serious criminals should not be eligible for earlier release under proposals.
The gel in England and Wales has been over or near its close capacity for many years, and is often higher than their safe capacity. Official data shows that the current adult prison population is about 87,700 compared to about 87,800, while about 88,800 has a maximum operational capacity. However, the maximum capacity figures are recorded only annually, and the poor state of the prison property means that at any time the maximum useable maximum can be reduced at any time.
Without improving punishment, the jail population is estimated to increase to 105,000 by 2029.
In September 2024, the prison congestion resulted in about 1,700 emergency released Prisoners Serving sentences of less than five years, who gave 40% of their sentence. He was usually not eligible for the initial release until he served his 50% sentences.
Gauk review was commissioned to create a more durable solution to prevent emergency measures further. However, both reviews and emergency measures have come under criticism, namely dangerous criminals will be issued and communities and victims will risk. Chhaya Home Secretary, Robert genericHas claimed that the most recent proposal will “promote the wave of crime”.
So, will small sentences make communities less safe?
What does evidence say?
One of the main recommendations is that custody should be used only as the last remedy. It only asks for sentences under 12 months, only for being given in extraordinary circumstances, for example, where the culprit is known to reduce a high level of risk to a specific victim despite being sentenced to a low serious offense.
Research on short -term imprisonment continuously indicates that it is ineffective for several reasons. The sentence of low gel is inconsistently expensive, especially when compared with community sentences. Criminals serving him have committed relatively minor crimes, so apart from extraordinary cases pose a low risk.
Perhaps the most important discovery is that the smaller the sentence, the higher the rate. Refining is about 55% for prisoners sentenced to less than 12 months as compared to a total rate of 27.5%. If it can be resumed using more effective sentences, the communities will be safe.
Another major proposal is the “earned progress model”. Under this, most of the prisoners (except those sentenced for serious sexual or violent offenses specified) will be eligible for release after serving a third of their sentence. They will be creatively engaged with the prison regime.
Till then he was intensively looked after by probation services, until he served two-thirds of his sentence. Next, they will not actively look after.
Prisoners who fail to engage creatively will not be eligible for release to half the path of their punishment. Under the initial release policy launched by the government in September 2024, these prisoners will be released after just 40% of their sentences.
There is a sound evidence basis for encouraging good behavior in the prison rather than punishing bad behavior only. This is shown to help prisoners to help develop a sense of autonomy and accountability for their functions. This can help them start again after release.
Focus on effective rehabilitation instead of punishment alone, runs through reviews. For example, recommendations for better and targeted narcotic intake and mental health treatment.
Courts have comprehensive evidence that suggests that rehabilitation focuses on, and prolonged prison sentence, which reduces the level of overall crime and makes communities safe. It also makes economic understanding.
Charlie Taylor, Chief Inspector of Jails, in his most recent annual report in September 2024, clarified that a fundamental rehabilitation of jails is required to rehabilitate to reduce overall crime levels.
The Howard League has also welcomed the proposals in a review of the sentence for the Penal Reform.
Worry
The aggrieved groups have expressed concern about the risk of sexual criminals or domestic abusers, even under the current regime. The review recommends strengthening safety for victims, for example, specialist domestic misconduct by expanding courts and tagging for all criminals of violence against women and girls.
More controversial, it Recommends increasing tests in the use of voluntary chemical caustation for severe sexual criminalsThe Justice Secretary is reported to consider the use of compulsory chemical caustation.
Other questions live around the implementation of reforms, not at least how they will be funded in the current economic environment. Martin Jones, the chief inspector of the probation, warned that the proposal in the Gauk review will be “frightening”, without better funding and other reforms in the probation service. The review recommends investing in stressful probation service, and is to be brought to the third region’s organizations to support it.
These are ambitious reforms that will require considerable investment in probation service, jails, community rehabilitation and technology. Human rights concerns about adopting advanced AI by probation services are also emerging, as recommended by review.
Ultimately, there is very little evidence to suggest that low prisoners and low sentences will make communities less safe. It is ineffective rehabilitation that leads to re -starting which comes at considerable social and economic costs.
Daniel ALG is a senior lecturer at Criminology and Criminal Justice at Brunell University, London.
This article is reinstated by negotiations under a creative Commons License. read the Original article,
