- Browse/Search the Program
Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Room
- Information Menu
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
- Navigation and Settings Menu
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Judicial decision making and prognosis – The conflict of security and resocialisation in matters of early release
Fri, September 13, 3:30 to 4:45pm, Faculty of Law, University of Bucharest, Floor: Ground floor, Room 1.05Abstract
In Germany, a prisoner can be released early after two thirds of the sentence. In the decision, the public interest in safety and the prisoner’s prospects after release have to be taken into account. These requirements are the same in all federal states. Still, the number of early releases in Berlin is consistently and significantly lower than in the other federal states even though the Berlin prison estate is proud of a high proportion of the prison population serving their sentence in open conditions.
Where does this difference between Berlin and the other federal states stem from? Since the prison population in Berlin does not differ in socio-demographic characteristics from that of the other federal states, the question is if the reason lies with the decision-makers, the judges in the chambers for the execution of sentences. Our research project examines the decision-making process of these judges at the Berlin Regional Court on early releases.
The early release decision requires judges to make a "genuine" and, above all, case-by-case decision: they must form a prognosis about the prisoner's future legal behavior. Various aspects are taken into account in this assessment, including the resocialization measures carried out in prison, the prisoner's personality and also the situation in which the prisoner would be released. However, all information must then be evaluated and weighted by the respective decision-makers in relation to the prisoner and, above all, in relation to the general security interest. This marks the main part of the judges' individual decision-making process.
The paper will present first findings regarding the judges’ views on the relation between security interests and the requirements they place on a positive legal prognosis.