Imprisonment

Imprisonment is the word which means taking away the freedom of prisoners when
they are punished by a court of law. They are locked up in prison and all the rights
are taken away they are not given any rights which are under Article 21 or 32 of the
Constitution of India. They have to stay in jail till the end of the imprisonment given
by the court of law before that they are not allowed to be released from the jail.

What justifies imprisonment?

Imprisonment is used as a form of punishment in every country in the world (for

statistics on the prison populations of 223 independent countries and dependent
territories.
While there is often disagreement regarding the relative weight that should be
given to these differing aims and the way in which prisons should operate,
international law strongly emphasizes the importance of rehabilitation and
reintegration in order to meet the primary purpose of imprisonment.

Article 10.3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (GA
Resolution 2200A (XXI)) states that: “The penitentiary system shall comprise
treatment of prisoners the essential aim of which shall be their reformation and
social rehabilitation”. Of significance, the ICCPR is a legally binding multilateral
treaty that represents an international consensus that prisoners be treated
humanely, consistent with their inherent human dignity, and that prisons be
focused on rehabilitation and reformation rather than punishment. Similarly, Rule
4 of the Nelson Mandela Rules (2015) also emphasize the significance of preparing
offenders for their social reintegration in justifying imprisonment:

1. The purposes of a sentence of imprisonment or similar measures

deprivative of a person’s liberty are primarily to protect society against
crime and to reduce recidivism. Those purposes can be achieved only if the
period of imprisonment is used to ensure, so far as possible, the
reintegration of such persons into society upon release so that they can
lead a law-abiding and self-supporting life.
 2. To this end, prison administrations and other competent authorities should
offer education, vocational training and work, as well as other forms of
assistance that are appropriate and available, including those of a remedial,
moral, spiritual, social and health- and sports-based nature. All such
programmes, activities and services should be delivered in line with the
individual treatment needs of prisoners.

Yet there is little evidence to suggest that the use of imprisonment as a

punishment worldwide has been effective in achieving this aim (Coyle et al.,
2016). Conversely, the overuse and overreliance on imprisonment worldwide has
led to a growing recognition that overcrowding and poor regimes in penal
institutions around the world have led to significant human rights violations, with
prisoners enduring inhuman and degrading prison conditions without adequate
access to basic services or rehabilitation programmes delivered in line with their
individual needs (UNODC, 2013a). Many prisoners are subject to appalling
treatment and conditions that inherently undermine their human dignity and
value as human beings.

Types of Imprisonment

1. Mandatory imprisonment- When any person commits a crime it becomes

mandatory to give him/her punishment for that crime because if the
person who commits crime are left with no punishment he will become
dangerous to society it harms whole public. This is the reason criminals are
not kept free after he commits any crime they have to face imprisonment.
2. Maximum sentences- The person who commits crime they got life
imprisonment and the duration of life imprisonment is decided by a court
of law. The minimum life imprisonment is 14 years but it can extend upto
30 years of life imprisonment.
3. Minimum life imprisonment- The minimum life imprisonment is for 14
years. It is decided by the Supreme Court of India.
 4. False imprisonment- Many times people unlawfully caught by the police
and get imprisonment because of false crime.

Purpose of Imprisonment

There are five main underlying theoretical justifications of criminal punishment:

Retribution – this theory of punishment derives from the Old Testament lex
talionis “an eye for an eye”. It justifies punishment on the basis that all individuals
convicted of a crime deserve to be punished, and proposes that the most
appropriate response is a punishment that is proportional to the wrong
committed (see for example: Baier, 1977).

Incapacitation – this theory assumes that the state has a duty to protect the
public from future wrongs or harms, and that such protection can be afforded
through some form of incarceration or incapacitation. It focuses on preventing
future crimes by disabling and restricting the offender’s ability to commit a future
wrong, and can take very different forms, including the death penalty,
incarceration, house arrest and disqualification from driving for drunken drivers
(see for example: Zedner, 2004).

Deterrence – like incapacitation, deterrence justifies punishment on the basis of

preventing future crimes. Individual deterrence justifies the imposition of
punishment to prevent the offender from committing further crimes. general
deterrence justifies the imposition of punishment to deter and prevent others
from committing similar crimes (see for example: Hudson, 2003).

Rehabilitation –Alexander Paterson, who was appointed as a Commissioner of

Prisons in Britain in 1922 famously stated, individuals “are sent to prison as
punishment, not for punishment. the central premise of rehabilitation theory is
that punishment can prevent future crime by reforming the offender’s behaviour.
The purpose of punishment is to address and reduce the risk and needs of
individual offenders through intervention programmes, such as education,
vocational training, and treatment, including cognitive-behavioural programmes,
so that they can return to society as law-abiding citizens. Its main focus is on the
rehabilitation and social reintegration of offenders into society
Reparation – the justification of reparation as punishment is based on the premise
that crimes should be corrected by offenders making amends to victims to repair
the wrong that they have done. According to this theory, restitution or restoration
and compensation to victims, their families or communities is considered a central
part of criminal justice.

Conclusion

While many prison reformers have demonstrably improved conditions for prisoners
over the years , they continue to face significant challenges in the twenty first
century. In many countries, outdated legislation, "tough on crime" policies, a lack
of political will and social pressures, as well as limited resources and weak
monitoring systems, threaten the impact of prison reform work, and challenge the
human rights argument underpinning the importance of prison reform. In all
regions of the world, the use of imprisonment continues to raise questions about
the extent to which it is an effective, fair and humane punishment.