A slew of reports from the Office of the Inspector of Prisons was published late last week. They exert a powerful cumulative impact, painting a vivid picture of severely overcrowded prisons where men and women, many of whom struggle with addiction and mental illness, languish in squalid conditions, their treatment needs unmet.
How did we arrive at such a parlous situation and how might we navigate our way out of it? What can be done to ensure imprisonment is used sparingly and the conditions of confinement are decent and humane?
The Government seems to think it can build its way out of the crisis, promising to construct a new prison at Thornton Hall and to expand capacity by 1,500 places. Given the enormous cost overruns associated with capital projects ranging from the Leinster House bicycle shed to the National Children’s Hospital, we should brace ourselves for a gigantic bill if the Government’s building programme goes ahead.
This is not the first time the prison population has surged. It rose steadily between 2005 and 2011, but a very different approach was taken back then. A subcommittee on penal reform was established by the Oireachtas to consider what could be done. It noted that imprisonment rates had a very small impact on crime rates and rather than calling for expansion, it advocated restraint, recommending that the Government aim to reduce the prison population by one-third. The subcommittee’s work coincided with a fall in prisoner numbers that continued for several years.
READ MORE
The recent trend has been steeply upward and shows no sign of abating. Since January 2022, the number in custody has risen from 3,708 to 5,755, more than 600 of whom are sleeping on mattresses on cell floors because no beds can be found for them. This is unprecedented.
Politicians are in the habit of saying the increase in imprisonment reflects demographic change, that there is a certain inevitability about the trend. While Ireland’s population may have risen steeply, there is no simple relationship between the number of people living in a country and the number of prisoners. The latter depends on crime rates, victims’ propensity to report, investigative efficiency, prosecution practice, sentences imposed, early release mechanisms, political priorities and the legislative environment.
The fact that the national population has been on an upward trajectory at the same time as the number of prisoners has fluctuated shows this correlation is imperfect. The number of women in prison is a case in point. In January 2022, there were 139 female prisoners. Last week, there were 309. Obviously, the number of women in Ireland has not doubled over the past four years.
The Council of Europe argues that if a country’s prison population exceeds 90 per cent of available capacity, this becomes a high-risk situation and urgent action is required to avoid further congestion. The Irish Prison Service accepts 95 per cent as a safe operating limit. In January 2022, the prison population, at 85 per cent capacity, was comfortably beneath both thresholds. Today it stands at 122 per cent.
Many factors contribute to rising prisoner numbers, so any reduction strategy will have to be multifaceted. Here are four suggestions, none of which require the construction of new cellblocks.
First, it is time to take restorative justice seriously. The National Commission on Restorative Justice recommended that when judges are contemplating a custodial sentence of up to three years, they should be required to consider referring the case to a process such as victim-offender mediation.
Studies show a high level of victim satisfaction with restorative justice and a positive impact on recidivism. In addition, given it costs €99,000 to keep someone in prison for a year, there would be considerable financial savings. The commission called for nationwide implementation of restorative justice by 2015. This has not happened and it is mystifying why progress has been so slow.
Second, the use of short prison sentences must be curtailed. Every year, most offenders sent to prison receive sentences of six months or less. They could be more effectively dealt with on probation or given community service. It would be beneficial to examine sentencing practice to understand what judges believe is achieved by punishments, in terms of rehabilitation, retribution, deterrence and public protection.
Third, special attention should be paid to prisoners awaiting trial for whom conditions are particularly grim. If such individuals are convicted and receive a custodial sentence, credit is routinely given for time already served. To reflect the harshness of their confinement, why not credit them with two days for every day spent on remand?
Fourth, we need to review early release procedures. Determinate sentences are automatically reduced by one-quarter if a prisoner’s conduct is good. A discount of one-third is allowed if a person can show they have reduced their risk of reoffending. Applications for enhanced remission should be encouraged. (Alternatively, the standard rate could be increased to one-third across the board.)
Parole is limited to life-sentence prisoners, most of whom spend more than 25 years behind bars before release on licence. Parole eligibility should be widened to include those serving long determinate sentences and the process should be accelerated where risk assessments are favourable and a resettlement plan is in place.
The penal system is at a critical juncture. Building prisons will take a long time, cost a fortune and fail to address the drivers of the current crisis. Urgent remedial action along the lines I have set out might offer a better prospect of success.
Ian O’Donnell is professor of criminology at University College Dublin. His latest book is Prison Life: Pain, Resistance, and Purpose.
