LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 525

Overcrowding of Albanian Prisons. A Quantitative Analysis of Evolution and Causes

Nikolli A.1

1 Judge in the criminal section, District court of Shkoder. Ph.D. Candidate, Doctoral School, Law sciences, European University of Tirana (ALBANIA) alnikolli@live.com.

Abstract

Purpose: Although imprisonment has been one of the key sentences for more than two centuries, different

countries have adopted the use of it at different levels to fight various forms of criminality. Albania has long been subject to an emphasis on the political rhetoric of a "keen and unmerciful war" with crime, which has led to an increase in the number of inmates and prison overcrowding. This paper aims to explore the dynamics of the prison population in Albania over the past 20 years and to analyse the reasons that have led to overcrowding.

Materials and methods: In conducting this study, we used data published by the Ministry of Justice in statistical yearbooks from

2004 to 2012 and statistics from the General Department of Prisons on prisoner numbers for the years 2006–2014. Useful data were also obtained from different editions of the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics and the World Prison Population List. Through quantitative and comparative analysis methods the paper aims to present the evolution of prisoner numbers in Albania compared with several other European countries. Further, the paper analyses the causes of the increasing number of convicted prisoners and pre-trial detainees, and the impact of each variable on this overcrowding.

Conclusions: The results of this paper show that the punitive policy spirit has led to an increase in the number of pre-

trial detainees and those sentenced to imprisonment, while inhibiting the application of alternative sanctions to imprisonment.

Keywords: prison overcrowding, penal policy, severe sentence, punishment, Albanian Penal Code.

1 Introduction

Imprisonment is one of the earliest sanctions that human society imposed on people showing antisocial behaviour [1]. The Old Testament of the Bible refers to the use of imprisonment from 2040–164 B.C. in Egypt and its use in ancient Assyria and Babylon [2]. However up to the end of the Middle Ages imprisonment was rarely used, because most of the sentences were corporal or death sentences. The application of imprisonment as the main form of punishment began with the birth of eighteenth century humanistic ideas, with the aim of replacing inhumane corporal penalties. The number of offenders sent to prison has risen dramatically since the end of the Second World War, and continues to grow. Crewe [3] argues that ‘imprisonment is the ultimate sanction of most Western societies, and prisons are a potent symbol of the state’s power to punish and its failure to integrate all its citizens into its system of norms’.

Nowadays prison overcrowding is a global problem. Out of 194 jurisdictions for which data was collected by the World Prison Brief of the International Centre for Prison Studies, 118 had a rate of prison occupancy above 100 per cent (overcrowding). Of these, 15 jurisdictions had rates of overcrowding above 200 per cent and 33 had rates between 150 and 200 per cent [4]. A high incarceration rate of citizens has high humanitarian, social and economic costs for a country. Although Albania in 1994 had a rate of 34 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, for some years it has been one of a list of countries with a high level of prisoners with overcrowding of penitentiary institutions. Increasing the accommodation capacity for prisoners through building new prisons has been insufficient to handle the increasing number of prisoners.

This paper aims to explore the situation of the prison population in Albania and analyse some of the main reasons behind it. People deprived of their liberty in prisons are divided into those who are convicted prisoners, and those detained in custody (during preliminary investigations or trials). Consequently, the paper

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 526

will address separately the increase in the number of convicted prisoners and the increase in the number of detainees.

1.1 Methodology and Materials

For the purposes of this study, we used annual statistical data published by the Ministry of Justice for 2004–2012 and data published by the General Department of Prisons on prisoner numbers for the years 2006–2014, although unfortunately we were not able to find current data on the numbers convicted for 2013 and 2014. Useful data were also obtained from the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics and the ICPS. First, through tables presented in the paper, the aim is to give a picture of the evolution of prisoner numbers in Albania and then to compare these findings with those of several other European countries. Further, through quantitative methods and interpretation of data we analyse the causes behind the increasing number of sentenced prisoners and detainees. The paper analyses the effect of the harsh penal policy pursued by the Albanian legislature with the toughening of sentences and a wave of public opinion towards severe punishment for any illegal conduct.

2 Overcrowding of prisons in Albania

The issue of prison overcrowding can be viewed from two different angles. The first aspect of the prison population has to do with the human rights of prisoners, where conditions of overcrowding fail to meet basic humanitarian needs for rest, sleep, and maintaining hygiene. The second aspect of prison overcrowding has to do with the social, criminological and economic side of the problem, namely the issues of alternative solutions for the level of criminalization of society in a given country, or put simply, the criminal policy of a country. Although prison overcrowding is directly associated with an aggressive criminal policy and generally occurs in countries with a high imprisonment rate and a harsh punishment system [5], we cannot say that any country with these conditions will suffer from prison overcrowding. Comparative incarceration levels are expressed using a ratio of inmates per 100,000 inhabitants, while overcrowding is generally defined by reference to the occupancy rate and the official capacity of the prisons. Using this simple formula, overcrowding refers to a situation where the number of prisoners exceeds the official prison capacity. So although theoretically a country may have a high imprisonment rate, this may not result in prison overcrowding if the state invests significant sums in the building of new prisons and in the maintenance and improvement of existing ones. Conversely, low imprisonment rates do not necessarily mean that prisons are not overcrowded. In a number of countries, prisons are acutely overcrowded, despite low imprisonment rates [5]. This may be due to the lack of adequate prison space or infrastructure, or because the geographical distribution of the prisons does not meet the current requirements.

In 1995, Albania had only seven penitentiary institutions, with a maximum capacity of 1,200 inmates, or a rate of 37/100,000 inhabitants [6]. Furthermore, year on year the hosting capacity for prisoners has been increased by building new prisons so that while in 2007 the capacity was 3,462 prisoners, in 2008 it was 4,264 prisoners, in 2011 it had reached 4,417 prisoners and, with the opening of a new detention centre in Elbasan in October 2012, the capacity of Albanian prisons went up to 4,537 places [7]. Currently in Albania there are twenty-two prisons (and detention centres) in operation with further new prisons at Berat and Fier due to come into service, while another prison in Shkoder is in its construction phase [8]. Although the construction of these new institutions has helped to relieve the overcrowding situation in penitentiary institutions, it has not managed to solve it, because the number of prisoners has increased at the same rate if not more than the increase in prison capacity. The new prisons planned to be opened in the coming months and years do not suffice to replace the old prisons that already do not fulfil the minimum standards of living. Among those with immediate closure requirements at the request of the Ombudsman and the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT), are Prison 313 and Burrel Prison [9]. While each year Albania has an urgent requirement for new prisons, the head of Sweden's prison and probation service, Nils Oberg, announced in November 2013 that four Swedish prisons were to be closed due to an ‘out of the ordinary’ decline in prisoner numbers [10].

The first data on imprisonment rates in Albania were for 1995 where, according to the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics [11] there were 36 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants. By 1996 [12] this rate was 39 prisoners per 100,000 and by the April of 2014 [13], this had reached a peak of 182 inmates per 100,000 (according to a more accurate calculation this rate could be as high as 203/100,000 as explained below). Figure 1 shows the trend of imprisonment rates from 2000 to 2014 in Albania.

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 527

Figure 1. Imprisonment rate dynamics in Albania

Source: ICPS [4], [14], [15] and General Department of Prisons [16], [17], [13].

This rate is calculated based on a population of 3.2 million inhabitants, but according to INSTAT [18] the current resident population of Albania is less than 2.9 million. So, based on these population figures, the imprisonment rate in Albania in April 2014 would actually be 203 per 100,000. According to the International Centre for Prison Studies [4] in 2011 Albania had a higher rate than most of the Balkan countries, apart from Montenegro which had a rate of 227. In 2010 the imprisonment rates for the others were: Croatia 117, Bosnia & Herzegovina 73, Cyprus 110, Greece 102, Kosovo 66, FYROM (Macedonia) 114, Bulgaria 120, Romania 136, Serbia 164, Slovenia 63 and Turkey 168. The highest imprisonment rate in Europe was for the countries of the former Soviet Union, namely Russia – the highest with 568, then Georgia 547, Belarus 381, Ukraine 338, Latvia 314, Lithuania 276 and Estonia 254.

Among western countries the lowest rates were for the Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and the Faroe Islands (Danish) ranging from 23 to 78 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants. Other western countries such as Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland also had rates of less than 100 prisoners, while Italy and Portugal in the same year (2010) had rates of 111 and 113 prisoners respectively. Among western European countries the highest imprisonment rates were for England, with 153, and Spain with 159 prisoners per 100,000.

It would appear from the above figures that the incarceration rate of a country is related to a traditional level of democratic emancipation, as the Nordic countries, followed by those in western Europe have the lowest rates, while the Soviet countries tend to have the highest. Based on data for the year 1995 (when Albania had a low rate of 36) and, further, from the Figure 1 data, it is clear that Albania has traditionally had a low incarceration level. In an attempt to explore and explain the situation of overcrowding in Albanian prisons we will analyse the numbers of people convicted by the Albanian courts and compare these with some other European countries.

Figure 2. Convicted persons in Albania from 1999 to 2012

Source: Council of Europe [11], [12] and Ministry of Justice Annual Statistics [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25] [26] [27].

As shown in Figure 2 above, the number of people found guilty by the Albanian courts doubled between 1999 and 2012. The increase in numbers of convicted people is only a broad indication; as the nature and severity levels of the sentences are not considered, we cannot calculate the effect the sentences have on the growth of the prison population. Having a high conviction rate does not necessarily mean that this country would also have a high imprisonment rate. Despite the above increase shown in the conviction rate, when compared

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 528

with other European countries, Albania has a very low rate of criminality (persons convicted by the courts). Figure 3 below shows this fact.

Figure 3. Conviction rate per 100,000 of the population in some European countries.

Source: Council of Europe (European Sourcebook 2010) [28].

By analysing these data and comparing them with the imprisonment rate data, it can be concluded that a high conviction rate does not necessarily bring a high imprisonment rate. For example, while Finland and Denmark have the highest conviction rates, they have the lowest imprisonment rates of 56 and 74 per 100,000 respectively [4]. On the other hand, Albania has a twentieth of the conviction rate of Finland, but paradoxically has an imprisonment rate which is four times greater.

2.1 Solution of Overcrowding Through Amnesties

According to the data published by the General Department of Prisons for March [29] and April 2014 [13] the number of people convicted in Albanian prisons was 3,172, while in June 2014 [30] it was noted that as a result of benefits from an amnesty law [31] the number of convicted prisoners had decreased by at least 602 people, or 19 per cent. Although the amnesty contributed significantly to reducing the number of (convicted) inmates in these institutions, it was unable to contribute to a reduction in the number of detainees, which in June 2014 [30] reached a historical peak of 2,851 people, exceeding for the first time the number of convicted prisoners (2,851 detainees compared with 2,570 convicted prisoners). So, although the amnesty of April 2014 [31] decreased the concentration in prisons from 182 to 169 people deprived of liberty per 100,000 inhabitants, this number was still well above the region's average and much higher than the capacity of the country’s penitentiary institutions (which from November 2012 had capacity for only 4,537 inmates) [7] resulting in overcrowding in prisons of at least 884 people, or approximately 20 per cent above the norm, despite the amnesty.

Although not to the same degree, the amnesty of 2012 [32] also failed to resolve the prison overcrowding situation where the number of incarcerated people was significantly lower. From data published by the General Department of Prisons [33] (2012), it can be seen that even after the implementation of Law 107, dated 08.11.2012, "On granting amnesty" (through which at least 512 convicted prisoners were granted liberty) there was still overcrowding of 73 inmates above the permitted norm in penitentiary institutions.

3 Reasons for the increase in convicted prisoners

3.1 Punitive Criminal Justice Policies in this Category The issue of prison overcrowding is complex, widespread and has extended over a long period; it

therefore requires a deep and coordinated analysis not only at the criminal policy level but also with a wider socio-economic perspective. On 27 January 1995 Albania approved a new Criminal Code which entered into force on 1 June 1995 [34]. The (new) Albanian Criminal Code must hold the world record for a law that has been changed the most in the shortest time. Since its entry into force in 1995 until now it has been changed by fifteen laws (the latest being approved on 31 July 2014 [35]. Between 1995 and 2014, in the special part of the Albanian Criminal Code, 120 new criminal offences were enacted and most of the existing ones were almost entirely changed, while only six existing articles were abrogated by the legislature (Articles 116, 227, 229, 239, 240 and 241) and an article by the Constitutional Court [36] (Article 315). The numerous legal changes to the Criminal Code, besides the addition of new criminal offences and changes in the formulation of existing ones,

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 529

have affected most of the sanctions for these offences. From a study of the fifteen legislative changes made to the Criminal Code it is noted that mostly they have aggravated the existing sanctions. While Figure 3 shows that the number of convicted people doubled between 1999 and 2012 it does not shed light on what category of offences these were and what was the severity of sentences given by the courts. In order to analyse the level of severity of punishment stipulated by the Albanian courts, Table 1 presents details of sentences between 2004 and 2012.

Table 1. Types and measures of sentences stipulated by the Albanian courts during the years 2004-2012

Source: Annual Statistics of the Ministry of Justice 2004–2012 [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27].

As can be seen from this table, the increase in the number of convicted people did not contribute to an increase in the number of people sentenced to life imprisonment or heavy sentences (5–10 years and 10–25 years). Furthermore the number of people sentenced to imprisonment of 10–25 years has declined significantly in recent years. The largest increase is shown in the categories of sentences of fines and light prison sentences (up to 2 years and 2–5 years). From these data it emerges that, regarding the sentencing levels, a major contribution to the Albanian prison overcrowding is the category of convicted prisoners with sentences of up to 5 years. Although these data help to shed some light on the imprisonment levels imposed by the Albanian courts, again this table does not reflect the whole picture. The correct figures for imprisonment sanctioned by the Albanian courts over a year is the sum of the number of individuals sentenced to imprisonment multiplied by the actual length of time that they are bound to serve in prison (because the spans of 2–5, 5–10 and 10–25 years have high margins of error).

Legislative initiatives enacting new offences in the Criminal Code and the tendency to aggravate sanctions for existing offences are commonly presented by governments as part of successful reforms and as a clear expression of the will to fight crime [37], [38]. In reality, these initiatives have not only proved to be unsuccessful in reducing the crime rate, but in fact have been shown to contribute to the overpopulation of Albanian prisons.

One particularly significant disadvantage of the high punitive impact of the Albanian Penal Code is the high level of sentence minimums for most offences. Frequent changes to the Criminal Code have raised these minimum sentences in order to reduce and limit the degree of judicial discretion in sentencing. The problem deepens if we consider that the new Penal Code did not take into account the former provision which recognized the power of prosecutors/judges to dismiss the prosecution or sentencing of acts which carried low social risks. The Criminal Code of Kosovo [39], which is one of the newest criminal codes in Europe and was adopted with the assistance of the best European and American experts [40], provides, in Article 1, that the criminal offences and the types of measures and the severity of the criminal sanctions for the perpetrators of criminal offences are based on the necessity of criminal justice enforcement and the proportionality of the level and nature of the risks to human rights, freedoms and social values. Further, in Article 11 this Code determines that an act shall not constitute a criminal offence even if it has the characteristics of a criminal offence as defined by law if it is an act of minor significance.

3.2 Sentences for Serious Crimes

Although the above data show that in 2012 prison sentences of 5-25 years represented only 5.6 per cent of the total convictions for this year, according to data published by the General Department of Prisons, in 2014 in Albanian prisons [30] there were 1,946 prisoners with sentences of 5-25 years, which is 33.36 per cent.

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 530

Likewise although the percentage of sentenced people with life imprisonments in 2012 [16] was only 0.13 per cent, in 2014 their numbers in Albania reached 143 inmates or 2.45 per cent of the total number.

According to Articles 29 and 33 of the Penal Code a person sentenced to life imprisonment stays in jail until his (natural) death [41]. Further, Article 65 states that in exceptional cases only, a person sentenced to life imprisonment can be conditionally released when they have served no less than 25 years in prison and if whilst serving their sentence they have shown excellent behaviour and it is considered that the purpose of the punishment in educating them has been achieved. However, this remote possibility is limited by Article 64/3 which prohibits the release on parole of recidivist prisoners for crimes committed intentionally, and for the commitment of five serious crimes, thus effectively making the life sentence a punishment which still ends with natural death in jail.

A further negative development regarding punishment for serious crimes is the increase in the maximum prison sentence from 25 years to 35 years [42] (with law no. 144/2013), making it essentially life imprisonment. The further toughening of sanctions for serious crimes will increase the percentage of this category of prisoners. Although their numbers are increasing slowly, if it continues at this pace, over the next 10 years the number of convictions for serious crimes will be over 60 per cent of all prisoners.

3.3 Application of Alternatives to Imprisonment

The application of alternative sentencing is one way to relieve prison overcrowding in the country [43]. Law No.10023 dated 27.11.2008 [44], along with the addition of many new criminal offences in the special part of the Code, added several articles to the general part which augmented and clarified the application of imprisonment alternatives. Following these changes, the Albanian Penal Code provides for these alternatives to imprisonment:

• Semi-liberty • Suspension of imprisonment and placing on probation • House arrest • Suspension of imprisonment and the obligation to perform work in the public interest • Release on parole (early conditional release) These changes, together with the adoption of Law No. 10024, dated 27.11.2008 [45], which created the

probation service in Albania, paved the way for a wider application in practice of imprisonment alternatives [46], [47]. In juridical practice, to date, the suspension of imprisonment and placing on probation has been the most applied alternative, while the other four have found little application. According to Ministry of Justice data [26], in the last 5 years the number of cases where a prison sentence has been suspended have increased slightly. The relevant data are presented in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4. Suspension of imprisonment and placing on probation

Source: Annual Statistics of the Ministry of Justice 2012 [26]

According to Article 59 of the Albanian Criminal Code the suspension of imprisonment and placing on probation may be granted only for acts with low social dangerousness, when the court has stipulated a prison sentence of up to 5 years. Considering that the number of people convicted by the courts has been increasing, only presenting the numbers of suspended prison sentences does not reflect the whole picture. Dividing the number of people who had suspended sentences by the total number who received sentences of up to 5 years imprisonment, shows that this alternative sentence was applied in 21 per cent of cases in 2008; 24 per cent in 2009; 25 per cent in 2010; 26 per cent in 2011 and 24 per cent in 2012. Due to legal restrictions, the application of other sentence alternatives to imprisonment has been very small and inconsiderable and it is only since 2013 [27] that the courts have begun to more frequently assign sentences involving the suspension of imprisonment and the obligation to perform work in the public interest.

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 531

3.3.1 Early Conditional Release A very important alternative in determining the physiognomy of the main purpose intended in

sentencing is early conditional release. If the criminal justice system focuses on the retributive purpose of punishment, prisoners have to serve the whole time of imprisonment imposed by the court, but if the criminal law of a country appreciates more the educational and rehabilitative purpose of punishment, then if the education and psycho-social improvement of the prisoner is attained, they should be released regardless of the time remaining to be served in prison. The Albanian Criminal Code has set time limits on when would be the closest term to gain eligibility for early conditional release. Originally the Albanian Criminal Code envisioned a minimum term as serving half the sentence to gain eligibility for early conditional release, but with the changes made to the Penal Code with Law No. 8733, dated 24.1.2001 [48], these timelines were extended, making the minimum terms to be served not less than two-thirds of the sentence imposed for crimes with punishment of up to 5 years’ imprisonment, and not less than three-quarters of the sentence imposed for crimes with punishment measures of 5–25 years’ imprisonment [49]. These possibilities are further limited by the third paragraph of Article 64 which prohibits the release on parole of recidivists convicted for crimes committed intentionally and for five other serious offences (expressly defined by this Article), thus in practice making the early release on parole for serious crimes a very rare possibility and for less serious crimes a hard option.

As noted by these data, despite the slight increase, the implementation of alternatives to imprisonment in Albania (including the use of fines) is several times lower than in Germany, Austria, France or Sweden [50] and consequently this has not helped to sufficiently ease the prison overcrowding.

4 The increasing number of detainees

Detainees are the second category of inmates of penitentiary institutions. According to the Albanian Criminal Procedure legislation, detainees are defined as persons deprived of liberty on the basis of a court decision that has assigned to them the precautionary measure of jail arrest. This legal status continues until the decision on their guilt becomes final (in the first instance or on appeal). Article 232 of the Albanian Criminal Procedure Code [51] sets out seven coercive precautionary measures:

a) prohibition from leaving the country b) compulsion to appear before the judicial police c) prohibition or obligation to stay in a certain place d) patrimonial bail e) house arrest f) jail arrest g) temporary hospitalization in a psychiatric hospital. House arrest and jail arrest are the two most serious precautionary measures because these result in

restriction of the person’s liberty and they should be assigned only if all other coercive measures are inadequate [52]. Article 230/1 of the Criminal Procedure Code expressly limits the use of (pre-trial) jail arrest [53]. The High Court has elaborated on this legal restriction on assigning jail arrest in a number of its decisions, for example Decision No. 204 dated 28.12.2004 [54], Decision No. 19 dated 15.03.2007 [55], Decision No. 119 dated 30.05.2008 [56] and Decision No. 201 dated 24.09.2008 [57]. In all these cases the Criminal Chamber of the High Court has changed the decisions of the Courts of Appeal on the grounds that these courts did not consider the legal restrictions of Article 230/1 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the coercive measure of jail arrest. Despite the clear legal framework, in reality the situation regarding the use of this preliminary measure by the district and appeal courts is completely different. A clearer picture regarding the enforcement of four of the most commonly used preliminary coercive measures is represented in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5. Dynamics of precautionary coercive measures

Source: Annual Statistics of the Ministry of Justice 2004–2012.

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 532

As observed in the above data, jail arrest is the most common of the preliminary coercive measures and in 2012 it significantly increased. Although data are not available for the number of instances of jail arrest given by the courts during 2013 and 2014, based on the figures of the General Department of Prisons for 2014 [30] on the number of detainees in prison it can be assumed that the use of this measure has increased even more during the last 2 years. The increased number of detainees is an indicator of the climate of pressure on the justice system to satisfy public opinion concerning the immediate steps that the government is taking against crime.

However, all the other preliminary measures are applied less frequently and have a stable trend, with the exception of the obligation to appear before the judicial police, which has increased significantly. The security measure of patrimonial bail is rarely applied by courts even though it is more lenient in terms of human rights and offers good guarantees that the defendant won’t run away. Western countries apply jail arrest (as well as the imprisonment sentence) only for serious crimes. Thus in Finland in 2006, for the crime of theft there were only 624 convictions per 100,000 of the population [28] which was three times the number of all Albanian convictions for this year. If for just one-quarter of these defendants the Finnish courts were to order jail arrest, the prisons of this country would immediately be overcrowded.

In fact, police arrest represents the entry point to the criminal justice system. The highly political populism on issues of criminality and the inadequate interpretation by the media of the performance of the prosecution and judicial system affects the situation; in many cases judges set aside the legal criteria for assigning preliminary measures in order to avoid being identified as hindering the tough stance of the government against crime. The numerous cases when Ministers of the Interior, Justice and other high government officials and those from the opposition have criticized specific decisions regarding the ordering of preliminary measures, have directly affected the increase in the number of people who are remanded in custody by the courts. The most recent case concerned a statement by Prime Minister Rama who, in a meeting with the heads of police in the country, was strongly critical of the prosecution and courts regarding cases where people who committed illegal construction were not facing jail arrest [58].

The notion of ‘being tough’ and taking immediate action against crime resulted in June 2014 seeing the largest ever number of detainees in prison, even exceeding the number of people convicted on the final decision [30]. It is the actual number of detainees remaining after the amnesty of April 2014 that is the main cause of prison overcrowding in Albania.

The number of jail arrests ordered by the courts (the same as the number of prisoners) again does not present the whole picture about the contribution of this measure to prison overcrowding, because the other unknown element is the duration of the terms for which the defendants remain in pre-trial detention during preliminary investigations and while the trial is ongoing, until a final guilty decision is found. Due to the lack of data we were unable to analyse the effect of the length of detention on prison overcrowding, but we were able to deduce that the harsh criminal climate and the increase in the number of people arrested brings an aggravating chain effect, increasing the workload of the prosecutors and courts. The greater the number of people arrested, the greater the workload of the courts, the longer the delays, and the higher the likelihood of injustices due to reduced capacity and compliance with due process.

5 Conclusion

The number of those incarcerated has been increasing in Albania, and in 2014 [13] it reached a figure of 5,883 prisoners or 203 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants. Although the conviction rate has been growing in the last 20 years, Albania still has one of the lowest rates in Europe. Therefore the prison overcrowding is caused as a result of the harsh criminal policy against people arrested by the police and prosecution and later sentenced by the courts. The frequent and unreasonable changes to the Albanian Criminal Code have a high element of populism and demagogy, since they are not based on scientific studies, nor the practices of the penal codes of Western European countries. Aggravating the sentence measures and raising the minimum sentences for petty offences with low social danger, instead of bringing a measurable reduction of criminality, has led to an increase in the number of prisoners and subsequent prison overcrowding. The legislature seems unable to look beyond amnesties, persistently relying on them as the only solution to prison overcrowding, despite their ineffectiveness.

The pro-imprisonment spirit has also inhibited the application of fines and imprisonment alternatives. Furthermore, the Albanian legislature has not only increased the length of sentences stipulated for many criminal offences, but also the proportion of the prison term that has to be served in order to qualify for early conditional release. In addition, the increasing number of detainees has substantially affected the prison overcrowding in a way that even the frequent amnesties are unable to solve because they usually only benefit convicted people and not pre-trial detainees.

The German and Finnish examples demonstrate what is needed to initiate political changes that will reduce the prison population effectively: a justificatory system or a narrative that is politically acceptable, that endorses decarceration policies or alternatives to imprisonment, and that is embraced by the legal professions to whom the implementation of crime policies is entrusted [59].

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 533

REFERENCES

[1] Welch, M. (2003). Corrections: A Critical Approach. Second edition. UK: McGraw-Hill. [2] Morris, N., Rothman, D. J. (eds). (1998). The Oxford History of the Prison: The Practice of

Punishment in Western Society. UK: Oxford University Press. [3] Crewe, B. (2007). The Sociology of Imprisonment. In Jewkes, Y. (ed.). (2007). Handbook on

Prisons. Devon: Willan Publishing. [4] ICPS (2011). World Prison Population List. Ninth edition. Retrieved from:

http://www.prisonstudies.org/info/worldbrief/. [5] UNODC (2013). Handbook on strategies to reduce overcrowding in prisons. New York.

Retrieved from: http://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/Overcrowding_in_prisons_Ebook.pdf

[6] Council of Europe (1999). European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics. First edition, Strasbourg.

[7] General Department of Prisons (2012). Monitoring of performance indicators according to objectives of the National Strategy for Development and Integration. Retrieved from: www.dpbsh.gov.al.

[8] Naço, N. (2014). Newspaper Shiptarja.com, 14 February 2014. Constructed new correctional institutions. Retrieved from: http://www.shqiptarja.com/Aktualitet/2731/ndertohen-institucione-te-reja-denimi--priten-ndryshime-ligjore-200784.html.

[9] Totozani, I. (2014). Ombudsman: Close the Prison 313, out of the standards. Web page Balkanweb. 20 August 2014. Retrieved from:http://www.balkanweb.com/bw_lajme2.php?IDNotizia=206688&IDCategoria=1.

[10] The Guardian (2013). Sweden closes four prisons as number of inmates plummets. The Guardian 11 November 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/11/sweden-closes-prisons-number-inmates-plummets

[11] Council of Europe (2003). European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics. Second edition, Strasbourg.

[12] Council of Europe (2006). European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics. Third edition, Strasbourg.

[13] General Department of Prisons (2014). Statistical data of the penitentiary system –April 2014. Retrieved from: www.dpbsh.gov.al.

[14] ICPS (2006). World Prison Population List. Seventh edition. Retrieved from: http://www.prisonstudies.org/info/worldbrief/.

[15] ICPS (2008). World Prison Population List. Eighth edition. Retrieved from: http://www.prisonstudies.org/info/worldbrief/.

[16] General Department of Prisons (2012). Statistical data of the penitentiary system – December 2012. Retrieved from: www.dpbsh.gov.al.

[17] General Department of Prisons (2013). Statistical data of the penitentiary system – April 2013. Retrieved from: www.dpbsh.gov.al.

[18] INSTAT (2014). Population 1 January 2001–2014. Retrieved from: http://www.instat.gov.al/al/themes/popullsia.aspx.

[19] Ministry of Justice (2005). Annual Statistics for 2004. Tirana. [20] Ministry of Justice (2006). Annual Statistics for 2005. Tirana. [21] Ministry of Justice (2007). Annual Statistics for 2006. Tirana. [22] Ministry of Justice (2008). Annual Statistics for 2007. Tirana. [23] Ministry of Justice (2009). Annual Statistics for 2008. Tirana. [24] Ministry of Justice (2010). Annual Statistics for 2009. Tirana. [25] Ministry of Justice (2011). Annual Statistics for 2010. Tirana. [26] Ministry of Justice (2012). Annual Statistics for 2011. Tirana. [27] Ministry of Justice (2013). Annual Statistics for 2012. Manuscript submitted for publication. [28] Council of Europe. (2010). European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics.

Fourth edition, Strasbourg. [29] General Department of Prisons (2014). Statistical data of the penitentiary system –March 2014.

Retrieved from: www.dpbsh.gov.al. [30] General Department of Prisons (2014). Statistical data of the penitentiary system – June 2014.

Retrieved from: www.dpbsh.gov.al. [31] Law “For granting amnesty”, 2014, approved by Law no. 22/2014, came into force on 10 April

2014. Published in the official bulletin no. 38, dated 26 March 2014. [32] Law “For granting amnesty”, 2012, approved by Law no. 107/2012, came into force on 28

LUMEN-TCA 2014 (21-22 November 2014, Targoviste, Romania)

© Medimond . RY21C0091 . ID643 534

November 2012. Published in the official bulletin no. 148, dated 21 November 2012. [33] General Department of Prisons (2012). The main developments of the Penitentiary System in

2012. Retrieved from: www.dpbsh.gov.al. [34] Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania (1995). Approved by Law no. 7895, dated 27 January

1995, updated in 2014. [35] Law no. 98/2014, dated 31.07.2014, for some changes in Law No. 7895, dated 27.1.1995

"Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania". [36] Constitutional Court (2008). Decision no 11, dated 02.04.2008 of the Constitutional Court. [37] Parliament of Albania (2013). Record dated 03.04.2013 of the Legal Affairs Committee of

Albanian Parliament. [38] Council of Ministers (2014). Report of Council of Ministers for the bill "On some additions and

amendments to Law No. 7895 dated 27.1.1995" Penal Code of Republic of Albania. [39] Criminal Code of the Republic of Kosovo (2012) approved by Law no. 04/L-129, 20 April 2012,

Pristina, Official gazette No. 19 / 13 July 2012. [40] Salihu, I. (2012). Criminal Law, General Part. Fifth edition. Kosovo: Pristina. [41] Muçi, Sh. (2012). Criminal Law, General Part. Tirana: University Marin Barleti Press. [42] Law no. 144/2013, dated 02.05.2013, for some changes in Law No. 7895, dated 27.1.1995

"Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania". [43] UNAFEI (2011). Strategies and Best Practices Against Overcrowding in Correctional Facilities.

Tokyo, Japan. Retrieved from: http://www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/Congress_2010/00All.pdf. [44] Law no. 10023, dated 27.11.2008, for some changes in Law No. 7895, dated 27.1.1995

"Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania". [45] Law no.10024, dated 27.11.2008, on some additions and amendments to Law No.8331, dated

21.4.1998 “On execution of criminal decisions”. [46] OSCE (2010). Manual on the Application of Alternatives to Imprisonment. Tirana: Pegi. [47] Hysi, V. (2012). Penology. Third edition. Tirana: University of Tirana. [48] Law no. 8733, dated 24.01.2001, for some changes in Law No. 7895, dated 27.1.1995 "Criminal

Code of the Republic of Albania". [49] Elezi, I., Kaçupi, S., Haxhia, M. (2013). Penal Code Commentary. General Part. Tirana: Kumi

Publications. [50] Whitman, J. Q. (2004). Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide between

America and Europe. New York: Oxford University Press. [51] Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Albania (1995), approved by Law No. 7905, dated

03.21.1995, updated in 2014. [52] Islami, H., Hoxha, A., Panda, I. (2003). Criminal Procedure. [53] Trenova, G. (2008). Judicial Interpretation of Criminal Procedure Code. Tirana: Dita. [54] Decision no. 204 dated 28.12.2004 of the Criminal Chamber of the High Court. [55] Decision no. 19 dated 15.03.2007 of the Criminal Chamber of the High Court. [56] Decision no. 119 dated 30.05.2008 of the Criminal Chamber of the High Court. [57] Decision no. 201 dated 24.09.2008 of the Criminal Chamber of the High Court. [58] Rama, E. (2014). Speech Before Heads of Police. Dated 25.08.2014. Broadcast by Top

Channel Television. Retrieved from: http://www.top-channel.tv/artikull.php?id=283234&ref=ml. [59] Albrecht, H. J. (2013). Sentencing in Germany: Explaining Long-Term Stability in the Structure

of Criminal Sanctions and Sentencing. Law and Contemporary Problems (1)76, pp. 211–236.