Electronic Monitoring in Belgium: A Penological Analysis of Current and Future Orientations

Abstract

Electronic monitoring was introduced nationwide in Belgium in 2000 and has expanded ever since. Currently important changes are taking place, radically transforming its operation and nature. The aim of this article is to describe and critically discuss the current shift in EM discourses and practices in Belgium from a penological perspective. We start with a brief sketch of the historical evolution of EM, explaining the penal and political context in which EM emerged and was further established, what goals it was supposed to meet and how these goals and practices shifted. With the new regulations of 2012 and 2013, both the rationale and the technology of EM have further evolved. These recent evolutions will be illustrated and situated in a consideration of the wider transformation of punishment in the community.

Walking on Thin Ice: How and Why Frontline Officers Cope With Managerialism, Accountability, and Risk in Probation Services

“…Scholars notice a progressive shift toward a more rational-technical approach to probation work and its management in Belgium (e.g., Bauwens & Roose, 2017; Beyens & Roosen, 2013; Jonckheere, 2013). Since the end of the 2000s, POs carry out probation work in accordance with an adapted Business Process Reengineering (BPR) protocol that provides hands-on systematic procedures for each specific step of supervision.…”

Electronic monitoring and reintegration in Belgium

“…16 The solution for this overburdened system was an adjustment in the EM procedure, aiming to shorten the waitlists and waiting times for prospective EM prisoners. This was achieved through more standardisation and rationalisation in human supervision (Beyens and Roosen, 2013); that is, the abolition of social enquiry reports for the largest group of persons to be subjected to EM, standardised time schedules, a change in the consent procedure, the abolition of home visits and support of justice assistants for those with a prison sentence of up to three years, and so forth.…”

Making Sense or/of Decisions? Collective Action in Early Release Process

“…In Belgium, following the Dutroux Affair in 1996 (Walgrave and Varone 2008 ), the conditions of early release are enacted in the External Legal Position Act of 2006. As a consequence, SIC (Sentence Implementation Courts) have replaced the former "Parole Commissions" and are responsible for granting conditional release (Bauwens et al 2012 ), electronic monitoring (Beyens and Roosen 2013 ), semi-detention, and provisional release in view of expulsion or extradition (De Ridder et al 2012 ) to prisoners serving a sentence of more than three years. However, since the implementation of the 2006 Act is not yet fully achieved the Minister of Justice, via the DMD (Detention Management Department at the Prison Central Administration, or "Direction Gestion de la Détention"-DGD), remains responsible for granting provisional release to prisoners serving a sentence of up to three years.…”