Make a Submission
No. XLV/2 (2023)
Articles

Recall to prison in Belgium: Experiences of parolees who live under licence conditions

Powrót do więzienia w Belgii: doświadczenia warunkowo zwolnionych więźniów

PDF
  • Audrey Teugels
Audrey Teugels
KU Leuven
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2023.12

Published 2023-12-31

Keywords

  • recall to prison,
  • non-compliance,
  • breach,
  • pains,
  • license conditions

How to Cite

Teugels, A. (2023). Recall to prison in Belgium: Experiences of parolees who live under licence conditions: Powrót do więzienia w Belgii: doświadczenia warunkowo zwolnionych więźniów. Archives of Criminology, (XLV/2), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2023.12
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

In the recent penological literature, the back door of a prison is often presented as a revolving door through which many prisoners leave the prison prematurely, but then return after a short period. A large number of prisoners who have been conditionally released are sent back to prison during the licence period or before the end of their sentence due to a breach of the licence conditions. Since the revocation of a release modality (such as parole) might affect reintegration, a careful balance is needed between proportionality, the risks, the possibility of behavioural change and the opportunities for reintegration. In other words, the impact on detainees should not be underestimated if a decision to recall is being taken. Since the majority of parolees in Belgium are sent back to prison after non-compliance with the imposed conditions, this article discusses the experiences of interviewees who lived under these conditions when being granted a release modality before being recalled to prison.

PDF

References

  1. Aebi M.F. and Tiago M.M. (2018). Council of Europe Annual Penal Statistics: Prison Population. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
  2. Bahn C. and Davis L. (1991). ʻSocial-psychological effects of the status of probationers.ʼ Federal Probation 55, pp. 17–25.
  3. Bastard J. (2017). Le travail de la décision. Les processus de l’application des peines en Belgique francophone [The process of sentencing in French-speaking Belgium]. Liège: Université de Liège.
  4. Beijerse J. uit, Struijk S., Bleichrodt F.W., Bakker S.R., Salverda B.A., and Mevis P.A.M. (2018). De praktijk van de voorwaardelijke invrijheidstelling in relatie tot speciale preventie en re-integratie [The practice of conditional release in relation to the prevention of reintegration]. Rotterdam: Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
  5. Berge Y. van den and Verbruggen F. (2014). ʻLangzaam maar onzeker: het wettelijk kader voor een geleidelijke terugkeer naar de maatschappijʼ [Slow but uncertain: The legal framework for a gradual return to society]. In K. Beyens, T. Daems, and E. Maes (eds.) Exit gevangenis? De werking van de strafuitvoeringsrechtbanken en de wet op de externe rechtspositie van veroordeelden tot een vrijheidsstraf [Exit prison? The functionning of the Sentence Implementation Court and the law on the external legal position of convicts]. Antwerpen: Maklu, pp. 31–74.
  6. Beyens K. (2020). ʻHet lappendeken van tien jaar strafuitvoering in België’ [The patchwork of ten years of sentence implementation in Belgium]. Panopticon, Tijdschrift voor strafrecht 41, pp. 10–41.
  7. Beyens K. and Boone M. (2013). ʻComparatief onderzoek naar de beleving van detentie: Hoe wij ʻmet elkaar hebben leren levenʼ [Comparative research into the perception of detention: How to learn to live together]. In C. Kelk, F. Koenraadt, and D. Sigel (eds.) Liber Amicorum prof. dr. Chrisje Brants [Book of Friends prof. dr. Chrisje Brants]. Den Haag: Boom Lemma, pp. 365–374.
  8. Beyens K. and Scheirs V. (2017). ʻBreach of work penalties and conditional release in Belgium.ʼ In M. Boone and N. Maguire (eds.) The Enforcement of Offender Supervision in Europe: Understanding Breach Processes. London: Routledge, pp. 119–133.
  9. Beyens K., Breuls L., De Pelecijn L., Roosen M., and Scheirs V. (2020). ʻRecall to prison in Belgium: Back-end sentencing in search of reintegration.ʼ Probation Journal 67(1), pp. 6–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0264550519900227
  10. Bottoms A. (2002). Community Penalties: Change and Challenges. Cullompton: Willan.
  11. Breuls L. and Scheirs V. (2017). ʻRecall to prison: Het opvolgen en herroepen van strafuitvoeringsmodaliteitenʼ [Recall to prison: Monitoring and recalling modalities]. In K. Beyens and S. Snacken (eds.) Straffen: Een penologisch perspectief [Punishment: A penological perspectif]. Antwerpen: Maklu, pp. 719–735.
  12. Breuls L., De Pelecijn L., Scheirs V., and Beyens K. (2020). ʻTerug naar de gevangenis? De herroepingsprocedures voor de strafuitvoeringsrechtbankenʼ [Back to prison? The recall procedure for Sentence Implementation Courts]. Justice et Sécurité 16, pp. 1–19.
  13. Christie N. (1982). Limits to Pain: The role of Punishments in Penal Policy. Oxford: Martin Robinson.
  14. Claes B., Maeseele T., Vettenburg N., and Van Garsse L. (2016). ʻHumane detentie en sociale rechten: een thematische verkenning binnen en overheen de murenʼ [Human detention and social rights: A thematic exploration within and over the prison walls]. Panopticon, Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht, Criminologie en Forensisch Welzijnswerk 37(2), pp. 122–132.
  15. College van de hoven en rechtbanken (2020a). De jaarlijkste statistieken van de hoven en de rechtbanken. Gegevens 2018 [The annual statistics of the courts and tribunals. Data 2018]. Brussel: College van de hoven en rechtbanken.
  16. College van de hoven en rechtbanken (2020b). De jaarlijkste statistieken van de hoven en de rechtbanken. Gegevens 2019 [The annual statistics of the courts and tribunals. Data 2019]. Brussel: College van de hoven en rechtbanken.
  17. Crewe B. (2011). ʻDepth, weight, tightness: Revisiting the pains of imprisonment.ʼ Punishment and Society 13(5), pp. 509–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474511422172
  18. Crewe B. (2015). ʻInside the belly of the penal beast: Understandig the experience of imprisonment.ʼ International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy 4(1), pp. 50–65. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v4i1.201
  19. Crewe B., Hulley S., and Wright S. (2017). ʻThe gendered pains of life imprisonment.ʼ British Journal of Criminology 57(6), pp. 1359–1378. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azw088
  20. Cullen F.T. (1994). ʻSocial support as an organizing concept for criminology: Presidential address to the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences.ʼ Justice Quarterly 11, pp. 527–559.
  21. Digard L. (2010). ʻWhen legitimacy is denied: Offender perceptions of the prison recall system.ʼ Probation Journal 57(1), pp. 43–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0264550509354672
  22. Downes D. (1988). Contrasts in Tolerance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  23. Durnescu I. (2011). ʻPains of probation: Effective practice and human rights.ʼ International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 55(4), pp. 530–545. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X10369489
  24. Durnescu I. (2019). ʻPains of reentry revisited.ʼ International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 63(8), pp. 1482–1498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19828573
  25. Funk P. (2004). ʻOn the effective use of stigma as a crime deterrent.ʼ European Economic Review 48, pp. 715–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2003.11.003
  26. Gainey R.R. and Payne B.K. (2000). ʻUnderstanding the experience of house arrest with electronic monitoring: An analysis of quantitative and qualitative data.ʼ International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 44(1), pp. 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X00441008
  27. Griffin D. and Healy D. (2019). ʻThe pains of parole for life sentence prisoners in Ireland: Risk, rehabilitation and re-entry.ʼ European Journal of Probation 11(3), pp. 124–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220319891522
  28. Hayes D. (2015). ʻThe impact of supervision on the pains of community penalties in England and Wales: An exploratory study.ʼ European Journal of Probation 7(2), pp. 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220315593099
  29. Hayes D. (2017). ʻProximity, pain and state punishment.ʼ Punishment and Society 20(2), pp. 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474517701303
  30. Hayes D. (2019). ʻPain, harm, and punishment.ʼ In P. Ugwudike, H. Graham, F. McNeill, P. Raynor, F.S. Taxman, and Ch. Trotter (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Rehabilitative Work in Criminal Justice. London: Routledge, pp. 1040–1048.
  31. Howard F.F. (2019). ʻThe experience of prison recall in England and Wales.ʼ The Howard journal of Crime and Justice 58(2), pp. 180–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/hojo.12306
  32. Howard F.F., Travers R., Wakeling H., Webster C., and Mann R. (2018). Understanding the Process and Experience of Recall to Prison. London: HM Prison & Probation Service.
  33. Johnson R. and Toch H. (1982). The Pains of Imprisonment. London: Sage Publications.
  34. Lebel T. (2012). ʻIvisible stripes? Formerly incarcerated person's perceptions of stigma.ʼ Deviant Behavior 33, pp. 89–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2010.538365
  35. Martin J.S., Hanrahan K., and Bowers J.H. (2009). ʻOffendersʼ perceptions of house arrest and electronic monitoring.ʼ Journal of Offender Rehabilitatio 48(6), pp. 547–570. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509670903081359
  36. Mortelmans D. (2013). Handboek kwalitatieve onderzoeksmethoden [Manual of qualitative research methods]. Leuven: Acco.
  37. Nederlandt O. (2020). Les juges de l’application des peines face à la réinsertion des personnes condamnées: Une immersion dans la fabrique législative et la pratique judiciaire du droit de l’exécution des peines privatives de liberté [An immersion in the legislative fabric and the judicial practive of the law concerning the exécution of custodial sentences]. Bruxelles: Université Saint Louis.
  38. Nederlandt O., Servais A., and Teugels A. (2022). ʻSortie de prison sous conditions: enjeux et difficultés de l’exécution de la peine privative de liberté en probation. E-legalʼ [Conditions of imprisonment: Issues and difficulties in the execution of custodial sentences on probation]. Revue de Droit et de Criminologie de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles 6, pp. 1–36.
  39. Nugent B. and Schinkel M. (2016). ʻThe pains of desistance.ʼ Criminology and Criminal Justice 16(5), pp. 568–584. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895816634812
  40. Padfield N. (2013). ʻUnderstanding recall 2011.ʼ University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper 2/2013. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2201039
  41. Padfield N. and Maruna S. (2006). ʻThe revolving door at the prison gate: Exploring the dramatic increase in recalls to prison.ʼ Criminology and Criminal Justice 6(3), pp. 329–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895806065534
  42. Payne B.K. and Gainey R.R. (1998). ʻA qualitative assessment of the pains experienced on electronic monitoring.ʼ International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 42(2), pp. 149–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X9804200207
  43. Petersilia J. (1990). ʻWhen probation becomes more dreaded than prison.ʼ Federal Probation 54(1), pp. 23–27.
  44. Robert L. (2009). ʻGeleidelijke terugkeer of plotse overgang naar de samenleving? Langgestrafte gedetineerden in de gevangenis van Andenneʼ [Gradual return or sudden transition to society? Long-term prisoners in Andenne’s prison]. In T. Daems, P. Pletincx, L. Robert, V. Scheirs, A. van de Wiel, and K. Verpoest (eds.) Achter tralies in België [Behind bars in Belgium]. Gent: Academia Press, pp. 163–191.
  45. Scheirs V. (2014a). De strafuitvoeringsrechtbank aan het werk [The work of the Sentence Implementation Court]. Antwerpen: Maklu.
  46. Scheirs V. (2014b). ʻNon-compliance als deel van het re-integratieproces? Enkele reflecties over het herroepen van de voorwaardelijke invrijheidsstellingʼ [Non-compliance as a part of the reintegration process? Some reflections on the revocation of conditional release]. Panopticon, Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht, Criminologie en Forensisch Welzijnswerk 32(5), pp. 385–391.
  47. Scheirs V. (2016). ʻDoing reintegration? The quest for reintegration in Belgian sentence implementation.ʼ European Journal of Probation 8(2), pp. 82–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220316661660
  48. Sexton L. (2015). ʻPenal subjectivities: Developing a theoretical framework for penal consciousness.ʼ Punishment and Society 17(1), pp. 114–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474514548790
  49. Shammas V.L. (2014). ʻThe pains of freedom: Assessing the ambiguity of Scandinavian penal exeptionalism on Norwayʼs prison island.ʼ Punishment and Society 16(1), pp. 104–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474513504799
  50. Steen S., Opsal T., Lovegrove P., and McKinzey S. (2013). ʻPutting parolees back in prison: Discretion and the parole revocation process.ʼ Criminal Justice Review 38(1), pp. 70–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016812466571
  51. Sykes G.M. (1958). The Society of Captives. A Study of a Maximum Security Prison. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  52. Travis J. (2002). ʻInvisible punishment: An instrument of social exclusion.ʼ In M. Mauer and M. Chesney-Lind (eds.) Invisible Punishment: The Collateral Consequences of Mass Imprisonment. United States of America: Urban Institute, pp. 15–36.
  53. Weaver B., Piacentini L., Moodie K., and Barry M. (2020). ʻExploring and explaining non-compliance with community supervision.ʼ British Journal of Criminology 61, pp. 434–455. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azaa078
  54. Weaver B., Tata C., Munro M., and Barry M. (2012). ʻThe failure of recall to prison: Early release, front-door and back-door sentencing and the revolving prison door in Scotland.ʼ European Journal of Probation 4(1), pp. 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/206622031200400108
  55. Webster R. (2023). The Growing Problem Of Prison Recalls. Why Are so Many People Recalled to Prison?, Russellwebster.com. Available online: https://www.russellwebster.com/the-growing-problem-of-prison-recalls/ [14.11.2023].
  56. Wet van 17/05/2006 betreffende de externe rechtspositie van de veroordeelden tot een vrijheidsstraf en de aan het slachtoffer toegekende rechten in het raam van de strafuitvoeringsmodaliteiten [Act of 17 May 2006 on the External Legal Position of convicted prisoners and the right of the victims in the framework of modalities of implementation of sentences]. Available online: https://openjustice.be/ [08.01.2024].