NCJ Number
193938
Journal
Corrections Today Volume: 64 Issue: 1 Dated: February 2002 Pages: 30-33
Date Published
2002
Length
4 pages
Annotation
This article examines the successful program of “decarceration,” the trend toward less incarceration, and liberalization of criminal law practices in Finland.
Abstract
At the beginning of the 1950's, the incarceration rate in Finland was four times higher than in other Nordic countries. By the end of the 1950's, the courts had begun to reduce the length of sentences. Between 1950 and 1965, the average length of all prison sentences fell from 13 to 7 months. Average prison sentences for aggravated assault and all forms of robbery dropped from 2 years to 1 year. In addition, the use of different sentencing alternatives has changed. In 1971, 38 percent of offenders sentenced for theft received custodial sentences; in 1991, this proportion had decreased to 11 percent. In the mid-1960's, nearly 90 percent of drunken drivers received unconditional prison sentences; in the early 1970's, the figure was 70 percent, but 10 years later, the proportion had dropped to 12 percent. Behind these changes were amendments made in the general penalty structure. To replace short prison sentences with other sanctions, the scope of suspended sentences and fines were extended in the mid-1970's. During the 1990's, penalties remained constant. The only major amendment in the system was the introduction of community service. Along with an increase in the number of community service orders, the number of unconditional sentences of imprisonment decreased between 1992 and 1993. Enforcement practices have also contributed to the decrease in incarceration. A number of legislative initiatives were carried out in the 1960's to restrict the use of imprisonment as a default penalty for unpaid fines. The system of parole and early release was also a powerful tool in controlling incarceration rates. The profound change in the use of imprisonment raises questions about its effect on crime. That Finland has substantially reduced its incarceration rate has not had an influence on crime rates. This shows that crime rates and incarceration rates are independent of each other. References