Criminal Justice response to COVID- 19 pandemic and need for effective, efficient implementation of non- custodial measures
As the global battle against the second wave of the COVID- 19 pandemic rages, Prisoners Rehabilitation and Welfare Action ( PRAWA) calls for the use of Non- Custodial sanctions for Petty/ Minor offenders, especially violators of regulations/ laws made to curb the spread of the virus.
The COVID- 19 pandemic took the world unawares at its inception causing panic, confusion and conflicting/ uncoordinated responses to it. Most nations of the world used the justice sector to respond to this purely health issue. However, having lived with the pandemic for over a year now, it is expected that nations review their approaches to handling the pandemic and address identified challenges.
Clearly, the justice sector’s response to COVID- 19 and the enforcement of regulations and laws made by both the Federal and State Governments in this respect came with a lot of human rights abuse issues. Some of these are captured in PRAWA Impact E- Newsletters.
The masses especially the poor/ vulnerable ones were disproportionately affected by these regulations/ laws which restricted movement of individuals and criminalized some other erstwhile legal human activities especially those people engage in to put food on their tables.
PRAWA and other well- meaning organizations raised concerns as to how these persons would survive the lockdown period in the absence of their daily source of income and recommendations were made for government to provide palliatives to vulnerable Nigerians that needed this most.
Notably, PRAWA also advocated the utilization of Non- custodial measures for violators of the COVID- 19 regulations. Use of Non- custodial sanctions helps in the reduction of the number of persons going into custodial centres and the likelihood of spread of the virus amongst inmates.
The implementation of non- custodial measures in Nigeria is supported by the Nigerian Correctional Service Act, 2019 and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015. The Nigerian Correctional Service Act provides that: The Correctional Service shall consist of, ( a) Custodial Service; and ( b) Non- custodial Service. Some of the objectives of the Act are to ensure compliance with international human rights standards and good correctional practices and provision of enabling platform for implementation of non- custodial measures.
Section 37 ( 1) ( a- e) of the Act provide for the different types of Non- custodial measures – community service, probation, parole, restorative justice measures and any other non- custodial measure assigned to the Correctional Service by a court of competent jurisdiction.
While Sect 4 ( 1) ( c) provides that: The Controller- General shall in accordance with the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act and other relevant legislation and policies administer non- custodial measures. PART 44 & 45 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 provides for Probation and Non- Custodial Alternatives and Parole respectively.
Interestingly, many states of the federation have adopted the ACJA 2015 by enacting their own state Administration of Criminal Justice Laws capturing provisions on Non- Custodial measures. However, these state Administration of Criminal Justice Laws towed the line of the ACJA in making provisions on the State Judiciary being involved in the supervision of non- custodial measures. This error has long been corrected in the Nigerian Correctional Service Act, 2019 and it is expected that state assemblies take note of this and make the necessary amendments. Many more states are yet to enact their own Administration of Criminal Justice Laws and expectations are that the state assemblies quickly do the needful in this regard.
We must however note that in spite of the identified strong legal backing for the use of non- custodial sentencing, it was not really in practice in Nigeria as at early part of 2020, at the inception of the COVID- 19 pandemic. Experts identified several challenges limiting the use of these measures at the auspicious time of the pandemic. Some of these challenges were connected to the non- adoption of the ACJA by some states and the level of preparedness of the Nigerian Correctional Service to take up the huge responsibility of implementation of Non- Custodial measures especially regarding the availability of requisite resources and capacity needed for this very new legal innovation.
Some of the identified gaps have been addressed under the Effective Implementation of Non- custodial measures Project of PRAWA funded by EU and supported by the British Council and ROLAC. The project has recorded a lot of successes in terms of the development of necessary resources and capacity building for the implementation of Non- custodial measures in Nigeria.
Obviously, the Nigerian Correctional Service and other justice sector institutions are substantially better positioned to implement non- custodial alternatives in Nigeria. It is on record that the NCOS were able to manage and ensure that the pandemic did not spread into the custodial centers across the country. This great achievement was made possible partly because of the use of alternatives to custodial sentencing ( especially community service) during this period for violators of the COVID- 19 Laws/ regulations. At the peak of the pandemic in 2020, FCT non- Custodial Directorate alone supervised over 23,000 violators of COVID- 19 regulations.