Resource Centre

Health and justice officials across North America have described correctional institutions as petri dishes for the transmission of COVID-19. Individuals in custody commonly have health profiles that are more compromised than those of the general population. Institutional infrastructure issues and custody counts that create barriers to protocols, including physical distancing measures, that health authorities recommend to limit the spread of the virus compound these profiles. Many correctional authorities have struggled to implement strategies to mitigate infection rates among custodial populations. This paper examines the strategies employed by one provincial correctional authority in Canada that has to date successfully prevented the spread of COVID-19 in custody centers by adopting a health-informed approach to the crisis rather than a traditional justice-informed response. The findings highlight practices that can inform the responses of other jurisdictions as the pandemic continues and identify areas of future research on the effects of COVID-19 on incarcerated persons, correctional and health-care staff, and communities. (COV-016)

The main purpose of this paper is to review the national responses for persons deprived of liberty (PDLs) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Philippines. The researcher discusses the major responses that have been carried out such as easing the rules on parole grant and executive clemency, providing human consideration to the vulnerable segments, and improving the corrections facilities health management. These responses are expected to decrease the growth of virus infection inside the corrections facilities, protect the condition especially of the vulnerable segments, and ensure the overall safety of the community. This paper specifically recommends for the need to expand the virtualization of judiciary functions to the provincial zones, place the release of the vulnerable segments in priority order, and technically improve the health management of corrections. However, as current responses may just represent temporary measures due to the crisis, this paper further urges for responses that will eventually lead to long-term decongestion of corrections facilities or reduction of the perennially high prison population of the country. (COV-011)

Currently, there are more than 4.5 million Americans under some form of community supervision. Much of the experience of traditional community supervision relies on face-to-face interactions. Individuals on supervision often require treatment or services typically delivered in face-to-face settings. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has forced community corrections’ agencies to quickly rethink how they do business, with limited existing research on how to adapt supervision protocols in the midst of a global pandemic. Using surveys of directors of community corrections’ agencies across the United States, the goal of the current study was to examine how community corrections’ agencies have adapted traditional supervision processes to address disease prevention and containment in addition to supporting client needs and community safety as a result of COVID-19. Changes implemented during the pandemic may have implications for the future landscape of community supervision. Understanding how and what agencies prioritize in a time of global crisis can provide a foundation for identifying sustainable changes as well as understanding future impacts on system and client-level outcomes. (COV-017)

The COVID-19 pandemic infiltrated the United States in early 2020, with correctional facilities becoming hot spots for the novel coronavirus shortly thereafter. Using data gathered from Departments of Corrections’ official websites, we provide a summary of state and federal prison system responses to COVID-19 as of June 2020. We highlight strengths and deficiencies in system responses as well as pertinent variations across jurisdictions. We conclude with a call for scholars and grant funders to prioritize incarceration-based data collection efforts on COVID-19 so the short and long-term consequences of the pandemic, and systemic responses to it, can be more fully assessed. (COV-023)

Italy was the first country outside of Asia to deal with a major COVID-19 outbreak. The first cases dated back to January 31, 2020, when two Chinese tourists visiting Rome tested positive for the virus. As the number of infections surged over the next few weeks, the world watched as Italy faced the grim reality of the dangers associated with the virus and how the nation struggled to contain it. By mid-March, the entire country was in lock down. This article chronicles the impact of the virus on incarcerated persons and the ways in which the government reacted to several prison riots that took place in response to crowded prisons, the COVID-19 outbreak, and the initial lock down measures put in place. In the concluding section, the impact of Italy’s mitigation strategy on the problems of (1) prison crowding, (2) prison violence, and (3) prisoner and staff health is assessed. (COV-009)

In response to the pandemic that started in early 2020, prison systems around the world have adopted various strategies to prevent the spread of Covid-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). In Spain, the main strategy used by the State Penitentiary Administration against the pandemic has focused on the use of the “third degree” of prison or “semi-freedom” with telematic control (or electronic monitoring, as it is better known in the rest of the world). While in closed prisons the main measures to manage the pandemic have been focused on avoiding contact with outside, in open prisons inmates who could have introduced the virus into prison facilities due to their semi-freedom have been released and sent “home,” in order to prevent the spread of the virus. The author analyzes the data provided by the Spanish prison statistics during the pandemic, illustrating the evolution of the numbers of convicts classified in “open regime” and under electronic monitoring. At the same time, the author highlights some of the ethical and public security implications that might be posed by the quasi-massive release supported by the expansion in the use of open regime with telematic control, and some recommendations thereon are proposed. (COV-018)

Controlling COVID rates, which initially soared within New York State, proved to be more challenging for correctional institutions, which were tasked with trying to protect a captive population. This article profiles the Westchester County Department of Correction (WCDOC), a county jail located 20 miles north of Manhattan; it is the second-largest jail in New York State. By employing a multitude of modalities, the WCDOC was able to lower their COVID-19 rates significantly, while simultaneously providing medical, mental health, drug treatment, and court-related services. By leveraging the use of technology and employing innovative policies for prisoners and staff, the WCDOC can serve as a model for other correctional institutions. (COV-010)

South Africa is experiencing the worst outbreak of COVID-19 on the African continent. Amidst many other social and economic pressures facing the country, the surge of coronavirus cases has also disrupted operations in correctional environments. Incarcerated individuals are among the most vulnerable as they are susceptible to infectious disease due to higher rates of chronic and acute illness, close confinement, and overcrowding. Despite the advances in upholding prisoner’s rights by the South African government and the pandemic responses by the Department of Correctional Services, the novelty of this virus exposes the weaknesses in systems ill-equipped to deal with a rapidly growing pandemic. This article chronicles the spread of COVID-19 in South Africa’s correctional system, its response, and continued areas for improvement, highlighting the unique context of South Africa’s history related to corrections and contagion. (COV-019)

This paper assesses the state of COVID-19 in the Pakistani and Indian prison systems. Using publicly available data, governmental documents, media, and non-profit organization reports, and scholarly literature, we provide an overview of COVID-19 in each country and the current state of each nation’s prison system. We then analyze the impact of the novel coronavirus on the corrections systems and each government’s response to the virus in its prison infrastructure. The pandemic provides both Pakistan and India with the opportunity to change course and move toward a more sustainable prison system that protects human rights while bolstering health security. (COV-012)

Large outbreaks of coronavirus infections occurred in several prisons in China in February 2020. Since then, the authorities on the national and local levels have introduced a series of measures to prevent more COVID-19 infections in correctional institutions. This article reviews those strategies and explores their ties to past prison reforms and their potential influences on future directions. First, it provides an overview of the changes in prison management and operation that foreshadowed some of China’s approaches to COVID-19 in the prison system. Second, it examines the strategies undertaken by the prison system to stop the spread of COVID-19. Finally, the article discusses the implications of the COVID-19 response for prison reforms and the challenges the Chinese prison system faces in its continuous efforts to contain COVID-19. (COV-013)

This article examines the impact of COVID-19 on penitentiary systems in the Central American countries of Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala (the Northern Triangle). Despite similar conditions in terms of crowding, lack of personal protective equipment, and infrastructure deficiencies, the neighboring countries have implemented distinctly different approaches to managing their incarcerated populations. In Honduras, in recognition of the elevated risks to certain inmates, nearly 2,000 prisoners were released in the early stages of the contagion. In El Salvador, President Bukele capitalized on the COVID crisis to implement curfews and national lockdowns to ensure conditions approaching martial law, declaring extreme security steps to address gang violence, while claiming incarcerated gang leaders were behind the increased violence. In Guatemala, the President Giammattei, a medical doctor, recognized prisons as epicenters of focus for reducing transmission rates and quickly advanced plans to contain a much larger outbreak. Using data collected from public media sources and in-depth qualitative interviews with prison administrators and staff, we provide a descriptive overview of the COVID impacts in these countries and consider possible longer-term prison policy implications. (COV-014)

The article is an overview of mitigation efforts and outcomes from a six month timeframe of managing COVID19 at the PA Department of Corrections. (COV-015)

In spite of all the measures taken during the past decades, the Romanian prison system is still considered overcrowded by European standards (111% above rated capacity in June 2020). However, very much against the trend set by other European jurisdictions, Romania did not opt for an early release scheme to fight COVID-19. Instead, the government took steps to strengthen its internal mechanisms to ensure safe interactions between staff and inmates, between inmates themselves, and between inmates and the outside world. This paper explains why that was the only option on the table for the Romanian authorities and then provides a preliminary assessment of the consequences of this strategic decision. Overall, with no known case of infected prisoners, while serving their sentence inside the penitentiary system, it seems that the route taken by the Romanian prison authorities was an effective one, at least in terms of minimizing the outbreak of Covid-19 in the prison system. At least so far … However, the legal, psychological, and experiential consequences of these strict medico-carceral measures for the prisoners and their families remain to be explored. (COV-020)

As the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) spread across the United States in spring 2020, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) made the startling announcement that of its 2,700 initial screenings of inmates for the virus, 2,000 had tested positive – an astounding 70% positivity rate. It is obvious to assume that prisons and jails would be locations of outbreaks and rapid community spread given the close quarters, limited access to preventive methods, and movement of both inmates and staff in and out of facilities. Yet, the speed of early transmission through the federal prison system led to questions of whether the BOP was adequately prepared to handle a contagion such as COVID -19, and if the steps that have ultimately been taken (such as moving inmates from prison to community using existing release mechanisms, suspending visitation, and increased screening of both inmates and staff) are sufficient to minimize new infections throughout the system. This article describes and assesses the BOP’s COVID-19 mitigation strategies, details treatment programming challenges during the pandemic, and offers suggestions for future infectious disease outbreak response. (COV-025)

In Germany, the situation of prisons before the outbreak of the Covid-19-pandemic was quite relaxed as the prison population was in decline and overcrowding not a problem. However, there was a special problem with fine defaulters, who comprise about 10% of the daily adult German prison population. Short-term prisoners in general are a problem resulting in a large influx of possibly infected people. Since March 2020 all German Federal states stopped (or reduced) incarcerating fine defaulters and some states went further, not executing prison sentences of up to one or even up to three years. The prison population dropped from about 77 per 100,000 inhabitants to 69. Prison conditions, however, worsened because of restricted contacts of prisoners with the outside world. On the other side, access to internet communication was introduced in order to compensate the lockdown of personal visits and of prison leaves. Since June some of the restrictions were repealed, as the pandemic was under control and almost no infections were observed for prisoners. Visits and prison leaves gradually are allowed again in a limited way. Further crime policy considerations to abolish or reduce fine default and other short-term imprisonment are discussed. (COV-008)