Can’t pay, so off to prison?
You probably though that the debtors’ prison was a Victorian concept popularised by Charles Dickens in his novel Little Dorrit, and that it is of historical interest only. Well, yes and no. If you owe me a hundred Euro I cannot get you sent to Mountjoy prison. But if you owe €100 to the state because you have not paid a fine for a minor criminal offence, then you can indeed be imprisoned. Not only can you be, you probably will be. According to a report in the Irish Times, the number of people sent to prison for this reason this year will reach 4,000 – which, to put it in perspective, will be a quarter of all those sent to prison in 2009.
This state of affairs is appalling, and is unacceptable in today’s society. Though the figure of 4,000 may include some who are simply refusing to obey the law, the overwhelming majority will be people from lower income groups for whom the fine is a financial problem. But in any case, using prison for these purposes is simply stupid in terms of criminology – prisons should house those (and only those) who are a danger to society.
The news that we are imprisoning people in this way should spark outrage. The only bit of good news is that the practice may fall off with the enactment shortly of the Fines Bill 2009, under which other means will be prioritised for addressing the non-payment of fines. But even then, some will be sent to prison. And as long as this happens, our whole system of addressing non-payment of fines is a disgrace. As a society, we should not tolerate it.
Tags: Fines Bill 2009, non-payment of fines, prison
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
November 10, 2009 at 8:26 am
The simplest thing to do would be to remove the prison option from the district judges. There is nothing preventing them from handing the subject a shovel and pointing to a road between mile mark five and six. Of course, fines are not the only foolish causes for being banged up in Clink.
November 10, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Even were you to do that, there would be some who’d refuse to do that. No matter what, we still need a recourse to prison, for those who refuse to pay fines (or do community service imposed for failing to pay fines. Or whatever). It’s not particularly nice, but it is an unfortunate reality. (Although, it may be the case that we are sending too many to prison currently).
November 10, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Yes it is true you will have people who will refuse. But I see little logic in banging someone up for some vague ‘contempt’ of the authority of some DJ, when to purge the contempt is impossible as they have not the cash.
Also, we have the insane situation of the cost. It is just fishing with a gold hook.
November 10, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Coincidentally enough I was discussing this issue with a group of prison officers yesterday. It was pointed out that there are comparatively few people who get committed to prison simply for failure to pay a fine. Many defaulters are liable for a string of fines, usually escalating in stature, while others may have a mixture of fines due plus some sort of custodial sentence. In addition a person who has accumulated a series of fines may be in a position to ‘clear’ all of them through a relatively short stay in prison – not perhaps a strategy that you or I would choose, but eminently rational – perhaps – for someone who already has a criminal record.
It is certainly the case, however, that the processing of fine defaulters does impose a significant burden on prison staff and does contribute to prison overcrowding.
It is also the case that we need more subtle statistical data on this: the ‘headline’ figure of 4000 may not present the real picture. This figure, as with all crime statistics, has to be recognised as socially constructed in all manner of complicated ways.
November 10, 2009 at 8:28 pm
The answer to this is that ALL fines should be based on a percentage of income, rather than a nominated cash amount. There is no justice in taking the same amount of money for the same offence from people in widely different income groups. The fine should represent a level of hardship. You’ll find the same principle in the story of the widow’s mite.