Comparison of the corrections and sentencing practices of the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands

Comparison of the corrections and sentencing practices of the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands

Introduction

All around the world, most Judicial systems face tough questions on the importance of incarceration in criminal Justice systems. Throughout history, the correction system is always seen to be the ultimate way of tackling criminals. However, this purpose has transformed with time. Prisons have been used as an area for detaining criminal suspects, a place for the stray citizens, an institution for keeping the mentally ill and an institution for rehabilitation of citizens. The challenges and transformations that have occurred in the course of history have shaped and developed the correctional systems that we have today.

Recent statistics put the United States as the country with the most significant number of prisoners per 100,000 of the national population. The figure stands at 716 prisoners per 100,000 of the national population (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2019). When these figures are compared to European rates, the results are shocking with 79 prisoners per 100,000 of the national population in Germany and 82 prisoners per 100,000 of the national population in the Netherlands (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2019).The situation of mass incarceration is being contributed by the political climate, strict crime policies, determinate sentencing. In result, it has seen the generation of lengthy prison sentences thus resulting in the rapid increase in the prison population and leading to depletion of resources. The practice of mass incarceration by the criminal justice systems has resulted to the development of a system capable of only incapacitation. Most prisons in the United States are unable to achieve rehabilitation due to the already high number of inmates despite the financial situation and the depleting amount of resources (Subramanian & Shames, 2019). However, according to the Vera Institute of Justice report” Sentencing in Germany and the Netherlands,” there are other nations which have created successful prison models and manage lower inmate population (Subramanian & Shames, 2019). The thesis of this paper is to compare and contrast the corrections and sentencing practices of the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands. The paper will provide an opportunity to learn from these countries which have been able to lower prison populations and reducing crime rates. The potentially advantageous practices will help solve America’s problem of mass incarceration.

Justice systems

The first step in analyzing the criminal justice systems is to make a cross-national comparison of recidivism, crime, and incarceration rates across jurisdictions of the three countries. Crime and incarceration: most people would argue that a higher crime rate in the U.S would be the explanation to a high rates of incarceration compared to Germany and the Netherlands. However, studies reveal that there exists differences across countries, in their classification of offenses and crime categories (Subramanian & Shames, 2019). For instance, if a crime such as “dangerous and serious bodily injury ”  in Germany is compared to the same crime category of aggravated assault in the United States, Germany rate is much lower.

Comparing incarceration rates between the countries, it is noted that countries use specific groups of citizens in their incarceration rates. These groups may include remand detainees, juveniles, and mentally ill offenders. For instance, in Germany and the Netherlands, offenders who have been charged but not yet convicted are placed in prison which is not the case in the United States where such populations are placed in local jails (Subramanian & Shames, 2019).The recidivism rate between the countries was compared to indicate the performance of a justice system. This comparison is often complicated since each country uses different definitions and different periods for measurement of recidivism. Both countries not only measure re-incarceration but also re-conviction. The follow-up time in Europe also varies from one to eight years, unlike the United States where the follow-up time is three years (Subramanian & Shames, 2019).

A look at the basic principles of the sentencing practices of German and the Netherlands systems reveals that they are built around the beliefs of resocialization and rehabilitation. This differs with the corrections systems in the U.S which mainly focuses on incapacitation and retribution and not rehabilitation (Aronowitz, 2008). Correction systems in Germany and the Netherlands focus on the rehabilitation and normalization of the inmates. These principles influence the sentencing practices and the conditions of incarceration in the Netherlands and Germany.

Sentencing options

Both countries have a similar approach to their approaches to sentencing. These include diversion, fines, suspended sentences, and other community sentences.

Diversion

In Germany and the Netherlands, prosecutors have powers to divert offenders away from prosecution. Prosecutors in both Germany and the Netherlands can also impose a penal order which may include; community service, fines, confiscation of assets and driving restrictions. Diversion through penal orders applies only to minor offenses in Germany (Subramanian & Shames, 2019). These minor offenses are often considered as felonies in the United States

Fines

In the United States, fines are generally used in combination with other offenses as an additional penalty. However, in Europe, fines act as stand-alone penalties. For instance, in the Netherlands, the financial penalties act of 1983 stipulates that fines should be preferred to imprisonment and applied to all offenses including those punishable by life imprisonment (Aronowitz, 2008). In Germany, fines are imposed on offenders in a “day fine approach” and put into consideration the offender’s income.

Suspended sentences and other community sentences

In both Netherlands and Germany, a huge proportion of sentences are suspended. Suspended sentences in these countries are similar to probation in the United States. For instance, in the Netherlands, financial sentences of up to two years may be suspended in part or in whole. Similar to Germany, prison sentences of up to two years can be suspended by the courts, and the offender is placed on probation (Subramanian & Shames, 2019). It is therefore clear from the above principles that prisons in these countries are used sparingly since the rehabilitation principles mainly favor intermediate and non-custodial sanctions. It makes their correction and sentencing approach less punitive and rehabilitation oriented.

Sentencing

Both Germany and the Netherlands rarely use incarceration and for short sentences (Aronowitz, 2008). This arises from the fact that both countries use non-custodial sanctions and diversions; thus few offenders get prison sentences. For instance, in 2010, Germany issued day fines to approximately 80 percent of the cases. It comes as a sharp contrast to the United States where 70 percent of the offenders received prison sentences with only 30 percent receiving probation (Subramanian & Shames, 2019). Another difference in the sentencing practices in Europe and those in the United States is the duration of prison sentence imposed (Subramanian & Shames, 2019). The duration of sentence imposed on a particular offense is much lower in Europe than in the United States. Take the Netherlands for example, in 2012. Ninety-one percent of the sentences were for one year or less. It differs with American correctional systems where the average duration of prison sentencing ranges from 3-6 years (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2019)

Conclusion

Mass incarceration in the U.S should be stopped and the reforms carried out in the criminal justice systems. It is essential for U.S policymakers to adopt and incorporate European practices of; socialization, education, life skills, and cognitive-behavioral skills which have proved to be more successful (Aronowitz, 2008). The following changes should be made to the U.S sentencing commission to address the problem of mass incarceration in American prisons;

1. There should be the expansion of prosecutorial discretion to divert offenders.
2. Adoption of the disciplinary structure and expansion of the disciplinary measures to sanction offenders.
3. Treatment of young offenders as special populations.
4. The conditions within the prison should be normalized.
5. There should be reduced reliance on incarceration and the expansion of community-based sanctions.

These practices will help a better approach to managing the problems within the prison system.

References

Aronowitz, A. (2008). World Factbook of Criminal Justice. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). (2019). Retrieved from https://bjs.gov/

Michael Moore Goes to Norway & Visits a Prison of the Future. Retrieved fromhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01mTKDaKa6Q

Subramanian, R., & Shames, A. (2019). Sentencing and Prison Practices in Germany and the Netherlands. Retrieved from https://www.vera.org/publications/sentencing-and-prison-practices-in-germany-and-the-netherlands-implications-for-the-united-states