Kazna zatvora u Srbiji – trendovi i odlike zatvoreničke populacije
Author/s: Natalija Lukić,
Pages: 135-160
UDK: 343.265(497.11)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47152/rkkp.62.2.6
Abstract: Predmet rada je analiza stope zatvaranja pod kojom se podrazumeva stopa izrečenih zatvorskih kazni na godišnjem nivou ali i stopa zatvorenika, odnosno stopa lica koja se nalaze na izdržavanju zatvorske kazne. Cilj rada je da najpre ukaže na situaciju u Srbiji u tom pogledu i da izvrši komparaciju sa drugim evropskim državama. Osim stope zatvaranja, cilj rada je i da analizira karakteristike zatvoreničke populacije, odnosno uzrast, pol, zatim visinu izrečenih zatvorskih kazni, stopu umiranja. Konačno, autorka se osvrće na moguća objašnjenja represivne kriminalne politike u Srbiji i posledica takvih orijentacija. The rate of persons deprived of liberty in Serbia has been increasing since 2006 and during the last decade this rate has been approximately 150. The data of the Council of Europe for the year 2022 show that in a large number of countries there a decrease in the rate of prisoners (all persons deprived of liberty) has been determined, and Serbia is still in the group of countries with a high rate of prisoners. However, the capacities of penal institutions in Serbia allow such figures, and according to the data, the total population of persons deprived of liberty is about 1,000 people smaller than the maximum capacity allows. There is an average of 3.8 people in cells, while the European average is 2.1, and in half of the countries that number is 1.4. Similarly, the sentencing policy of the courts is uniform and the rate of those sentenced to prison generally follows the rate of all those convicted. In addition to a suspended sentence, the courts usually opt for a prison sentence. Taken together, imprisonment (including the house arrest that is enforced in the premises where the convicted person lives) amounts to about 1/3 of all imposed sanctions. The question arises why Serbia did not follow the trend of most European countries in which the population of persons deprived of their liberty has decreased in the last years? One of the explanations is the adoption of repressive criminal law solutions that in many situations limited the discretionary powers of judges in respect to penal sanctions. While on the one hand it is not in dispute that for serious crimes the only option will be a prison sentence, in the case of some incriminations it was better to leave the choice to the judges. However, it seems that the trend of transferring decision-making from the judiciary to the legislature is not typical only for Serbia (see for example: von Hirsch, 2017). At the same time, the public most often expresses repressive attitudes, which should be respected, but legal solutions should not be guided only by the interest of getting political support of voters but also by scientific and professional arguments. Scientific knowledge points to all the problems that, on the one hand, appear in prisons and how and in what way these problems prevent the successful execution of prison penalty and the implementation of treatment. In such situations, it would be more appropriate to opt for alternatives for less serious crimes, and in this way, prisoners could also receive greater commitment of treatment services as well as generally better conditions while serving their prison sentence. Although, according to statistical data, prisons are not overcrowded, it seems that those authors who claim that the frequency and length of prison sentences are primarily determined by existing capacities are right. If they are exceeded, one option is the construction of new institutions, which is usually associated with financial problems, and another option is amnesty and pardon. At the end, it should be borne in mind that long-term prison sentences are the least common, and that the largest number of prisoners will be released after a few years. It is clear that the public should also be interested in ensuring that at least some of them do not commit criminal acts again, and criminological research confirms that insisting on intimidation and retribution will not reduce recidivism rate.
Keywords: stopa kazne zatvora, zatvorenička populacija, komparacija, Srbija. Prison rate, prison population, comparison, Serbia.
References:
Atanacković, D. (1988). Penologija, Beograd, Naučna knjiga.
Blumstein, A. (2004). Restoring Rationality in Punishment Policy, In: M. Tonry (Ed.) The Future of Imprisonment (ed. Michael Tonry), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 61-80.
Boone, M., van Swaaningen, R. (2013). Regression to the Mean: Punishment in the Netherlands. In: V. Ruggiero, M. Ryan (Eds.) Punishment in Europe, New York, 9-32.
Coyle, A. (2005). Understanding Prisons, Key Issues in Policy and Practice. Maidenhead. Open University Press.
Fagan, J. (2004). Crime, Law and the Community: Dynamics of Incarceration in New York City, In: M. Tonry (Ed.) The Future of Imprisonment, Oxford. Oxford University Press, 27-59.
Felson, M. (2011). Zločin i svakodnevni život, Beograd, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Garland, D. (2018) Theoretical advances and problems in the sociology of punishment, Punishment and Society, vol.20, n.1, 8-33.
Gendreau, P. (2017). Rehabilitation. What Works to Change Offenders? In: F.T. Cullen, C.L. Johnson (Eds.), Correctional Theory, Context and Consequences, London, Sage Publications, 171-203.
Ignjatović, Đ (2017). Kazneni populizam. In: Đ. Ignjatović (Ur.) Kaznena reakcija u Srbiji VII, Beograd, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu, 11-32.
Ignjatović, Đ. (2018). Pravo izvršenja krivičnih sankcija, Beograd, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
Janković, I. (1984). Socialism and the Death Penalty, Research in Law, Deviance and Social Control, 6, 109-140.
Johnson, E. H. (1978). Crime, Correction and Society, Georgetown, Ontario. The Dorsey Press.
Karstedt, S. (2015). Cultural peers and penal policies: A configurational approach toward mapping penal landscapes, Punishment and Society, vol.17, n.3, p. 374-396.
Knežić, B. (2017). Obrazovanje osuđenika. Način da se bude slobodan. Beograd, Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja.
Kolarić, D. (2020), Višestruki povrat u krivičnom pravu Srbije – Osvrt na Zakon o izmenama i dopunama Krivičnog zakonika iz 2019. godine. In: Đ. Ignjatović (Ur.), Kaznena reakcija u Srbiji X, Beograd, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu, 208-217.
Lukić, N. (2022). Porast stope zatvaranja, trendovi i moguća objašnjenja. In: Đ. Ignjatović (Ur.), Kaznena reakcija u Srbiji XII, Beograd, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
MacKenzie, D.L. (2017). From Theory to Policy. In: F.T. Cullen, C.L. Johnson (Eds.), Correctional Theory, Context and Consequences, London, Sage Publications, 2-26.
Mathiesen, T. (2001). Televions, public space and prison population, A commentary on Mauer and Simon. In: D. Garland (Ed.), Mass Imprisonment, Social Causes and Cinsequences, London. Sage Publications, 28-34.
Milutinović, M. (1981). Penologija, Beograd, Savremena administracija.
Mrvić-Petrović, N. (2007). Kriza zatvora, Beograd, Vojnoizdavački zavod.
Nagin, S. D. (2017). Deterrence. In: F.T. Cullen, C.L. Johnson (Eds.), Correctional Theory, Context and Consequences, London, Sage Publications, 77-112.
Piacentini, L. (2013). The Russian Penal System. In: V. Ruggiero, M. Ryan (Eds.) Punishment in Europe, New York, 157-182.
Pinerová, K. (2018). Prison and Society Connected: The Development of the Czechoslovak Prison System in 1945-92, Acta Polonie Historica, 118, 151-181.
Platek, M. (2013). Poland: The Political Legacy and Penal Practice, In: V. Ruggiero, M. Ryan (Eds.) Punishment in Europe, New York, 183-202.
Pratt, J. (2007). Penal Populism, New York, Routledge.
Rothman, D. (2017). Correctional Theory in Practice, America’s Changing Context. In: F.T. Cullen, C.L. Johnson (Eds.), Correctional Theory, Context and Consequences, London, Sage Publications, 27-42.
Stevanović, Z. (2014). Tretman osuđenika u zatvorskom sistemu Srbije, Beograd, Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja.
Stevanović, I., Međedović, J., Vujičić, N. (2018), Ekspertsko istraživanje i analiza povrata u Republici Srbiji, Beograd, Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja, Misija OEBS u Srbiji.
Tonry, M. (2001). Symbol, substance, and severity in western penal policies, Punishment and Society, vol.3, n.4, p. 517-536.
Tonry, M. (2004). Has the Prison a Future? In: M. Tonry (Ed.) The Future of Imprisonment, Oxford. Oxford University Press, 3-26.
von Hirsch, A. (2017). Just Deserts, Doing Justice or Getting Tough? In: F.T. Cullen, C.L. Johnson (Eds.), Correctional Theory, Context and Consequences, London, Sage Publications, 44-76.
von Hofer, H., Tham, H. (2013). Punishment in Sweeden: A Changing Penal Landscape, In: V. Ruggiero, M. Ryan (Eds.) Punishment in Europe, New York, 33-53.
Вуковић, И. (2022), Кривично право, општи део, Београд, Правни факултет Универзитета у Београду.
Wilson, J. Q. (2013). Thinking about Crime, New York. Basic Books.
Wilson, J. Q. (2017). Incapacitation, Locking Up the Wicked. In: F.T. Cullen, C.L. Johnson (Eds.), Correctional Theory, Context and Consequences, London, Sage Publications, 113-143.