Following an increase in positive indicators resulting from the start of applying alternative non-custodial penalties, legal and criminal justice experts see a need to expand the application of community service sentencing, as one of these alternative penalties, and to work on diversifying the forms of such penalties and developing mechanisms for their implementation, given their positive effects on both the convicted person and society, particularly in crimes whose nature does not require isolating the offender from society.
اضافة اعلان
According to experts, expanding these penalties aligns with the shift in modern criminal policy toward giving greater space to reform, rehabilitation, and reintegration, instead of relying solely on traditional imprisonment-based punishment and its potential social and economic consequences, as well as the possibility of convicted persons mixing with people who have committed more serious crimes.
They stressed the importance of expanding the application of these penalties and developing mechanisms for their implementation, alongside considering not recording them in the judicial record under specific conditions and controls, in order to preserve convicted persons' opportunities for work and social life after serving their sentence, and to help them return to normal life and reintegrate into society.
The law defines community service as "requiring the convicted person, with their consent, to perform unpaid work in service of the community for a period determined by the court, of no less than 50 hours, at a rate of five hours per day."
The Need for Substitution
Mohammad Shabana, program director at Penal Reform International, said modern criminal policies, built on the findings of scientific studies and monitoring reports on the causes of crime and recidivism, have demonstrated the need to replace some of the formal procedures used to deal with offenders, in ways that facilitate their reconciliation with society, redress harm, guarantee victims' rights, and achieve higher levels of effectiveness in rehabilitation and reform programs.
Shabana explained that this can be achieved by encouraging the expansion of a system of legislation, policies, and procedures that serve as alternatives to custodial sentences, chiefly community service or work for the public benefit, alongside electronic monitoring, judicial and community supervision, assignment to specific tasks, restrictions on visiting certain places, protection orders in domestic violence cases, as well as psychological and social support programs.
According to Shabana, experience has shown that using alternatives to custodial sentences, including community service, has achieved important results in restoring and repairing the relationship between offenders and society, as well as between offenders and victims.
Resorting to community-based alternatives to custodial sentences also reduces, according to Shabana, the negative social effects that may result from certain crimes, including revenge, retaliation, and social stigma, as well as limiting the effects of "criminal contagion" that can result from convicted persons mixing with others inside correctional and rehabilitation centers.
At the same time, these alternatives preserve victims' rights and allow law enforcement authorities to make use of offenders' energies and capabilities in beneficial social and economic activities, while also paving the way for them to be more receptive to counseling and rehabilitation programs, facilitating their reintegration into society.
The benefits of these penalties are not limited to the reform and social dimension but extend to the economic dimension as well, as Shabana points out that the cost of community-based and transformative alternatives is much lower than the cost of detention, which includes expenses for housing, guarding, transport, living and health services, and more.
Additionally, implementing these penalties through, with, and within the community, under the supervision of the judiciary and law enforcement agencies, leaves greater room for engaging the community in reform programs, while the financial savings resulting from reduced detention procedures can be used to improve and strengthen staff capabilities, services, and rehabilitation programs.
For his part, Dr. Ali Al-Dabbas, associate professor of public law at Petra University, believes that expanding alternative penalties, including community service, represents a good approach, given the results it can achieve, which may in some cases be more effective than imprisonment.
He explained that not depriving the convicted person of their liberty reduces the negative effects associated with imprisonment, and lowers the likelihood of them mixing with people who have committed other crimes, and the potential impact this could have on their behavior and the increased likelihood of reoffending.
He pointed out that there are non-serious crimes that do not pose a direct threat to society, and therefore subjecting the offender to a penalty based on providing a service to the community may be more beneficial than placing them in a correctional and rehabilitation center, especially since this penalty keeps the convicted person within their social and family environment, while at the same time allowing society to benefit from the work they provide.
Community service, according to Al-Dabbas, can also create a positive feeling in the convicted person that society and the state are not dealing with them only through punishment and isolation, but are giving them an opportunity to correct their mistake and take responsibility, which helps ease negative feelings toward society and enhances the chances of reforming their behavior and reintegrating them.
Al-Dabbas said judges have become more aware of the importance of alternative penalties as a modern legislative option in line with the requirements of developing the justice system, considering this trend a reflection of a gradual shift from traditional punishment models toward more flexible approaches focused on the rehabilitative outcomes of punishment.
He affirmed that this shift is not limited to the judicial institution but extends to society as well, which has begun to show increasing acceptance of this type of penalty, especially as its positive effects on individuals and society become apparent, supporting the trend toward expanding its use in cases whose nature allows for it.
Al-Dabbas places this trend within the context of reformative criminal policy that redefines the function of punishment, so that it is not limited to deterrence or isolating the offender, but extends to reforming their behavior, rehabilitating them, and reintegrating them into society, noting that the benefits of alternative penalties may in some cases be greater than applying a custodial sentence.
He pointed to the particular importance of these alternatives for youth and juveniles, as they allow dealing with them through community service, taking responsibility, and behavioral reform, instead of reporting directly to traditional punishment and its potential negative effects.
The effects of alternative penalties are not limited to the convicted person, as they also help ease overcrowding in correctional and rehabilitation centers, which in turn reflects on the quality of services provided to inmates, and gives these centers greater capacity to focus on reform, rehabilitation, and reintegration programs.
Definitions
"Alternatives to custodial sentences" are defined as penalties that replace traditional imprisonment-based punishment, implemented in accordance with Article (25 bis) of the Penal Code No. (16) of 1960 and its amendments, within a legislative trend toward diversifying criminal justice tools.
According to the legal text, these alternatives take various forms, including community service, which requires the convicted person, with their consent, to perform unpaid work in service of the community for a period determined by the court, of no less than 50 hours, at a rate of five hours per day.
They also include rehabilitation programs, through which the convicted person undergoes reform tracks aimed at correcting and improving their behavior, alongside treatment programs for addiction cases, within an approach that does not stop at punishing the person but extends to addressing the factors linked to their behavior and rehabilitating them.
The scope of alternatives extends to include electronic monitoring, through which the convicted person's movements are monitored, with the possibility of banning them from visiting specific places or geographic areas or requiring them to remain at home or within a specific geographic area, partially or fully, for the duration set by the court, provided these measures are accompanied by the use of electronic monitoring tools.
The law also allows the court to combine any of these alternatives with additional measures, including a travel ban for a specified period, or requiring the convicted person to provide a financial pledge not to approach or contact certain persons or entities, strengthening the guarantees related to the enforcement of the sentence.
In terms of scope of application, the law grants the court authority to replace custodial sentences with alternatives in all misdemeanors, as well as in felonies where the sentence handed down does not exceed temporary hard labor or temporary detention for a period of three years, except in cases of repeat offenses, based on a social status report and taking into account the circumstances of each case individually.
This authority extends to allow substitution either at the time the sentence is issued or after it becomes final.
The legislation also allows for the possibility of replacing the remainder of a sentence after the ruling is issued, provided the convicted person has shown good conduct and behavior within correctional and rehabilitation centers, that the remaining period does not exceed one year, and that the original sentence is no less than three years and no more than eight years.
This aspect adds a further dimension to the rehabilitative function of the sentence, by motivating the convicted person to maintain positive behavior and benefit from reform and rehabilitation programs, in exchange for the possibility of completing part of the sentence outside correctional centers within the controls set by law.
On the other hand, the law specifies a set of crimes excluded from the application of these alternatives, including felonies against state security, counterfeiting of banknotes and coins, felonies against persons unless accompanied by a waiver of personal right, in addition to crimes violating the duties of public office, crimes of rape, indecent assault, and criminal abduction, and torture crimes as stipulated in Article (208).
The exceptions also include crimes covered under counter-terrorism laws, narcotics and psychotropic substances laws, protection of state secrets and documents, anti-money laundering and terrorism financing laws, as well as crimes stipulated in the Military Penal Code and the Compulsory Military Service Law.
