Abstract:
Quantified decision-making refers to the scaling of factors such as crime seriousness, risk assessment, violation severity, and punitive responses or intensity of surveillance. As such, it is largely based on the justice principle, according to which the punitive response should be
commensurate with the crime committed. This study consequently looks at the applicability of a retributive stance towards probation, and suggests a quantified, or structured, approach to decision-making in probation with special reference to the South African situation.
Referring to historical and ideological precedents, it is maintained that the current crisis in corrections - referring to the congestion of prison facilities and the negative spin-offs related to it - can, to a large extent, be ascribed to an over reliance on imprisonment as a sentencing
option. It is argued that imprisonment can be seen as a failure in terms of both its basic motives, and more importantly, with regard to its unintended consequences, necessitating a search for viable sentencing alternatives. With regard to probation, and Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) in particular, this study recognizes its limitations, but maintains that probation still holds the greatest potential as a workable alternative to incarceration. In view of South African corrections, that is plagued by prison overcrowding, on the one hand, and certain structural shortcomings, on the other, a structured probation system is proposed that will evade the weaknesses of subjective decisionmaking, which often act to intensify the crisis. It is proposed that quantified decision-making tools be developed that will replace both sentencing and revocation decisions. It is further
suggested that an effective risk prediction instrument be developed to guide the probation process.
