Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Should Jails Be A Centre of Retribution or Rehabilitation?
Should Jails Be A Centre of Retribution or Rehabilitation?
OR REHABILITATION?
SUBMITTED BY:
DIV: C
PRN: 17010223034
BATCH: 2017-22
In
August 2017
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
At last but not the least I want to thank my sister Chhavi Katyal
(Student, M.A in Psychology, AUD) who treasured me for my hard
work and encouraged me for taking up this topic as my project.
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
3. DISCUSSIONS
4. CONCLUSION 6
INTRODUCTION
Social factors are what drive the people towards a certain direction in
their life. With India’s constitutional system, nearly 400 articles find
relevance in making the nation and system work well. N.R Madhava
Menon, the founder-director of NLSIU Bangalore and a frequent writer
in The Hindu talks about how India is trying to approach a system
which inclines towards “Restorative Justice”. Talking about the criminal
justice system, he mentions the ineffective punishments that are given
to the criminals and states the loopholes of the society where the
prosecution’s discretion creates a corrupt manipulated system. No
doubt, he talks about a system where the police officers are discrete
about a case and the system believes in solving the case in the very
early stages, this can be because of the lack of lawyers but the social
aspect behind this is clear, dealing with non-mainstream cases affects
the image of a mainstream lawyer.
Various discussions have been done on the argument between the two
types of justice systems. While the prisons in early 90s believed in
retribution than letting the criminal make a comeback, most of the
modern jails follow the idea of restoration. The earlier prisons did not
have a boundation of many social factors like the type of government
or the presence of a sole constitution. While many scholars argue that,
the democratic type of government is more retributive in nature
because the people elect their governments and the judicial system
works towards the betterment of the society and not for the individuals
who committed a crime against the society.
A few nations over the world are currently supplanting the antagonistic
model of criminal equity incompletely or completely with various
models of therapeutic equity, yielding promising outcomes in
wrongdoing control. The procedure is more shared, consensual and
comprehensive, that is normal for indigenous frameworks of equity.
The part of the state is decreased and the support of groups
energized. This is not to be mistaken for the panchayat model of
subjective basic leadership by a couple of older folks of the territory.
Due process prerequisites are followed in helpful equity while interest
is augmented and made straightforward, comprehensive and
responsible. At the same time, the framework regards assorted variety
as a social actuality, interrelatedness as an excellence and
redressing/mending the mischief as a noteworthy goal.
Wrongdoing and savagery constitute a noteworthy obstacle for
improvement and social combination for a plural society like India. The
ill-disposed model of criminal equity, with rebuffing the wrongdoer as
its lone point, has demonstrated exorbitant and counterproductive.
Groups must be included and casualties given rights in discovering
approaches to remedy the off-base. While keeping the antagonistic
framework for certain genuine and complex offenses, India needs to
try different things with more just models went for compromise and
rebuilding of connections. Remedial equity is an appreciated thought
especially in the matter of adolescent equity, property offenses,
collective clashes, family debate, and so on. What is required is a
difference in attitude, eagerness to convey casualties to the middle
phase of criminal procedures and to recognize that reestablishing
connections and amending the mischief are imperative components of
the criminal equity framework.
In such cases, the system tempts to follow retribution but again goes
with the restoration because the crimes that are done at times are so
sudden and instinctive that our mind stops controlling bodily actions of
a person. The debate of retribution and restoration has no end if
“Rarest of Rare” cases are talked about but giving a chance would be
the best solution for a major social change in the society.
CONCLUSION
The restoration policy does not only benefit the prisoner but his social
relation holders as well. The victim never gets a closure when a
prisoner is hanged to death or is kept rotting in jails because without a
confrontation, a closure cannot be provided. The social factors affect
the victim more than the criminal and these social factors defame the
victim as well as the prisoner for no reason and without the knowledge
of a proper back story.
Bibliography
Menon, N. M. (2016, April 5). Towards Restorative Criminal Justice. The Hindu.