Formalni i suštinski faktori u primeni uslovnog otpusta

Abstract

Autori ilustruju teorijske koncepte, formalne uslove i suštinsku primenu uslovnog otpusta kroz penalnu praksu u Srbiji. Uočena je dominacija formalnih elemenata u odlukama sudova, povodom molbi osuđenih za dodelu uslovnog otpusta. Uočena je razlika u predlozima zatvorskih uprava, nasuprot odluka suda povodom tog predloga. Naglašeno je odsustvo standardizovanih instrumenata u proceni rizika i potreba osuđenih lica. Generalno, uslovni otpust se retko dodeljuje. Saradnja državnih institucija povodom uslovnog otpusta je formalnog karaktera. Ne postoje institucionalne forme postpenalnog prihvata i tretmana uslovno otpuštenih osoba. Nema kontrole ponašanja osuđenih tokom uslovnog otpusta. Nema evaluacije efekata uslovnog otpusta. Predlaže se sistemska reforma u procesu razmatranja i odlučivanja o uslovnom otpustu, uvođenje standardizovanih instrumenata procene rizika i potreba osuđenih lica, formiranje posebnih službi za postpenalni tretman i kvalitetnija saradnja državnih organa.

The authors illustrate the theoretical framework of the formal requirements and meaningful implementation of conditional release in penitentiary practice in Serbia. From a sample of 6000 applications submitted from 20 prisons, during the two previous years, it was observed that certain formal elements in the decisions of the courts, regarding the request for granting the conditonal release, were dominant. The observed differences between the proposals of the prisons’ administration as opposed to a court decision regarding the proposal were considered. There was an emphasis on the lack of standardized tools to assess risks and needs of offenders. In general, conditional release is rarely granted. Duration of conditional release is not a corrective element in the treatment of convicted persons. The cooperation of state institutions regarding conditional release is formal. There are no institutional forms of post-penal care, conditional release and evaluation of the effects of conditional release. A reform of the system of considering and deciding parole is presented, including the practical use of standardized risk assessment instruments and needs of offender. It is also proposed that special services for postpenal treatment and quality cooperation of the authorities is established.