ABSTRACT; On the occasion of a public session held in Brussels on 12 September "to draw up a European charter of prisoners' rights", and during which Sergio d'Elia (1) also spoke in his capacity as expert, the main problems raised by the subject were discussed, starting from the fact that "the two prevalent conceptions of penalty, retributive and rehabilitative, are in a crisis". "The state cannot deal with so many conflicts" and there is the need to carry out a "reform of the repressive and prison system, providing for solutions according to the individual cases".

(1994 - IL QUOTIDIANO RADICALE, 4 November 1993)

On 28 September the European Parliament held a public session in Brussels to draw up a European charter of prisoners' rights, with the aim of bridging the gap between the penal and prison codes of the various countries. At present in Europe the highest penalties vary between twenty years (Sweden) to thirty years (Italy and Spain) and on average fifteen (as in Germany). With the exception of Spain, in the other countries there is life imprisonment; in some there are no accessory penalties, in others there is bail half way through the sentence; in all countries there are rules for the expulsion of foreigners and safety measures that limit freedom of circulation in the country and outside.

"The two prevalent conceptions of penalty, retributive and rehabilitative, are in a crisis", said Sergio D'Elia, member of the radical party's leadership, invited to the session in his capacity as an expert.

"Considering prison as a way of repaying a damage and calculating it in twenty, thirty years of penalty or life imprisonment, does not take into account the loss of the sense (measure) which time and work have undergone in the society of information".

Ten years of prison half a century ago do not "correspond" to ten years today: freedom, knowledge, social relations and goods which an individual could enjoy or be deprived in a ten-year period correspond today - at the speed and the media of our time and society - to a much larger range of "assets". On the other hand, prison does not fulfil the "educational" function it should have according to many regulations. The length and place of the detention represent the best education to crime. The "emergency" by which prisons are over-populated is a result of the law and the choices made in penal and prison policies. In Italy there are at least 50,000 prisoners versus 26,000 two years ago, twice as many as the institutions can handle; 31% of them are drug-addicts, 15% are foreigners, 60% are awaiting trial. While ever new hypotheses of crimes (and often they are crimes without victims) are devised, we continue prosecuting "crimes" that are not real offences against a social group and to inflict penalties for all

crimes and all convicts. And yet, in order to guarantee a better social safety, repression should concentrate on the sole behaviours that represent a danger for society and regarding which other forms of control have proven ineffective.

Let's start by the fact that the state cannot handle so many conflicts. The police that arrest the criminal, the organization of the trial, the penal judge who convicts him, the detention for a year, the civil judge for the repayment...and then accessory penalties: what a waste! For minor crimes, all this could be solved by a direct relation among the parts, confirming the action of the police and resorting to civil judges only in case of disagreement. Individual forms of repayment and activities of public utility are certainly more convenient for the state and for its citizens.

A reform of the repressive system is necessary, providing for individual solutions according to the case. For less serious crimes and for less dangerous prisoners, the judge should establish a punishment other than imprisonment, choosing among the current accessory penalties, preventive measures, security measures, public utility work and measures other than detention, to be considered as autonomous sanctions. For less serious crimes and the most dangerous criminals, penalties of no more than 10-15 years should be applied, as currently provided in Europe, For less serious crimes and for non-dangerous criminals a mixed system could be adopted: applying a detention penalty of a certain period, at the end of which alternative measures automatically come into effect.

Translator's Notes

(1) D'ELIA SERGIO. (1952). Former leader of "Prima Linea", a terrorist organization of the Left, sentenced to 30 years of imprisonment, recently released. In 1986 he joined the Radical Party during the campaign for the achievement of 10.000 members, thus embracing the radicals' nonviolent theories. Has been active in the secretariat of the Radical Party as of 1987, and deals in particular with prison reform. Is currently organizing an association whose objective is that of granting the right to vote for convicts and the reform of the system of accessory penalties. Works at the project for the "New Party".