Instead of prisons: a handbook for abolitionists
Yüklə 1,92 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- Developing a strategy for local moratorium
- Researching a moratorium campaign
- WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE PRISON ESTABLISHMENT
- Flow process of existing system
- Prisoners presently in confinement
- WHERE DO WE FIND THE INFORMATION WE NEED
- Funding prison/jail construction
| Moratorium responses
Most moratorium advocates come out of the experience of reform, having devoted boundless energies toward "improving" prison conditions. We will continue to make every attempt to reduce the sufferings of those who are caged, as they request it, and as long as incarceration exists. However, we are convinced that there can never be a "humane" cage. The concept of caging as a response to lawbreaking is inappropriate and brutal. Other solutions can and must be developed. Moratorium is a first step toward new solutions. Further, there is no evidence to support the results of a small, new prison over a large, old prison. Denial of freedom is the same whether it occurs in a larger space or a smaller space. There are more than enough units in existing facilities to house the population if alternatives are employed. Limiting space forces legislatures to decide who must be restrained, removing the pretense that it's acceptable to imprison anyone the court wishes as long as it is done within modernized and humane facilities. Questions of employment for prison personnel or construction workers in a society that diminishes its dependence on prisons, are problems which can be remedied thru social and economic planning. New employment opportunities and retraining of guards and other prison personnel are better solutions than increasing dependence on incarceration. We consider prisoners and their families as the people most directly affected by the prison system. We have heard their cries for release; their grievances about conditions of brutality and injustice; their expressed fears for their welfare; their requests for legal assistance; their demands to be treated as human beings-but we have never heard them ask for smaller, shiny new prisons. Moratorium is an opportunity to begin dialogue with those who support the building and use of prisons as a response to crime. There are no quick and total solutions to the complexities of crime and criminal behavior, but there are enough alternative choices available now to justify a moratorium on all prison/jail construction. With an end to prison construction, we can seriously examine and implement the use of alternatives as we move toward creating a more just system. Developing a strategy for local moratorium The overcrowding of prisons is not necessary--it is deliberate! Because of its network of laws the state can easily increase or decrease its rate of arrests and prosecutions at will. It is deliberate because by overcrowding an excuse is created for justifying greater appropriations and the building of even more facilities. It is deliberate because it perpetuates a bureaucracy which benefits its careerist members. It is deliberate because overcrowding creates greater tensions and frustrations among prisoners which lead to occasional flashpoints of fights, attempted escapes, killings, rapes, or rebellion. This then is used as a way of demonstrating to the public what "animals" prisoners are. It is deliberate because the threat of having to turn such criminals loose terrorizes white middle-class society and prompts it to view the state as its protector. Contrast this tactic with the one that terrorizes the Black population by the constant threat of imprisonment. So prisoners serve as scapegoat-criminals while the real criminals remain at large. It is also deliberate because a large prisoner population is profitable for a great number of people including the legal, medical, and pharmaceutical professions, academic professionals, contractors, and practically the whole corporate system. -Bob Canney, Florida prisoner, Come Unity, March 1976 A community moratorium group should be prepared to develop a rationale and strategy for halting plans to construct a new penal facility. Tho local situations differ, in many respects prison construction issues are universal. Thus campaigns can draw upon experiences from similar moratorium efforts. NMPC suggests the following general outline for a strategy on moratorium:
Every effort should be made to pursue nonjudicial avenues before initiating legal action for moratorium. Litigation is costly, slow and cumbersome. An evolving moratorium campaign built on factual, economic and practical arguments will help produce the type of evidence and documentation necessary to support a legal case. If litigation ultimately is necessary, the litigants who first pursue nonjudicial solutions appear more reasonable and responsible. It would also be useful to assemble a group of moratorium advocacy lawyers to assist in developing and shaping a law suit if that becomes necessary. Researching a moratorium campaign Educating the public to the prohibitive costs of jails and prisons and the comparative benefits of alternatives requires solid research and concrete proposals. Do not hesitate to undertake a moratorium on prison/jail construction in your community because you feel you don't have the necessary research, education or action skills. Your participation in a serious campaign will help develop them. There is no mystique to researching if you follow thru on three basic questions:
WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE PRISON ESTABLISHMENT? Here are three important questions we need to answer:
Flow process of existing system Criminal (in)justice processes are comprised of three general components: police /apprehension, courts /adjudication and "corrections"/punishment. These components can often be found in each tier of government: city, county, state and federal. Usually there are additional separate courts and prisons for juveniles. It is important to understand the flow process in your community when attempting to stop construction of new prisons/jails. Such information is also central to promoting various alternatives in program, procedure or policy that would diminish dependence on confinement. Appropriate alternatives can be introduced at different points in this flow process that will greatly effect the cost and numbers of defendants passing thru later points. For example, if there is less pretrial detention of poor people, we know that:
It is also important to examine the per capita detention rate of your state, and if possible, your city or county, to determine whether your lock-up rate is greater or less than other states. Prisoners presently in confinement Analysis of total population of confines Legal status Number pending trial Number post-trial but pre-sentence Number pending appeal or transfer Number serving sentence Number for parole or probation revocation, for violation, for alleged or judicially proven commission of new crime Offense Number for consensual, victimless, or status offenses (drunkenness, vagrancy, prostitution, consensual adult sex, drugs, runaways, etc.) Number for unviolent offenses (burglary, car theft, embezzlement, credit card fraud, bad checks) Number for violent offenses in which a friend or family member was the victim with no malice aforethought. Number for violent offenses, against strangers or premeditated. Socioeconomic Income level Education Job skills Race Residential pattern Analyzing the imprisoned population, especially those for whom a new jail is anticipated, is an important research task. Information on confinees can usually be obtained from the administrator of the particular facility involved. In some states annual demographic statistics can also be obtained from courts or police agencies. In terms of reducing dependence on confinement, it is important to determine who of those currently locked up does not require a secure setting. Tho appropriate alternatives can eventually be developed for all confinees, the most logical candidates for immediate decarceration include:
Until that time when abolishing-type changes depopulate the prisons, the reality of prison life must continually be exposed to public view. It is entirely possible that constitutional standards for prisons cannot be met due to fiscally squeezed budgets and because of the lawlessness of the prison environment. Thus the conditions of prison life must be carefully monitored and challenged. It is necessary to seek both the official version of prison conditions and the testimony from persons presently caged or recently released. WHERE DO WE FIND THE INFORMATION WE NEED?
It is important to understand which political entity wants the new facility and for which prisoners it is to be constructed. Is it the city council, county commissioner, or state legislature that is calling for the new prison/jail? In some cases it will be a federal prison being planned and at some time prior to construction hearings must be held in the community where the prison is to be located. The community should be alert to such hearings, as it provides an important arena for registering objections and educating the public. The political unit desiring the new facility will contain within its structure a particular official (county sheriff, jailer, or warden; city jailer or warden; state warden or "corrections" commissioner) who should be able to furnish demographic information about inmates and other data. If officials are uncooperative, a concerted effort by an organized community group will usually be able to get the information. In the event that such material is withheld, citizens have other avenues for securing what is essentially public information. Since many states have fairly comprehensive public information laws, any withholding of information on the grounds that it is "confidential" can and must be challenged. Sources A great deal of the homework you discover you need to do, might already have been done, so it is important to be well acquainted with the major sources and publications of the criminal (in)justice systems of your locality. Many states have commissions which gather and publish data important to moratorium campaigns. For instance, in Connecticut, the Connecticut Justice Commission publishes annually a comprehensive document, The Criminal Justice System in Connecticut. Other data is available in that state from the apartment of "Corrections," its business office and various divisional offices. Each state planning unit which disburses Law Enforcement Assistance Acts (LEAA) funds, has research reports which are public documents. LEAA Guideline Manual 4100.1, Chapter 1, Paragraph 28, states that all identifiable plans, applications, grants or contract awards, reports, books or papers maintained by State Planning Units (SPU's) "shall be made properly available upon request to any person for inspection or copying." LEAA's Washington Information Office very cooperatively forwards documents upon request. Details for researching state budgets and expenditures can be found in "Researching the Prison Power Structure," Chapter 9. The responsibility for construction of new facilities for most state agencies is usually vested in a "Bureau of Building Construction" or similar agency. Thus, if you want to know who is building a prison/jail already begun and how much it will cost, ask this bureau,- not the Department of "Corrections." Funding prison/jail construction
Legislative decisions on funding prison/jail construction are made by a city council, county commissioners, regional or special district authority, the state legislature, U.S. Congress, a criminal justice commission or task force or by other official bodies. Other officials in positions of power who need to be influenced in their decision making are: city manager or mayor or city warden; county executive officer; county sheriff or warden; state governor; "corrections" commissioner; director of criminal justice planning agency; director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons; director of area criminal justice commission or task force and others holding similar power positions. Funds for prison/jail construction come mainly from the following sources: general revenue, local and/or state, regional; bonds; LEAA, administered via local and/or state Criminal Justice Planning Agencies under various names or subdivisions; revenue sharing; or special tax. The method of funding the proposed institution should be determined at the first possible moment. Isolating the source of funds, permits the educational program to be geared to the appropriate agency procedures and focusses the lobbying on the proper political figures. It is equally imperative that the use to which the facility will be put is perfectly clear. For instance, if the proposed construction is designed for pretrial detainees, it will be far more vulnerable to legal attack, since there are many established and proven alternatives to pretrial detention. Yüklə 1,92 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|