Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Publishing partners
  4. Intersentia
  5. Content Listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

7719 results in Intersentia

Page 243 of 386

  • Women in prison in Portugal

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 613-644

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    This chapter aims at discussing the historical evolution of women's criminality and imprisonment in Portugal. Though focusing on women, whenever possible a comparison with men is brought into the discussion.

    Portugal is no exception to the worldwide imbalance between men and women's incarceration rates. Women have consistently been the minority among the population behind bars. Currently, as well as until the 1990s, they represent less than 6%. However, after the democratic revolution in 1974 (which decriminalised one of the main causes of women's imprisonment during the dictatorship: prostitution), this proportion rose steeply by the second half of the 1990s, up to nearly 10% by the end of the century - one of the highest rates in the European Union (EU).

    In fact, during the 1990s the total population behind bars (men and women) registered an unprecedented increase, and attained the highest carceral rate per 100,000 inhabitants (145) in the EU. One of the features of this substantial change in prison population was its massive provenance from the same lowincome urban territories. As a result, co-prisoners are often neighbours, relatives or previous acquaintances, an aspect that altered the social world of the prison. This was both a consequence of selective drug control (intensive law enforcement targeting specific areas) and of the workings of the Portuguese retail drug economy (see section 4.2.3 below).

    Although this change spanned both male and female prisons, it has been more concentrated - and therefore more salient - in the latter. Its prominence in women's institutions stems partly from the relative homogeneity of their population. In the 1990s, the variety of offenses behind women's imprisonment was sharply reduced. Although the population of male prisoners is also fairly homogeneous (property offenses and drug-related crimes together account for the majority of convictions), its internal distribution is more balanced than that of its female counterpart, which concentrates overwhelmingly on drug trafficking. As an example, analysed in Cunha's study documenting these shifts during the 1990s: in 1997, 46% of men were imprisoned for property offenses and 34% for drug-related crimes, as against 16% and 69% in the female case. Women are proportionally more likely to be sentenced to imprisonment for drug-related crimes than men.

  • United Nations Rules for the treatment of women prisoners and non-custodial measures for women off enders (the Bangkok Rules)

  • from Appendix - The Bangkok Rules: Annexe Règles De Bangkok
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 869-890

  • Summary

    Preliminary observations

    1. The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners apply to all prisoners without discrimination; therefore, the specific needs and realities of all prisoners, including of women prisoners, should be taken into account in their application. The Rules, adopted more than 50 years ago, did not, however, draw sufficient attention to women ‘ s particular needs. With the increase in the number of women prisoners worldwide, the need to bring more clarity to considerations that should apply to the treatment of women prisoners has acquired importance and urgency.

    2. Recognizing the need to provide global standards with regard to the distinct considerations that should apply to women prisoners and off enders and taking into account a number of relevant resolutions adopted by diff erent United Nations bodies, in which Member States were called on to respond appropriately to the needs of women off enders and prisoners, the present rules have been developed to complement and supplement, as appropriate, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules) in connection with the treatment of women prisoners and alternatives to imprisonment for women off enders.

    3. The present rules do not in any way replace the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners or the Tokyo Rules and, therefore, all relevant provisions contained in those two sets of rules continue to apply to all prisoners and off enders without discrimination. While some of the present rules bring further clarity to existing provisions in the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and in the Tokyo Rules in their application to women prisoners and off enders, others cover new areas.

    4. These rules are inspired by principles contained in various United Nations conventions and declarations and are therefore consistent with the provisions of existing international law. They are addressed to prison authorities and criminal justice agencies (including policymakers, legislators, the prosecution service, the judiciary and the probation service) involved in the administration of noncustodial sanctions and community-based measures.

  • Women in prison in Spain: their criminological and social invisibility

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 697-722

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    This chapter aims to take a close look at the reality of female crime in Spain. On the one hand, we analyze the singularities of this type of crime, which has, as with other neighbouring countries, experienced a significant increase in recent years. On the other hand, we focus on describing the current situation of women incarcerated in our prisons, an especially vulnerable group given their peculiarities and necessities. Lastly, the chapter establishes whether the current Spanish prison legislation echoes all or some of the United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures of Freedom for Women Offenders (Bangkok Rules, 2010). To this end, a detailed study of standards, both national and international, is essential.

    INTERNATIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK

    On 14 December 1955, during the Franco dictatorship, Spain joined the United Nations, putting an end to the international isolation that had occurred after the Second World War. On 24 November 1977, at which time the Constitution of 1978, which reinstated a democratic system, had not yet been approved in our country, Spain joined the Council of Europe, becoming the 20th State of the international organization. In the decade that followed, Spain joined NATO (30 May 1982) and the European Union (1 January 1986).

    In relation to international and European conventions and treaties specifically concerning women, Spain has signed and ratified the following:

  • - The United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW 1979), signed by Spain on 17 July 1970 and ratified on 5 January 1984, as well as the Optional Protocol (CEDAW-OP, 1999), signed by Spain on 14 March 2000 and ratified on 6 July 2001. Spain made no reservations in relation to the Convention, but made a statement declaring that “[t]he ratification of the Convention by Spain shall not affect the constitutional provisions concerning succession to the Spanish crown”.

  • - The Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, adopted in Istanbul on 7 April 2011, signed and ratified by Spain on 11 May 2011.

  • Women in prison in Austria

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 251-272

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    An international study on women in the penal system determined a number of issues specific to female prisoners, ranging from their family situation (i.e. motherhood) to issues of mental and physical health, to issues related to the conditions of detention (i.e. detention far from home or detention in predominantly male prisons). The study speaks of “too much security” in female correctional facilities, as female inmates have a considerably lower potential for danger - considering the crimes they committed and their criminal history - than male inmates. This is especially not taken into account in a penal system design that places women in a wing of male correctional facilities. In addition, education and employment opportunities are lacking, as are as recreational offers.

    The question of the applicability of these findings to the situation in Austria will be covered below. This can be viewed against the following background. In Austria's penitentiary system, the concept of behavioral rehabilitation during imprisonment was traditionally more of a program than a reality, even before prison overcrowding. This has clearly changed, though, towards providing supervision while sentences are served. Expenses for staff resources for prison security grew, partly on account of higher occupancy rates, partly on account of higher standards and increased security activities. Staff resources for care services diminished, though, at the same time had to be distributed evenly amongst a prison population that has grown by 30% since 2001, to number nearly 9,000 inmates.

    There are three different penal measures involving detention: pre-trial detention, imprisonment and post-trial detention measures. These will be examined in sections 1.1-1.3 below.

    PRE-TRIAL DETENTION

    The Criminal Procedure Act provides for pre-trial detention and governs the justifications for detention, these being the risk of flight by the accused, the risk of interference with witnesses and the risk ofre offending. Because of the legislative presumption of innocence, pre-trial detainees may be subjected only to those restrictions that serve the purposes of detention, or the maintenance of security and order. Interaction with the outside world is in principle controlled by the investigating judge. The form of the detention on the whole is the responsibility of the head of the institution. Pre-trial detainees are not obliged to work, and the legislation puts them in a better position in some respects than ordinary prisoners. Apart from this, the Prison Act is fundamentally also applicable to pre-trial detention.

  • Women in prison in Finland

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 333-344

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    As in many domestic prison systems, in Finland the number of women in prison has been increasing over the last few decades. However, since these women still amount to a small percentage of the entire prison population, adequate facilities for them are scarce. This chapter presents an overview of the rules and policies relevant to women in prison in Finland.

    INTERNATIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK

    In May 1990, Finland ratified the European Convention on Human Rights. The Convention had an immediate and direct impact on detention rules, as the maximum length of police detention fell overnight from 21 days to three days. But the ratification of the Convention had deeper consequences too. It impacted on doctrines of legal interpretation, developed in constitutional theory. The Convention does not have absolute precedence over other statutory law in Finland, but should there be a conflict between these norms, a doctrine of “human rights friendly interpretation”, as developed by the Constitutional Law Committee, provides that the interpretation and application of laws shall always aim at obtaining a result that, as closely as possible, corresponds to the international obligations of Finland in the field of human rights. The same principle has also been declared in the new Finnish Constitution, which entered into force in 2000. According to section 22, public authorities shall “guarantee the observance of basic and human rights”. This confirms on a constitutional level the Constitutional Law Committee's “human rights friendly interpretation” of national law. As a result, the Finnish courts have more and more often referred to the articles of the Convention in their decisions.

    Section 7 of the Finnish Constitution states that

    “No one shall be sentenced to death, tortured or otherwise treated in a manner violating human dignity.”

    In addition:

    “The rights of individuals deprived of their liberty shall be guaranteed by an Act.”

    The latter provision means that deprivation of liberty must be based on an Act of Parliament (not on inferior norms).

    STATISTICS ON WOMEN IN CRIME, IN DETENTION AND IN PRISON/CRIMINOLOGICAL FACTORS

    Over the last 35 years, Finnish women have become more involved with the criminal justice System. They have committed more crimes, for which they have been convicted and detained, as Tables 1-5 show. However, the number of female prisoners is still rather low in Finland in comparison to the number of male prisoners, which causes problems.

  • Avant-propos

  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp vii-viii

  • Summary

    La communauté internationale a longtemps coopéré à l’élaboration de normes communes en matière de traitement des délinquants. Les efforts consentis par la Commission internationale pénale et pénitentiaire (CIPP), en collaboration avec la Société des Nations, puis le travail de la Fondation internationale pénale et pénitentiaire (FIPP), ont mené à l'adoption du premier ensemble de règles internationales en 1955, à savoir les Ensemble de règles minima pour le traitement des détenus (ERMTD). L'adoption de ces règles marque une étape déterminante dans la garantie d'un traitement fondé sur les droits pour ceux qui sont privés de liberté.

    Pendant plus de cinq décennies, l'ERMTD fut considéré comme une référence ultime de bons principes, généralement acceptés, qui sous-tendent le traitement des prisonniers et la gestion des institutions pénitentiaires. Nous assistons cependant à une prise de conscience internationale de l'absence dans le système de justice pénale d'une reconnaissance des besoins specifiques aux femmes. Les détenues du monde entier partagent des antécédents communs qui déterminent la façon dont elles aboutissent en prison. Nombreuses sont celles qui partagent un passé commun de maltraitance et de traumatismes, d'opportunités d’éducation et de travail limitées. Certaines sont marquées par la toxicomanie et des problèmes de santé mentale et / ou physique. En l'absence d'aide et de traitement specifique au genre, les détenues risquent la revictimisation en prison et la rechute dans la délinquance dès leur sortie.

    L'adoption par l'Assemblée générale des Nations-Unies, en décembre 2010, des « Règles des Nations Unies concernant le traitement des détenues et l'imposition de mesures non privatives de liberté aux délinquantes », également appelées « Règles de Bangkok » constitue un changement de paradigme dans la perspective des établissements pénitentiaires pour les femmes. Les Règles de Bangkok tiennent compte des standards et des normes existants, notamment l'ERMTD et les Règles minima des Nations Unies pour l’élaboration de mesures non privatives de liberté (Règles de Tokyo), tout en intégrant des éléments de la Convention sur l'élimination de toutes les formes de discrimination à l’égard des femmes et la Convention relative aux droits de l'enfant.

    Depuis leur adoption, les Règles de Bangkok ont été promues et appliquées dans divers pays. Au cours des cinq dernières années, nous avons constaté que des efforts étaient consentis dans le but d'améliorer la législation et les pratiques.

  • Women in prison in England and Wales

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 295-332

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) is an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) responsible, on behalf of the Secretary of State for Justice, for commissioning and delivering prison and probation services in England and Wales. Northern Ireland and Scotland prison and probation services are managed separately from the NOMS. Women currently make up 5% of the prison population in England and Wales, and are held in 12 prisons across the country. Two of these are operated by private sector providers under contract.

    The Secretary of State for Justice commissioned a review of the women's estate in January 2013. The report was published on the 25 October 2013 and recommended that the women's prison estate be reconfigured to ensure that women are kept as close to home as possible, with the right interventions and opportunities for meaningful resettlement. The review recommended the establishment of strategic hubs as near as possible to the major population centres, proposed the testing of open units at two women's prisons and the establishment of community employment regimes at every women's prison.

    Prison Service Orders (PSOs) and Instructions (PSIs) convey mandatory actions to prison establishments. The policy for women's prisons can be found in PSO 4800 and PSI 49/2014.

    INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK

    The United Kingdom (UK) is a member of the following international organisations:

  • - the United Nations (since 1945);

  • - the Council of Europe (since 1949);

  • - the European Union (formerly the European Economic Community (since 1973));

  • - other international organisations, including the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (formerly the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe) (since 1975), and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (since 1961).

    • NOMS is aware of the need to ensure that the Prison Rules continue to reflect domestic legislation, such as the Human Rights Act 1998 and other national standards, as well as meeting the obligations set out in the various international conventions to which the UK is a party. These Rules are made available in an open and transparent manner, and can be accessed on the Ministry of Justice website.

    The UK is a party or a signatory to the following international instruments:

  • - the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) (since 1986);

  • Règles des Nations Unies concernant le traitement des femmes détenues et les mesures non privatives de liberté pour les femmes délinquantes (Règles de Bangkok)

  • from Appendix - The Bangkok Rules: Annexe Règles De Bangkok
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 891-914

  • Summary

    Observations préliminaires

    1. L'Ensemble de règles minima pour le traitement des détenus s'applique ä toutes les personnes sans distinction; sa mise en oeuvre doit par conséquent tenir compte des réalités et besoins particuliers de toutes ces personnes, y compris les détenues. Toutefois, ces règles, qui ont été adoptées il y a plus de 50 ans, ne prêtent pas suffisamment attention aux besoins particuliers des femmes. Au vu de l'augmentation du nombre de détenues dans le monde, il est devenu d'autant plus important et urgent de faire mieux ressortir ces considérations.

    2. Constatant la nécessité d’élaborer des règles mondiales concernant les dispositions particulières qui devraient s'appliquer aux détenues et aux délinquantes et tenant compte d'un certain nombre de résolutions pertinentes adoptées par differents organes de l'Organisation des Nations Unies qui engagent les États Membres à répondre de manière appropriée aux besoins des délinquantes et des détenues, les présentes règles ont été élaborées pour compléter, comme il convient, l'Ensemble de règles minima pour le traitement des détenus et les Règles minima des Nations Unies pour l’élaboration de mesures non privatives de liberté (Règles de Tokyo) en ce qui concerne le traitement des détenues et les mesures de substitution à l'emprisonnement pour les délinquantes.

    3. Les présentes règles ne se substituent en aucune manière à l'Ensemble de règles minima pour le traitement des détenus ni aux Règles de Tokyo et, par conséquent, toutes les dispositions pertinentes figurant dans ces deux séries de règles continuent de s'appliquer à toutes les personnes détenues et délinquantes sans distinction. Certaines des présentes règles précisent comment les dispositions existantes de l'Ensemble de règles minima pour le traitement des détenus et des Règles de Tokyo s'appliquent aux détenues et aux délinquantes, tandis que d'autres abordent de nouvelles questions.

    4. Ces règles s'inspirent de principes figurant dans diverses conventions et déclarations des Nations Unies et sont donc conformes aux dispositions du droit international existant. Elles s'adressent aux autorités pénitentiaires et aux organes de justice pénale (décideurs, législateurs, services des poursuites, juges et services de probation) intervenant dans l'administration des peines non privatives de liberté et des mesures en milieu ouvert.

  • Women in prison in the USA

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 817-866

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    The female prison population in the United States (US) continues to increase at a worrisome rate. In the past 30 years, the number of women in lockup - around 205,000 right now - has increased by 832%. There are now over 1 million women under various types of confinement or supervision by the correctional system. True, the number of men in prison is still much larger than that of incarcerated women, but the growth of the female prison population has a very damaging effect on families and communities that are torn apart as a result. Also, differently from men, sexual and physical violence, drug dependence, mental illness and poverty are all strongly correlated with women's incarceration. This means that the US still prefers to punish instead of heal. It imprisons women instead of instituting the policies and programs and providing the services that could help them live healthy, secure and productive lives. Additionally, women of color and Latino women bear the brunt of all of these factors at disproportionate rates, which means that they also have a greater likelihood of becoming entangled in the criminal justice system. While the number of African American women in jails and prisons has diminished sharply in the last 10 years, that of Latino women has increased. Also more White women are becoming caught up in the justice system for the same root reasons as the other groups, especially as consequence of the economic crisis and loss of employment opportunities.

    This chapter provides an overview of how the jail and prison systems treat women inmates, especially in light of human rights and constitutional principles, United Nations (UN) and other treaties and conventions, and the realities of female deviance and criminality within the context of women's roles in society and their place in their communities. The result is not always as positive, enlightened and advanced as one might expect of the US. Regardless of how civilized, advanced and law-abiding we might think we are, being in the custody of the State is a dangerous, humiliating, demeaning situation that elicits all sorts of negative and dark dynamics, especially when sexuality and power, as in the interaction of male guards and female inmates, come into play. The harsh reality of sexual abuse and overall mistreatment and violence on the part of correctional personnel towards women inmates cannot be ignored any more.

  • Women in prison in Germany

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 373-416

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    On 31 March 2013, 3,184 women and 53,378 men were imprisoned in Germany. With a share of 5.6%, female prisoners form a minority of the total prison population and have, accordingly, garnered little attention in practice and research in previous decades. However, from the beginning of the 21st century onwards, (inter)national research on female prisoners has steadily grown, as has interest in the implementation of international and European prison recommendations on female inmates.

    Although recommendations have no legally binding character, their legal effect should not be underestimated. In a landmark decision, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany emphasized the importance of international rules in a case concerning the unconstitutionality of the youth custody law on 31 May 2006:

    “Indications can be found that available findings have not been taken into consideration sufficiently as required under the Basic Law or that prisoners’ concerns are not being given adequate weight when requirements under international law or international standards referring to human rights, as set out in the relevant directives and recommendations adopted by the United Nations or organs of the Council of Europe have not been observed or they fall short of them”.

    While the German federal states (Bundesländer) responded by passing new constitutional youth custody laws, as required by the Federal Constitutional Court, by the end of 2007, the decision of the Court had far-reaching relevance for the whole law of prison administration. Due to federal reforms in 2006, the individual German states are now responsible for their own prison laws. This reform has led to an on-going process: at present, 11 out of 16 German states have enacted their own prison laws. That is why the prison laws of the German states differ to a certain extent from the Federal Prison Act nowadays. One example of this relates to the accommodation of women apart from men in separate prisons, in section 140 paragraph 2 of the Federal Prison Act. In contrast to this provision and Rule 56 of the Bangkok Rules, Article 166 paragraph 2 of the Bavarian prison law takes a more relaxed approach to the accommodation of female prisoners, in separate departments of male prisons. Due to the confusing diversity of different prison laws, the following chapter will mainly consider the provisions of the Federal Prison Act, which is still in force in six German states.

  • Women in prison in Russia

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 645-662

  • Summary

    Women's penal colonies are zones of absolute lawlessness.

    Irek Murtazin

    INTRODUCTION

    Social control of criminality is a major problem in the contemporary world. Street crime, organized crime, violent crime, terrorism and so forth affect people and give rise to “moral panics” and “fear of crime”. Legislators, politicians, police and criminal justice officials try (often habitually) repressive methods to gain control over criminality. However, traditional measures have not obtained the desired results.

    Social control is a mechanism for the self-organization and self-preservation of society through the establishment and maintenance of a normative order, involving the elimination, neutralization or minimization of deviant behavior, including crime. Social control of criminality includes general methods of social control - punishment and crime prevention.

    Some have argued that a “crisis of punishment” exists, a crisis of criminal justice, of criminal law's control of criminality, including control of the police. The basic trends in the current western theory (and practice, in some countries) of social control over criminality include recognition of the irrationality and inefficiency of punishment as revenge, a change in social control strategy from “war” to “peacemaking”, a search for non-repressive alternative measures of social reaction and a prioritizing of crime prevention.

    Criminal justice, police and penitentiary systems are the result of the general social, economic, cultural and political condition. The contemporary Russian post-Soviet criminal justice system, police and penitentiary systems have a complicated history. They have two main sources: first, the old tsarist system, which was part of the so-called Continental legal system but which had a genuine policy of repression; secondly, the Soviet “socialist” system. It is clear the communist regime was quite terrible. As a result of the unique experiment to establish a social utopia (the slogan on the gate of the Solovki Gulag camp read, “Happiness for everyone through violence”), the country was thrown off the path of civilization.

    Gorbachev's perestroika (“reconstruction”) was a necessary attempt to save the State through reform. Khrushchev had made a similar attempt (the so-called Thaw), but Gorbachev's reforms were the most radical. However, these reforms did not bring about their desired end, something that may not have been Gorbachev's fault but certainly was his misfortune.

    The contemporary Russian penal system is “better” than the Soviet Gulag but it is still repressive, an offense to human dignity, and especially agonizing for women and adolescents.

  • Women in prison in New Zealand

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 563-584

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    As in many other countries, women comprise a small but growing proportion of the prison population. Because New Zealand is geographically a long and narrow country, with many areas that are relatively sparsely populated (especially in the South Island), women are often detained in institutions that are a considerable distance from their normal place of residence. Only small numbers of women are imprisoned, so that they are often housed in relatively small units, sometimes without access to the same range of services and programmes as male inmates. This poses challenges for prison administrators in providing effective rehabilitation and reintegration. Those challenges have not been significantly mitigated by the expansion in the number of women in prison, since the growth is still not at a level that enables the development of programmes that depend upon economies of scale.

    This chapter will provide statistics on the number of women apprehended, convicted and imprisoned for offending; the type of offending in which they are involved; the conditions under which they are held when they are imprisoned; and the nature of the rehabilitative and reintegrative programmes and other facilities provided to them within prison.

    INTERNATIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK

    INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS

    New Zealand laws on detention in prison, and on the rights of those who are subject to imprisonment, are governed by a number of international treaties and instruments to which New Zealand is a party. First, New Zealand is a member of the United Nations (UN). It is therefore party to the seven core United Nations human rights instruments. Notably, in relation to detention of women in prison, these include:

  • - Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW);

  • - Optional Protocol to the CEDAW 1999 (CEDAW-OP);

  • - Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT);

  • - Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 2006 (OPCAT).

    • All of these international instruments have been ratified without reservation, except in relation to the Tokelau Islands; since Tokelau is a self-governing protectorate, the ratification does not extend to it unless a declaration to that effect is lodged with the UN.

  • Women in prison in Ireland

  • from Part III - National Reports: 3ÈME Partie Rapports Nationaux
  • Edited by Piet Hein van Kempen, Maartje Krabbe
  • Book:
    Women in Prison
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    25 September 2018
    Print publication:
    20 March 2017, pp 479-512

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    A key feature of the imprisonment of women in Ireland is that the rate of imprisonment is growing, and that sentences tend to be short. Historically, the subject of the imprisonment of women in Ireland was neglected, and the first purpose-built prison for women was not constructed until 1999. More recently, increasing levels of overcrowding in the two prisons for women in Ireland and deteriorating conditions have given rise to concerns about the treatment of women in prison and the need to increase resort to alternatives to custody. The statutory agencies in charge of prisons and probation in Ireland have, however, recently published a joint strategy aimed at addressing some of these issues.

    Ireland has a history of detaining women in institutions outside the formal criminal justice system, particularly where the women involved had children outside of marriage or were deemed to have offended the moral codes of a conservative society in some way. That history, which is only now coming to light and being come to terms with in Ireland, must be acknowledged, but it does not constitute the subject of this report.

    INTERNATIONAL AND DOMESTIC HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORK

    Ireland is a member of the United Nations (since 1955), was a founding member of the Council of Europe (in 1949) and is a member of the European Union (since 1973). Ireland became a contracting party to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) on 23 December 1985, and to the United Nations Optional Protocol to CEDAW on 7 September 2000. No reservations have been entered by Ireland to these Conventions. Ireland is a dualist country.

    Ireland is not a party to the Council of Europe's Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. While domestic violence against women has been considered under Ireland's reporting requirements arising from CEDAW, and Ireland has a National Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Investigation Unit within the police force, the issue of factors leading to women's involvement in crime and those leading to their imprisonment have yet to be addressed specifically.

    The Irish Constitution (Bunreacht na hÉireann), dating from 1937, also contains enumerated and unenumerated rights.

  • Chapter 9 - Conclusion

  • Cheryl S. White
  • Book:
    Bridging Divides in Transitional Justice
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    27 September 2018
    Print publication:
    06 March 2017, pp 271-306

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    International criminal trials have been lauded for their expressive value. The expressivism of trials was tied to their legitimacy as impartial arbiters of fact as courts enforced international norms and modelled due process in societies transitioning to democratic governance. There is some conflation of expressivism with communication in the literature. Expressivists, for instance, argue that trials have a pedagogical or educative function. While there is a degree of overlap in the nomenclature, expressive actions and statements do not equate with, and in fact may silence, dialogue which may be essential to societal reconstruction in the aft ermath of atrocities. Shift ing the focus to communication within transitional trials speaks to the rupture caused by past violence that still affects the society. Communicative processes are not merely didactic or concerned with message-sending. Communication carries an intention to engage another with the possibility of response in some form. The distinction made in this book is that communicative trials are concerned with the exchanges between trial actors that move from the didactic to something revelatory, affirming or restorative for those taking part in the discussion, and potentially for the society observing the process.

    The significance of dialogue on the past within transitioning societies has been identified in studies of the Balkans communities which were consistently critical of the non-inclusive and non-communicative approach of the ICTY towards them as primary stakeholders in the justice process. Dialogical transitional justice is more commonly associated with truth and reconciliation commissions or local justice processes. For uneasily transitioning societies like Cambodia, justice and dialogue go hand in hand, as trials open up conversation on the suppressed history of crimes. The isolation of the Cambodian people in the aft ermath of the Khmer Rouge revolution, and government policies of reconciliation by forgetting, made the communication platform within ECCC trials a means of finally confronting the societal rupture caused by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

    The procedural regimes engaged by courts will have considerable impact on the communicative potential of trial proceedings. This chapter revisits aspects of the ECCC's proceedings that illustrate manifestations of the elements of communication: representation and trial dialogue. To demonstrate the discursive nature of the trials, debates emerging in proceedings on the topics of trauma and the victim/perpetrator relationship in Cambodia are discussed.

Page 243 of 386