Judicial Power and the Execution of Liberty Depriving Sentences in Belgium

• NCJ Number: 74281
• Journal: Revue penitentiaire et de droit penal Volume: 104 Issue: 3 Dated: (July-September 1980) Pages: 389-395
• Author(s): M Devreux
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 7 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: French
• Country: France
• Note: Fourth report presented at the 5th Colloquium of the Lille Institute of Criminology on the Sentencing Judge, May 5-6, 1980.

Annotation

The limited powers of the Belgian judiciary system to intervene in the execution of prison sentences are outlined.

Abstract

Essentially, the penitentiary administration in Belgium has sole charge of executing the sentence imposed by the courts; every aspect of the convicted offender's life is thus regulated by the prison administration except the length of sentence. The judiciary may only intervene in a certain number of circumstances. Conditional release is recommended or revoked by the Minister of Justice on the recommendation of the Attorney General, and a judge presides over the probation board. The 1964 law of social defense places the appropriate jurisdiction in charge of mentally incompetent prisoners, and juvenile judges are permitted to follow the course of convicted juvenile offenders and to modify measures taken. Various types of partial release programs may be recommended by the prosecutor and initiated with the cooperation of the prison administration. Pardons are granted by the Minister of Justice with the recommendation of the court, and rehabilitative measures are supervised by the arraignment chamber of the court of appeals. The courts have not become involved in the correctional process per se because of the strict Belgian doctrine of separation of powers. Defenders of administrative independence also argue that judges are not prepared by their training and experiences for administrative functions. However, a number of prominent jurists have spoken out in favor of participation of judges in the process of executing sentences. The present tendency favors creation of an administrative commission composed of judges, lawyers, and prison administrators. The commission would devote its attention to matters regarding conditional release and also to such aspects of prison function, as partial release programs. However, even such a commission would not become involved in prison treatment matters, which would be left to the prison administration. Notes are supplied.