TO THE EDITOR:
The debate on sentence reductions demands more than answers dictated by circumstance. In recent decades, mechanisms for release from prison, such as parole and sentence reductions, provided for by the legislature, have been restricted.
The risk is that this controversy deepens that trend, without reflecting on the purposes of penal execution. Early release mechanisms are not arbitrary concessions nor should they be confused with impunity. They respond to principles of humanity in punishment, special prevention, and criminal policy rationality. The sentence must correspond to the gravity of the crime, but its execution must recognize people's capacity for change and offer incentives and opportunities for reintegration. Criminology has warned about the potentially criminogenic effects of prolonged imprisonment, especially in contexts of overcrowding, violence, and institutional precariousness.
It is urgent to move toward a law on the execution of sentences and a specialized judiciary to resolve these matters. Rational penitentiary policy requires long-term decisions, protected from political instrumentalization.
The challenge is to balance the dignity and rights of those serving sentences, the legitimate demands for justice of victims, and the security needs of society. This balance is not achieved by restricting benefits, but with a system of penal execution founded on criteria …
AI Brief
Your highlights
CommentsTO THE EDITOR:The debate on sentence reductions demands more than answers dictated by the circumstances of the moment. In recent decades, penitentiary release mechanisms, such as parole and sentence reductions, established by the legislature, have been restricted. The risk is that this controversy deepens that trend, without reflecting on the purposes of the execution of criminal sentences. Early release mechanisms are not arbitrary concessions nor should they be confused with impunity. They respond to foundations of the humanity of punishments, special prevention, and criminal policy rationality. The sentence must correspond to the gravity of the crime, but its execution must recognize people's capacity for change and offer incentives and opportunities for reintegration. Criminology has warned about the potentially criminogenic effects of prolonged imprisonment, especially in contexts of overcrowding, violence, and institutional precariousness. It is urgent to move forward toward a law on the execution of sentences and a specialized judiciary to resolve these matters. A rational penitentiary policy requires long-term decisions, protected from political instrumentalization. The challenge is to balance the dignity and rights of those serving sentences, the legitimate demands for justice of victims, and the security needs of society. This balance is not achieved by restricting benefits, but with a criminal sentence execution system founded on rigorous and transparent criteria, individualized decisions, and effective mechanisms of support and supervision after release, which allow for evaluating results and safeguarding their legitimacy. Paula MedinaDirector Master's in Criminal Justice System, Central UniversityMore about:Execution of sentencesCriminal benefitsReintegration