Parole for Maltese inmates by end of 2011

Unveiling the Act, Justice and Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici described the process of fashioning the Act as a long an arduous one. Having begun two years ago, the act first saw light of day as a White Paper published just under a year ago. Since then it underwent an extensive consultation process.

“No parole system is easy to introduce” Mifsud Bonnici said, “especially in a country as small as Malta where any such measure could have a considerably large impact.”

This Reparative Justice Act, he explained, would introduce Parole into the Maltese legal framework along with other necessary reforms to certain areas of the justice system – such as a reform in the system of how sentences are reduced, the introduction of support measures for victims of crimes, and other support-oriented measures.

All inmates would be able to apply for parole the moment the act comes into force, provided they confirm to the extensive eligibility threshold the act itself lays out – depending on the charges they were convicted under, and the portion of their sentence served to date.

Outlining the proposed parole structure, Mifsud Bonnici said the act would establish an Offender Assessment Board. Composed of one chairperson and between two to four members appointed by the Minister, this board would evaluate each inmate that enters parliament, as well as the ‘care plan’ that will be prepared for each one.

The OAB will also review evaluation reports of each inmate who applies for parole. Intended to address the issue of recurring and ‘chronic’ recidivism (where individuals fall into a vicious criminal cycle) by “guiding criminals out of that lifestyle,” Mifsud Bonnici said.

Mifsud Bonnici explained that the Parole Board would be composed of a chairperson – a retired member from the judiciary – and eight other members appointed by the minister and be “familiar with the criminal justice field or other relevant professions.”

This board, he said, will determine whether an applicant “deserves” to be awarded parole, on what conditions will the parole be granted (which can include compensation to victims, community service, or electronic tracking programmes), as well as apply ‘punitive measures’ should these conditions be breached.

“Simply because someone is eligible to apply for parole and does so is no guarantee they will be granted parole,” Mifsud Bonnici maintained.

According to the proposed act, prisoners not eligible for parole are: those incarcerated for offences related to the Immigration Act, those subject to extradition or deportation at the end of their sentence, prisoners sentences to crimes against the state or terrorist crimes (or related offences), or prisoners sentenced to life-long imprisonment.

This last point, Mifsud Bonnici said, was a point of considerable debate. “We felt that since this act is as yet in its infancy and needs to be seen ‘in action, we felt it would be premature to grant parole to prisoners sentenced to lifelong imprisonment.” He however said that it is not excluded “for the future.”

Parole consideration

 - Prisoners sentenced to between one to two years in prison and who have served at least 33 per cent of their sentence

 - Prisoners sentenced to between two to sever years in prison and who have served at least 50 per cent of their sentence

 - Prisoners sentenced to seven years or more in prison and who have served at least 58 per cent of their sentence

Despite the conditions laid down, Mifsud Bonnici said, the act provides exceptions in that if a prison inmate is less than 16 years of age, or “in situations where the court determines that it would be in the interest of the inmate’s reformative process”, the court can recommend that parole be considered earlier.

The Act also lays down that the period of eligibility for parole is directly tied to an inmate’s behaviour, in that breaching prison regulations would mean that the period within which parole would not  be considered is ‘extended’.

Also, the Act specifies that prisoners who were sentenced to a prison sentence while attending a drug rehabilitation programme should be considered for parole immediately, so as not to disrupt the rehabilitation process.

Regarding the system through which sentences can be reduced (remission), Mifsud Bonnici said that the reforms were fashioned along with the principle that for sentences to be reduced, “a prison had to earn it.”

He pointed out that the process for prison sentences remission would be overseen by a new board chaired by the Director of Prisons – a new development in the Maltese legal system, Mifsud Bonnici said. The board may impose conditions on prisoners who benefit from early release, including participation in rehabilitation programmes and even community service.

The Act also lays out hat the period of early release may not exceed a third of the prison sentence, while remission would be available for prisoners irrespective of whether they applied for parole.

Referring to support measures for victims of crimes, Mifsud Bonnici described these as a very important step for the Maltese framework in that “many pay attention to the rights and the care of the accused, but the legal system often forgets about the victims.”

The Act will establish a Victim Support Unit as part of the probation services structure, the function of which will include the operation of a Victim’s Charter, establishing criteria for the appointment of mediators, and promoting mediation between victims and those responsible for the crimes against them.

Mifsud Bonnci spoke highly of the concept of mediation – the process by which victims and criminals can be brought face to face and ‘interact’ – maintaining how research shows that it has the potential to have a substantial effect on reducing recidivism.

“Mediation is not obligatory,” he however said. “But according to foreign studies, many victims do want to meet those who committed crimes against them, often to understand the why behind the act.”