Prison Labour — Reformative and Rehabilitative Aspects

pt61-1-16

Prison Labour — Reformative andRehabilitative Aspects

N. S. CHANDRASEKHARAN*

Crime is an evil and the purpose of penal law is to reduceits incidence to the maximum possible extent. In the past 'thispurpose was sought to be achieved by severely punishing thecriminal. Gradually the idea began to gain ground that theapproach should not be one of condemning and crushing thecriminal but one of reforming and rehabilitating him in society.

Of the different modes of punishment under our ,penalsystem, viz. fine, imprisonment and capital punishment, the mid-category; viz, imprisonment is rich with reformative and rehabi-litative potential. The period of imprisonment can be utilisedto transform the offender into a good citizen useful to society.A multi-pronged correctional programme is required to achievethe desired purpose. And in this, prison labour can play a signi-ficant role.

THE PUNITIVE ASPECTOriginally prison labour was conceived of as a form .of

compulsory labour designed to crush the criminal and in thatprocess to tame him. The treadmill' and the crank 2 were used

B.A. (Kerala), LL.M. (Cochin), Lecturer, Department of Law,University of Cochin.It was a cylindrical device with steps every 7 or 8 inches. Theconvict had to step from one step to another, k..43ing his hands ona hand rig, rnd keep the mill turning. Though such a device couldbe used for industrial purposes to secure rotary motion, in prisonsin England in the early 19th century, they were uselessly employedfor the purpose of punishment alone. See, Mable A. Elliot, Crimein Modern Society, First Edition, p. 685 (1952).It was a handwheel similar to the paddle wheel of a steamer. These

f. n. contd....

162 COCHIN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW (991

in England in the 19th century with this purpose in view. 3

These instruments were however abolished by the turn of the20th century.

In India also prison labour was intended originall y tohumiliate, disgrace and finally to crush the prisoner. Graduallythe idea of profitable employment of prison labour and its re-formative impact began to gain ground. Still the main emphasiscontinued to be on the punitive aspect of prison labour.

The Indian Penal Code is based on the punitive aspect oflabour when it makes a distinction between simple imprison-ment and rigorous imprisonment, hard labour being the distin-guishing feature of the latter.

THE ARGUMENT AGAINST PRISON LABOUR AND ITS VALIDITY

An objection may be raised against prison labour that itis defective in so far as it denies opportunities to the prisonerfor introspection and repentance. Labour kee ps the prisoneroccupied in body and mind. The argument is that if you wantthe criminal to correct himself you have to leave him alone inprison allowing him to focus his mind on him and his pastmisdeeds. The protagonists of anti-labour approach suggest thatin such a situation the prisoner will evaluate his past actionsfrom an ethical plane and will resolve to correct himself.

The interest groups such as manufacturers and trade unionsof workers may raise the objection that deployment of prisonlabour for production of marketable goods would result in un-fair competition in the open market detrimental to their interest.But this is a matter more for proper regulation of the distribu-

were employed in prisons in England by the mid of the 19th cen-tury. The prisoners were forced to turn the cr.nk as a punitivemeasure. See, ibid.

3. The prisoners had to crank 4,200 times for breakfast and 4,500time for dinner. See Bhattacharya, Prisons (1958), p. 58.

N. S. CHANDRASEKHARAN 163

tion of prison products and the•r price-fixation. It is not a validargument ag •inst prison labour as •uch.

The argument that prisoners will be reformed and will re-main well-disciplined by not giving them any work is not valid.Experience has shown that contrary is the case. 4 The greatestbdredom in life is to remain idle; the boredom is aggravatedwhen idleness is compulsorily imposed. Work as such is not atall a punishment; it •s a safety valve of life otherwise mono-tonous. The prisoners' point of view is also that work in prisonsis necessary. 5 But th• merit of labour with its reformative andrehabilitative impact may be lost if it is compulsorily imposedsolely as a punitive me•ure.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND FORCED LABOUR

International covenants and conventions condemn forced• labour as v•olative of human rights. But they make an exception

in respect of prison labour. The International Covenant on Civiland Political Rights which condemns com pulsory labour ex-cludes prison labour from its coverage. 6 So is the case with the

The 'U.S. experience during 1935-'40, when legislat•on restrictedprison labour was, ".... prisons were more or less forced to dexiceways and mea ►s for taking up some of the sl:ck ti•e which thedecline in prison employment 'imposed. Idleness in priSon createdmany problems. Men became easily disgruntled with food and themonotony of having nothing to do often , seemed unbearable. Thenumber of prison riots and escapes increased. In consequence someprisons developed extensive recreational progr-mmes to keep theprisoners continually occupied." See, ,Mable A. Elliot, Crime inModern Society, .(1952) p. 596.

See infra, n. 10.

6. Article 8(3)I(a) and (b) of the Covenant provides,

"30) No one shall be •equired to perform forc:d or compulsorylabour;

(b) paragraph 3(a) shall not be held to •reclude, in countrieswhe•e imprisonment with hard labour may be imposed asa punishment for a crime, the performance of hard labourin pursuance of a sentence to such imprisonm•nt by acompetent tonal."

f. n.. contd....

164 COCHIN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 19 8'1

European Convention on Human Rights. ? The I.L.O. Conven-tion on Forced Labour imposes on the countries ratifying theconvention, the obligation to suppress forced labour in all itsforms. But work exacted as a consequence of a conviction in acourt of law is outside its coverage. 8 At the same time itplaces a restriction on hiring out of prison labour to nrivateemployers.

For the text of the covenant, see, H. F. Van Panhuys, L. J. Brink-horst and H. H. Maas (Ed.), International Organisation and bite-gration (1968), p. 258.

Article 4(2) of the convention provides,

"2. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsorylabour."

Clause 3t(a) of article 4 makes the following exception:

"3. For the purpose of this article the term 'forced or com-pulsory labour' shall not include:

(a) any work required to be done in the ordinar y course ofdetention imposed according to the provisions of article5 of this convention or during conditional relase from suchdetention."

Art. 5 of the Convention referred to above covers the case ofa:lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competentcourt.'

For the text of the convention see Id. at p. 929.

I.L.O. Convention No. 29. For the text, see I.L.O., Conventions andRecommendations 1919-66 (1966), p. 155.

Art. 1 of the Convention provides,

"Each Member of the Internation.1 Labour Organisation whichratifies the convention undertakes to suppress the use of forcedor compulsory labour in all its forms within the shortes t period."

And article 2(c) of the Convention provides,

"2. Nevertheless for the purpose of this convention, the term`forced or compulsory labour' shall not include —

(c) any work or service exacted from any person as a consequ-ence of a conviction in a court of law, provided th the saidwork or service is carried out under the supervision and controlof a public author:ty and that the said person is not hired to orplaced at the disposal of private individuals, companies or asso-ciotions."

N. S. CHANDRASEKII ARA1V lei

The fact that forced labour in prison is not prohibited byInternational Conventions does not mean that prison labour canbe exploited to the extreme or that it should always be penalin content. The main emphasis has to be on the reformative andrehabilitative aspects of such labour with a view to making theprisoner develop a sense of self-respect and responsibility.9

PRISON LABOUR IN KERALA: AN OVERVIEW OF THE CENTRAL

PRISON AT TRIVANDRUM 10

Prison Labour and the task system:

The items of work to which prisoners are out in the Cen-tral Prison, Trivandrum are, in general, weaving, carpentry,printing and book-binding, leather works, tailoring, smithy, kit-chen work, maintenance work, sweeping and cleaning and othermiscellaneous work.

The entire prison life is work oriented. Even persons serv-ing simple imprisonment are doing work. Some of them preferto do work• since it keeps them• engaged, gives an opportunityto earn something and entitles them to remission of sentence.Some others do work because they are asked .to do work by theprison authorities.

Prison labour is divided into 2 categories, viz., tasked workand untasked work. In tasked work a prisoner , has •to turn outa certain minimuth quantum of work. For instance the task ofa person working in the section of weaving sarees is to weave

The Standard Mihintum Rules for the TrehtMent cf Pr soners adopt-ed by the first U.N. Congress on the •Prevention of Crime andTreatment of Offenders emphasised that the purpose of the treat-ment of persons sentenced to imprisonment should be such as wouldenconrate their self-respect and develop their sense of responsibility.See, P. Gopala Menon, "Open Prisons - A Progressive Approach inPenal System,' Indian Express, February 17, 1981.With a view to understanding the nature of life in prison and ques-tions relating to prison labour I visited the Central Prison at Tri-yarhirtun and interviewed some prisoners and officials. The discuSsionis based on the information gathered es also on ate general im-meta/I:ens I had diking the visit. The prisoners generally expressedthe view that labour in prison is necessary.

166 COCHIN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW

a saree (41 meters) per day; in the printing section the taskis to print 5400 papers a day and in the thread winding sectionto wind 1+ bundles of thread a day. The work turned out by.the prisoner is assessed weekly.

Wages for prison tab0ur:

Only nominal wages are paid for the work. The wagespayable were doubled recently. The revised rates vary from70 paise to Re. 11- per task. The following is some of the wagerates for tasked work.

Per task Per extra-task

Rs. Ps. Rs. Ps.

Weaving 00-70 1-00

Carpentry skilled works 00-90 1-20

unskilled 00-70 0-80

Sawing wood 1-00 1-40

In untasked work the wage rates vary ,from 50 naise perday to Re. 11-. Wor•ers are classified as skilled, Class I andClass II. The rates of wages t2 are-

Rs. Ps.

Skilled 1-00

Class I 0-70

Class II 0-50

The prisoners' working hours are fixed at 8 hours a day.

With effect from 1-6-1980 by Kerala Govt. Order (MS) 54I801Home dated 31-5-1980.

In Andhra Pradesh the rate of wages N fixed at Re. 11- per day forskilled worker and 50 palm per day for semi-skilled worker as perAndhra Pradesh Government Order No. (MS) 570 dated 19th April,1978.

N. S. CRANDkASEKHARAN 161

PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS

If prison labour is to serve its true purpose it is necessarythat the allocation of work to prisoners should be on the basisof their aptitude and also taking into consideration of thepossibilities of his pursuing that work outside, to earn a liveli-hood, when he is released. If in the work allocation the punitivecontent is predominant or expediency decisive, the desired pur-pose may not be achieved.

For a person coming from an area where there is no pro-bability of his earning a livelihood by weaving, the time hespends on this work in prison may 'be of no use when he goesout. The prisoner when released cannot start a weaving industryon his own, for it requires some capital which may not be forth-coming. Some prisoners now working in the weaving sectionfrankly disclosed the fact that when they are free there is noteven a remote possibility of their earning a livelihood by pursu-ing this trade.

Weaving 61 thick sheets and towels and coarse cloth areconsidered to be the hardest 'task by the prisoners. Some of themcomplained of developing physical ailments (stomach ache) dueto this work. The loom for weaving thick sheet is to be operatedby hand and the woofing is also to be done by hand. There isno mechanical device for the movement of the shuttle to tarrythe thread of weft between the threads of warn. The taskfixed is to weave about 31 metres of thick sheet a day and theprisoners put to this work would take considerable time toachieve this target, with the result that they may not be able toearn anything inspite of the hard work." The weaving sectionhas handlooms and also powerlooms for weaving different typesof cloth.

Compared to the weaving section, work in the carpentrysection is considered to be more attractive by the prisoners.This is because the task fixed is not so heavy, the wage rates

13. A worker who lre been working on this t ype, of loom, when asked,told me that he has been working on this for three years andthat he has only just started to complete the task.

168 COCHIN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW (leiare better than that for other works and also because skill incarpentry will be useful to them, when they go out of prison onrelease, to earn a living. In carpentry work the task fixed, forinstance, for a team of one skilled worker and two unskilledworkers working together, is making of one chair (without therattan work) in a period of three days. This means the dailytask is only 1/3rd of a chair, and if the team makes two chairsa week the task for the week is achieved. The skilled workergets wages at the rate of 90 paise and the unskilled one 70paise. They can earn higher rates of wages for extra task.

The difference in the wage rates and the difference in theutility of the trades coupled with the inability of the jail admini-stration to put each prisoner to the type of work he desires todo, result in demoralisation of the prisoners. They develop afeeling that only those who are 'influential' will get good workand that the rest will be allocated to other work according toexigencies or as a penal measure. This may not be true, butsince there is such a feeling and as it is likely to have a demora-lising effect on prisoners we have to think of measures to avoidthis.

From the rehabilitative point of view not much purpose isserved by putting prisoners to work which is of no use to themand for which they have no aptitude. The work programme hastherefore to be thoroughly reoriented.

Some prisoners suggest that they be trained in work suchas motor mechanism, welding works, etc. which will be of useto them when they go out. They are agreeable to go out andwork in factories and other institutions 14 under proper security,where they can learn and do useful work. Some suggest that ascheme of financial assistance by nationalised banks, if intro-duced, may be of use to start such enterprises in 'the prison itselfas well as outside so that prisoners within prison may not find

14. The I.L.O. Convention No. 29 (supra, n. 8) prohibits ∎hirinR to orplacing prisoners at the disposal of private individuals, companiesor associations. This may have reference only to such deploymentcompulsorily and against the wish of prisoners. If the prisonersvolunteer to do such work there appears' to be no rerson why theinternational convention should stand in their way.


it a problem to get training in useful work and to get suitablework on release from prison. With the introduction of such ascheme, perhaps labour even in the present trades to whichprisoners are put in prison, will be more meaningful from therehabilitative point of view. The idea of Prisoners' and Ex-prisoners' Co-operative Centres is therefore something worthyof consideration.

Innovatory measures on these lines may be possible with-out much risk to security. Our experience with regard to theopen prison is encouraging." The impact of permitting prisonersto work according to their aptitude and in conditions which helpthem develop a sense of self-respect and responsibility, may betremendous. Since it is rich with reformative and rehabilitativecontents, experiments on such lines will be a welcome and pro-.gressive measure.

The system of assessment of task weekly for purposes ofcalculation of wages 16 is •an aspect which requires reconsidera-tion. Under the present system if the prisoner is unable to com-plete the total task for the week even by a small margin heloses his entire wages for the week. For instance if a prisonerwhose task is 4/ metres of saree weaving a day weaves 25metres of saree in a week of 6 working days, he is not paidanything for the work done, since when the work is assessedat the week-end he has not completed the task for 6 days, viz:251 metres. He loses his wages for the entire week since on anaverage his daily task is not achieved. This system is designedas an incentive to work but creates a feeling in the prisoner'smind that their labour is being exploited. When a worker whohas woven 25 metres gets nothing and another who has woven254 metres gets full wages for the week, naturally the formerbecomes discontent. He may quite often have complaints evenabout the accuracy of the measurement. Some prisoners ex-

For a dNcussion on the open prison in Kerala, see, Gopala Menon,"Open Prison - A Progressive Approach in Penal System;" TheIndian Express, 17th February 1981.

Rule 377 of the Kerala Prisons Rules, 1958 provides th:t for cal-culating the wages the work done in a week shall be taken intoconsideration.


pressed the feeling that the measurement is not sometimescorrectly done and that complaints about it are exercises in vainwhich may affect them adversely later.

While slack•ess in work is not something to be encouraged,exploitation of labour as also creation of a feeling among theprisoners that their labour is exploited has to be avoided. Thisis important when we view prison labour from the reformativeand rehabilitative angle. With this end in view the system ofdenying wages for the e•tire work under the present systemeven for small defficiency in the work has to be discontinued anda more reasonable system of payme•t by results on a graduatedproportional basis introduced.

The rates of wages are very low. As Justice SubramanianPotti •marked what happens in the prison is sheer exploitationof labour, when persons who turn out good work are paid only50 paise or one rupee a day."We should think on lines of pay-ing minimum wages to prisoners."

Two main arguments may perhaps be raised against asystem of payment of proper wages to prisoners, viz:

1) The state has to incur heavy expenditure to maintainthe prisoners and part of the burden should fall on theprisoners themselves.

See the report under caption "Call to Overhaul Penal Laws" in theIndian Express dated 20th January 1981. Taking in a seminaronganised by the Association for Social Health in India (KeralaBranch) Justice P. Subramanian `Potti is reported to have said th twhzn prisoners are forced to do compulsory labour at very lowrates of wages it was nothing but exploitation of labour. He sug-gested that prisoners have •o 'be paid mi•mu• wages for the workthat they do and that such a measure, by itself would •e a greatrehabilitative measure.

The principle of full pay for prison work is gradually gaining groundin the west. The Board of Trustees of the National Council onGrime and Delinquency u•ged the introduction of 'federal and Statelegislation requiring that an inmate employed at productive work •na federal, state or local institution shall be paid no less than the •minimum wage ope•ative nationally or in his State." See, BenedictS. Alper, Prisons Inside-out: Alternatives in Correctional Reform(1974), p. 82.


2) If prisoners are paid wages, the punitive aspect will belost and this may promote crimes. Persons who sufferoutside due to unemployment may find the orison aheaven and they, as well as those who are released fromprison, may prefer to come to prison by committingsome crime or the other.

Some officials in prison raised these arguments when a sugges-tion was put to them about the need for increasing the rate ofwages for prison labour.19

These arguments do not appear to have much validity. Re-formation of the criminal is a matter of social concern. Exploita-tion of labour will deprive prison labour of its reformative andrehabilitative value to a substantial extent. The prison admini-stration expenses cannot be met by exploitation of the prisonlabour. Society is bearing the burden now. It is true thatthere may be an initial increase in this burden if the rates ofwages are increased. But if such a measure will help to achievethe desired purpose of reforming and rehabiliating the criminal,society should be prepared to bear the additional burden.20

The fact that proper wages are paid in prison is not likely

The officers who have -to work for securing the welfare of theprisoners hold the view that the current rates of wa ges are morethan sufficient.

Opinion is gaining ground in India Aso that prisoners shouiA begiven adequate wages. See supra, n. 17. See also J. M. J. Sethna,Society and the Criminal (1980), p. 292. He observes:

"Wages should be allowed according to the quantity and qualityof labour. Out of the desire to get better wages the prisoners wouldbe inclined to work better. And if he works better and gets wageshe would get an opportunity of buying things in prison.... Theprisoner should be paid such adequate wages as would enable himto pay for his meals and to buy and pay for some articles in prison.and to remit some money for the benefit of his dependants at home.If inadequ:te wages are paid, that would be of no use, for theprisoner would not find anything really worth in such wa ges. Wagesshould be adequate. An adequate wage system provIdes in each pri-soner the sense of self-respect. He then realises that his labour isnot that of a slave or a condemned man; he would feel as muchnobility in his work as does a free man."


to attract persons to prison. Restriction on the freedom inherentin prison life is a sufficient fetter in this regard.21

Under the present system the prisoner can spend in theprison canteen 1/3rd of the wages earned, 1/3rd he can send tohis family and the remaining 1/3rd is reserved to be handedover to him at the time of his release. If he does not want tosend the 1/3rd to his family, he can spend in the prison canteenupto of his earnings22 . No cooked food is available in thecanteen. Things like soaps, bidis, cigarettes, cloth whiteners, teaand plantain fruits are available. A prisoner doing untaskedlabour getting a 50 paise wage a day can therefore purchaseonly one plantain fruit from the canteen a day, for a plantainfruit may cost about 15 paise. Persons who get financial assist-ance from their family are at an advantage and those whosefamily economic position is poor are at a disadvantage. Canteenexpenses can be met from funds provided to the prisoner by hisfamily. Payment of only very 'nominal wages in prison and atthe same time permission, for utilisation in prison, of moneyfrom outside gives the whole affair a colour of exploitation ofthe poor.

We are generally reluctant to look into the welfare of thefamily of the prisoner so also that of the family of the victim ofthe offence. It may happen in many number of cases, especiallythe offence. It may hapen in many number of murder cases thatthe earning member of one family is killed and that of anotherfamily being the offender is in prison. We have to think of thefamilies of both of these persons. There may be justification forpunishing the offender, but in that process it is unjustified topunish his family as also the family of the victim. This aspectalso points to the need of providing proper work for prisoners,

An interview with the prisoners revealed how much they value andcrave for freedom. None of the prisoners interviewed was preparedto opt for a life in prison even if adequate wages are paid for prisonlabour. If this is the case with them, it cannot be different in thecase of free citizens outside prison. The crgument that payment ofadequate wages for prison labour would promote commission ofcrimes therefore appears to be unrealistic.

Kerala Prison Rules 1958, Rule 384.


for paying them proper wages and of ensuring payment of pro-per percentage from such wages to the family of the victim asalso to that of the prisoner in cases where it is necessary. Incases where such payment is not necessary, the percentage ofwages ,set ,apart for such allocation may be pooled together andpayments made in other deserving cases. The present system forpayment of 1/3rd of the wages to the family of the prisonerserves no useful purpose since the wages in prison are very low.

13ven if we introd•ce, as an initial measure, a system ofpaying proper wages to prison labour and charging them fortheir dietary expenses, it is likely to have good effect on theprisontrs. This would create a sense of self-respect 23 among theprisontrs and would malce it possible to improve the dietarysystem.24

It also requires consideration whether the oresent systemof allOwing remi•ion in lieu of wages is not to be changed. Asper the system a prisoner can 'purchase' remission of his sent-ence upto 60 days a year by paying for it from his wages. Therate is 25 paise for o•e day's remission. 25 This also acts to thedetriment of the poor. While those who are not poor, who geta•ounts from their family for the canteen expenses and donot require any amounts to be sent to their family or to beaccumulated for payment on release, can spend without difficultythe wages earned for purchasing remission, in the case of poorprisoners it operates as a drain on their canteen fund or family.

The ,prisoners welcomed the suggestions of introducing a systemunder which they will be paid at the rate of ith the rate of wagespaid for simile7 labour outside and of ch•rging them for the dietsupplied. In their view it was good because the stigma of 'free food'will not •e there, that it would create a feeling of self-respect, thatit may render possible some alteration in the present system ofdiet and that they may be able to send more money to the family.

Some prisoners doing hard hbour felt that the diet is insufficientfor them. The quality of food, especially the fish, they said was verybad. Usually dry fish is supplied when the diet includes fish. Theysuggested that it would be good if arrangement is made to providefresh fish instead of dry fish now supplied which according to themwas 'unbearable.'Kerala Prison Rules 1958, Rule 3.84A.


fund or reserve fund. What does society gain by getting 25paise in lieu of one day's remission of sentence? If the purposeis to provide an incetive for work why should not it be grantedon the basis of work done as is the case with the remission of2 days per month for good work now granted. 26 There appearsto be no sufficient justification for making remission availablefor purchase; it may be granted for good work by enhancingthe rate of remission now granted for good work.

The prisoners have to work for 8 hours a day, from 7.30with one hour interval at mid day. They are locked up at 6 p.m.and they are unlocked only at 6 a.m. In view of this the pri-soners are hard pressed for time. 27 Suitable alterations in theworking hours and reduction of the working hours 28 may bethought of in order to provide prisoners with time to be spenton sports and games. This will have reformative impact.

The question of introducing a system of payment of com-pensation to prisoners Who suffer major injuries in the courseof work which reduce their earning capacity and who contractoccupational disease in prison's is also a matter which shouldreceive active consideration.

Id., •Rule 303 (b).

The Advisory Committee on After-care Programme appointed bythe Central Social Welfare Board in 1955 reported:

"An analysis of the daily routine of the jails shows that greatemphasis is laid on prisoners being engaged in one form of labouror another. Immediately after they are ready in the morning, theyare sent to their respective jobs; they work until they return fortheir mid day meal, after a little break they are again sent outfor work. The day ends early at 6 pan. after the prisoners have beenserved evening meals and locked up again to be opened the nextmorning. The emphasis on work in daily routine hardly leaves anytime to the prisoners to do anything constructive or useful for them-selves." See India Social Welfare Board, Aftercare Programme,(1955) pp. 207-08. This statement is true of the prison systemeven today.

The prisoners said that the present arrangement places on them sucha streSs that it reduces the productivity of their labour. They saidthat if the working hours are reduced by one or two hours andthat time can be spent on other activities, they will be able to turnout the same quantum of work now done in 8 hours.


SOME MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS

the 1978 amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code haspresotibed a minimum period of 14 years of imprisonment inthe case of persons sentenced to imprisonment for life. 29 It re-quirei serious consideration whether this amendment is a salu-tory one. With the change of emphasis these days from thepunitive aspect of the prison life to its reformative and rehabilit-ative ,aspects it appears unjustified to prescribe such a longpen of imprisonment as the minimum compulsory. No useful

is served by keeping for such a long time a person whois r armed and is capable of being rehabilitated in society.Cont. •ed detention of such a person in prison is likely to haveonly k demoralising effect on him and may neutralise the refor-matiVe and rehabilitative impact which the prison life for aperiod might have had on him. 30 The law has to change. Acommittee consisting of not only officers of law enforcementagency but also of criminologists, psychiatrists, etc., who canmake a correct assessment of whether the prisoner can be sentback safely to society should be constituted with Dowers to grantremission of sentence and order release of the prisoner whenthey find that the time is ripe for the release of the prisoner.

More amenities for sports and games" and more conveni-ences. in prison 32 and more opportunities for entertainments3

Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, Section 433 A.One of the prisoners said that normally a period of 4 to 5 yearsmay be more than sufficient for the complete reformat:on of aperson capable of reformation. Continued detention of the prisonerin the prison may have, he said, only a punitive content in it andmay have the effect of crushing the prisoner mentally and physicallyin many oases.At present in the Central Prison provision is made for playingVolley Ball and Badminton. But the prisoners said that the batsare all broken or worn out and that no ball for playing volley isnow available. Carrem Board is provided but it has to be placed onthe ground for playing, since no table is provided.No mirror is provided to prisoners. This is said to be on securitygrounds. But if sharp instruments can be given to prisoners with-out risk while they are doing work, there appears to be no sufficient

f. n. contd....

176 COCHIN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW leigi

and more time for interview with members of the family of theprisoner with opportunity for the prisoner to take in his armshis young children and fondle them and the like, may helpreformation and social readjustments. Prisoners' welfare 34 pro-grammes may be given more importance than is given now.

justification for denying •the use of a mirror. It can be safely affixedon the outer walls of the Cells and thus any possibility of risk canbe avoided.

There is a radio but it is said to be out of order for months to-gether. Prisoners said that there are persons with artistic talentsamong them and that they should be given opportunities to giveexpression to their talents. Such faclities may be afforded since itsoverall impact will be only beneficial.

There are three Welfare Officers in the Central Prison, Trivandrum.(The prisoners in the prison on the date of visit was 641). Two ofthem have post-graduation while the third is a graduate. Graduationis the minimum qualification for a Welfare Officer. Two of theWelfare Officers have qualification in Social Service and Sociology.But all the three are appointed by transferlpromotion from the cadreof Deputy Jailor. Their activities are mainly concerned with censur-ing of papers and letters, providing of amenities for sports andentertainments, solving of the personal and family problems of pri-soners and the like. In a system of prison with emphasis on reform-ative End rehabilitative aspects the role of Welfare Officer is pivotal.It may •be advisable •therefore to avoid the practice of appointingWelfare Officers by transfer from the executive wing of the Jailpendent persons who can work without inhibition for the welfareadministration. As far as possible Welfare Officers should be inde-of the prisoners. It is necessary that they keep laison with otheragencies operating in the area of social welfare, with a view tofacilitating rehabilitation of the prisoner after release.

Prison Labour — Reformative and Rehabilitative Aspects

Documents

Transcript of Prison Labour — Reformative and Rehabilitative Aspects