Legal Regulation on Early Release from Imprisonment: Comparative Experience of Selected Foreign Countries

Each year, the majority of individuals released from correctional institutions on legally prescribed grounds are released on the basis of early release. Since early release from imprisonment produces both positive and negative social effects, it has been considered necessary to study this issue, which is why this topic was selected.
The institution of early release from imprisonment was first codified in the French Criminal Code in 1855, and because most countries in the world have incorporated it into their criminal legislation, it may be regarded as a universally recognized legal institution.
The institution of early release is grounded in the principle of humanity, reflecting the idea that once the objectives of punishment have been achieved prior to the full expiry of the sentence, continuing the imprisonment is no longer necessary.
The UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Mandela Rules, 2015) provide that “...before the release of a prisoner, measures shall be taken to ensure his or her gradual reintegration into society.” In pursuit of this objective, the Rules emphasize that “individual characteristics of each prisoner shall be taken into account; special regimes and conditions shall be established for prisoners who have been released or are close to release; and a period of supervision after release may be imposed, during which supervision shall not be exercised by the police but shall involve the provision of social welfare services and assistance...”¹
The central substance of this standard under the Mandela Rules is probationary supervision, under which individuals released from correctional institutions and undergoing reintegration into society are provided with social welfare services, psychological assistance, and other forms of support.
There are two essential grounds for applying the institution of early release from imprisonment:
Material ground — the objectives of punishment have been fulfilled;
Temporal ground — the offender has served a specified portion of the sentence.
In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, many countries abolished forms of punishment involving torture and, in some jurisdictions, completely abolished the death penalty by removing it from their criminal codes. In its place, most jurisdictions began to apply early release from imprisonment more widely. This development enabled courts to impose more humane forms of punishment, and the humanitarian principle came to be expressed through the mechanism of early release.
In foreign countries, the most common form of early release is release under supervision, meaning that the released individual remains subject to oversight. The essence of this system is that the prisoner is released before the full expiry of the sentence but is placed under supervision during the period of regained liberty. In most Western and Eastern European countries, prisoners are permitted to apply for supervised release after serving a portion of their sentence.
A shared feature among these countries is the existence of strict mechanisms governing both the supervision of individuals released early and the work of the officers responsible for supervision at all stages. These stages include consideration of the early-release application, the supervision phase, and the provision of post-release assistance.

imprisonment, criminal legislation of selected foreign countries, probation period

1. The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Criminal Code of Mongolia (2015) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Criminal Code of the State of New York, in: Criminal Legislation of Foreign Countries: Collection of Legislative Materials, ed. I.D. Kozochkin, Moscow, 1969 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Polyanskii N.N., Criminal Law and the Criminal Court of England, Moscow, 1969 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Crime and Punishment in England, the USA, France, the FRG, and Japan, Moscow, 1991 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. B. Galbadrakh, Ensuring the Rights of Prisoners Serving Sentences of Imprisonment in the Russian Federation and Mongolia, PhD dissertation, Omsk, 2018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Dyuskin A.M., Organizational and Legal Issues of Parole for Persons Sentenced to Imprisonment, PhD dissertation, Moscow, 2005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Conflict of Law in the Safeguarding of Malaysian Intangible Cultural Heritage: A Way Forward
• Alternative Dispute Resolution in India: A Brief Overview Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. - William E. Gladstone
• The Role of Museums in Safeguarding Cultural Heritage Rights: Balancing Access and Repatriation
• An Evaluation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Significance and Application in Nigeria
• The Role of International Law in Shaping National Immigration Policies.