fbpx
Wikipedia

Parole

Parole (also known as provisional release or supervised release) is a form of early release of a prison inmate where the prisoner agrees to abide by behavioral conditions, including checking-in with their designated parole officers, or else they may be rearrested and returned to prison.

A parole officer with the Missouri Department of Corrections interviews a drug-related offense probationer

Originating from the French word parole ("speech, spoken words" but also "promise"), the term became associated during the Middle Ages with the release of prisoners who gave their word.

This differs greatly from pardon, amnesty or commutation of sentence in that parolees are still considered to be serving their sentences, and may be returned to prison if they violate the conditions of their parole.

Modern development edit

Alexander Maconochie, a Scottish geographer and captain in the Royal Navy, introduced the modern idea of parole when, in 1840, he was appointed superintendent of the British penal colonies in Norfolk Island, Australia. He developed a plan to prepare them for eventual return to society that involved three grades. The first two consisted of promotions earned through good behaviour, labour, and study. The third grade in the system involved conditional liberty outside of prison while obeying rules. A violation would return them to prison and they would start all over again through the ranks of the three-grade process.[1][2] He reformed its ticket of leave system, instituting what many consider to be the world's first parole system.[3] Prisoners served indeterminate sentences from which they could be released early if they showed evidence of rehabilitation[4] through participation in a graded classification system based on a unit of exchange called a mark.[5] Prisoners earned marks through good behavior, lost them through bad behavior,[3] and could spend them on passage to higher classification statuses ultimately conveying freedom.[5]

In an instance of multiple discovery, in 1846, Arnould Bonneville de Marsangy proposed the idea of parole (which he termed "preparatory liberations") to the Civil Tribunal at Reims.[6][7]

Canada edit

In general, in Canada, prisoners are eligible to apply for full parole after serving one-third of their sentences.[8] Prisoners are also eligible to apply for day parole,[9] and can do this before being eligible to apply for full parole.

Any prisoner whose sentence is less than two years is sent to a correctional facility in the province or territory where they were convicted, whilst anyone sentenced to serve no less than two years will be sent to a federal correctional facility and will thus have to deal with the Parole Board of Canada.[10]

Parole is an option for most prisoners. However, parole is not guaranteed, particularly for prisoners serving life or indeterminate sentences. In cases of first-degree murder, one can apply for parole after 25 years if convicted of a single murder. However, if convicted of multiple murders, either of the first or second-degree, the sentencing judge previously had the discretion to make parole ineligibility periods consecutive - thereby extending parole ineligibility beyond 25 years and, in rare cases, beyond a normal life-span.[11][12] On May 27, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously ruled that extending parole ineligibility beyond the statutorily mandated 25 years was unconstitutional for being "cruel and unusual" punishment.[13]

China edit

In China, prisoners are often granted medical parole or compassionate release, which releases them on the grounds that they must receive medical treatment which cannot be provided for in prison. Occasionally, medical parole is used as a less public way of releasing a wrongly convicted prisoner.[14][15]

The Chinese legal code has no explicit provision for exile, but often dissidents are released on the grounds that they need to be treated for a medical condition in another country, and with the understanding that they will be reincarcerated if they return to China. Dissidents who have been released on medical parole include Ngawang Chophel, Ngawang Sangdrol, Phuntsog Nyidron, Takna Jigme Zangpo, Wang Dan, Wei Jingsheng, Gao Zhan and Fang Lizhi.[citation needed]

Israel edit

Until 2001, parole in Israel was possible only after the prisoner had served two thirds of their sentence. On 13 February 2001, the Knesset passed a bill, brought forward by Reuven Rivlin and David Libai, which allowed the early release of prisoners who had served half of their prison term (the so-called "Deri Law"[16]). The law was originally intended to help ease overcrowding in prisons.

Italy edit

Libertà condizionata is covered by Article 176 of the Italian Penal Code. A prisoner is eligible if he has served at least 30 months (or 26 years for life sentences), and the time remaining on his sentence is less than half the total (normally), a quarter of the total (if previously convicted or never convicted) or five years (for sentences greater than 7.5 years). In 2006, 21 inmates were granted libertà condizionata.[citation needed]

New Zealand edit

In New Zealand, inmates serving a short sentence (up to two years) are automatically released after serving half their sentence, without a parole hearing.[17] Inmates serving sentences of more than two years are normally seen by the New Zealand Parole Board after serving one-third of the sentence, although the judge at sentencing can make an order for a minimum non-parole period of up to two-thirds of the sentence. Inmates serving life sentences usually serve a minimum of 10 years, or longer depending on the minimum non-parole period, before being eligible for parole.[18] Parole is not an automatic right and it was declined in 71 percent of hearings in the year ending 30 June 2010.[19] Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole has been given only once, to Brenton Tarrant for the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings.

United Kingdom edit

The Parole Boards in the UK are only involved in the release of prisoners with specific sentences. Indeterminate sentences (life imprisonment and imprisonment for public protection) are always handled by the Parole Board because they have no fixed release date. Some determinate or "fixed" sentences, such as extended determinate sentences, are also handled by the Parole Board, but for the majority of prisoners the Parole Board will not be involved in their release.[20]

The conditions of release are called a licence, and parole is called released on licence. There are seven standard licence conditions for all prisoners:[21][22]

  1. Be of good behaviour and not behave in a way which undermines the purpose of the licence period;
  2. Not commit any offence;
  3. Keep in touch with the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by the supervising officer;
  4. Receive visits from the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by the supervising officer;
  5. Reside permanently at an address approved by the supervising officer and obtain the prior permission of the supervising officer for any stay of one or more nights at a different address;
  6. Not undertake work, or a particular type of work, unless it is approved by the supervising officer and notify the supervising officer in advance of any proposal to undertake work or a particular type of work;
  7. Not travel outside the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man except with the prior permission of your supervising officer or for the purposes of immigration deportation or removal.

When a prisoner does not have to have their release approved by the Parole Board, further "additional licence conditions" may be suggested by the Probation Service and set by prison governors.[23] When the Parole Board is involved, the Probation Service may suggest additional conditions, but the Parole Board is responsible for determining which additional conditions will be added to the licence.[22] If an offender breaks any of these conditions, they can be "recalled" or returned to prison.[24]

Since 2014 many of the probation and license monitoring functions have been carried out by private-sector "community rehabilitation companies" (CRCs) as well as the National Probation Service.[25][26] In May 2019 the government announced that supervision of offenders, including supervision of offenders released on licence, would be re-nationalised. The decision was made following multiple criticisms of the system which led Chief probation inspector Dame Glenys Stacey to describe the system as "irredeemably flawed".[27]

United States edit

Early history edit

Penologist Zebulon Brockway introduced parole when he became superintendent of Elmira Reformatory in Elmira, New York. To manage prison populations and rehabilitate those incarcerated, he instituted a two-part strategy that consisted of indeterminate sentences and parole releases.[28] This was significant in prison reform due to its implication that prisoners began their rehabilitation during incarceration, which would be recognizable by a parole board.[29] It also provided newfound emphasis on prisoners' protection from cruel and unusual punishment.

Modern history edit

In some jurisdictions in the United States, courts may specify in a sentence how much time must be served before a prisoner is eligible for parole. This is often done by specifying an indeterminate sentence such as "5 to 15 years", or "15 years to life". The latter type is known as an indeterminate life sentence; in contrast, a sentence of "life without the possibility of parole" is known as a determinate life sentence.[30]

On the federal level, Congress abolished parole in the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 (Pub. L. No. 98-473 § 218(a)(5), 98 Stat. 1837, 2027 [repealing 18 U.S.C.A. § 4201 et seq.]). Federal prisoners may, however, earn a maximum of 54 days good time credit per year against their sentence (18 U.S.C.A. § 3624(b)). At the time of sentencing, the federal judge may also specify a post-imprisonment period of supervised release.[31] The U.S. Parole Commission still has jurisdiction over parole for those prisoners convicted of felonies in the District of Columbia and who are serving their sentences there, as well as over certain federally incarcerated military and international prisoners.[32][33]

In most states, the decision of whether an inmate is paroled is vested in a paroling authority such as a parole board. Mere good conduct while incarcerated in and of itself does not necessarily guarantee that an inmate will be paroled. Other factors may enter into the decision to grant or deny parole, most commonly the establishment of a permanent residence and immediate, gainful employment or some other clearly visible means of self-support upon release (such as Social Security if the prisoner is old enough to qualify). Depending upon the jurisdiction, the parole board may look at various factors such as the inmate's criminal history, participation in rehabilitation, education, or vocational programs, expressions of remorse, admissions of guilt, and insight (in the psychiatric sense) into the factors driving the inmate's decision to commit the crimes at issue (in order to estimate the likelihood that the inmate may reoffend upon encountering similar factors in the outside world after release). Many states now permit sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole (such as for murder and espionage), but any prisoner not sentenced to such sentences or the death penalty will eventually have the right to petition for release (one state – Alaska – maintains neither the death penalty nor life imprisonment without parole as sentencing options).

Before being granted the privilege of parole, the inmate meets with members of the parole board and is interviewed. The parolee also has a psychological examination. If parole is granted, the inmate must first agree to abide by the conditions of parole set by the paroling authority. While in prison, the inmate signs a parole certificate or contract. On this contract are the conditions that the inmate must follow. These conditions usually require the parolee to meet regularly with his or her parole officer or community corrections agent, who assesses the behavior and adjustment of the parolee and determines whether the parolee is violating any of his or her terms of release (typically these include being at home during certain hours which is called a curfew, maintaining steady employment, not absconding, refraining from illicit drug use and, sometimes, abstaining from alcohol, attending addiction treatment or counseling, and having no contact with their victim). The inmate gives an address which is verified by parole officers as valid before the inmate is released to parole supervision.

Upon release, the parolee goes to a parole office and is assigned a parole officer. Parole officers make unannounced visits to parolees' houses or apartments to check on them. During these home visits officers look for signs of drug or alcohol use, guns or illegal weapons, and other illegal activities. Should parolees start to use drugs or alcohol, they are told to go to drug or alcohol counseling and Narcotics Anonymous or Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. Should they not comply with conditions on the parole certificate (including abstention from voting) a warrant is issued for their arrest. Their parole time is stopped when the warrant is issued and starts only after they are arrested. They have a parole violation hearing within a specified time, and then a decision is made by the parole board to revoke their parole or continue the parolee on parole. In some cases, a parolee may be discharged from parole before the time called for in the original sentence if it is determined that the parole restrictions are no longer necessary for the protection of society (this most frequently occurs when elderly parolees are involved).

Service members who commit crimes while in the U.S. military may be subject to court martial proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). If found guilty, they may be sent to federal or military prisons and upon release may be supervised by U.S. Federal Probation officers.

Parole in the United States has proven to be politically divisive. Beginning from the initiation of the war on drugs in the 1970s, politicians began to advertise their "tough on crime" stances, encouraging a tightening of penal policy and resulting in longer sentences for what were previously referred to as minor drug violations.[34] During elections, politicians whose administrations parole any large number of prisoners (or, perhaps, one notorious criminal) are typically attacked by their opponents as being "soft on crime". According to the U.S. Department of Justice, at least sixteen states have removed the option of parole entirely, and four more have abolished parole for certain violent offenders.[35][36] However, during the rise of mass incarceration in the 1970s, the states that continued to use parole and indeterminate sentencing contributed more to rising incarceration rates than those without parole boards. Said states implemented a dramatic decrease of parole releases, which inevitably resulted in longer sentences for more prisoners. From 1980 to 2009, indeterminate sentencing states made up nine of the ten states with the highest incarceration rate.[29]

Starting in the 1980s, parole was revisited as a method once again to manage prison populations and as financial motivation to prevent further budget straining. The new approach to parole release was accompanied with the growth of a mass surveillance state. The supervision practices of increased drug testing, intensive supervision, unannounced visits and home confinement are widely used today.[29] Additionally, a growing condition of parole was to assume the role of informant towards frequently surveilled communities.[37]

The Great Recession of 2008 coupled with the Twin Towers attack on September 11, 2001 contributed to the public emphasis on the war on terror and eventually led to a trend of lowering incarceration. In fact, presidential politics between 2001 and 2012 were, for the first time in ten years, not focused on domestic crime control and even saw the promotion of the Second Chance Act by George W. Bush, who used the act to pledge federal money for reentry as a symbol of his "compassionate conservatism".[37]

Debates and reform efforts edit

Since the 1990s, parole and indeterminate sentencing have been the focus of debate in the United States with some emphasizing reform of the parole system and others calling for its abolishment altogether. These debates are fueled by a growing scholarship that criticizes U.S. parole boards and also the parole system more broadly.

Parole boards are seen as lacking in efficient qualifications and too politicized in the appointment process.[37] The decision for granting parole has been criticized for neglecting the due process of prisoners on a case-by-case basis.[38] Additionally, the process for being granted a commutation has been criticized, as many prisoners have been denied a commutation for not showing the right amount of "remorse" or proving substantially that they were ready to contribute again, which are aspects that many argue are too normative and subjective.[39]

Most agree that, as was originally intended, the parole system puts a necessary focus on rehabilitation, despite its current problems which are widely debated. Critics note that it is becoming more and more expensive to the taxpayer, with little evidence of successful rehabilitation for prisoners. The conditions of parole themselves are often attacked as well, critiqued for being overwhelmingly criminogenic and perpetuating mass surveillance and a permanent state of imprisonment that does little to ensure a smooth reentry into society.[34] Critics note that greater discretion is required to decide which parolees require costly supervisory resources and which ones do not, rather than placing digital, physical, and structural restrictions on every parolee.[29]

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) stated in 2005 that about 45% of parolees completed their sentences successfully, while 38% were returned to prison, and 11% absconded. These statistics, the DOJ says, are relatively unchanged since 1995; even so, some states (including New York) have abolished parole altogether for violent felons, and the federal government abolished it in 1984 for all offenders convicted of a federal crime, whether violent or not. Despite the decline in jurisdictions with a functioning parole system, the average annual growth of parolees was an increase of about 1.6% per year between 1995 and 2002.

A variant of parole is known as "time off for good behavior", or, colloquially, "good time". Unlike the traditional form of parole – which may be granted or denied at the discretion of a parole board – time off for good behavior is automatic absent a certain number (or gravity) of infractions committed by a convict while incarcerated (in most jurisdictions the released inmate is placed under the supervision of a parole officer for a certain amount of time after being so released). In some cases "good time" can reduce the original sentence by as much as one-half. It is usually not made available to inmates serving life sentences, as there is no release date that can be moved up.

Difference from mandatory supervision edit

Some states in the United States have what is known as "mandatory supervision", whereby an inmate is released before the completion of their sentence due to legal technicalities which oblige the offender justice system to free them. In the federal prison system,[40] and in some states such as Texas, inmates are compensated with "good time", which is counted towards time served. For example, if an inmate served five years of a ten-year prison term, and also had five years of "good time", they will have completed their sentence "on paper", obliging the state to release them unless deemed a threat to society in writing by the parole board. Where parole is granted or denied at the discretion of a parole board, mandatory supervision does not involve a decision making process: one either qualifies for it or does not. Mandatory supervision tends to involve stipulations that are more lenient than those of parole, and in some cases place no obligations at all on the individual being released.

Immigration edit

In US immigration law, the term parole has two meanings related to allowing persons to enter or leave the United States without the normally required documentation.

Impact edit

According to a review of the academic literature by economist Jennifer Doleac, reductions in parole supervision was one of the most cost-effective ways to improve the reintegration and rehabilitation of the formerly-incarcerated.[41][42]

Prisoners of war edit

Parole is "the agreement of persons who have been taken prisoner by an enemy that they will not again take up arms against those who captured them, either for a limited time or during the continuance of the war."[43] The US Department of Defense defines parole more broadly: "Parole agreements are promises given the captor by a POW to fulfill stated conditions, such as not to bear arms or not to escape, in consideration of special privileges, such as release from captivity or lessened restraint."[44]

The practice of paroling enemy troops began thousands of years ago, at least as early as the time of Carthage.[45] Parole allowed the prisoners' captors to avoid the burdens of having to feed and care for them while still avoiding having the prisoners rejoin their old ranks once released; it could also allow the captors to recover their own men in a prisoner exchange. Hugo Grotius, an early international lawyer, favorably discussed prisoner of war parole.[46] During the American Civil War, both the Dix–Hill Cartel and the Lieber Code set out rules regarding prisoner of war parole.[47] Francis Lieber's thoughts on parole later reappeared in the Declaration of Brussels of 1874, the Hague Convention, and the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.[48]

In the United States, current policy prohibits US military personnel who are prisoners of war from accepting parole. The Code of the United States Fighting Force states: "I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy."[49] The position is reiterated by the Department of Defense. "The United States does not authorize any Military Service member to sign or enter into any such parole agreement."[50]

See also edit

References edit

  1. ^ Joel Samaha (2006). Criminal Justice. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. ISBN 9780534645571. OCLC 61362411.
  2. ^ John V. Barry, "Maconochie, Alexander (1787–1860)", Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, accessed 4 April 2013].
  3. ^ a b Joan Petersilia, When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
  4. ^ Robert D. Hansner, Community Corrections. Los Angeles: Sage, 2010.
  5. ^ a b Gray Cavendar, Parole: A Critical Analysis. Port Washington: Kennikat Press, 1982.
  6. ^ Normandeau, André (1969). "Pioneers in Criminology: Arnould Bonneville de Marsangy (1802-1894)". The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science. Northwestern University School of Law. 60 (1): 28–32. doi:10.2307/1141732. JSTOR 1141732. Historical innovations are often created independently and almost simultaneously. This seems to be the case about the origins of parole, especially in view of factors of time and means of communication. In effect, Maconochie developed his scheme in the years 1840-1844 as governor of Norfolk Island, a famous penal colony east of Australia, whereas Bonneville's ideas came out in the years 1846-1847. Our knowledge of the slowness of communications at the time, especially in such a sector of activity, leaves us with the impression that Bonneville really did not know about Maconochie's proposal.
  7. ^ Bonneville de Marsangy, Arnould (29 January 1868). Twenty-Third Annual Report of the Executive Committee of the Prison Association of New York for 1867. C. Van Benthuysen & Sons. pp. 165–178.
  8. ^ "Types of Release - Fact Sheet". Government of Canada. 12 March 2019. Retrieved 8 November 2020.
  9. ^ . Correctional Services Canada. 1 December 2014. Archived from the original on 28 June 2013. Retrieved 6 July 2016.
  10. ^ "Frequently Asked Questions". Correctional Service Canada. 28 July 2010.
  11. ^ MacDonald, Michael (31 October 2014). "Justin Bourque handed harshest sentence since Canada's last execution more than 50 years ago". National Post.
  12. ^ "Winnipeg 'killing machine' who targeted homeless men gets three life sentences, no parole". nationalpost.com. 28 June 2016. Retrieved 15 April 2018.
  13. ^ Nerestant, Antoni (27 May 2022). "Quebec City mosque shooter must get chance at parole after 25 years, Supreme Court rules". CBC News.
  14. ^ "China Grants Convicted Scholars Medical Parole". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 13 January 2008.
  15. ^ . Agence France-Presse. 20 January 2005. Archived from the original on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 13 January 2008.
  16. ^ Kra, Baruch. "Will Deri Benefit From the Deri Law'?". Haaretz. Retrieved 22 October 2019.
  17. ^ "Parole". Department of Corrections. 4 December 2016. Retrieved 19 February 2021.
  18. ^ . Paroleboard.govt.nz. Archived from the original on 5 May 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  19. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 October 2011. Retrieved 3 June 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  20. ^ "An outline of the parole process". gov.uk. 20 March 2019. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
  21. ^ Gianquitto, Lisa; Rule, Philip (1 February 2012). "Licences and Licence conditions". InsideTime. from the original on 7 July 2019.
  22. ^ a b "Licence Conditions and how the Parole Board use them". gov.uk. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
  23. ^ "Licence conditions, licences and licence and supervision notices" (PDF). National Offender Management Service. 23 March 2015. (PDF) from the original on 2 March 2018.
  24. ^ "Being taken back to prison". gov.uk. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
  25. ^ Grierson, Jamie (26 July 2018). "Private probation companies to have contracts ended early". The Guardian. from the original on 27 July 2018.
  26. ^ "National Probation Service About Our Services". gov.uk. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
  27. ^ "Probation service: Offender supervision to be renationalised". BBC News. 16 May 2019. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
  28. ^ Samaha, Joel (2006). Criminal Justice - Joel Samaha - Google Books. Thomson/Wadsworth. ISBN 9780534645571. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  29. ^ a b c d Reitz, Kevin R.; Rhine, Edward E. (13 January 2020). "Parole Release and Supervision: Critical Drivers of American Prison Policy". Annual Review of Criminology. 3 (1): 281–298. doi:10.1146/annurev-criminol-011419-041416. ISSN 2572-4568.
  30. ^ In re Jeanice D., 28 Cal. 3d 210 (1980) ("25 years to life" is indeterminate life sentence implying that minor convicted of first-degree murder was eligible for commitment to California Youth Authority rather than determinate life sentence which would require incarceration in regular prison).
  31. ^ "United States Parole Commission" (PDF). United States Department of Justice. February 2012. (PDF) from the original on 13 March 2016.
  32. ^ (PDF). United States Parole Commission. May 2003. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 October 2017. Retrieved 17 June 2018.
  33. ^ a b Angle, Roland E. (2014). "Build a Mass Movement: Abolish the Probation & Parole Systems to Attack the Foundation of the U.S. Police State". Race, Gender & Class. 21 (1/2): 236–245. ISSN 1082-8354. JSTOR 43496972.
  34. ^ "Quality of snitches declining as result of sentencing laws". Arizona Republic. 17 August 1997. p. 6.
  35. ^ Gormley, Michael (6 May 2007). "Parole system 'unfair'". The Berkshire Eagle. Retrieved 23 July 2022.
  36. ^ a b c SCHOENFELD, HEATHER (2016). "A Research Agenda on Reform: Penal Policy and Politics across the States". The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 664: 155–174. doi:10.1177/0002716215601850. ISSN 0002-7162. JSTOR 24756113. S2CID 155248074.
  37. ^ Reingold, Paul (2017). "From Grace to Grids: Rethinking Due Process Protection for Parole". Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 107: 213–251.
  38. ^ De Giorgi, Alessandro (2017). "Back to Nothing: Prisoner Reentry and Neoliberal Neglect". Social Justice. 44: 83–120 – via ProQuest.
  39. ^ ""Good Time Credit" for Federal Prisoners 2017-06-14 at the Wayback Machine." Families Against Mandatory Minimums. Retrieved on May 10, 2017.
  40. ^ Doleac, Jennifer L. (2 July 2018). "Study after study shows ex-prisoners would be better off without intense supervision". Brookings. Retrieved 3 August 2020.
  41. ^ Doleac, Jennifer L. (16 June 2018). "Strategies to Productively Reincorporate the Formerly-Incarcerated into Communities: A Review of the Literature". Rochester, NY. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3198112. hdl:10419/185106. S2CID 158258290. SSRN 3198112. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  42. ^ 2 Bouvier's Law Dictionary 2459 (1914)
  43. ^ US Department of Defense Directive 1300.7, Training and Education Measures Necessary to Support the Code of Conduct (23 December 88).
  44. ^ Herbert C. Fooks, Prisoners of War 297 (1924).
  45. ^ Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli ac Pacis (1625), reprinted in 2 Classics of International Law 853-54 (J. Scott ed. 1925).
  46. ^ James M. McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom 791 (1988); U.S. Army General Orders No. 100 (24 April 1863), reprinted in R. S. Hartigan, Lieber's Code and the Law of War 45–71 (1983).
  47. ^ Annex to Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, Art. 10 (1907) and Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Art. 21 (1949), both reprinted in Documents on the Laws of War 216 (A. Roberts & R. Guelff (ed.), 1982).
  48. ^ Code of Conduct for Members of the Armed Forces of the United States, Exec. Order No. 10,631, 20 Fed. Reg. 6057, 3 C.F.R. 1954–58 Comp. 266 (1955), as amended by Exec. Order No. 12,017, 42 Fed. Reg. 57941 (1977); and Exec. Order No. 12,633, 53 Fed. Reg. 10355 (1988).
  49. ^ DoD Directive 1300.7, Enclosure 2, Para. B3a(5).

External links edit

  • California Reentry Program - Helping parolees re-enter society
  • Term to Life Prisoner Support
  • How Parole Board hearings work (Directgov, England and Wales)
  • Community Corrections (Probation and Parole), Bureau of Justice Statistics
  • Rule of Parole in India—Criminal Lawyers in Delhi/Criminal Lawyer V K Singh
  • The Prisons Act, 1894 (Act IX, 1894), International Committee of the Red Cross

parole, other, uses, disambiguation, also, known, provisional, release, supervised, release, form, early, release, prison, inmate, where, prisoner, agrees, abide, behavioral, conditions, including, checking, with, their, designated, parole, officers, else, the. For other uses see Parole disambiguation Parole also known as provisional release or supervised release is a form of early release of a prison inmate where the prisoner agrees to abide by behavioral conditions including checking in with their designated parole officers or else they may be rearrested and returned to prison A parole officer with the Missouri Department of Corrections interviews a drug related offense probationerOriginating from the French word parole speech spoken words but also promise the term became associated during the Middle Ages with the release of prisoners who gave their word This differs greatly from pardon amnesty or commutation of sentence in that parolees are still considered to be serving their sentences and may be returned to prison if they violate the conditions of their parole Contents 1 Modern development 2 Canada 3 China 4 Israel 5 Italy 6 New Zealand 7 United Kingdom 8 United States 8 1 Early history 8 2 Modern history 8 3 Debates and reform efforts 8 4 Difference from mandatory supervision 8 5 Immigration 9 Impact 10 Prisoners of war 11 See also 12 References 13 External linksModern development editAlexander Maconochie a Scottish geographer and captain in the Royal Navy introduced the modern idea of parole when in 1840 he was appointed superintendent of the British penal colonies in Norfolk Island Australia He developed a plan to prepare them for eventual return to society that involved three grades The first two consisted of promotions earned through good behaviour labour and study The third grade in the system involved conditional liberty outside of prison while obeying rules A violation would return them to prison and they would start all over again through the ranks of the three grade process 1 2 He reformed its ticket of leave system instituting what many consider to be the world s first parole system 3 Prisoners served indeterminate sentences from which they could be released early if they showed evidence of rehabilitation 4 through participation in a graded classification system based on a unit of exchange called a mark 5 Prisoners earned marks through good behavior lost them through bad behavior 3 and could spend them on passage to higher classification statuses ultimately conveying freedom 5 In an instance of multiple discovery in 1846 Arnould Bonneville de Marsangy proposed the idea of parole which he termed preparatory liberations to the Civil Tribunal at Reims 6 7 Canada editIn general in Canada prisoners are eligible to apply for full parole after serving one third of their sentences 8 Prisoners are also eligible to apply for day parole 9 and can do this before being eligible to apply for full parole Any prisoner whose sentence is less than two years is sent to a correctional facility in the province or territory where they were convicted whilst anyone sentenced to serve no less than two years will be sent to a federal correctional facility and will thus have to deal with the Parole Board of Canada 10 Parole is an option for most prisoners However parole is not guaranteed particularly for prisoners serving life or indeterminate sentences In cases of first degree murder one can apply for parole after 25 years if convicted of a single murder However if convicted of multiple murders either of the first or second degree the sentencing judge previously had the discretion to make parole ineligibility periods consecutive thereby extending parole ineligibility beyond 25 years and in rare cases beyond a normal life span 11 12 On May 27 2022 the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously ruled that extending parole ineligibility beyond the statutorily mandated 25 years was unconstitutional for being cruel and unusual punishment 13 China editIn China prisoners are often granted medical parole or compassionate release which releases them on the grounds that they must receive medical treatment which cannot be provided for in prison Occasionally medical parole is used as a less public way of releasing a wrongly convicted prisoner 14 15 The Chinese legal code has no explicit provision for exile but often dissidents are released on the grounds that they need to be treated for a medical condition in another country and with the understanding that they will be reincarcerated if they return to China Dissidents who have been released on medical parole include Ngawang Chophel Ngawang Sangdrol Phuntsog Nyidron Takna Jigme Zangpo Wang Dan Wei Jingsheng Gao Zhan and Fang Lizhi citation needed Israel editUntil 2001 parole in Israel was possible only after the prisoner had served two thirds of their sentence On 13 February 2001 the Knesset passed a bill brought forward by Reuven Rivlin and David Libai which allowed the early release of prisoners who had served half of their prison term the so called Deri Law 16 The law was originally intended to help ease overcrowding in prisons Italy editMain article Liberta condizionata Liberta condizionata is covered by Article 176 of the Italian Penal Code A prisoner is eligible if he has served at least 30 months or 26 years for life sentences and the time remaining on his sentence is less than half the total normally a quarter of the total if previously convicted or never convicted or five years for sentences greater than 7 5 years In 2006 21 inmates were granted liberta condizionata citation needed New Zealand editSee also New Zealand Parole Board In New Zealand inmates serving a short sentence up to two years are automatically released after serving half their sentence without a parole hearing 17 Inmates serving sentences of more than two years are normally seen by the New Zealand Parole Board after serving one third of the sentence although the judge at sentencing can make an order for a minimum non parole period of up to two thirds of the sentence Inmates serving life sentences usually serve a minimum of 10 years or longer depending on the minimum non parole period before being eligible for parole 18 Parole is not an automatic right and it was declined in 71 percent of hearings in the year ending 30 June 2010 19 Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole has been given only once to Brenton Tarrant for the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings United Kingdom editSee also Parole Board for England and Wales and Parole Board for Scotland The Parole Boards in the UK are only involved in the release of prisoners with specific sentences Indeterminate sentences life imprisonment and imprisonment for public protection are always handled by the Parole Board because they have no fixed release date Some determinate or fixed sentences such as extended determinate sentences are also handled by the Parole Board but for the majority of prisoners the Parole Board will not be involved in their release 20 The conditions of release are called a licence and parole is called released on licence There are seven standard licence conditions for all prisoners 21 22 Be of good behaviour and not behave in a way which undermines the purpose of the licence period Not commit any offence Keep in touch with the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by the supervising officer Receive visits from the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by the supervising officer Reside permanently at an address approved by the supervising officer and obtain the prior permission of the supervising officer for any stay of one or more nights at a different address Not undertake work or a particular type of work unless it is approved by the supervising officer and notify the supervising officer in advance of any proposal to undertake work or a particular type of work Not travel outside the United Kingdom the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man except with the prior permission of your supervising officer or for the purposes of immigration deportation or removal When a prisoner does not have to have their release approved by the Parole Board further additional licence conditions may be suggested by the Probation Service and set by prison governors 23 When the Parole Board is involved the Probation Service may suggest additional conditions but the Parole Board is responsible for determining which additional conditions will be added to the licence 22 If an offender breaks any of these conditions they can be recalled or returned to prison 24 Since 2014 many of the probation and license monitoring functions have been carried out by private sector community rehabilitation companies CRCs as well as the National Probation Service 25 26 In May 2019 the government announced that supervision of offenders including supervision of offenders released on licence would be re nationalised The decision was made following multiple criticisms of the system which led Chief probation inspector Dame Glenys Stacey to describe the system as irredeemably flawed 27 United States editSee also United States federal probation and supervised release Early history edit Penologist Zebulon Brockway introduced parole when he became superintendent of Elmira Reformatory in Elmira New York To manage prison populations and rehabilitate those incarcerated he instituted a two part strategy that consisted of indeterminate sentences and parole releases 28 This was significant in prison reform due to its implication that prisoners began their rehabilitation during incarceration which would be recognizable by a parole board 29 It also provided newfound emphasis on prisoners protection from cruel and unusual punishment Modern history edit In some jurisdictions in the United States courts may specify in a sentence how much time must be served before a prisoner is eligible for parole This is often done by specifying an indeterminate sentence such as 5 to 15 years or 15 years to life The latter type is known as an indeterminate life sentence in contrast a sentence of life without the possibility of parole is known as a determinate life sentence 30 On the federal level Congress abolished parole in the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 Pub L No 98 473 218 a 5 98 Stat 1837 2027 repealing 18 U S C A 4201 et seq Federal prisoners may however earn a maximum of 54 days good time credit per year against their sentence 18 U S C A 3624 b At the time of sentencing the federal judge may also specify a post imprisonment period of supervised release 31 The U S Parole Commission still has jurisdiction over parole for those prisoners convicted of felonies in the District of Columbia and who are serving their sentences there as well as over certain federally incarcerated military and international prisoners 32 33 In most states the decision of whether an inmate is paroled is vested in a paroling authority such as a parole board Mere good conduct while incarcerated in and of itself does not necessarily guarantee that an inmate will be paroled Other factors may enter into the decision to grant or deny parole most commonly the establishment of a permanent residence and immediate gainful employment or some other clearly visible means of self support upon release such as Social Security if the prisoner is old enough to qualify Depending upon the jurisdiction the parole board may look at various factors such as the inmate s criminal history participation in rehabilitation education or vocational programs expressions of remorse admissions of guilt and insight in the psychiatric sense into the factors driving the inmate s decision to commit the crimes at issue in order to estimate the likelihood that the inmate may reoffend upon encountering similar factors in the outside world after release Many states now permit sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole such as for murder and espionage but any prisoner not sentenced to such sentences or the death penalty will eventually have the right to petition for release one state Alaska maintains neither the death penalty nor life imprisonment without parole as sentencing options Before being granted the privilege of parole the inmate meets with members of the parole board and is interviewed The parolee also has a psychological examination If parole is granted the inmate must first agree to abide by the conditions of parole set by the paroling authority While in prison the inmate signs a parole certificate or contract On this contract are the conditions that the inmate must follow These conditions usually require the parolee to meet regularly with his or her parole officer or community corrections agent who assesses the behavior and adjustment of the parolee and determines whether the parolee is violating any of his or her terms of release typically these include being at home during certain hours which is called a curfew maintaining steady employment not absconding refraining from illicit drug use and sometimes abstaining from alcohol attending addiction treatment or counseling and having no contact with their victim The inmate gives an address which is verified by parole officers as valid before the inmate is released to parole supervision Upon release the parolee goes to a parole office and is assigned a parole officer Parole officers make unannounced visits to parolees houses or apartments to check on them During these home visits officers look for signs of drug or alcohol use guns or illegal weapons and other illegal activities Should parolees start to use drugs or alcohol they are told to go to drug or alcohol counseling and Narcotics Anonymous or Alcoholics Anonymous meetings Should they not comply with conditions on the parole certificate including abstention from voting a warrant is issued for their arrest Their parole time is stopped when the warrant is issued and starts only after they are arrested They have a parole violation hearing within a specified time and then a decision is made by the parole board to revoke their parole or continue the parolee on parole In some cases a parolee may be discharged from parole before the time called for in the original sentence if it is determined that the parole restrictions are no longer necessary for the protection of society this most frequently occurs when elderly parolees are involved Service members who commit crimes while in the U S military may be subject to court martial proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice UCMJ If found guilty they may be sent to federal or military prisons and upon release may be supervised by U S Federal Probation officers Parole in the United States has proven to be politically divisive Beginning from the initiation of the war on drugs in the 1970s politicians began to advertise their tough on crime stances encouraging a tightening of penal policy and resulting in longer sentences for what were previously referred to as minor drug violations 34 During elections politicians whose administrations parole any large number of prisoners or perhaps one notorious criminal are typically attacked by their opponents as being soft on crime According to the U S Department of Justice at least sixteen states have removed the option of parole entirely and four more have abolished parole for certain violent offenders 35 36 However during the rise of mass incarceration in the 1970s the states that continued to use parole and indeterminate sentencing contributed more to rising incarceration rates than those without parole boards Said states implemented a dramatic decrease of parole releases which inevitably resulted in longer sentences for more prisoners From 1980 to 2009 indeterminate sentencing states made up nine of the ten states with the highest incarceration rate 29 Starting in the 1980s parole was revisited as a method once again to manage prison populations and as financial motivation to prevent further budget straining The new approach to parole release was accompanied with the growth of a mass surveillance state The supervision practices of increased drug testing intensive supervision unannounced visits and home confinement are widely used today 29 Additionally a growing condition of parole was to assume the role of informant towards frequently surveilled communities 37 The Great Recession of 2008 coupled with the Twin Towers attack on September 11 2001 contributed to the public emphasis on the war on terror and eventually led to a trend of lowering incarceration In fact presidential politics between 2001 and 2012 were for the first time in ten years not focused on domestic crime control and even saw the promotion of the Second Chance Act by George W Bush who used the act to pledge federal money for reentry as a symbol of his compassionate conservatism 37 Debates and reform efforts edit Since the 1990s parole and indeterminate sentencing have been the focus of debate in the United States with some emphasizing reform of the parole system and others calling for its abolishment altogether These debates are fueled by a growing scholarship that criticizes U S parole boards and also the parole system more broadly Parole boards are seen as lacking in efficient qualifications and too politicized in the appointment process 37 The decision for granting parole has been criticized for neglecting the due process of prisoners on a case by case basis 38 Additionally the process for being granted a commutation has been criticized as many prisoners have been denied a commutation for not showing the right amount of remorse or proving substantially that they were ready to contribute again which are aspects that many argue are too normative and subjective 39 Most agree that as was originally intended the parole system puts a necessary focus on rehabilitation despite its current problems which are widely debated Critics note that it is becoming more and more expensive to the taxpayer with little evidence of successful rehabilitation for prisoners The conditions of parole themselves are often attacked as well critiqued for being overwhelmingly criminogenic and perpetuating mass surveillance and a permanent state of imprisonment that does little to ensure a smooth reentry into society 34 Critics note that greater discretion is required to decide which parolees require costly supervisory resources and which ones do not rather than placing digital physical and structural restrictions on every parolee 29 The U S Department of Justice DOJ stated in 2005 that about 45 of parolees completed their sentences successfully while 38 were returned to prison and 11 absconded These statistics the DOJ says are relatively unchanged since 1995 even so some states including New York have abolished parole altogether for violent felons and the federal government abolished it in 1984 for all offenders convicted of a federal crime whether violent or not Despite the decline in jurisdictions with a functioning parole system the average annual growth of parolees was an increase of about 1 6 per year between 1995 and 2002 A variant of parole is known as time off for good behavior or colloquially good time Unlike the traditional form of parole which may be granted or denied at the discretion of a parole board time off for good behavior is automatic absent a certain number or gravity of infractions committed by a convict while incarcerated in most jurisdictions the released inmate is placed under the supervision of a parole officer for a certain amount of time after being so released In some cases good time can reduce the original sentence by as much as one half It is usually not made available to inmates serving life sentences as there is no release date that can be moved up Difference from mandatory supervision edit Some states in the United States have what is known as mandatory supervision whereby an inmate is released before the completion of their sentence due to legal technicalities which oblige the offender justice system to free them In the federal prison system 40 and in some states such as Texas inmates are compensated with good time which is counted towards time served For example if an inmate served five years of a ten year prison term and also had five years of good time they will have completed their sentence on paper obliging the state to release them unless deemed a threat to society in writing by the parole board Where parole is granted or denied at the discretion of a parole board mandatory supervision does not involve a decision making process one either qualifies for it or does not Mandatory supervision tends to involve stipulations that are more lenient than those of parole and in some cases place no obligations at all on the individual being released Immigration edit Main article Parole United States immigration In US immigration law the term parole has two meanings related to allowing persons to enter or leave the United States without the normally required documentation Impact editAccording to a review of the academic literature by economist Jennifer Doleac reductions in parole supervision was one of the most cost effective ways to improve the reintegration and rehabilitation of the formerly incarcerated 41 42 Prisoners of war editParole is the agreement of persons who have been taken prisoner by an enemy that they will not again take up arms against those who captured them either for a limited time or during the continuance of the war 43 The US Department of Defense defines parole more broadly Parole agreements are promises given the captor by a POW to fulfill stated conditions such as not to bear arms or not to escape in consideration of special privileges such as release from captivity or lessened restraint 44 The practice of paroling enemy troops began thousands of years ago at least as early as the time of Carthage 45 Parole allowed the prisoners captors to avoid the burdens of having to feed and care for them while still avoiding having the prisoners rejoin their old ranks once released it could also allow the captors to recover their own men in a prisoner exchange Hugo Grotius an early international lawyer favorably discussed prisoner of war parole 46 During the American Civil War both the Dix Hill Cartel and the Lieber Code set out rules regarding prisoner of war parole 47 Francis Lieber s thoughts on parole later reappeared in the Declaration of Brussels of 1874 the Hague Convention and the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 48 In the United States current policy prohibits US military personnel who are prisoners of war from accepting parole The Code of the United States Fighting Force states I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy 49 The position is reiterated by the Department of Defense The United States does not authorize any Military Service member to sign or enter into any such parole agreement 50 See also edit nbsp Wikimedia Commons has media related to Parole Parol evidence rule Rehabilitation policy Release on temporary licence Ticket of leaveReferences edit Joel Samaha 2006 Criminal Justice Belmont CA Thomson Wadsworth ISBN 9780534645571 OCLC 61362411 John V Barry Maconochie Alexander 1787 1860 Australian Dictionary of Biography National Centre of Biography Australian National University accessed 4 April 2013 a b Joan Petersilia When Prisoners Come Home Parole and Prisoner Reentry Oxford Oxford University Press 2003 Robert D Hansner Community Corrections Los Angeles Sage 2010 a b Gray Cavendar Parole A Critical Analysis Port Washington Kennikat Press 1982 Normandeau Andre 1969 Pioneers in Criminology Arnould Bonneville de Marsangy 1802 1894 The Journal of Criminal Law Criminology and Police Science Northwestern University School of Law 60 1 28 32 doi 10 2307 1141732 JSTOR 1141732 Historical innovations are often created independently and almost simultaneously This seems to be the case about the origins of parole especially in view of factors of time and means of communication In effect Maconochie developed his scheme in the years 1840 1844 as governor of Norfolk Island a famous penal colony east of Australia whereas Bonneville s ideas came out in the years 1846 1847 Our knowledge of the slowness of communications at the time especially in such a sector of activity leaves us with the impression that Bonneville really did not know about Maconochie s proposal Bonneville de Marsangy Arnould 29 January 1868 Twenty Third Annual Report of the Executive Committee of the Prison Association of New York for 1867 C Van Benthuysen amp Sons pp 165 178 Types of Release Fact Sheet Government of Canada 12 March 2019 Retrieved 8 November 2020 Types of Release Correctional Services Canada 1 December 2014 Archived from the original on 28 June 2013 Retrieved 6 July 2016 Frequently Asked Questions Correctional Service Canada 28 July 2010 MacDonald Michael 31 October 2014 Justin Bourque handed harshest sentence since Canada s last execution more than 50 years ago National Post Winnipeg killing machine who targeted homeless men gets three life sentences no parole nationalpost com 28 June 2016 Retrieved 15 April 2018 Nerestant Antoni 27 May 2022 Quebec City mosque shooter must get chance at parole after 25 years Supreme Court rules CBC News China Grants Convicted Scholars Medical Parole The Chronicle of Higher Education Archived from the original on 16 July 2012 Retrieved 13 January 2008 US lawmakers demand China grant dissident medical parole Agence France Presse 20 January 2005 Archived from the original on 22 December 2015 Retrieved 13 January 2008 Kra Baruch Will Deri Benefit From the Deri Law Haaretz Retrieved 22 October 2019 Parole Department of Corrections 4 December 2016 Retrieved 19 February 2021 Cases and Eligibility Paroleboard govt nz Archived from the original on 5 May 2012 Retrieved 27 April 2012 Archived copy PDF Archived from the original PDF on 4 October 2011 Retrieved 3 June 2011 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint archived copy as title link An outline of the parole process gov uk 20 March 2019 Retrieved 28 December 2019 Gianquitto Lisa Rule Philip 1 February 2012 Licences and Licence conditions InsideTime Archived from the original on 7 July 2019 a b Licence Conditions and how the Parole Board use them gov uk Retrieved 28 December 2019 Licence conditions licences and licence and supervision notices PDF National Offender Management Service 23 March 2015 Archived PDF from the original on 2 March 2018 Being taken back to prison gov uk Retrieved 28 December 2019 Grierson Jamie 26 July 2018 Private probation companies to have contracts ended early The Guardian Archived from the original on 27 July 2018 National Probation Service About Our Services gov uk Retrieved 28 December 2019 Probation service Offender supervision to be renationalised BBC News 16 May 2019 Retrieved 28 December 2019 Samaha Joel 2006 Criminal Justice Joel Samaha Google Books Thomson Wadsworth ISBN 9780534645571 Retrieved 27 April 2012 a b c d Reitz Kevin R Rhine Edward E 13 January 2020 Parole Release and Supervision Critical Drivers of American Prison Policy Annual Review of Criminology 3 1 281 298 doi 10 1146 annurev criminol 011419 041416 ISSN 2572 4568 In re Jeanice D 28 Cal 3d 210 1980 25 years to life is indeterminate life sentence implying that minor convicted of first degree murder was eligible for commitment to California Youth Authority rather than determinate life sentence which would require incarceration in regular prison Supervised Release Law and Legal Definition US Legal Archived from the original on 23 August 2010 United States Parole Commission PDF United States Department of Justice February 2012 Archived PDF from the original on 13 March 2016 History of the Federal Parole System PDF United States Parole Commission May 2003 Archived from the original PDF on 26 October 2017 Retrieved 17 June 2018 a b Angle Roland E 2014 Build a Mass Movement Abolish the Probation amp Parole Systems to Attack the Foundation of the U S Police State Race Gender amp Class 21 1 2 236 245 ISSN 1082 8354 JSTOR 43496972 Quality of snitches declining as result of sentencing laws Arizona Republic 17 August 1997 p 6 Gormley Michael 6 May 2007 Parole system unfair The Berkshire Eagle Retrieved 23 July 2022 a b c SCHOENFELD HEATHER 2016 A Research Agenda on Reform Penal Policy and Politics across the States The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 664 155 174 doi 10 1177 0002716215601850 ISSN 0002 7162 JSTOR 24756113 S2CID 155248074 Reingold Paul 2017 From Grace to Grids Rethinking Due Process Protection for Parole Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 107 213 251 De Giorgi Alessandro 2017 Back to Nothing Prisoner Reentry and Neoliberal Neglect Social Justice 44 83 120 via ProQuest Good Time Credit for Federal Prisoners Archived 2017 06 14 at the Wayback Machine Families Against Mandatory Minimums Retrieved on May 10 2017 Doleac Jennifer L 2 July 2018 Study after study shows ex prisoners would be better off without intense supervision Brookings Retrieved 3 August 2020 Doleac Jennifer L 16 June 2018 Strategies to Productively Reincorporate the Formerly Incarcerated into Communities A Review of the Literature Rochester NY doi 10 2139 ssrn 3198112 hdl 10419 185106 S2CID 158258290 SSRN 3198112 a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help 2 Bouvier s Law Dictionary 2459 1914 US Department of Defense Directive 1300 7 Training and Education Measures Necessary to Support the Code of Conduct 23 December 88 Herbert C Fooks Prisoners of War 297 1924 Hugo Grotius De Jure Belli ac Pacis 1625 reprinted in 2 Classics of International Law 853 54 J Scott ed 1925 James M McPherson Battle Cry of Freedom 791 1988 U S Army General Orders No 100 24 April 1863 reprinted in R S Hartigan Lieber s Code and the Law of War 45 71 1983 Annex to Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land Art 10 1907 and Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War Art 21 1949 both reprinted in Documents on the Laws of War 216 A Roberts amp R Guelff ed 1982 Code of Conduct for Members of the Armed Forces of the United States Exec Order No 10 631 20 Fed Reg 6057 3 C F R 1954 58 Comp 266 1955 as amended by Exec Order No 12 017 42 Fed Reg 57941 1977 and Exec Order No 12 633 53 Fed Reg 10355 1988 DoD Directive 1300 7 Enclosure 2 Para B3a 5 External links edit nbsp Look up parole in Wiktionary the free dictionary California Reentry Program Helping parolees re enter society Term to Life Prisoner Support How Parole Board hearings work Directgov England and Wales Community Corrections Probation and Parole Bureau of Justice Statistics Rule of Parole in India Criminal Lawyers in Delhi Criminal Lawyer V K Singh The Prisons Act 1894 Act IX 1894 International Committee of the Red Cross Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Parole amp oldid 1199037191, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.