Prisons in Europe San Marino

Transcription

1 Prisons in Europe San Marino Country Profile Marcelo F. Aebi Léa Berger-Kolopp Christine Burkhardt Mélanie M. Tiago Lausanne, 3 June 21 Updated on 21 November 21

2 COUNTRY PROFILE This country profile on San Marino is taken from the report Prisons in Europe (link), which contains 51 profiles on the prison populations in the Prison Administrations of the 47 member States of the Council of Europe. Prisons in Europe presents data on prison populations across Europe from 25 to 215. It is divided in two volumes: Volume 1 presents country profiles based on several indicators concerning prison populations, and Volume 2 includes all the data used for the report. The report has been prepared by the University of Lausanne and co-funded by the European Union and the Council of Europe. Each country profile includes a Table with Key Facts about the country, which are presented in the form of several indicators referring to the latest available year and to the evolution during the latest ten years, as well as the relative position of the country (low, medium or high) for each indicator compared to the 2 member States of the European Union ( EU 2 ) and the 47 member States of the Council of Europe ( CoE 47 ). The classification in low, medium and high is based on the comparative indicators presented in Part 2 of the study. The country profile is divided in four sections and includes Figures. The four sections are the following: - Key facts - The country in brief: This section summarizes the trends shown in the key facts from 25 to 214/15. It illustrates which indicators have increased, which have decreased and which have remained stable. The indicator is considered as showing a stable trend if the variation is lower than 5%. - The country in comparative perspective: This section compares each country to the rest of the countries included in the study. General comments: This section includes eight Figures, comments to these Figures and some possible explanations of the observed trends. The eight Figures are numbered from 1 to within each country profile and also include, between brackets, their absolute number from 1 to 4. The Key facts include indicators of stock and flow. The stock indicators refer to the situation on 1st September 215. The flow indicators refer to the situation during the year 214. On the basis of the data included in this study, we have calculated for each indicator the average for the 1 to 11 years under study. This average is presented in the fifth column of the country profiles. Finally, the last column of the country profiles provides a graphic indicator of the trend observed when one compares the last year of the series (214 and 215 respectively) to the first one (25). The arrows included in this column reflect the evolution of the indicator according to the following table: +/- 4.9% stable +5 to +9% slight increase +1 to +19% moderate increase +2 to +49% substantial increase +5% and more huge increase -5 to -9% slight decrease -1 to -19% moderate decrease -2 to -49% substantial decrease -5% and more huge decrease

3 COUNTRY PROFILE SAN MARINO TRENDS Key Facts Prison population rate (inmates per, inhabitants) on /15 Comparative Evolution /15 CoE 47 EU 2 Average % Change 6.1 Low NAP 5.2 Rate of entries into penal institutions in 214 (inmates per 5.4 Low NAP 35.3, inhabitants) Rate of releases from penal institutions in 214 (inmates per, inhabitants) Available 49.2 Low NAP 31.2* since 29 Average length of imprisonment in 214 based on the total number of days spent in penal institutions (in 1. Low NAP 1.6 months) Average length of imprisonment in 214 based on stock and flow (in 2.5 Low NAP 1.7 months) Prison density on (inmates per places) 25. Low NAP 14.4 Median age of the prison population on (in years) 29.7 Low NAP 45.2 ** Percentage of female inmates ( ). Low NAP 2.3 Percentage of foreign inmates ( ). High NAP 3.6 of which: in pre-trial detention. High NAP 27.3 Percentage of non-sentenced inmates ( ). Low NAP 2.5 Rate of deaths per 1, inmates in 214. Low NAP. Rate of suicides per 1, inmates in 214 (n=) of which: % in pre-trial detention (n=) - Available since 213 Ratio of inmates per staff (number of inmates per 1 staff person) Percentage of custodial staff in the total staff Total budget spent by the prison administration (in Euro) Available since 213 Average amount spent per day for the detention of one inmate (in Euro) Available since 2 * Average calculated from 29 to 214 ** Percentage change calculated form 26 to 215 *** Average calculated from 2 to 214. Low NAP.. Low NAP NAP NAP.3 Low NAP High NAP NAP NAP NAP NAP 4. High NAP 67.7*** 1

4 Cautionary statement San Marino has a population of roughly 33, persons. The majority of its prisoners serve their sentences in Italian prisons and are not included in the statistics of the country. Hence, on 1 st September of every year, San Marino usually has less than 15 inmates. From a statistical point of view, this means that it is not possible to establish reliable time series. As a consequence, the figures, rates and graphs included in this report are given purely as an indication and must be interpreted very cautiously. San Marino in brief Comparing 214/15 to 25, the following indicators show a decrease: median age of the population (- 7%), percentage of non-sentenced inmates (-%), and average amount spent per day for the detention of one inmate (-31%). Comparing 214/15 to 25, the following indicators show an increase: prison population rate (+%), rate of entries into penal institutions (+117%), rate of releases from penal institutions (+54%), average length of detention based on the total number of days spent in penal institution (+4%), average length of detention based on stock and flow (+6%), prison density (+2%), ratio of inmates per staff (+%), percentage of custodial staff (+15%) Comparing 214/15 to 25, the following indicators remain stable: percentage of female inmates (%), percentage of foreign inmates (%), percentage of pre-trial detainees among foreign inmates (%), rate of deaths per 1, inmates (%), and percentage of suicides (%). San Marino in comparative perspective Compared to other European countries, in 214/15 San Marino presents: o Low: Prison population rate, rate of entries into penal institutions, rate of releases from penal institutions, average length of detention based on the total number of days spent in penal institution, average length of detention based on stock and flow, prison density, median age of the prison population, percentage of female inmates, percentage of non-sentenced inmates, rate of deaths per 1, inmates, rate of suicides per 1, inmates, percentage of suicides in pre-trial detention, ratio of inmates per staff. o Medium: none of indicators. o High: Percentage of foreign inmates, percentage of pre-trial detainees among foreign inmates, percentage of custodial staff in the total staff, average amount spent per day for the detention of one inmate. 2

5 General comments Figure 1 (29) Fig. 1: Prison population rate and low of entries and releases from penal institutions (per, inhabitants) Rates per, inhabitants Flow of entries Flow of releases Prison population rate Figure 1 shows that, from 25 to 215, the prison population rate of San Marino (stock) increased by %. In 25, the country had 3.4 inmates per, inhabitants, while in 215 it had 6.1. However, the number of inmates is too low to reach reliable conclusions. From 25 to 214, the rate of entries (flow of entries) increased by 117%. In 25, there were 27 entries into penal institutions per, habitants, while in 214 there were 5. From 29 to 214, the rate of releases (flow of releases) increased by 54%. In 29, there were 32 releases from penal institutions per, habitants, while in 214 there were 49. The flow of entries and the flow of releases show similar rates and trends with the exceptions of the years 27 and 214, but the number of inmates is too low to reach reliable conclusions. Figure 2 (29) Fig. 2: Average length of imprisonment (in months) Average length of imprisonment (in months) , 2,4 2,4 2,5 2,2 2,7 2,4 1,5 1,6 1,5 1, 1,3 1, 1,2 1,2 1,3 1,3,4,, Based on days spent in penal institutions Based on stock and flow of entries in penal institutions Figure 2 shows that, from 25 to 214, the average length of imprisonment based on the number of days spent in penal institutions increased by 4%. In 25, the average length of imprisonment was 1.2 months, while in 214 it was 1. months. During the same period, the average length of imprisonment computed on the basis of the ratio between the stock and the flow increased by 6%. In 25, the average length of imprisonment was 1.5 months, while in 214 it was 2.5 months. 3

6 Figure 3 (291) Fig. 3: Prison density per places (Overcrowding) 4 Prison density per places Figure 3 shows that, from 25 to 215, the prison density of San Marino increased by 2%. In 25, the country had one prisoner and 12 available places (i.e. a rate of inmates per places), while in 215 it had 2 prisoners and available places (i.e. a rate of 25 inmates per places). Figure 4 (292) Fig. 4: Total capacity of penal institutions and number of inmates Absolute numbers Number of places in penal institutions Number of staff (FTE) Number of inmates Of which: number of custodial staff Figure 4 shows that, from 25 to 215, the total number of places in penal institutions in San Marino decreased by 33%. In 25, the country had 12 places, while in 215 it had. During the same period, the total number of inmates increased by %. In 25, the country had 1. inmate, while in 215 it had 2.. From 25 to 215, the total number of staff remained stable. In 25 and 215, San Marino had in total a staff of 6. persons. During the same period, the total number of custodial staff increased by 15%. In 25, the total custodial staff was 2. persons, while in 215 it was 5.. 4

7 Figure 5 (293) Fig. 5: Percentage of females and foreigners in the prison population rate Percentage Females Foreigners Figure 5 illustrates the difficulties faced when establishing distributions on the basis of a few observations. From 25 to 215, San Marino usually had one or two inmates in its prison institution by 1 st September (in 21, there were none, and in 214 there were four). As a consequence, percentages based on that low number are not reliable. For example, from 25 to 215, there were usually no females deprived of freedom in San Marino, but in 214 one of the inmates was a woman, which raised the percentage of females to 25%. In the case of foreigners, their percentage reached % in 25, 26 and 215 because the only inmate of the country was a foreigner. Figure 6 (294) Fig. 6: Percentage of inmates and foreign inmates without a final sentence 75 Percentage All inmates Foreign inmates Once more, Figure 6 illustrates the difficulties faced when establishing distributions on the basis of a few observations. For example, from 25 to 215, the percentage of inmates without a final sentence remained stable because, in 25, there was only one inmate and he did not have a final sentence (i.e. a percentage of % of inmates without a final sentence), while in 215 there were two inmates and none of them had a final sentence (i.e. % of the inmates did not have a final sentence. During the same period, the percentage of foreigners held in pre-trial detention also remained stable because the inmate held in 25 was a foreigner and the two inmates held in 215 were also foreigners, which means that in both cases they represented % of the total number of inmates of San Marino. 5

8 Figure (295) Fig. 7: Distribution (in percentage) of sentenced prisoners by offence Percentage Homicide Assault and battery Sexual offences Robbery Theft Drug offences Other offences* Not speci ied Again, Figure 7 illustrates the difficulties faced when establishing distributions on the basis of a few observations. For most of the years, the available information is based on only one or two prisoners serving final sentences. That explains why the percentages vary from 5% to %. The absence of bars for the years 25, 21 and 215 means that there were no prisoners serving final sentences. As a consequence, it is methodologically inappropriate to make any interpretation of the data presented in Figure 7. Figure (296) Fig. : Rate of deaths and suicides (per 1, inmates) Rates per 1, inmates Rate of deaths (per 1, inmates) Of which: rate of suicides (per 1, inmates) From 25 to 214, no inmates died in the penal institution of the country. 1 The figures provided by the country do not always add to %. 2 Sexual offences include (1) rape (included in the SPACE questionnaire since 25), and (2) other sexual offences (included in the SPACE questionnaire since 2). 3 Other offences include (1) economic and financial offences (included in the SPACE questionnaire since 2); (2) terrorism (included in the SPACE questionnaire since 27); (3) organised crime (included in the SPACE questionnaire since 27); (4) cybercrime (included in the SPACE questionnaire since 214); and (5) other cases (included in the SPACE questionnaire since 25). 6