MPs to move private members Bill on parole

Two MP's from opposite sides of the House are working together in a bid to table a private member's Bill to introduce parole. Parole is a system through which prisoners can apply to be granted release from jail early after serving part of their sentence. Conditions for their release may be enforced by the board granting parole.

Jason Azzopardi and José Herrera, two practising criminal lawyers, confirmed with The Times they were working together and had already drafted a document which they hoped to present to their respective parliamentary groups.

Both lawyers said they had no conflict of interest in presenting such a Bill as they saw probation as beneficial to society and not a form of clemency for offenders. They argued that wherever parole was introduced, the number of repeat offenders dropped and a decrease in crime was beneficial to society.

Dr Azzopardi said parole was not an amnesty but "a sentence under supervision. We had it in Malta in 1919 and it was a success as none of the 19 people released under parole relapsed. In Malta, more than 92 per cent of prisoners benefit from remission, that is a reduction of four months for every year of their prison term for good behaviour. Remission should be given for good behaviour but in practice most prisoners benefit from it.

"But what does society gain when a person leaves prison after two years when one was originally jailed for three?" Dr Azzopardi asked.

"Parole is no panacea, but if rigorously and judiciously applied, it can provide an important link in the judicial system. Parole is not a right but is given at the discretion of the parole board which acts on guidelines that will be stipulated by law," he said.

Dr Herrera said parole was more transparent and was more of an incentive for prisoners to reform themselves.

"Parole does not mean one is forgiven. One can apply for it after serving a part of one's sentence and one can be set free under the conditions imposed by the parole board," Dr Herrera said.

He expressed the opinion that ideally, parole should be possible for any type of crime. "It is the parole board that should see whether a serial killer or one who kills in a brawl be treated differently. The scope of parole is reform not mercy".

Fr Mark Montebello, who runs the organisation Mid-Dlam ghad-Dawl, which works with prisoners, former prisoners and their families, said if the private member's Bill is submitted in Parliament it would be the first time in parliamentary history that MPs from opposite sides of the House would be doing such a thing. Shortly they will have a joint adjournment in Parliament to speak about it, and that too is a first. Even Alternattiva Demokratika agreed with the concept, he said.

"Parole worked wherever it was introduced and there is no reason for it not to work here too if it is well implemented. Checks and balances have to be in place," Fr Montebello said.

"In Malta the rate of re-offending is incredibly high. Some 61 per cent of those in prison end up in prison again. Some prisoners have been in prison seven or eight consecutive times. In Europe the rate of people going to prison eight times is practically nil. This is more of a reason to go for it. Abroad, parole reduced recidivists by 14 per cent.

"Parole is not prisoner centred but community centred. The prisoner will have more responsibility. Parole can introduce concepts such as compensation for victims; it can compel a prisoner to attend therapy sessions to cure alcohol, drug or other problems," Fr Montebello said.