Community Service As A Punishment: Indian And Global Perspective Analysis
"Hate the crime, not the criminal" - Mahatma Gandhi
Punishment & its Delivering methodology has always been a 'bone of contention' in Public Debate. Everyone advocates for the 'most apt punishment tainted by their perspective of the crime. Doesn't the most justified punishment need to evaluate both sides, of the victim & of the criminal? Mahatma had a profound perspective on crime & punishment, he advocated that, Crime is a malady, a disease, that the product of prevalent social system.
Solely attributing it to be criminal is a fallacy to our ideology. He argued that, when punishment is served based on vengeance theory, it greatly ignores the root cause of the criminal behaviour associated to it. When serving a punishment, it's important to assess the broader socio-economic factors that contribute to criminality. The Indian Penal Code is a British made statute, and it's primary objective is to serve punishment. The new Criminal law, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) that replaces IPC, i.e. shifts the aim of the criminal law from promulgating punishment, to providing justice to the victims.
One of the newest inclusion brought is the introduction of 'community service as a punishment'. 6 offences under BNS, has community service as punishment. Community service as punishment, leaves room for reformation in criminals through self - revelation, inculcating the values that aid in the development of the individuals. According to Mahatma Gandhi, if crime is a malady, then the criminals are the ones affected by it. Thus, it is the duty of the society and the state to implement mechanisms to rehabilitate the criminals.
Community service as a punishment can be effective for first-time offenders, will serving the same punishment for a repeated offender be effective, or will it cause public fear & nuisance. This article explores the fundamental questions whether community service is an effective system of punishment in India. This article also evaluates the Indian scenario to various countries that has already formulated and implemented the method before India.
Introduction
One of the greatest characteristics of law is that it is known to be dynamic in nature, to adapt and to improve as the world evolves and circumstances diversify. Such has been the case with the new Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita legislation, in replacement of the Indian Penal Code, as it brought both cohesiveness with the sections and some additional newly introduced provisions; one of which is the introduction of community service as an additional form of punishment into the Indian judicial system. India so far in the years from 1860, from when the IPC was enacted, has had five forms of punishment.
Namely, that of death penalty, imprisonment for life, imprisonment (both simple and vigorous), forfeiture of property and fine. With the passing of BNS, we now have a sixth form of punishment being community service mentioned under section 4 of the Act, which may pose itself to be a new concept for India, but has existed in other judicial systems for decades in various other countries. Therefore, there comes a need to have a comparative; to recognize the possible loopholes, to understand how to effectively implement it and to answer one very important centralized question, i.e. what type of community service is sentenced to which kind of offenses.
There exist multiple theories of punishment that the law could primarily choose to focus on in the process of formulating the legislative provisions for punishment for various offenses. India has chosen to focus on the reformative theory of punishment, which is a philosophy of criminal justice that emphasizes rehabilitation and reformation of offenders[1]. Community service is an option for reforming the offender, but it does only exist for smaller offenses, for which this can play as an alternative to prison time. It not only acts as a deterrent, but it portrays as a symbolic and practical way of restitution for the damages that the accused has caused.
BNS specifies six kinds of offenses for which community service may be sentenced. Namely, offense of- Public servant unlawfully engaging in trade, Non-appearance in response to a proclamation under section 84 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Attempt to commit suicide to compel or restrain exercise of lawful power, Theft, Misconduct in public by a drunken person and Defamation.
The provisions of the Act stay silent on what is the description of service for the community that the offender can be held accountable to perform. Thereby, leaving it to the discretion of the judges. However, this gives space to quite a bit of ambiguity in this instance and the following comparative aims to shed some clarity upon the questions that rule our minds with this topic.
Thinking beyond Imprisonment as a punishment: Community service as an alternative
Imprisonment is the most popular punishment given in India, not only prisoners who are convicted inhabit the prison, but also under-trial prisoners. In India according to the 2022 data, prisons have exceeded their occupancy level and is at the rate of 131%[2]. Thus, it's the need of the hour to opt for a alternative, reducing the reliance on imprisonment.The issues that concern the life at prison is listed below :
Countries that have implemented 'community - service' as a punishment:
Georgia:
Community - service as a punishment has earned it's place in Georgian Legislation since 1999. Over the decades, the punishment has become well structured and defined and has been used in great efficiency. The latest amendment to the Punishment has been made in 2022 and it's enshrined in Title 42 - Chapter 3 -52 (§ 42-3-52) of the Georgia Code 2022. The Code, specifies the category of offenders who are avoided community service as a punishment; Traffic Violations, Ordinance Violations, Non-Injurious or Non-destructive or Non-violent Mis-demeanour; Non-Injurious or Non-destructive or Non-violent Felonies and any other offence that the court may deem fit.[3]
According to the Act, when the punishment imposed, certain time duration is the bench mark, for the court to follow when sentencing an offender with community service,i.e.; regarding cases that involves traffic violations or ordinance violations, or misdemeanours, the punishment shall not be less than 20hours or exceed the limit of 250 hours, and it shall be completed within 1 year; when the offence committed is felony, the punishment shall be not less than 20 hours or not exceed 500 hours, and to be completed within 3 years; the court is also vested with the duty to order the offender to perform community service, 40hours per week. [4]
Community service is served as an offence for non - violent offenders and people with little or no criminal history,it is inapplicable for serious offences. As the name suggest, the pivotal element of the community service is that it provides for the betterment of the community.
The court instructs the offender a list of approved organisations to work for, and prohibits the offender from working in churches and schools. It is essential that the work must done at an organisation in the country or even city the offender hails from. The impetus behind the introduction of community service as a punishment in Georgia, was the step in the direction of humanization of criminal legislation as strictness in law, didn't always strike as a solution to the raising negligent or petty crimes.
On a logical note, imposing imprisonment on these petty offender doesn't aid the purpose of the deterrence or reformation, on the other hand merely imposing fine may not serve the purpose of stopping the offender and others from repeating the crime. The community service, indeed is the alternative mechanism that provides for a real and effective punishment, which in turn reforms the offender in the process and well as work towards for the betterment of the society.
United Kingdom:
England established Community Service as a punishment in the year 1972 in The Criminal Justice Act 1972. Punishment is named as 'Community Payback Order'. Section 15 to 19 gives description, procedure & rules in the statute. In England, this form of punishment is given to 1st time offender convicted for a less-serious offences. Under the punishment, one must do unpaid work that aid in the welfare and betterment to the community.
The courts when imposing community payback, is it typically for a fixed number of hours that's mandated to be completed within a fixed timeframe. The 3 Main Objectives of imposing the community services are: To encourage offenders to associate society to normal terms; To corrects the mistakes made to the society; To put a wall to stop offences being committed in the future. [5]
Community work assigned to them are categorised into 3: environmental projects -Cleaning- wasteland; Assisting in local charities - food distribution for the poor, church service, NGO camp services etc; Maintaining public spaces - removing graffiti, decorating community centre etc.[6] The process of the implementation of the punishment is organised to not disrupted the work life of the offender, thus, it is always arranged hours after the working hours.
Apart from the punishment, additionally the offenders are also enrolled in various programmes & treatment to treat their mental concerns like drug additions, counselling sessions, anger management etc, besides these treatments, they are also given chances to improve their skills, qualifications, interview skills etc.[7]
When giving the offender a chance to return to life as a normal individual, they are also accountable to complete the imposed punishment, consequences for not complying to the punishment would be : Warning or Breach proceedings; Return to court and the judge reassesses the sentence; The court may also impose an alternative sentencing that could be more severe. [8]
The United Kingdom's system of Community Payback is indeed true to the name, it is reformative impulse to the offender at the same time, the welfare action to the society. The system is well structured to cater all the concerns & issues that would sprout out in the implementation.
United States:
The US has been able to successfully implement community service into its judicial system, the key reason for which being that it has explicitly expressed terms on its method of implementation. Chapter 3 of the U.S.C[9], i.e. the United State Courts, states about community service (Probation and supervised release conditions). Under which, it grants the power to the courts to provide that the defendant must work in community service in the way the court chooses to direct.
The U.S.C specifies a sample condition language that needs to be utilized while passing the sentence. The specifications of which include the number of hours of community service to be performed within what number of months. The probation officer is to supervise the participation by approving the program, which may be regards to the agency, location or the frequency of participation. A written verification of completed hours must be submitted to the probation officer. The defendant must be employed and complete community service for a combination of 30 hours per week.
Purpose:
It is further expressed that these conditions serves the statutory sentencing purposes of public protection and rehabilitation. Community service is seen as a versatile condition that serves multiple purposes. Mainly in two ways, firstly, as a controlling strategy that requires defendants to be productively occupied and secondly, as a correctional strategy that provides a way for defendants to acquire job readiness skills and job experience or broaden their network of associates in a more productive direction.
And there is always the additional benefit, the by-product of these services which benefit the community. Probation officers are instructed to have all defendants productively occupied throughout the sentence and the only excuse for leniency is allowed due to any disability or earned retirement.
Method of implementation:
The placements for community service are required to be purposeful, realistic, appropriate, reliable and beneficial to the community. The agency to which the offender is placed has all information of the defendant's criminal history disclosed, so they may make an informed decision on whether to accept the placement. Any delay by the defendant in following through with their community service obligation is only allowed in certain circumstances as prescribed in the U.S.C.
The factors which need to be taken into consideration include the sentencing objective of the court, which is primarily always seen as an opportunity for the offender to reform himself, while also benefiting the community. Additionally, the type of community service that the judge prescribes is always in connection to the crime committed[10].
Other important criterions during the sentencing include considering the characteristics, skills and abilities of the defendant; the needs of the community; third party risks and logistical considerations. The period of community service cannot go beyond the maximum sentence for the crime that the defendant has been found guilty of.
Spain:
Work for the benefit of the community (WBCO) was introduced into Spanish legislation with their 1955 Criminal Code[11]. In Spain, it is utilized as an alternative to prison sentence, as a response to fine default and also as autonomous penalties. Community service (WBCO) requires offenders to perform unpaid work for public interest activities.
The implementation process begins when judges send sentences to Penitentiary social services, who interview offenders and create implementation plans that accommodate work and family responsibilities. The Spanish system with regards to community service seems to be pliant in nature, as it follows a 'principle of flexibility', that is instructed to guide the implementation of the penalty. Meaning, the order is intended to be completed within the leisure time of the offender. It further uniquely mandates the consent of the offender for the order, as it is linked to important constitutional principles.
The requirement is connected to the 1978 constitution's prohibition of forced labour and inhuman treatment; hence, it is seen necessary for both practical implementation and rehabilitation effectiveness. Though some critics also have a view that consent undermines the punishment's credibility and creates procedural complications, the requirement still remains the same. It has been established in the Criminal Code that WBCOs should always preserve the personal dignity of the offender and these orders must be prevented from becoming 'shaming penalties'.
Placements are provided by NGOs, local councils and regional government departments. In most of Spain, the General Secretariat of Correctional Institutions manages implementation, while Catalonia operates independently under its Justice Department. Recent innovations include group placements in public transport and road safety activities. All plans must be approved by the judge of penitentiary surveillance.
Changes in the system:
There were major changes that came with legal reforms in 2003, 2004 and 2007, expanding WBCOs to include substitutes for prison sentences and direct penalties for certain crimes. Subsequent to these changes, it led to a drastic increase in cases, especially after a reform in 2007 that established WBCOs as alternatives for road safety offenses, creating massive caseloads on supervisors.
The Catalan administration had to implement a fast-track system, hire more supervisors and prioritize cases at risk of expiring. This has ultimately forced Spain and its correctional administration to revise implementation practices by changing it from tailored rehabilitation programs to more standardized approaches. This has caused tensions between traditional social work approaches and efficient supervision methods.
The relevancy to observe the history of these various countries, with regards to their experience with community service as part of their judicial system, helps us better understand on what are the possibilities in which India can implement in its own way and what are the possible challenges that we might face.
Conclusion:
Community service as a punishment introduced by BNS plays perfectly into the Indian judicial system, as it supports the theory of reformative punishments that the country has prioritized to follow. However, there exists a great deal of ambiguity as the provisions of BNS stay silent on how community service is to be sentenced. On analysing how community service is implemented in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain and Georgia, there have been several takeaways that could be highly beneficial in understanding the broad spectrum of the term 'community service' and on the right way to navigate the sentencing and execution of this form of punishment.
4 key take-aways for India when implementing, community service as a punishment from the 4 countries that's been scrutinized are: The Georgian criminal system's aim towards humanization of the criminal law, & the emphasis on the rehabilitation of petty offenders. The most unique installation by the United Kingdom's criminal justice system, is the exposure of the offenders to various rehab counselling& skill development courses, that incentivises the offenders to return to normal life.
The greatest point to understand about the system in the US is that they have well expressed terms on which community service can be sentenced by the courts. Mainly, it being in connection to the crime and on it being reformative, as well as beneficial to the society. Whereas in Spain, the rights of the offenders have been given great consideration, which leads it to demand more efforts from the administration.
End Notes:
Punishment & its Delivering methodology has always been a 'bone of contention' in Public Debate. Everyone advocates for the 'most apt punishment tainted by their perspective of the crime. Doesn't the most justified punishment need to evaluate both sides, of the victim & of the criminal? Mahatma had a profound perspective on crime & punishment, he advocated that, Crime is a malady, a disease, that the product of prevalent social system.
Solely attributing it to be criminal is a fallacy to our ideology. He argued that, when punishment is served based on vengeance theory, it greatly ignores the root cause of the criminal behaviour associated to it. When serving a punishment, it's important to assess the broader socio-economic factors that contribute to criminality. The Indian Penal Code is a British made statute, and it's primary objective is to serve punishment. The new Criminal law, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) that replaces IPC, i.e. shifts the aim of the criminal law from promulgating punishment, to providing justice to the victims.
One of the newest inclusion brought is the introduction of 'community service as a punishment'. 6 offences under BNS, has community service as punishment. Community service as punishment, leaves room for reformation in criminals through self - revelation, inculcating the values that aid in the development of the individuals. According to Mahatma Gandhi, if crime is a malady, then the criminals are the ones affected by it. Thus, it is the duty of the society and the state to implement mechanisms to rehabilitate the criminals.
Community service as a punishment can be effective for first-time offenders, will serving the same punishment for a repeated offender be effective, or will it cause public fear & nuisance. This article explores the fundamental questions whether community service is an effective system of punishment in India. This article also evaluates the Indian scenario to various countries that has already formulated and implemented the method before India.
Introduction
One of the greatest characteristics of law is that it is known to be dynamic in nature, to adapt and to improve as the world evolves and circumstances diversify. Such has been the case with the new Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita legislation, in replacement of the Indian Penal Code, as it brought both cohesiveness with the sections and some additional newly introduced provisions; one of which is the introduction of community service as an additional form of punishment into the Indian judicial system. India so far in the years from 1860, from when the IPC was enacted, has had five forms of punishment.
Namely, that of death penalty, imprisonment for life, imprisonment (both simple and vigorous), forfeiture of property and fine. With the passing of BNS, we now have a sixth form of punishment being community service mentioned under section 4 of the Act, which may pose itself to be a new concept for India, but has existed in other judicial systems for decades in various other countries. Therefore, there comes a need to have a comparative; to recognize the possible loopholes, to understand how to effectively implement it and to answer one very important centralized question, i.e. what type of community service is sentenced to which kind of offenses.
There exist multiple theories of punishment that the law could primarily choose to focus on in the process of formulating the legislative provisions for punishment for various offenses. India has chosen to focus on the reformative theory of punishment, which is a philosophy of criminal justice that emphasizes rehabilitation and reformation of offenders[1]. Community service is an option for reforming the offender, but it does only exist for smaller offenses, for which this can play as an alternative to prison time. It not only acts as a deterrent, but it portrays as a symbolic and practical way of restitution for the damages that the accused has caused.
BNS specifies six kinds of offenses for which community service may be sentenced. Namely, offense of- Public servant unlawfully engaging in trade, Non-appearance in response to a proclamation under section 84 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Attempt to commit suicide to compel or restrain exercise of lawful power, Theft, Misconduct in public by a drunken person and Defamation.
The provisions of the Act stay silent on what is the description of service for the community that the offender can be held accountable to perform. Thereby, leaving it to the discretion of the judges. However, this gives space to quite a bit of ambiguity in this instance and the following comparative aims to shed some clarity upon the questions that rule our minds with this topic.
Thinking beyond Imprisonment as a punishment: Community service as an alternative
Imprisonment is the most popular punishment given in India, not only prisoners who are convicted inhabit the prison, but also under-trial prisoners. In India according to the 2022 data, prisons have exceeded their occupancy level and is at the rate of 131%[2]. Thus, it's the need of the hour to opt for a alternative, reducing the reliance on imprisonment.The issues that concern the life at prison is listed below :
-
Prevent over-crowding in prison: According to the Prison Statistics report of 2023, there was a 7% increase in the total number of persons held in county jails at midyear of 2023. As of December 2022, India had 5,73,220 prisoners in its jails, out of which 75.8% are under-trial prisoners. India faces a colossal issue with the occupancy in Indian prisons, where prisoners face various consequences due to overcrowding, such as poor living conditions, deplorable sanitation, and atrocities against inmates by fellow inmates for basic necessities.
-
Increase in crimes and its continuation due to fraternity between criminals: First-time offenders are more prone to rehabilitation and becoming better individuals than habitual offenders. Due to prisons being overcrowded, the contact between these habitual offenders and petty offenders becomes stronger. Habitual offenders entice petty offenders into their gangs in return for money and other benefits, making prisons a breeding ground for ill-motivated criminals.
-
Sexual violence against inmates by fellow inmates, staff, and others: Though prisons hold perpetrators for the safety of the public, they are not safe for inmates. Sexual violence against inmates has been a common occurrence in prisons but has often received a blind eye from the authorities.
- Hindrance to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals: Given the sordid status of prisons, the path toward sustainability is far from being achieved. Overcrowding, poor sanitation, and inadequate waste disposal management have caused the carbon footprint emitted by prisons to rise to higher levels.
Countries that have implemented 'community - service' as a punishment:
Georgia:
Community - service as a punishment has earned it's place in Georgian Legislation since 1999. Over the decades, the punishment has become well structured and defined and has been used in great efficiency. The latest amendment to the Punishment has been made in 2022 and it's enshrined in Title 42 - Chapter 3 -52 (§ 42-3-52) of the Georgia Code 2022. The Code, specifies the category of offenders who are avoided community service as a punishment; Traffic Violations, Ordinance Violations, Non-Injurious or Non-destructive or Non-violent Mis-demeanour; Non-Injurious or Non-destructive or Non-violent Felonies and any other offence that the court may deem fit.[3]
According to the Act, when the punishment imposed, certain time duration is the bench mark, for the court to follow when sentencing an offender with community service,i.e.; regarding cases that involves traffic violations or ordinance violations, or misdemeanours, the punishment shall not be less than 20hours or exceed the limit of 250 hours, and it shall be completed within 1 year; when the offence committed is felony, the punishment shall be not less than 20 hours or not exceed 500 hours, and to be completed within 3 years; the court is also vested with the duty to order the offender to perform community service, 40hours per week. [4]
Community service is served as an offence for non - violent offenders and people with little or no criminal history,it is inapplicable for serious offences. As the name suggest, the pivotal element of the community service is that it provides for the betterment of the community.
The court instructs the offender a list of approved organisations to work for, and prohibits the offender from working in churches and schools. It is essential that the work must done at an organisation in the country or even city the offender hails from. The impetus behind the introduction of community service as a punishment in Georgia, was the step in the direction of humanization of criminal legislation as strictness in law, didn't always strike as a solution to the raising negligent or petty crimes.
On a logical note, imposing imprisonment on these petty offender doesn't aid the purpose of the deterrence or reformation, on the other hand merely imposing fine may not serve the purpose of stopping the offender and others from repeating the crime. The community service, indeed is the alternative mechanism that provides for a real and effective punishment, which in turn reforms the offender in the process and well as work towards for the betterment of the society.
United Kingdom:
England established Community Service as a punishment in the year 1972 in The Criminal Justice Act 1972. Punishment is named as 'Community Payback Order'. Section 15 to 19 gives description, procedure & rules in the statute. In England, this form of punishment is given to 1st time offender convicted for a less-serious offences. Under the punishment, one must do unpaid work that aid in the welfare and betterment to the community.
The courts when imposing community payback, is it typically for a fixed number of hours that's mandated to be completed within a fixed timeframe. The 3 Main Objectives of imposing the community services are: To encourage offenders to associate society to normal terms; To corrects the mistakes made to the society; To put a wall to stop offences being committed in the future. [5]
Community work assigned to them are categorised into 3: environmental projects -Cleaning- wasteland; Assisting in local charities - food distribution for the poor, church service, NGO camp services etc; Maintaining public spaces - removing graffiti, decorating community centre etc.[6] The process of the implementation of the punishment is organised to not disrupted the work life of the offender, thus, it is always arranged hours after the working hours.
Apart from the punishment, additionally the offenders are also enrolled in various programmes & treatment to treat their mental concerns like drug additions, counselling sessions, anger management etc, besides these treatments, they are also given chances to improve their skills, qualifications, interview skills etc.[7]
When giving the offender a chance to return to life as a normal individual, they are also accountable to complete the imposed punishment, consequences for not complying to the punishment would be : Warning or Breach proceedings; Return to court and the judge reassesses the sentence; The court may also impose an alternative sentencing that could be more severe. [8]
The United Kingdom's system of Community Payback is indeed true to the name, it is reformative impulse to the offender at the same time, the welfare action to the society. The system is well structured to cater all the concerns & issues that would sprout out in the implementation.
United States:
The US has been able to successfully implement community service into its judicial system, the key reason for which being that it has explicitly expressed terms on its method of implementation. Chapter 3 of the U.S.C[9], i.e. the United State Courts, states about community service (Probation and supervised release conditions). Under which, it grants the power to the courts to provide that the defendant must work in community service in the way the court chooses to direct.
The U.S.C specifies a sample condition language that needs to be utilized while passing the sentence. The specifications of which include the number of hours of community service to be performed within what number of months. The probation officer is to supervise the participation by approving the program, which may be regards to the agency, location or the frequency of participation. A written verification of completed hours must be submitted to the probation officer. The defendant must be employed and complete community service for a combination of 30 hours per week.
Purpose:
It is further expressed that these conditions serves the statutory sentencing purposes of public protection and rehabilitation. Community service is seen as a versatile condition that serves multiple purposes. Mainly in two ways, firstly, as a controlling strategy that requires defendants to be productively occupied and secondly, as a correctional strategy that provides a way for defendants to acquire job readiness skills and job experience or broaden their network of associates in a more productive direction.
And there is always the additional benefit, the by-product of these services which benefit the community. Probation officers are instructed to have all defendants productively occupied throughout the sentence and the only excuse for leniency is allowed due to any disability or earned retirement.
Method of implementation:
The placements for community service are required to be purposeful, realistic, appropriate, reliable and beneficial to the community. The agency to which the offender is placed has all information of the defendant's criminal history disclosed, so they may make an informed decision on whether to accept the placement. Any delay by the defendant in following through with their community service obligation is only allowed in certain circumstances as prescribed in the U.S.C.
The factors which need to be taken into consideration include the sentencing objective of the court, which is primarily always seen as an opportunity for the offender to reform himself, while also benefiting the community. Additionally, the type of community service that the judge prescribes is always in connection to the crime committed[10].
Other important criterions during the sentencing include considering the characteristics, skills and abilities of the defendant; the needs of the community; third party risks and logistical considerations. The period of community service cannot go beyond the maximum sentence for the crime that the defendant has been found guilty of.
Spain:
Work for the benefit of the community (WBCO) was introduced into Spanish legislation with their 1955 Criminal Code[11]. In Spain, it is utilized as an alternative to prison sentence, as a response to fine default and also as autonomous penalties. Community service (WBCO) requires offenders to perform unpaid work for public interest activities.
The implementation process begins when judges send sentences to Penitentiary social services, who interview offenders and create implementation plans that accommodate work and family responsibilities. The Spanish system with regards to community service seems to be pliant in nature, as it follows a 'principle of flexibility', that is instructed to guide the implementation of the penalty. Meaning, the order is intended to be completed within the leisure time of the offender. It further uniquely mandates the consent of the offender for the order, as it is linked to important constitutional principles.
The requirement is connected to the 1978 constitution's prohibition of forced labour and inhuman treatment; hence, it is seen necessary for both practical implementation and rehabilitation effectiveness. Though some critics also have a view that consent undermines the punishment's credibility and creates procedural complications, the requirement still remains the same. It has been established in the Criminal Code that WBCOs should always preserve the personal dignity of the offender and these orders must be prevented from becoming 'shaming penalties'.
Placements are provided by NGOs, local councils and regional government departments. In most of Spain, the General Secretariat of Correctional Institutions manages implementation, while Catalonia operates independently under its Justice Department. Recent innovations include group placements in public transport and road safety activities. All plans must be approved by the judge of penitentiary surveillance.
Changes in the system:
There were major changes that came with legal reforms in 2003, 2004 and 2007, expanding WBCOs to include substitutes for prison sentences and direct penalties for certain crimes. Subsequent to these changes, it led to a drastic increase in cases, especially after a reform in 2007 that established WBCOs as alternatives for road safety offenses, creating massive caseloads on supervisors.
The Catalan administration had to implement a fast-track system, hire more supervisors and prioritize cases at risk of expiring. This has ultimately forced Spain and its correctional administration to revise implementation practices by changing it from tailored rehabilitation programs to more standardized approaches. This has caused tensions between traditional social work approaches and efficient supervision methods.
The relevancy to observe the history of these various countries, with regards to their experience with community service as part of their judicial system, helps us better understand on what are the possibilities in which India can implement in its own way and what are the possible challenges that we might face.
Conclusion:
Community service as a punishment introduced by BNS plays perfectly into the Indian judicial system, as it supports the theory of reformative punishments that the country has prioritized to follow. However, there exists a great deal of ambiguity as the provisions of BNS stay silent on how community service is to be sentenced. On analysing how community service is implemented in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain and Georgia, there have been several takeaways that could be highly beneficial in understanding the broad spectrum of the term 'community service' and on the right way to navigate the sentencing and execution of this form of punishment.
4 key take-aways for India when implementing, community service as a punishment from the 4 countries that's been scrutinized are: The Georgian criminal system's aim towards humanization of the criminal law, & the emphasis on the rehabilitation of petty offenders. The most unique installation by the United Kingdom's criminal justice system, is the exposure of the offenders to various rehab counselling& skill development courses, that incentivises the offenders to return to normal life.
The greatest point to understand about the system in the US is that they have well expressed terms on which community service can be sentenced by the courts. Mainly, it being in connection to the crime and on it being reformative, as well as beneficial to the society. Whereas in Spain, the rights of the offenders have been given great consideration, which leads it to demand more efforts from the administration.
End Notes:
- Reformative Theory of Punishment in India, Aishwarya Agrawal, https://lawbhoomi.com/reformative-theory-of-punishment-in-india/ Opened last on 16.11.2024
- Despite campaign, India saw number of prisoners increase in 2022, Shrihari Palith, https://scroll.in/article/1060246/despite-campaign-india-saw-number-of-prisoners-increase-in-2022
- GA Code § 42-3-52 (2022)
- GA Code § 42-3-52 (2022)
- Community Service Sentences in England: Legal Meaning, Consequences, and Non-Compliance Implications; Makwanas; Makwana solicitors; https://www.makwanas.co.uk/community-service-sentences-in-england/; last viewed on 6.48pm, 16th Nov, 2024
- Community sentences; https://www.gov.uk/community-sentences/print; last viewed on 7.02pm 16th Nov, 2024
- Community sentences; https://www.gov.uk/community-sentences/print; last viewed on 7.02pm 16th Nov, 2024
- Community Service Sentences in England: Legal Meaning, Consequences, and Non-Compliance Implications; Makwanas; Makwana solicitors; https://www.makwanas.co.uk/community-service-sentences-in-england/; last viewed on 6.48pm, 16th Nov, 2024
- United States Courts, https://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/community-service-probation-supervised-release-conditions, last opened on 16.11.2024
- What kind of community service can a judge order?, Celeste Bacchi, https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-kind-community-service-can-judge-order.html last opened on 16.11.2024
- 'It Could Be Us': Recent Transformations in the Use of Community Service as a Punishment in Spain, Ester Blay Gil, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242546169_'It_Could_Be_Us'_Recent_Transformations_in_the_Use_of_Community_Service_as_a_Punishment_in_Spain, last opened on 16.11.2024
- Vishnu Priya P.S, 2nd Year B.A.;LL.B (Hons) - Sastra University, School of Law
- Ramya Vijaykumar, 2nd Year BB.A.;LL.B (Hons) - Sastra University, School of Law
Law Article in India
Lawyers in India - Search By City
LawArticles
How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi
How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...
Increased Age For Girls Marriage
It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...
Facade of Social Media
One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...
Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...
The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India: A...
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept that proposes the unification of personal laws across...
Role Of Artificial Intelligence In Legal...
Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy, and the legal i...
Please Drop Your Comments