UNIQUE Confinement
Lawmakers acknowledged that the new punishment system only applies to the most serious offenses and obstinate offenders. However, they expressed worries about how it would strike a balance between the need to defend the public and individual freedom.
The new punishment plan aims not only to increase public safety but also to reinforce the incentive for inmates to get their own rehabilitation really, Minister for Law and Home Affairs K Shanmugam told parliament at the beginning of the debate.
With the knowledge that the word they impose under the SEPP is only the least, he claimed it could also lead to magistrates imposing shorter sentences up front.
Lawmakers brought up a number of problems during the conversation:
- An SEPP criminal may be held for existence, and it is unknown when they will be released.
- The Home Affairs Minister, a member of the executive branch, makes the decision regarding the length of detention for SEPP offenders rather than the courts.
- How are criminals going to be evaluated for an SEPP?
- What types of rehab programs may Jimmy offenders be able to access?
The UK’s report on phrases of prison for common protection, a type of indefinite incarceration that was implemented in 2005 and abolished in 2012, was cited by the candidate for MP Usha Chandradas.  ,
According to the report, affected inmates” regularly described mental and emotional deterioration” brought on by the sentence, with self-harm rates roughly twice as high as those serving life sentences.
In light of this, Ms. Usha questioned the type of mental health care and rehabilitation assistance that SEPP offenders and their families would receive.
Ms. Rahayu said the selection being made after the court’s maximum sentence is unique in response to concerns that the executive, not the judiciary, decides on additional detention.
She stated that the extended detention of the criminal after that point, after the term has passed, is no longer done to punish the offenders but rather to safeguard the general public.
It “involves a sophisticated assessment of numerous factors, including the offender’s potential for reoffending, his behavior while incarcerated, and his prospects for rehabilitation.” This should be an executive decision, according to a natural and principled method.
She claimed that in some circumstances, the ruling might get up for judicial review.
According to Ms. Rahayu, the Home Affairs Minister now makes the decision regarding earlier launch in the cases of remedial training, precautionary detention, and life imprisonment.