Not a day earlier, but neither a day later

TO THE EDITOR: The sentence reductions of a few weeks ago have placed at the center of the debate the appropriateness and suitability of contemplating this type of mechanism, particularly with regard to those convicted of crimes against the sexual integrity of minors. These laws reflect a consensus on the normative reproach we have decided to attach to the protection of the sexual indemnity of children and adolescents as an essential value, above any incentive for those who committed these crimes. If the sentence is 10 years in prison, that person will not be able to leave even one day earlier. But neither will they be able to leave even one day later. A consensus that is unfortunately less settled and currently absent from the discussion is the importance of weighing that reproach against reintegration as the structuring axis of punishment. If we know that a person, once their sentence is served—even down to the very last day—will return to live in society, would it not be better for that person to have worked toward reintegrating, rehabilitating, and acquiring tools and a trade? And "good conduct," as good behavior in prisons is known, is precisely one of those incentives for obtaining early release. The bill presented by Senators Longton, Squella, Araya, Flores, and Bianchi, whose support the government announced, has as its core idea the complete repeal of Law No. 19,856 and, with it, the absolute elimination of the sentence reduction system. In addition, it incorporates an aggravating circumstance of criminal liability for those who, prior to the repeal of the law, benefited from it and committed a new crime, without specifying with respect to which crimes. If approved, this bill completely erases the incentive mentioned above, with the consequence of hindering any possible work with persons deprived of liberty. But what will not change—and it is worth repeating constantly—is that all of those people will be released. While the bill does not affect parole, it does limit mechanisms intended to incentivize good behavior and promote reintegration. It must certainly be debated whether sentence reductions apply in all cases, as well as the criteria and procedures for determining them; but, as with all public policies, the solution is not to eliminate them, but to improve them. Francisca Werth Wainer Executive Director of the UC Center for Justice and Society