LIJDLR

CAN INDIAN PRISONS REPLICATE THE NORWEGIAN PRISON SYSTEM? A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN MODEL PRISON MANUAL 2023 AND THE NORWEGIAN PRISON POLICY

CAN INDIAN PRISONS REPLICATE THE NORWEGIAN PRISON SYSTEM? A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN MODEL PRISON MANUAL 2023 AND THE NORWEGIAN PRISON POLICY

Sridhar S, B.A.LL. B(Hons), School of Excellence in Law, TNDALU

Karpaga Vinayagam, B.C.A.LL. B(Hons), School of Excellence in Law, TNDALU

Recidivism in India had been a major issue over a period of time, which is a direct cause of failed Indian prison policy. Indian prisons are characterized by features of overcrowding, poor management, harsh living conditions, and human rights violations. In contrast, Norwegian prisons meet and set international standards in prison policy in the global arena. Norwegian prisons are recognized by interests in rehabilitation of inmates, societal reintegration, and a humane approach to prisoners. As a result, recidivism in Norway has decreased steadily, and it also had a positive impact on the economy of the nation. The aspects and effects of the incarceration system of Norway are elucidated in this study. Indian prisons are governed by old colonial laws, which makes the prison system more complicated in India. The Union government notifies the states with model prison manuals for the governance of jails. This study describes the aspects of the Model Prison Manual 2023 and aims to predict the effectiveness of the recent prison manual. The model prison manual 2023 has some inspirations from the Norwegian prison system, which is added to make the reformative system of justice effective in India. The addition of the policies is an appreciable step forward in the administration of justice, but the question of the applicability of these policies in Indian prisons is inevitable. This study analyses the possibilities of implementing successful policies of Norway in Indian prisons and the challenges in implementing identical policies.

Type
Information
Research Paper
LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume II, Issue III, Page 206-216.
Creative Commons
Copyright
Copyright © LIJDLR 2024