CLEEN Foundation in collaboration with the MacArthur Foundation project during a workshop it hosted for media practitioners recently has tasked journalists to lend their voice concerning the functionality of the parole system. The parole system in Nigeria plays a crucial role in the justice sector, aiming to facilitate the rehabilitation and reintegration of inmates into society as law abiding citizens while easing overcrowding and contributing to decongestion of correctional centres.
But has the parole system been able to achieve the purpose
for which it was created for in the first place? The answer is no as its effectiveness
and implementation have faced scrutiny due to challenges and gaps within the
existing laws and structures.
Blessing Abiri, Head of Lagos CLEEN Foundation, states the
issues concerns the conflict in the laws between the Correctional Service Law,
Administration of Criminal Justice Law, ACJL and addressing the issues that
relates to the inmates welfare and generally assuring that the administration
of criminal justice is improved in Nigeria. Other challenges include politicization of the
parole system, the lack of standardized criteria for the selection of inmates
for parole and lack of clarity on the role of stakeholders in the effective
administration of the parole system.
“The ACJ came in 2015 to radicalise, change and improve our
criminal justice system which parole is part of. We need to give voice so that
those innovations will be functional so that at end of the day correctional
centres will be decongested and giving opportunity for inmates who have been
identified for their good behavior so they can be easily reintegrated back to
the society as law abiding citizens”.
“Another thing is we
want inter-agency collaboration so that all the stakeholders involved in parole
administration must come together to make it work".
She tasked the media to identify and highlight the issues so
that policymakers can take more time to address on how it can work whether at
the state or federal level and addressing all the agencies involved
Salaudeen Hashim, Programme Director, CLEEN Foundation,
faults the system, stating that with the way it is structured cannot achieve
its set objective. “There is a setback
with the administrative of criminal justice particularly with the introduction
of innovations…which include the parole and with the provision of the new and
adjusted Custodial Facility Act; which says there must be some element of
parole introduction into the system”.
The ACJA states that inmates that are sentenced to at least
15 years or life imprisonment must have served at least one-third of their
sentences before they can be recommended for parole. However the ACJA does not
state the minimum period that inmates who are sentenced to less than 15 years
must have served before they can be recommended for parole by the controller
general.
“We noticed there are
a lot of challenges with the value chain within its implementation, one borders
around noncompliance, two around funding gap, three challenges with oversight
and most importantly there is weak political supports particularly relating to
non existence and functionality of the Parole Board in various states. We
believed that is also required immediate attention”, he maintains.
Generally there is problem with administration, operations,
structure, financing and the entire conception.
Concerning the board, while some states have the Parole Board and
Monitoring Committees, they are not functional in other states, while some need
financing and technology-based solutions.
According to Hashim, “In some states the Parole Board
chairman live outside the state or outside the country and the members have
never met at all since inauguration; some states have never been inaugurated
and that is a major gap”.
“In some places where the boards exist they are conflicting with
the Prerogative Mercy Committee, which gives governors absolute power to pardon
inmates. There are perceptions that the Parole Board will actually wear down
the powers of the governor in this regard most states have not operationalised that
particular provision because parole clearly stipulates that commendations can
be given to the court to actually consider an inmate for parole with a
recommendation from the Controller of Prisons that is not functional because
the governors believe that it will reduce their powers”.
He said that the only thing working in the parole system is
that we have it in our extant laws because in terms of those who benefitted
there is record except political exposed persons who are beneficiaries under
the prerogative of Mercy Committee not under the Parole Board. Again one of
findings suggests very clearly that those with lower social status or lower
economic status do not have access to the parole list so the issue of
eligibility is also a problem.
The importance of having parole system in Nigeria is that it
reduces the pressure on the correctional facilities, it also reduces frequent
jailbreaks, grievances among inmates, people will have sense of dignity
irrespective of the conditions the find themselves, reduces strain the budget
system because those who on parole will take care of themselves. Government
should look at all these measures in order to control cost of governance.
Parole system will also bring some sorts of ownership to a community as they
will became participants because for one to enjoy ownership, the conditions
should state that community should vouch that the person is not flouting the
conditions if not the parole will be revoked.
The organisation tasked government and relevant stakeholders
to review and update the legal framework governing parole to ensure that it
align with international best practices; implement measures to increase
transparency in the parole process; strengthen rehabilitation programmes;
reduce overcrowding; improve monitoring support, and lastly address judicial
delays.
Comments