Feature Article : "The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of Modernghana.com."

Undoubtedly, the eighteenth century marked the beginning of the response to then new criminological theories, culminating into the concept of imprisonment as a form of punishment for offenders or those who fell foul of the law.

Significantly, the main rationale of imprisonment was to make prisoners repay their debt to society and offer them the space and opportunity to reflect on their misdeeds.

It can be said that imprisonment had for several decades worked.

However, given the increasing crime and violence in our society today, it is no longer a hidden secret that the frightening over crowding or over population of our prisons and its characteristic implication is a growing concern for most well meaning citizens regardless of their political partisanship.

As noted by some social commentators,' in this sort of milieu, it is virtually impossible to pursue, far less achieve, any of the traditional objectives of punishment'.

It must be placed in context that such commentators are even questioning the concept of imprisonment.

It is against this background that Tony Peters observed in the UNESCO Courier of June 1998 that 'new alternative to prison opened up more humane sentencing with a view to reintegrating offenders into society and that 'the flagrant inhumanity of correctional facilities, the psychological impact of incarceration and the social exclusion which resulted from this form of punishment brought about a growing skepticism about the prison system's capacity to rehabilitate inmates.'

The 1980's saw the emergence of two schools of thought as regards the deficiency of imprisonment as a mechanism of punishment,

Whereas one thought was that prison seems to have lost it's legitimacy as a punitive institution, another positioned that offenders serve their full sentence so as to restore the punitive function of imprisonment.

Nevertheless there are those unconvinced about the socializing virtues of the deprivation of freedom, who emphasized that 'in a democratic state under the rule of law, inmates are citizens entitled to legal protection and basic human rights.

It is within this context that the offender management and rehabilitation organization (OMRO ) holds the professional view that crowded prison conditions now seem to overshadow ideological discussions about the appropriateness, usefulness and humanness of incarceration and throws itself into the forefront of the debate for alternatives to imprisonment.

There are several reasons for OMRO's position to actively champion the course for alternatives to imprisonment. There are issues ranging from the cost of constructing and maintaining prisons, the failure in our view of imprisonment reducing crime, the impact of imprisonment on inmates, their families and the community and the ethos of seeking legal and judicial reform and the rehabilitation of the offender.

Given that modern criminologist have agreed that 'prison causes more ethical, social, psychological and economic problems than it serves, OMRO believes that its advocacy for effective alternatives to imprisonment is morally, philosophically and psychologically justified beyond political jingoism and ideological activism.

The practice experience in Britain and most developed societies are indicative of two fundamental principles that should guide sentencing decisions about which sentence is most likely to prevent further offending and promote public protection.

The first is that of 'proportionality', that punishment should be proportionate to the seriousness and persistency of offending, with the second principle being a reflection of the 'risk factor prevention paradigm.'

According to criminological research, young people are exposed to multiple risks, and display a higher propensity to commit crime.

Some of these key risk factors include inappropriate attitudes to offending, deficits in cognitive skills, inadequate parental supervision, unstable living arrangements, poor school performance and persistent truancy, exclusion from school or unemployment, association with delinquent peers,

dependency on alcohol; and or drugs and experiencing high levels of socio-economic deprivation.

The increased emphasis on ensuring that community interventions are effective, consists largely in developing programmes which has as it's target the risk factors identified above during the assessment of the young offender.

Research evidence has also demonstrated three further principles that should underpin the development and implementation of community intervention programmes.  Continued    Source: marcus lawson

"The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of Modernghana.com." To have your articles publish, please submit them to editor@modernghana.com.

Other Articles by marcus lawson