In an interview with The Sunday Times, Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici said the Corradino Correctional Facility has not failed in its job to reform prisoners; however, with the instruments at hand it has not achieved the desired success.
History proves that the authorities have been very slow to react to the deep-rooted problems in the prison system.
Although in the past various recommendations were made for prison reform, most of them were not really acted upon and no real effort was made to change offenders from recalcitrant criminals to productive citizens. No real rehabilitation programmes were introduced, as it was believed work would rehabilitate prisoners because it would give them a sense of purpose, discipline and order.
To encourage prisoners to work, the 1820 Malta Prison Regulations promised them a reduction in their jail term subject to good behaviour and a period of forced labour.
Prison reform was first promised in 1850, after 83 male prisoners were transferred from the Great Prison in Valletta to the newly built prison in Corradino. When the Corradino Prison Ordinance was enacted in September 1850, the authorities wanted to introduce correctional and educational programmes with tougher discipline in the new prison.
In his first report on the Corradino prison in January 1851 the inspector of prisons said 27 prisoners had attended school and their improvement had been generally satisfactory. Meanwhile, the board of visitors had been established and its members were authorised to inspect the prison and inquire into the state of prisoners, and from time to time to report their findings to the head of government.
To encourage more work and good behaviour, remission of sentence was included in the 1861 prison regulations. Thus prisoners became entitled to a maximum of two days’ remission every week if they earned stripes for good conduct. These stripes were awarded by members of the board of visitors and the inspector of prisons.
However, in 1910 prisoners serving a second sentence of less than two years were not to be given any remission of sentence while those with a second conviction of two years or more were not allowed to earn any remission during the first year of their second sentence.
But if their conduct and work was approved by the superintendent, they were entitled to a remission of a quarter of their sentence.
In September 1912, Major Ralph Turton, commandant of the detention barracks in Malta, was asked to suggest how the penal discipline in force in prison could be made more effective and a greater deterrent. In his report two months later Turton said the poverty of the lower classes and the rise in population tended to swell the prison population, but should not have done so to such an abnormal extent.
According to Turton, the prison system was not enough of a deterrent and life in prison was far too easy and comfortable. Turton also recommended that remissions of should be calculated on three-quarters of the sentence.
The same suggestion about remission was made in 1917 in another report by a committee appointed by the governor. The committee was asked to report what modifications should be introduced in the organisation of Corradino prison. The committee members, G. Agius, L. Benjacar and Police Commissioner C.W. Duncan, also said that prisoners serving long sentences were dealt with too leniently.
The first real attempt at prison reform came in 1919, when Colonel Harry William Bamford of South Africa Demobilisation in London was appointed Commissioner of Police and Inspector of Prisons in Malta at the time when the government had long been considering improvements to the system for dealing with young offenders.
Bamford recommended that the Salvatore Barracks, lying east of Vittoriosa, be converted into a reformatory where juvenile offenders sentenced to jail could be detained instead.
The aim of the reformatory was primarily reform rather than punishment, and to separate youths from directly associating with criminals. Detention in the reformatory was for a minimum of two years, as young people sentenced for months, weeks, and even days were not subject to reform.
A juvenile prison was also opened at the police general headquarters. During the day these prisoners were employed in some work inside the building under the charge of a prison warder.
Bamford also introduced the parole system in Malta, then known as ‘release on licence’. This release was only obtained when it was thought a prisoner had shown evidence of reform and suitable employment had been found for him. In the annual police report for 1919-1920 Bamford said the obligation of prisoners released on licence to report periodically to the police had worked satisfactorily.
During that year only eight prisoners were granted parole in the third part of their sentence and on grounds of good behaviour. None of these prisoners had been re-arrested, and in further annual police reports it was said that “the records of the previous three years had shown that this conditional liberty has never been abused”.
For unknown reasons, there were no further releases on licence from Corradino prison after the late 1930s.
However, while recommending the parole system, Bamford also wanted to introduce the Habitual Criminals Act, which had been enacted in Australia.
According to this law, which was not introduced in Malta, when a person was convicted of an indictable offence and had already been convicted three times of similar offences, he was declared a habitual criminal. Thus he had to serve the allotted imprisonment under ordinary conditions, but at the close of it he entered his ‘indeterminate sentence’.
Meanwhile on March 11, 1920, Magistrates G.B. Mifsud, A. Mercieca, C. Mifsud, Robert F. Ganado and A. Montanaro made recommendations to the governor about the treatment of young offenders. In their report, among other things, the magistrates suggested the introduction of the probation system.
For some reason this recommendation was not acted upon then and the probation system had to wait for another 37 years.
The August 1944 report by Alexander Patterson, the famous English commissioner of prisons and reformer, was more constructive than previous prison reports.
According to Patterson, people were sent to prison as a punishment, not for punishment.
In his report to the Governor of Malta on the treatment of offenders, Patterson said: “The proper treatment of the adult offender in Malta was never of such critical importance as at the present time.
“Nearly three-quarters of the men at Corradino are in prison for the first time. Two-thirds of the prisoners are under 30. These are two facts of great significance.
“If the prison administration faithfully performs its function, which is the prevention of crime, resulting in a reduction of the prison population, the large majority of these comers should never pass the prison gate again.
“If, however, the prison is regarded merely as a place of safe detention, where bad men endure a prescribed period of discomfort, a far larger number of these young men, if they find life difficult on discharge, will return before long, and having come a second time are then far more likely to come many times again, thus saddling the government with a permanent and unnecessary expense.”
Patterson also suggested that the increase of remission made in March 1940 to one-third of the whole sentence, should be made retrospective to the date of conviction. He also recommended the reintroduction of parole (leave on licence) for certain prisoners subject to recall if it appeard to those charged with their supervision that they were showing signs of reverting to their previous practices.
Patterson also said the Magistrates’ Courts showed the greatest discrimination in dealing with juvenile offenders. He recommended that the courts adopt the modern and more scientific principle of dealing with each person as a separate educational and social problem and to seek to prescribe the right treatment for each particular condition, rather than be content to weigh out a punishment appropriate to the gravity of his offence.
To prove his point Patterson mentioned the case of a young boy who, after stealing a pair of sandals, was sent to the Approved School for five years, while another who had stolen £10 was remanded and admonished.
Patterson urged the Maltese authorities to train young offenders in methods of agriculture with a view to emigration. For this reason he also suggested the erection of a prison camp in Gozo.
Patterson was the first prison consultant to recommend the Prisoners’ Welfare Society, which would co-operate with the director of prisons in helping prisoners and their families both during their sentence and on discharge.
In his report to the governor, Patterson also recommended the probation system, then practised in many countries.
After World War II, work in Corradino prison was no longer considered as punishment but as training. Among the trades taught then were bookbinding, shoe-making, broom- and mat-making, tailoring, carpentry, blacksmith, bakery and agriculture.
In 1956, assistant attorney-general Prof. J.J. Cremona, in his report The Treatment of Young Offenders in Malta – Proposal for Reform, among other things recommended the introduction of the Borstal institute and the probation system.
The following year, J. Ross, another British consultant, was in Malta to advise on the probation system, juvenile courts, treatment of young offenders and other matters. In his report Ross mentioned that he was pleased to learn that the Legislative Assembly (Parliament) was discussing the Probation of Offenders Bill. In fact, the Probation of Offenders Act, which was the first alternative to prison, was promulgated that same year.
Meanwhile, the prison was administered under the outdated 1931 regulations. In his annual report for 1958 the director of prisons announced that new prison regulations were being drafted.
Moreover, when in January 1961 Mr O.V. Garratt, adviser on prison administration to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, was invited to Malta to draw up a report suggesting a revision of the prison administration, he drew attention for the urgent need of new regulations. Garratt also dealt with the problem of work in prison.
In his report, he wrote: “One of the chief problems any prison has to face is the full employment of prisoners. The work to which they are put should be purposeful and should, at least, enable prisoners to acquire habits of regular and orderly industry and at best give them a trade skill which may be useful on discharge.”
Although rehabilitation involved more than work, according to a report by Judge Maurice Caruana Curran in 1993, Garratt’s recommendation had not really been acted upon.
During the past years the number of inmates at Corradino increased and it is envisaged that the problem is bound to become more serious.
Thus, the authorities have to adopt policies to slow the growth through alternative forms of punishment for non-violent criminals.