1. S UMMARY OF RESEARCH RESULTS AND PROPOSALS FOR SANCTION POLICY Prof. JUDr. Helena Válková, CSc. Department of Social Work

2. Rational sanction policy promoted at European level should be based on:  criminological knowledge  the current sanction policy situation  the risks threatening the security of people in Europe and its future direction. 2 CONSTRAINTS OF SANCTION POLICY

3.  application of two opposing lines of punishment  greater differentiation of criminal sanctions  emphasis of the principle that imprisonment should be seen as a last resort in the sanction system (Section 55, paragraph 2)  tightening sanction policy for particularly serious crimes  new alternative sanctions (Section 60, Section 76) 3 SANCTIONS AND THEIR APPLICATION IN THE NEW CRIMINAL CODE

4.  consequences of strengthening criminal repression by increasing sentences for less serious crimes (evasion of alimony payments, obstructing the execution of an official decision, etc.), and based on recidivism  increase in mandatory imprisonment, especially sentences from 6 months to 3 years  long-term increase in the number of prisoners by 2,700 people 4 CONTROVERSIAL IMPACT OF CERTAIN AMENDMENTS OF THE CRIMINAL CODE

5.  limited community service sentences (Section 62 (2) of the Criminal Code, Section 314e (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure)  consistently low number of imposed fines  greater number of mandatory prison sentences  increase in suspended prison sentences at the expense of other alternative sanctions 5 CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF CHANGES IN SANCTION POLICY

6.  decrease in their application in preliminary proceedings since 2009, or respectively a certain stabilisation in recent years  this decline was not compensated by a significant increase in the application of diversionary measures at court  the reason is both current regulation of summary preliminary proceedings, and the pressure on criminal justice authorities for the earliest possible hearing of the case  insufficient cooperation with the Probation and Mediation Service (PMS), both in the preparation of conditions for diversionary measures, and obtaining information on the conditions for the imposition of alternative sanctions 6 DIVERSIONARY MEASURES WITH RESTORATIVE ELEMENTS

7.  one of the main objectives of recodification – de- penalisation and a reduction in the number of mandatory prison sentences - has not been fulfilled  the number of prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants in the Czech Republic remains high long-term, even after the adoption of the new Criminal Code  criminological research of criminal careers confirmed that recidivism is closely linked to basic demographic factors, mainly gender and age; a fundamental variable in all analyses was previous experience of crime, including the number of offenses committed, their type, and the age at which the person first came into contact with the criminal justice system 7 CONFIRMATION OF CRIMINOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE BY OUR RESEARCH

8.  the negligible differences between the resultant effect of sanctions monitored in our research confirms the thesis that the central focus of criminal policy should not be sanctions (penalties) and their strictness or suitability  when comparing the results of this research with similar international studies, we can basically say that our research project brought expected figures, as the rate of recidivism in studies of this type normally ranges between 30-50% 8 RESULTS OF CONDUCTED ANALYSES

9.  the most widely presented approach to the punishment of offenders is a repressive approach  there is minimal presentation of alternative sanctions, resocialisation of offenders, etc.  the mood of the Czech public remains fairly punitive, where approx. 60 to 70% of respondents believe in the deterrent effect of strict punishment and a strict regime in prisons, and also consider the sanctions imposed today to be the same or more lenient compared to ten years ago  knowledge of alternative sanctions and measures and knowledge of the structure of sentencing remains relatively poor 9 IMPACT OF MEDIA PRESENTATION ON SANCTION POLICY

10.  current legislation, including the system of measures for juveniles (minors), provides ample scope for the application of alternative sanctions, including the possibility of individualising specific sanctions, which also applies to diversionary measures with restorative elements, but these options are not employed  there is a need, among other things, to focus on deepening cooperation between individual entities involved in the imposition and execution of these sanctions, and to provide sufficient time 10 CONCLUSIONS OF CONDUCTED ANALYSES

11. In judicial practice:  for short-term mandatory prison sentences of up to one year, to leave it up to the courts when these punishments are imposed in exceptional cases, particularly in the case of repeat offenders who have committed a new crime shortly after serving a previous prison sentence or for whom previous alternative sanctions were ineffective or unenforceable; 11 RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSALS

12.  To use house arrest as an alternative to mandatory prison sentences for offences in judicial practice and to try to increase the frequency of its use in cooperation with the Probation and Mediation Service;  To adequately differentiate and individualise sentences of house arrest in conjunction with the imposition of reasonable restrictions and obligations pursuant to Section 60 (5) of the Criminal Code in relation to the person of the particular offender, his/her circumstances and possibility of rehabilitation; 12 RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSALS

13.  To take the option of imposing reasonable restrictions and obligations pursuant to Section 63 (2) of the Criminal Code in the case of community service sentences more often, so that this sanction is also duly differentiated and individualised in relation to the person of the particular offender, his/her circumstances and possibility of rehabilitation; 13 RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSALS

14.  To devote more attention to imposing the newly introduced sanction of a ban on attending sports, cultural and other social events, which can be a very effective in terms of individual and general prevention, especially for selected crimes; 14 RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSALS

15.  courts that do not impose fines, or impose them only sporadically, should change their practice in accordance with the provisions of Section 39 (7) of the Criminal Code, as this form of sanction can be imposed separately, as well as in combination with other sanctions, with a wide range of possible pecuniary penalties 15 RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSALS

16.  deepen cooperation between public prosecutors and judges and PMS, both in the imposition and execution of alternative sanctions  quickly introduce electronic monitoring of offenders sentenced to house arrest, as its absence is the major limiting factor for more frequent sentencing to house arrest  establish a system for monitoring and evaluating recidivism of convicted offenders in the Czech Republic  emphasise the interdependence of criminal and social policy when dealing with criminality 16 RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSALS

17.  wholly or partially decriminalise evading alimony payments, i.e. limit criminalisation to cases where the entitled party may be in danger of destitution  abolish the lower limit for the crime of theft under Section 205 (2) of the Criminal Code  waive the reimbursement of costs related to house arrest in the case of socially underprivileged offenders, where a lack of funds for their payment could be a discriminating factor for the imposition of this sanction 17 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

18.  request the opinion of the Probation and Mediation Service in the event a court, deciding by court order, is considering imposing a suspended sentence for an offender who has been convicted of a crime in the last three years or was released from prison during that time, regarding the appropriateness of the imposition of this sanction  deepen cooperation between the PMS and the court in the execution of supervision 18 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

19.  add a concrete determination of the times the convicted offender is obliged to remain at the designated residence in Section 60 (4) of the Criminal Code, which is a partial return to previous legislation  amend the current wording of Section 61 of the Criminal Code on the reinstatement of a prison sentence for alternative punishment more appropriately than its proportional conversion according to current legislation 19 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

20.  amend the conversion of community service sentences by returning to previous legislation  amend the period specified for the execution of a community service sentence to one year 20 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

21.  amend the institute of settlement so that settlement newly applies to specifically defined offences only, this being those that are in the nature of a conflict between the accused and injured party, which may not simply relate to misdemeanors, but can also be less serious crimes  approval of settlement would be associated with the suspension of criminal prosecution and criminal prosecution would only be closed on fulfillment of the conditions undertaken by the accused 21 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

22.  amend provisions governing the conversion of outstanding fines pursuant to Section 69 (2) and (3) of the Criminal Code by returning to previous legislation  amend provisions on the obligatory recovery of outstanding fines under Section 343 of the Criminal Code by returning to previous legislation; 22 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

23.  amend legislation on summary preliminary proceedings so that it truly reflects summary proceedings, i.e. so that it can only be applied in cases where the accused can be brought to trial in a very short time after the commission of the crime, and, at the same time, conditions for the application of diversionary measures with restorative elements are not met 23 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

24.  periodic evaluation of the practice of sentencing by court order, i.e. whether it was not possible to apply diversionary measures with restorative elements, particularly in the case of first offenders  introduction of an obligation for the public prosecutor to decide on diversionary measures with restorative elements if conditions for its application have been met 24 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

25.  periodic evaluation of the imposition of preventive detention in terms of the structure and severity of crimes, while respecting the fact this is one of the strictest sanctions intended for particularly dangerous offenders  amend Section 99 (5) so that the change of institutional treatment to preventive detention is only possible if the conditions set out in Section 100 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Code have been met 25 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS

26.  when imposing a penal measure of house arrest, shorten the time to a maximum of six months, in conjunction with supervision or other appropriate disciplinary measures  in accordance with the fundamental principles of the Juvenile Justice Act, rescind the option of decisions by court order in case of juveniles who have already reached the age of eighteen 26 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS ON SANCTION POLICY REGARDING JUVENILES

27.  develop a range of probation programmes, especially those aimed at "chronic" juvenile offenders; ensure regional accessibility of probation programmes and the stability of their funding; ensure independent evaluation of these programmes  abolish the possibility of imposing preventive detention for juveniles, or at least significantly tighten the conditions of its imposition 27 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS ON SANCTION POLICY REGARDING JUVENILES

28.  establish new non-institutional measures as another alternative to protective care - placing the child in professional foster care  establish the ability of the juvenile court to apply measures according to the Civil Code in this specific type of proceedings  consider abolishing the ability to impose treatment programmes for children under the age of fifteen and establishing the ability to impose the protective measure of seizure 28 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS ON SANCTION POLICY REGARDING JUVENILES UNDER THE AGE OF 15

29.  modify the standing of this category of offenders more, for example, by an obligatory reduction in the maximum sentence of imprisonment by one quarter, excluding the imposition of exceptional sentences, stricter conditions for the imposition of preventive detention (the same as for juveniles) 29 DE LEGE FERENDA PROPOSALS ON SANCTION POLICY REGARDING YOUNG ADULTS

30.  there is a need to focus more on ensuring the smooth transition of convicted offenders into the community (e.g. halfway houses or probation houses)  there is a need to improve cooperation with the Probation and Mediation Service, social workers, authorities for the social and legal protection of children, labour offices, governmental and non- governmental organisations, including the church and other religious societies  it is essential to provide assistance in finding employment, housing and counselling to deal with stressful situations and personal problems 30 CONCLUSION

31. Thank you for your attention helvalkova@gmail.com 31 AND FINALLY …