PANEL IRESPONDING TO PRISON OVERCROWDING:
ANOTHER ATTEMPT FROM THAILAND

I. INTRODUCTION
Criminal justice systems around the world have been coping with increasingly diﬃcult challenges
amid rapid changes in varying political and socio-economic systems. Imbalanced development has
weakened our social mechanisms, rendering us less effective in coping with economic hardships,
which can contribute to the increased number of crimes. Rising crime rates result in greater numbersof oﬀenders entering the criminal justice system and increased incarceration. Because many prison
facilities are not equipped to handle the increased volume of inmates, prison overcrowding has become
problematic. Failure to cope with these new challenges could bring serious consequence as thefunctioning of the criminal justice system, and the assertion of individual human rights of prisoners,
are at stake. In order to avoid the serious issues of case backlog and overcrowding of the correctional
facilities, it is imperative that the oﬀender treatment systems are continuously improved and further
developed.
This paper will begin with the assessment of current trends and reasons on the incidence of prison
overcrowding in Thailand. The discussion will then focus on non-custodial measures that Thailand has
used to reduce overcrowding in inmate facilities, including alternatives to imprisonment, diversionary
methods, restorative justice, and community-based treatment initiatives. Finally, I will share myviews on the key challenges involved in reducing prison overcrowding, and make recommendations for
how the Thai criminal justice system can continue its work in ﬁnding eﬀective alternative methods toincarceration.

II. PRISON OVERCROWDING IN THAILAND:CURRENT TREND AND SITUATIONS
Among the issues related to treatment of prisoners in Thailand, prison overcrowding is one ofmost problematic. During the years 1996-2002, correctional facilities in Thailand had to deal with
unprecedentedly large number of inmates. Thai prisons housed 103,202 inmates in 1996, with that
number increasing to 250,000 by the end of 2002. The current prison capacity, however, provides forapproximately 110,000 spaces. This clearly indicates a prison overcrowding situation. The trend ofincreasing inmates shown by the below Figures is ominous because there is little relief on the capacity
issue; prisoners increase, but the space to house them remains the same.
In Figure 1 the prison population for the period of nineteen years is shown. At present, the numberof inmates in Thailand remains high - 253 inmates per 100,000 - compared to other countries in Asia
and Paciﬁc region, as shown in Table 1.

151

Figure 1. Prison Population in Thailand from 1990 to 2008

Source: Inmate Statistics Center, Policy Planning Division, Department of Corrections.

This rate of increase was quite unusual and cannot be accounted for under normal functioning
conditions of the criminal justice system. The disproportionate increase of inmate population since1998 could be attributed to Thailandʼs penal policy, which severely criminalized offenses related todrug use, especially the substance amphetamine, to achieve deterrence effect among drug-related
oﬀenders.
Table 1. Prison Population across Seven Countries in Asia and Paciﬁc in 2007
Country

Total number

Indonesia

128,876

Macao

797

Total number(per 100,000 people)

Portion of Female
Inmates(percent)Portion of Child
Inmates(percent)

56

4.7

0.4

174

22.1

6.1

Malaysia

50,305

192

28.7

2.2

Myanmar65,063

126

15.0

1.6

Sri Lanka

25,537

121

1.4

0.04

Singapore

11,768

267

10.0

4.7

Thailand

165,316

253

15.1

3.9

Source: International Centre for Prison Studies, 2008

Figure 2 shows that the number of inmate convicted of drug-related oﬀenses has almost doubled
in 15 years, while the statistics for the other offenders remain mostly unchanged. This leads to aconclusion that the large number of drug-related oﬀenders is the result of severe measures, while thecontribution from the increase in the criminal activities themselves might be only secondary.
Figure 2. Number of inmates convicted of drug oﬀense vs other oﬀenses from 1993- 2007

Source: Inmate Statistics Center, Policy Planning Division, Department of Corrections.

152

III. POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS FOR PRISON OVERCROWDING
There are numerous factors that have contributed to the overcrowding of prisons in Thailand.
These include the increase of drug offenders entering the system as a result of the Royal Thai
Governmentʼs shift to a more prioritized crackdown on narcotics in the late 1990ʼs; the large
percentage of incarcerated inmates who are awaiting investigation or trial; and a historical reliance on
imprisonment for even low-level oﬀenders.
With respect to the increase in drug oﬀenders in the system, there are two possible explanations.
First, the rise could signify the enhanced eﬀectiveness of the criminal justice system in bringing those
who commit the crime to justice; the implication being that the drug problem in Thailand has been
properly taken care of since 1997. A second explanation is that by over-criminalizing the possession
or consumption of amphetamines, the demand for the now highly-punishable drug is even higher than
before, leading to a rise in cost and therefore proﬁt, thereby increasing the incentive for people to risk
trading them. This graver theory signiﬁes that severe punishment as deterrence measure has been far
from achieving its policy objectives. The question then becomes, how does a criminal justice systemdeal with drug oﬀenders in a way that does not exacerbate the prison overcrowding problem?
With regards to the high percentages of inmates on remand, it is clear from statistics that thisgroup constitutes many of the total incarcerated individuals. Tables 2, 3 and 4 illustrate the inmate
population profile according to their categories, types of offences and terms of imprisonment. The
largest portion of Thailandʼs correctional resources is being used to provide custodial treatment for theconvicted oﬀenders, while the suspects awaiting trial or ﬁnal judgment constitute the second largest
group of the population. This results in a current rate of imprisonment prior to conviction at nearly
30%, which implies that the criminal process has not yet been able to provide a timely response to
those awaiting trials and who must be assumed to be innocent. Table 5 provides regional comparative
data on this category of inmates, portraying that Thailand is among the top on the list of countries
having a large percentage of inmates on-remand. When viewed by types of oﬀences, inmates who havebeen convicted of oﬀences related to drug use constitute the largest group or almost 60%. It should
also be noted that about half of the total population in prisons are currently those serving relatively
short terms - less than 5 years.
Table 2. Overall population of the Thai prison system according to major categories(As of 1 September 2008)
Categories

Male

Female

Total

Percentage

1. Convicted

112,464

18,594

131,058

70.825

2. On-remand

44,744

7,538

52,28228.25

2.1 pending appeals

22,354

3,541

25,89513.99

2.2 awaiting trial

9,576

1,495

11,0715.98

2.3 awaiting investigation

12,814

2,502

15,316

8.28

3. Child and youth under detention

401

3

404

0.22

4. Relegated persons

11

1

12

0.01

5. Detainee
Total

1,128

185

1,313

0.71

158,748

26,321

185,069

100

Source: Inmate Statistics Center, Policy Planning Division, Department of Corrections

153

Table 3. Prisoners Statistics by Type of Oﬀences
Type of Oﬀences

Male

Female

Total

Percentage

1. Oﬀence against property

25,911

1,647

27,55822.25

2. Oﬀence against narcotics law

56,68915,34972,03858.16

3. Oﬀence against life

8,798

277

9,075

7.83

4. Bodily harm

3,552

83

3,635

2.93

5. Oﬀence against social security

216

11

227

0.22

6. Others

5,031

496

5,527

4.46

Source: Corrections in Thailand 2008- an annual report published by the Department of Corrections, Thailand.
Table 4. Prisoners Statistics by Sentence Terms
Sentence Term

Male

Female

Total

Percentage

Less than 3 months

899

96

955

0.77

3- 6 months

2,889

382

3,271

2.53

6 months - 1 year

7,930

1,263

9,193

7.12

1 - 2 years

16,164

3,173

19,337

14.97

2 - 5 years

32,7004,274

36,97428.63

5 - 20 years

38,0186,836

44,85436.22

20 - 50 years

10,1492,142

12,291

7.83

Life imprisonment

1,653

218

1,871

1.51

Death penalty

113

7

120

0.09

Source: Corrections in Thailand 2008- an annual report published by the Department of Corrections, Thailand.
Table 5. Numbers of oﬀenders awaiting trial in several countries in Asia in 2007.
Total Number of Inmates Percentage of Inmates onOn-Remand
remandCountry

Total Number of InmatesIndonesia

128,876

387

0.3

Iran

158,351

39,271

24.8

Macao

797

176

22.1

Malaysia

50,305

14,43828.7

Myanmar65,063

7,417

11.4

Mongolia

6,593

1,305

19.8

Hong Kong

10,440

1,409

13.5

Japan

81,255

9,751

12.0

Taiwan60,346

7,181

11.9

Brunei

486

35

7.2

Laos

4,020

40

1.0

Singapore

11,768812

6.9

Thailand

165,316

43,313

26.2

Source: International Centre for Prison Studies, 2008

Lack of coherent and eﬀective penal policies has also been a key factor, hindering any systematic
attempt to implement alternative approaches for parties of conflicting interests, and provide themaccess to justice. Social norms - as can be seen from the negative public attitude toward oﬀenders,along with the strong inclination among Thais to rely on formal criminal process or legal action asmeans to solve their problems - also play signiﬁcant roles in shaping the current situation of the Thai
correctional system. Further at the root of the problem, the symptoms of which can be seen from thesevere drug problems and high rate of crime, is the inability of the society to cope with the negative
impact of globalization. Various societal institutions such as family, community, educational systemand spiritual faith have been faced with new type of challenges and threats.

154

The entire criminal justice system has been placed under considerable pressure as a result of thelack of a coordinated eﬀort to systematically deal with these challenges. The burden caused by theanomalously sharp rise in inmate number has been enormous, resulting in worsening living conditions
for prisoners. Regardless of the peak increases in Thai inmate numbers from 1997-2006, the numberof correctional staﬀ remained nearly the same, making the current ratio of the corrections oﬃcers toinmates at 1:32. This is well-above the international standard of a 1:5 ratio. The current high ratio has
led to a heavy workload for the staﬀs, aﬀecting both their job morale and quality of work necessary tomeet the treatment needs of inmates.
Issues such as limitations in space, unsafe hygienic conditions, and the overall deterioration of theprison environment for both inmates and staﬀ, have arisen out of prison overcrowding. The United
Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (SMR, 1955) set expected norms
for the treatment of prisoners with respect these issues, and prisons overcrowding directly threatensthese minimum standards.
In order to respond to the serious issue of overcrowding, there has been a dual-approach by
Thailand. Budgets have been increased and allocated to expand and/or build new prisons to help easethe overcrowding of existing ones. However, as these new facilities will soon be full, more alternative
approaches which start early in the pre-prosecutorial stage and therefore prevent more oﬀenders fromentering the correctional system, have been introduced and proven to be successful. In the next
section some of these key measures will be highlighted to illustrate Thailandʼs attempt to reduce theproblems caused by prison overcrowding.

IV. SELECTED NON-CUSTODIAL METHODSFOR REDUCING PRISON OVERCOWDING IN THAILAND
The overhaul of the Thai criminal justice system which began in 1996, culminated in 2002 when
the Ministry of Justice was reorganized and repositioned as the focal point for justice administration.
This reorganization directly impacted the situation of overcrowded prison facilities by paving the way
for the application of alternatives to inmate incarceration, including diversion, restorative justice, andcommunity-based treatment. The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administrationof Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules, 1985), the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for NonCustodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules, 1990), and the Bangkok Declaration (2005) all helped to inform
Thailandʼs approach to dealing with prison overcrowding.
One of key milestones in the development of incarceration alternatives was the cabinet resolution
on July 10, 2001, which speciﬁed clear guidelines on how to reduce case backlog and overcrowding.
The so-called ʻJuly 10 Resolutionʼ recommended several non-custodial and community-based treatment
as desirable approaches, and thus served as a road map for tackling prison overcrowding in Thailand.
Some of the key initiatives included the expansion of the scope of probation to include juvenile
oﬀenders as new target group, the initiation of drug diversion programs, the setting up of community
mediation centers to settle certain kind of dispute within the communities, and the encouragement
for the use of prosecutorial discretion not to prosecute subject to certain kind of conditions. This
new policy has proved eﬀective not only by introducing new approaches for diversion of cases fromthe formal criminal justice process, but also by providing alternatives to imprisonment that are more
eﬃcient at reintegrating the oﬀenders successfully back into the society. As a result, the number ofprisoners decreased from 250,000 in 2001 to 210,000 in 2003, which demonstrates approximately a 16
% reduction in the inmate population in two years.

A. Alternatives to imprisonment: the Role of Probation

Probation is a signiﬁcant non-custodial measure to insure that prison remains a last resort of thesystem. In Thailand, probation measures for adult offenders were provided for by the Penal Codeof 1956, but had not been actively implemented due to the lack of a specialized agency or probationoﬃcers to carry out the court order. In 1979 a law on probation was proposed and a specialized agency

155

was created, with probation oﬃcers appointed to carry out the court orders imposing the conditions
for the supervision and rehabilitation of the oﬀenders under suspended or deferred sentences. Thislaw marked the beginning of the community-based treatment of offenders in Thailand, under the
responsibility of the probation oﬃcers, volunteer probation oﬃcers, and the civil organizations based in
the community. In 1992, the Department of Probation was established to handle all adult probations allover the country.
During its first two decades of operation, the Department of Probation focused its work on
providing probation programs for oﬀenders whose imprisonment terms were suspended. The programs
mainly consisted of the supervision of the offenders, combined with other types of support such as
education, counseling, rehabilitation, community services, and other social welfare. The overall
objective of these activities was to assist the oﬀenders in their eﬀort to rehabilitate and successfully
reintegrate into society, and to become productive members of society without relapsing into reoﬀending.
Prior to the launch of ʻJuly 10 Resolutionʼ, although the Department of Probation did excellent work
providing successful adult probation programs, it was unable to expand its scope of work to cover new,community-based alternative to incarceration. Lack of necessary legislation and overall criminal justicepolicy planning, lack of interagency cooperation and coordination among key actors, and inadequate
funding were among the major reasons hampering the successful introduction of community-based
treatment as alternative to the long-held practices based mostly on retributive, custodial measures.
Under the aforementioned ʻJuly 10 Resolutionʼ, however, the Department of Probation, under
the Ministry of Justice, became the key organization in the implementation of the new policy. The
Departmentʼs scope of work expanded to include probation programs for all types of offenders,
namely juvenile and adults. Additionally, its programs now cover all stages of the criminal process,including the pre-trial, trial, and post-conviction stages. With a specialized agency in charge of all the
probationary involvement for suspects and oﬀenders at all stages of the criminal process, the probation
system in Thailand, while larger, is now more focused than in the past, enabling the Department tocome up with innovative ideas to carry on its new assignments. The challenge, of course, is to doso while maintaining the quality of its traditional functions at the same time. The successes of the
programs run by the Department of Probation - the probation of adults, youth, and parolees, as wellas the community-based treatment - are vital in reducing the numbers of incarcerated inmates, andtherefore the problem of prison overcrowding.
Figures 3 and 4 indicate the clear trend of explosive growth in responsibility by the probationoﬃcers in recent years, as seen from the change in total number of cases handled by probation oﬃcers
during the past 30 years, and the number of oﬀenders who entered the probation system in comparison
with those put under the custody in prisons for the same period.
Figure 3. Number of cases handled by the Department of Probation in past 30 years. The number represents thatcoming from all types of work except that of the community justice.

156

Figure 4. Number of oﬀenders entering into the probation system vs. that placed under custody for the period of
30 years.

From its moderate inception in 1979, the probation system has now overseen more than 1.5 million
offenders, with less than 20% recidivism after probation, indicating that most of the offenders who
have been through treatment programs can successfully reintegrate into the society (see Table 6 formore detailed statistics).
Table 6. Numbers of oﬀenders who re-oﬀend under probation programs during 2004-2007.
Year

Total number of oﬀenders
under probation

Number of re-oﬀenders
under probation

Percentage of re-oﬀenders
under probation

2004

176,799

23,867

13.50

2005

126,974

10,5908.34

2006

128,954

16,622

12.89

2007

137,178

20,98815.30

Source: Annual Reports of the Department of Probation for the period of 2004-2007.

Here are some of the alternatives to incarceration measures that have been implemented by the
Department of Probation.

1. Probation of Adult Offenders

The current adult probation system in Thailand consists of:(a) Social Investigation
The social investigation in Thailand, in accordance with the Penal Code 1979 (B.E. 2522) Section
56, is conducted by probation oﬃcers in a pre-trial phase. Probation oﬃcers then have to prepare a presentence report required by court before a sentence is imposed. The overall aim of social investigation
is to gather facts related to the offender and offence, and to make recommendations for courts on
appropriate sentences.
A report contains the offenderʼs social background, circumstances of the offence, the risk theoffender is likely to pose to the public and advice on suitable probation measures for individual
oﬀenders. The likelihood of individual reform is also taken into account. Another essential part of thesocial investigation is the Risk/Need Assessment to be included in the pre-sentence report.
During the social investigation, as a result of a needs assessment, probation oﬃcers may address
the oﬀenderʼs needs and provide assistance where appropriate, such as helping them with bail matters,
meal allowance, transportation assistance, etc. More importantly, at this stage probation oﬃcers may
also work with victims of crime to give them voices, and provide them with support based ﬁrmly on
restorative justice principles.

157

(b) Supervision
The supervision of adult oﬀenders is an oﬀender rehabilitation process, in which probation oﬃcers
apply many diﬀerent techniques, including:i. The supervision of adult probationers with the use of counseling techniques as a rehabilitative
tool;
ii. The use of community-based rehabilitation programs that are appropriate to individual oﬀenders;andiii. The provision of assistance.
Supervision is a procedure to oversee, treat, support, and give counseling to probationers within
the community. Probationers will be given a helping hand to amend their habits, to reintegrate into
the community as a law-abiding citizen, and to discourage them from re-oﬀending or continuing theircriminal lifestyle.
When courts impose a suspended sentence or a suspension of sentence with probation conditions,probation officers will make an arrangement with the offender to fulfill the court order. The
arrangement is based largely on the outcome of risk and needs assessment of each offender. The
conditions could be modiﬁed or reduced or the probation may be terminated early before the speciﬁeddate. Probation officers will comments on this when reporting the progress of probation outcomes.
Additionally, the probation and supervision plan will be reassessed every 3-6 months. The supervisionalso gives oﬀenders the chance to compensate for the harm done by the crime they commit, and to be
encouraged to stop re-oﬀending.
(c) Speciﬁc Rehabilitation Programs
Concerning treatment programs, the Department of Probation has initiated a wide range of
rehabilitative interventions and activities. The strength of our rehabilitation is the way in which
probation rehabilitative practices are integrated with local resources and boundlessly work in
partnership with other government and non-government agencies. Various constructive programs
have been implemented. Explicit examples include ʻBuddhist Ordinationʼ, Dharma activitiesʼ (religious
training), Ethical Campsʼ, Anti Drink-Driving Campaignʼ, etc.
In attempting to create innovative rehabilitation programs, the department encourage probationoﬃcers to work jointly with multi-agencies, volunteer probation oﬃcers (VPO), psychologists, social
workers, social welfare oﬃcers, religious organizations (Buddhism, Islam, Church), etc. Moreover, thedepartment also works closely with the Victims of Drunk Drivingʼ Club whose members are seriouslyinjured or handicapped victims from drunk-drivers.
(d) Basic Assistance
Probation officers are mandated to provide basic assistance for all offenders- the offender undersocial investigation, adult probationers, juvenile delinquents, parolees, ex-probationers, and exprisoners. Basic assistance will be provided in accordance with the result of needs assessment andgenerally includes vocational training, helping with higher education, job searches, job applications,and other assistance beneﬁcial for rehabilitation. The objective, again, is for the oﬀenders to be able tosupport themselves and successfully integrate back into the society.

2. Probation of Youth Offenders

The responsibility of the probation of juvenile delinquents in Thailand lies with two agencies:
the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection and the Department of Probation. The
Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection deals with the social investigation of young
offenders and oversees those in the delinquent detention centers. The Department of Probation158

supervises young oﬀenders imposed probation orders by the court and those juveniles released fromdetention centers nationwide for a speciﬁc period of time. Since 2004, the Department of Probation
has begun the Juvenile Rehabilitation Program which incorporated a number of related projects aimed
at strengthening the cooperation with the community networks and the networks of civil society
organizations, empowering the family and the community, and capacity building for the probation
officers in their works for the children. In order to provide a venue for counseling and for creative
activities by the youth within the community, a number of community centers for juvenile have been
established to serve as a forum for coordinating assistance and support, as well as for the introductionof useful youth programs and activities in the community.

3. Probation of Parolees

After serving at least one of three of their sentence or at least ten years for life prisoners, mostprisoners are eligible for parole. Before a decision is made, probation officers will propose a postsentence investigation report to the Parole Board. A report consists of relevant information about
the inmate and his/her behavior during the imprisonment, as well as details of supporters. Probation
officers may also include in the report the views of the victim, the offenderʼs neighbor, and thecommunity leaders.
The purpose and practice of the supervision of parolees is similar to that of the supervision of adultprobationers. Their differences lie, however, in the ways in which they are approached and theirprogram requirements. This is due partly to the fact that the oﬀenders have been in custodial institutes
for some time, and adapting into the community and even their own family can be more challenging.

4. Aftercare Services

Another specialized category of services is available for ex-probationers who have completed theprobation term within one year. These oﬀenders are considered the socially disadvantaged who havelost their potential to abide the rule of law. Aftercare services aim to improve reformative potential
and self-sustainability.
For aftercare services, the Department of Probation has applied the use of the halfway houseʼ tohelp oﬀenders in need of accommodation. Halfway houses are there to help them adjust and prepare
to reintegrate into their family and community. As temporary accommodation, there are a variety ofroutine activities and programs in the halfway houses for residents to take advantage of, including
occupational training, spiritual counseling, and various skill development programs. In running the
temporary residences, the Department of Probation attempts to integrate various sciences, local
and traditional know-howʼs, cultures, and religions to frame their programs. Thus the halfway housecan be considered a joint venture among the probation departments, religious institutes, and thecommunity at large.
At present, there are several halfway houses operated by the Department which are locatedin provinces such as Nakhon Sawan, Amnat Charoen, Maha Sarakham, Kamphaeng Phet, andPhatthalung. These provide services for not only the oﬀenders under the probation order, but also
the drug addicts under the diversion initiative. Therefore, other than the aforementioned programs,
additional activities include drug rehabilitation programs and supervised community service.
While new initiatives are considerably more diverse and target group-specific populations,
implementing such treatment programs effectively at large scale require enormous resources far
beyond the normal capacity of any government agency. Therefore, recruitment of volunteers andactive participation by the community itself are of great importance as they provide sustainable
resource for implementing the community-based correctional programs. It is also important toempower each community to develop its own mechanism of crime prevention by means of knowledge
sharing. Some of the ongoing initiatives aimed at community empowerment in Thailand include a
program that utilizes volunteer probation oﬃcers, a community justice network aimed to strengthen
public participation in the criminal justice system, and the media-guided campaign against drunk159

driving.

B. Diversion

Diversion is both a natural process that takes place within the criminal justice system throughthe filtering of offences and offenders, and a deliberate method to process offenders in alternative
ways. The practice of diversion begins with the police and prosecutors, often at their discretion, andtherefore the practice must have rules and standards that both oﬀer protection for the accused, thevictim, and society, and provide for the most appropriate method of justice. Two well-utilized methodsof diversion in Thailand include drug treatment for drug oﬀenders and restorative justice interventions
for oﬀenders and victims.

1. The Compulsory Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts: A major scheme to reduce overcrowdingin Thailand

In 2002, the Thai government adopted a new policy to tackle the narcotic drug problem whichemphasized the enhancement of the preventive measures. Under the policy, the Drug Rehabilitation
Act of 2002, small drug pushers and drug addicts who would have been previously prosecuted as
criminal oﬀenders were now to be regarded as patients who need rehabilitation treatment. This law
was meant to provide a new legal framework for the integrated treatment of drug related oﬀenders in
Thailand. Under the revised scheme, all related government agencies have to work closely together
to provide integrated responses to the treatment of drug oﬀenders. These agencies include the Oﬃceof the Narcotic Control Board, the Royal Thai Police, the Department of Corrections, the Departmentof Juvenile Observation and Protection, the Court of Justice, the Royal Thai Army, the Royal Thai
Navy, the Royal Thai Air Force, the Ministry of Public Health, the Ministry of Interior, the Bangkok
Metropolitan Administration, and the Department of Probation serving as the focal point.
The Drug Rehabilitation Act of 2002 can be regarded as a revolutionary piece of Thai legislation.
The 2002 Act makes clear that drug addicts are not criminalsʼ, but patientsʼ who are in need ofeffective treatment, thus contributing to thousands of drug cases being diverted from courts, andshifting public view on drug dependents in Thailand. After taking-up the responsibility, Department of
Probation did not hesitate to take a more holistic approach by introducing various drug rehabilitation
programs to assist drug addicts rebuild a new life. The number of drug addicts who had been treatedunder the scheme from 2003 to present is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Number of participants to compulsory rehabilitation programs from 2003- 2008

The 2002 Drug Rehabilitation Act stipulates that the person charged with drug addiction , drug
addiction and possession , drug addiction and possession for disposal , or drug addiction anddisposal, - if the amount of possession is less than the limitation of the law - is to be transferred to thecourt within 48 hours, and in the case of young persons, 24 hours. The court then will begin to divert
the case from the traditional criminal justice system to designated facilities for drug assessment. The
evaluation will be conducted by the regional Sub-committee of Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation, chairedby Chief Provincial Public Prosecutors, who will make a decision whether the person is a drug addict.
Apart from this, the committee is given statutory power to supervise drug abusers/addicts during the160assessment and rehabilitation, refer the person to drug rehabilitation centers, consider the extension
or reduction of rehabilitation period, and grant temporary release during detention. If the evaluation
result shows that the person is a drug abuser/addict, s/he will be required to attend treatment
programs for a speciﬁc period of time.
If s/he is assessed as being addicted, the prosecutor will suspend the prosecution and the person
will be mandated to undergo one of the two compulsory systems: the custodial or non-custodial
rehabilitation program.
a. Custodial Rehabilitation
For custodial rehabilitation participants, there are two types of arrangements: intensive and nonintensive treatment. Intensive Custodial Rehabilitation Program comprises three stages; rehabilitation
process, re-entry process, and follow-up process. The Lat Lum Kaeo Community Treatment Centerand the Royal Air Force are responsible for rehabilitation process through the Therapeutic Community(TC) and the Jirasa Program. After 4 months, participants then move on to re-entry process. Activities
in this stage include community service, vocational training, and screening for drug abuse in urine
sample arranged by Department of probation. This stage lasts for two months. Then, participants
move on to follow-up process. Follow up process is under responsible of Ministry of Public Health,community representatives, and volunteer probation oﬃcers. This process lasts for 1 year. Participants
who are deemed successful are then exempt from the criminal prosecution.
Non-intensive Custodial Rehabilitation Program differs from the intensive programme in terms of
responsible agencies. Rehabilitation process of non-intensive program is operated by the Royal Thai
Army, The Royal Thai Navy and the Department of Medical Services. This stage lasts for 4 months.
The re-entry process and follow-up process is as same as those imposed for Intensive Program.
b. Non-Custodial Rehabilitation
In cases where no custody is required during the period of intensive treatment, participants who
are diagnosed as addicts may be admitted as patients to hospitals or other rehabilitation centers forfour to six months, where they can receive the appropriate treatment. In cases where participants
are deemed not to addicts, but merely drug users, they will receive a treatment provided by the
Department of Probation for six months. The remaining two-month probation period and the one-year
monitoring period, are implemented in the same way as the rehabilitation under the custody scheme.
In addition to the implementation of the rehabilitation scheme, the Department of Probation has
also come up with a number of initiatives to assist drug-related offenders in their effort to achieve
successful reintegration. These include the following:- Basic Educational Support: Drug addicts who undergo the rehabilitation program are also
given the opportunity to receive basic education. The program, run by the Department of
Probation in collaboration with the Ministry of Education, oﬀers a special curricula equivalent
to that of the regular elementary or primary schools to each participant depending on his/herneed. It is hoped that by fulﬁlling the educational gap for these drug related oﬀenders, they
will be more prepared for future employment or motivated to pursue higher education of theirchoice upon the completion of the program.
- Enhancement of Family Support: This initiative involves educating family members ofthe drug addicts on how to support the rehabilitation effort and provides counseling service
for family members as well as the participants to the rehabilitation program. The rationale
for this initiative is that rehabilitation will have a greater chance of success if it involves all
stakeholders, since the family members of each drug addict can play signiﬁcant roles in theirrecovery. In order to ensure the smooth and happy reintegration of the oﬀenders back into the161society, the support and understanding on the part of his or her family is deemed indispensable.
It has been found the participants whose family members also took part in the initiative of
rehabilitation had a higher rate of success.
- Buddhist Teaching for Drug Addicts: With the aim of applying relevant Buddhist principle
and guidelines to help the drug addict in developing their mental strength to carry out therehabilitation, this initiative has gained support from three Buddhist temples willing to provide
a pilot program under the initiative.
While drug treatment programs for drug offenders attempt to divert individuals away fromincarceration by taking into consideration their crime in the context of addiction, another form of
diversion - restorative justice - aims to divert individuals away from incarceration by taking into
consideration the context of justice for the victim.

2. Restorative Justice Interventions

As a more specific form of diversion, restorative justice recognizes the role of victims andcommunity in the process of justice, and has a definite place in modern criminal justice systems.
Restorative justice emphasizes informal methods of dealing with crime, and often works hand-in-handwith the community-based treatment options.
In Thailand, there are several criminal justice agencies implementing restorative justiceinterventions. To begin with, the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection has been
implementing restorative justice conferences since 2003. It is implemented under the guise of Family
and Community Group Conferenceʼ (FCGC), and conducted in the pre-trial stage as a channel ofdiversions. From the beginning of the program in June 2003 until February 2008, there have been
21,490 cases where FCGC was conducted, of which 18,128 cases were approved for non-prosecution
by public prosecutors. Similarly, the Department of Probation has initiated a program on restorative
justice known as Restore-Relationship Conferencingʼ, which is conducted at the pre-sentence/social
investigation stage. Due partly to the legislative limitation, the initiative does not place an emphasis on
diversion. Rather, the outcome of restorative justice conferences proves beneﬁcial for judges in giving
appropriate sentences. This is particularly true when judges examine the extent to which oﬀenders
feel guilty about their crime and if any reparation can be made.
Restorative justice has begun to gain wider acceptance in Thailand. Recently, the Criminal Court
has initiated a pilot project on criminal mediation based on restorative justice principles. Draft
legislations on diversions of small criminal cases during the police and prosecutors stages have also
been proposed for consideration of the parliament.
a. Restorative Justice in Response to Domestic Violence
In recent years, domestic violence (DV) has been recognized as another serious issue that threatens
the stability of the family in Thai society. Traditional views tend to regard violence in the home asa private matter, in which it is inappropriate for outsiders to interfere. The result is a problematic
dynamic where victims - who are female in the majority of the cases - are reluctant to report theviolence to authorities, and the incidences are repeated again and again in the home.
The Department of Probation in cooperation with the Royal Thai Police, the Rama Hospital,
the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration, the Women Empowerment Association (an NGO which
provides emergency shelters for female victims of violence) and the Friends of Women Foundation,
has designed an integrated DV response system where the concept of restorative justice is used inconjunction with the law enforcement and rehabilitation programs, organized by the interdisciplinary
professional organizations, to provide assistance to the victims of the violence and oﬀenders in an eﬀort
to change their behaviors and end the cycle of violence.

162

The restorative justice concepts have proved eﬀective in providing a suitable ground for resolving
dispute within the family in a way that tries to maintain the relationships among the family members, if
desired. In bringing the conﬂicted parties to engage in dialogue towards a mutual agreement, emphasis
is made on responding to the needs of the victims as well as holding offenders accountable. Bytaking into account the needs and desires of victims, as well as the complexity of domestic violence,
restorative justice techniques have provided a more eﬀective alternative to the formal criminal justiceprocess in response to DV.
When the violence occurs between married couples, regardless of their legal status, the partner
who has been inﬂicted with the violence can exercise his or her right to bring a criminal case against
the offender by first reporting it to the police. Under the restorative justice initiative, he or she
can request that a mediation dialogue with the partner be arranged by the probation officer, thepsychologist, or the social welfare worker. If the two sides can reach an agreement, the charge against
the oﬀender will be suspended on the condition that he or she participates in a rehabilitation program
under the supervision of the probation oﬃcer for an agreed period. During that period, the participants
will be able to receive various kinds of assistance from the Department of Probation, including legal aid
counseling, occupational training, and accommodation support. If the participant has not repeated any
incidences of violence, the charge will be completely dropped. Within the prescription period of theoﬀense, if the attempt at rehabilitation proves unsuccessful, the victim can at any time request thatthe prosecution reinstate the charges against her partner.

IV. KEY CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
REDUCING PRISON OVERCROWDING IN THAILAND
In order to tackle the problem of prison overcrowding, it is important that well-focused criminal
justice policies regarding alternatives to incarceration, non-custodial treatment, diversion, andsuccessful reintegration of oﬀenders are in place throughout the criminal justice process. It can be said
that these alternatives methods and community-based approaches have begun to take root in the Thaicriminal justice system and greater society. Yet, for these alternative approaches to survive and attainmaturity, a number of key challenges will have to be adequately dealt with. Here are some of thechallenges that, in my opinion, could adversely aﬀect the continuing eﬀort to tackle the issue of prison
overcrowding in Thailand.

A. Key Challenges
1. Explosive growth in scope of work

The increase is not only in the quantity of work, but also the variety of missions. New laws thathave been in force in recent years have paved the way for the expanded scope of probation workfrom the traditional intensive probation based on investigation and supervision of the offenders, tothe new frontier where probation work becomes an essential instrument for the diversion and crime
prevention. An introduction of innovative techniques such as the electronic monitoring for treatment
of offenders in the community, has also led to significant increase of work load for the probationoﬃcers. While vital in the ﬁght to control the growth of incarcerated oﬀenders, the expanded scopeof work has considerable impact on the probation staﬀ, many of whom are already under stress frombeing employed in a constantly under-staffed work environment. Figure 4 shows the number ofcases that fall under the responsibility of the probation oﬃcers, while Figure 5 traces the number ofprobationers entering the system during the past 30 years. Here the explosive growth in responsibilityof the probation staﬀs in recent years is clearly visible.
For prison oﬃcers, in normal circumstances, prison works has already been diﬃcult especially interms of security control and rehabilitation operations. Moreover, prison staﬀ in Thailand normally
have to perform double roles: as professional staff and also as guards. When the number of prison
population rapidly increases coupled with expanded demands from the public, policy makers and newlegislations, prison works are now even harder while the number of prison staff remains relatively
unchanged. Upper policy-level constraints make it diﬃcult for the public agency to employ additional163

staﬀ to tackle the additional missions. In order to eﬀectively address the overwhelming problem ofworkload increase and its impact on the morale of staﬀ, the government must take this issue seriously
and devise a systematic way to provide support and funding to ensure that the quality of the probation
program will not suﬀer.

2. Need for enhanced visibility

Probation work - as the approach where most of the activities take place within the community
at the microscopic level - tends to be less visible in the eyes of the general public as compared to
institutional custody treatment. One serious implication for this relatively low visibility is the diﬃcultyin trying to convince decision-makers who might ﬁnd it diﬃcult to see the tangible results of probation
work, that their policy advocacy and funding support are vital. While the overcrowding of prisons iseﬀectively shown with increasing ﬁgures of inmates, the linkage between decreasing the incarcerated
population and strengthening the programs of probation is a more diﬃcult relationship to portray.
The Department of Probation will therefore have to put forth a more strategic eﬀort to make theoutcome of the probation programs as clear and concrete as possible in order to gain understanding andappreciation from the policy-makers and general public. One successful example of raised visibility is
the campaign regarding drunk driving. Through the use of the media, the campaign was successful insending out clear messages to the public that the imposition of community services, such as working in
hospital or providing care for victims of drunk-driving accidents, is more eﬀective enforcement of thelaw, as it forced the oﬀenders to face the impact of their actions and refrain from repeating them. The
Court was also convinced to increase its use of community service orders as punishment, as opposed
to ﬁnes alone. The success of this program should encourage similar tactics to increase visibility withrespect to more types of oﬀences.

3. Need for effective treatment programs

With the ever-increasing complexity of issues related to crimes involving addiction, domestic
violence, and other societal and familial problems, there is a constant need for law enforcement,
probation staﬀ, and court oﬃcials to acquire new knowledge and skills to enable them to understandand cope better with conducting supervision and providing assistance to such oﬀenders. By eﬀectively
addressing such problems at a fundamental, rather than superﬁcial, level, there can be a true impact
on recidivism rates and therefore numbers of oﬀenders in the system and overall inmate population.
In earlier days, when the Department of Probation was under direct control of the judiciary,
the main responsibility of probation oﬃcers was to prepare the so-called social inquiry and oﬀendersupervision reports with more emphasis on the prevalent forms of punishment - imprisonment and ﬁnes
- and less emphasis on turning the probation programs into eﬀective alternatives. Now, the probation
programs need to be able to fulﬁll more policy requirements while providing no less eﬀective options
for the treatment of oﬀenders than the custodial approaches. The general public must be informed andconvinced that the programs can deliver desirable results - the reform of the oﬀendersʼ attitude andbehaviors - when these programs are implemented in local communities. In order to achieve that, theprograms need to be more responsive to as many types of target groups as possible, especially withrespects to their types of oﬀences. More cooperation and partnership with healthcare providers andsocial welfare agencies must be sought after in designing such programs.

4. Integration of enforcement agencies on treatment of offenders

The reorganization of the Ministry of Justice in 2002 successfully brought all related government
agencies charged with the treatment of oﬀenders under one umbrella. Yet there is still an urgent needfor the integration of these agencies to cascade down to real practice and work procedures withineach agency and across the related agencies. The development of an integrated system of offender
treatments is crucial to achieving more eﬃciency and reducing the duplication of work.
Every agencies in the criminal justice system will have to work closely with one another encies inorder to develop a suitable framework for such integration, with well-deﬁned scope of responsibility

164

and accountability. A unified strategic plan will be necessary for the smooth delivery of each key
process along the value chain of the overall offender treatment process, including the pre-release
preparation and after-release support. Additionally, the Department of Probation will need to continue
its eﬀort in promoting participation and partnership with other non-public sectors.

5. Maintaining the quality of public participation in probation work

Success by the Department of Probation in promoting public participation in the criminal justiceprocess of Thailand has inspired decision-makers at the top policy levels to apply this model ofvolunteering and community networking to other key criminal justice issues. A good example of thisis the development of the community-based system of responses focusing on the alternative dispute
resolution and access to legal assistance. So far, the volunteer probation oﬃcers initiative as well as
the prototyped networking initiatives by the Department of Probation have led to great success inmobilizing public support for and understanding of the work on oﬀender treatment. This ultimately
results in a more effective implementation of treatment programs and after-release assistanceprograms within the community. Still, for the public participation and partnership models developedin such manner to be eﬀectively applied to address other criminal justice issues, substantial funding
and support will be necessary. Otherwise, it might lead to the undesirable consequence where thecurrent eﬀorts in the community-based treatment of oﬀenders will be diluted as a result of insuﬃcient
resources.

6. Political challenges and consistency of penal policy

New initiatives and treatment programs related to oﬀenders take time to be accepted as worthwhile
not only for the policy-makers and the general public, but for employees within the criminal justicesystem itself. Practitioners such as prison oﬃcers, law enforcement employees, probation oﬃcers,
and court members must have a certain level of belief and buy-in for the programs to be implemented
successfully. Programs such as diversion, restorative justice, and community treatment must firstbe shown to be eﬀective in their objectives (of reducing incarceration rates, recidivism, etc.) before
buy-in can be achieved. Having time for the process to play out is diﬃcult when there is a lack ofconsistency regarding penal policy in the country. Because many of these initiatives are relatively
new to criminal justice in Thailand, there has not yet been a consistent approach to reducing prison
overcrowding through such initiatives. Changing agendas of political leaders, as well as changing of
the leaders themselves, has contributed to this problem. A consistent and committed approach by thepolicy-makers would allow the programs to reach their full potential, thus providing tangible statistics
to allow for evidence-based decisions regarding penal policy.

7. Judiciary’s involvement in promoting community corrections sentence

In many cases, despite all the work being done at the pre-prosecutorial stage by the Ministry ofJustice, sentences ultimately lie in the hands of the judiciary. This can be a challenge not only becauseof the necessary buy-in discussed in the previous section, but because historically the judiciary tends
to utilize the traditional methods of ﬁnes and imprisonment rather than the more alternative methods.
As the sentencersʼ of the offenders, the judiciary play a vital role in the promotion and utilizationof the alternative methods, and are a key group involved in tackling the rate of incarceration. By
accepting and mandating various methods of diversion, treatment, mediation, etc. while remaining
independent, the judiciary can go a long way towards promoting community corrections sentences.

B. Recommendations

Based on a recognition that prison overcrowding is not merely as a result of increased crime, but
as a result of the criminal justice policies made to deal with criminals, the solution then becomes about
eﬀective treatment that is not merely about keeping oﬀenders under control through incarceration, but
about providing them with the necessities and treatment for a successful reintegration into a crimefree life in society. Here are a few of my thoughts on how to enhance alternative to incarceration
measures to better cope with the challenges mentioned above, and positively impact the problem ofprison overcrowding in Thailand.

165

1. Earlier application of alternative measures

Prison overcrowding is by and large the result of a breakdown of the system of applying alternative
measures to appropriate offences and offenders from the stage of initial arrest through to thesentencing stage. Non-custodial measures must be more vigorously applied in the pre-prosecutorial
stage of the criminal justice system for the system to work, and for prison to be the last resort. The
mindset of prison as a last resort must be present in all sectors of the system from the beginning, sothat the oﬀender will be channeled as early and as appropriately as possible into alternative measuresof community corrections.

2. More variety for non-custodial treatment

While imprisonment may be justified for certain types of offenders under certain circumstances,
it is not justiﬁed for all. In order for the system to better serve and respond speciﬁcally to the needsof the oﬀenders, more options for the community-based and alternative treatment measures is highly
desirable. Introduction of such measures at the pre-trial stage and during the period of suspended
sentence, as well as in-house arrest could provide more variety for the non-custodial treatment in thecommunity. Speciﬁc treatments that match the needs of certain group of oﬀenders are also desirable.
In addition to the oﬀenders or suspects awaiting trials, as well as drug abusers, prisoners with shortterms of imprisonment (i.e. those who have committed compoundable oﬀences of less than two- years
term) might well be a good candidate for such measures. Furthermore, the entire criminal punishment
system needs to be reformed in order to allow for the introduction and implementation of the noncustodial measures in greater variety. The legal framework needs to be revised to allow for morealternatives to imprisonment in order to reduce the number of inmates incarcerated for the shortterm.

3. Multilevel conditions

At present, the conditions set forth for the oﬀenders to observe during probation tend to be quite
rigid and inflexible, rendering them less responsive to the different needs and circumstances ofeach offender. For instance, in case of offenders who have re-offended, the conditions may well beappropriately intensive, with a combination of limiting freedom of movement, restriction on accessto any particular areas, compulsory rehabilitation, or even the increase of the probation period. On
the other hand, for oﬀenders of petty crimes, normal conditions might not necessary. One approach
to allow for such multi-level conditions is to empower the probation oﬃcers to use their discretion inorder to reach an agreement with each oﬀender in a tailor-made fashion.

4. Need for ‘national penal policy’ and modernized legislations

Reiterating the challenge of consistent policies, there is a demonstrated need for a national penal
policyʼ which promotes community corrections and reserves prison spaces for only hardcore criminals.
This will take the modernization and innovation of legislation, using best practices and evidence-basedknowledge from around the globe, and applying it in a manner that is suitable to Thai law, customs,
culture, and society. Currently, Thailand is exploring a number of innovative policies regarding
intermediate sanctions, including intensive probation, home detention, weekend detention, periodic
detention, and electronic monitoring for the community-based treatment of the oﬀenders. Additionalinnovative approaches might include pre-sentencing probation, assistance program for victims ofcrimes, as well as the implement of restorative justice measures.

5. Improvement of transition operation and aftercare services

Prison should not be a revolving door for inmates; the issue of overcrowding can not be addressed
without looking at keeping oﬀenders from re-oﬀending after they leave prisons or other correctional
programs. Community-based corrections and treatment programs are only as good as their re-oﬀending
rates, so it is crucial that transition operations for inmates and aftercare services for ex-probationers
are improved to prevent recidivism.
In response to the need to systematically embrace more innovative approaches, some might look
for the establishment of new agency to be responsible for the new demand. Still, in my opinion, it

166might be more productive to consider assigning such new missions to the Department of Probation,
considering that its staffs have had considerable real work experience and are equipped with thenecessary fundamental knowledge and skills. Each probation oﬃcer, provided that they are properly
trained, will have at least three signiﬁcant qualiﬁcations, namely: 1) being knowledgeable with respect
to laws and criminal justice system, 2) having good background knowledge on psychology and social
welfare, and 3) having intensive working experience with all key stakeholders in the criminal justiceprocess- whether they are the police, the public prosecutors, the oﬀenders, the victims of crimes, orthe members of local community. Therefore, we only need to build up more on the well-laid foundation
which will be more cost eﬀective and feasible.
At the heart of any quality treatment lies the ultimate goal of reintegration of the oﬀenders into thesociety. Measures must be tested and monitored for their eﬀectiveness in terms of providing assistanceto the oﬀenders so they can attain such goal. This involves taking into account the societal and familial
dynamics surrounding the crime, and applying the support needed to reintegrate the offender backinto the community. As the society becomes more and more complex with more compounded impactof the weakened social institutions, so are the nature and circumstances surrounding the offenders
and their oﬀences. The probation oﬃcers will require constant training and re-training to bring theirknowledge and skills in keeping up with the latest development of the serious issues of the days. They
are required to do more than just supervising the oﬀenders according to the conditions set forth by the
court orders. They must be able to work closely and productively with the oﬀenders, the victims ofcrimes, and the local communities. Their role will not be limited to merely rules keepersʼ but extend
to encompass that of the local community resources managersʼ in order to truly return the oﬀenders
back into the society.

6. Increased partnership

My experience in working to promote public participation in the treatment of offenders has
conﬁrmed the fundamental belief that direct engagement of the community members, either throughthe form of volunteers or networking, is indispensable for the effective implementation of thealternative treatments for imprisonment. It is the most efficient way to make use of the resources
within the local community as well as other forms of social capital to support the probation work anddecrease in the rate of incarceration. In the context of Thailandʼs political system, direct participationfrom the local community also contributes to the on-going eﬀorts with respect to decentralization ofadministration power from the central government, as mandated by the Constitution. As present,
there are over 6,700 Tambon Administration Organizations - the smallest units of local governments- throughout Thailand with more independence in terms of policy planning and budget management.
The success in promoting community involvement in the treatment of oﬀenders should be expanded
to include the form of partnership agreements with these local administrations, which will provide amore sustainable solution to the chronic problems of budget constraints and lack of support for theassistance program for the reintegration of the oﬀenders into the society.

V. CONCLUSION
Prisonersʼ rights are human rights, and as stipulated in the SMR (United Nations, 1955), prisoners
have the right to adequate facilities. The problem of overcrowded prisons is one that many countries,
including Thailand, are currently dealing with. One approach utilized has been capacity-based solving the situation by building more prisons. The Ministry of Justice in Thailand recognizing thatthe issue of prison overcrowding is not just a symptom of increased crime, but of penal policies as
well, has used a three-prong approach: prevent newcomers from entering prisons; reduce the current
prison population by using early release (parole) measures for prisoners who are near the end of theirsentence and have earned parole through good behavior; and reduce the recidivism rate. Initiatives
created to underline these three strategies include alternatives to incarceration, such as enhanced
probationary measures that include community treatment, diversion, and restorative justice.
Alternatives to incarceration programs have come a long way in Thailand has since they were ﬁrst
introduced thirty years ago. They currently operate as well-accepted options for the diversion of167

criminal cases from the historical method of fines and imprisonment. Additionally, there have been
a number of new measures for specific group of offenders to better serve their needs, along with
the needs of the victims and society at large. Public participation and community engagement havebecome the integral part of system where rehabilitation and reintegration are the ultimate goals. Someinnovative measures such as restorative justice with emphasis and role for the victim have been sought
after more and more. Finally, the working style where community networking and partnership are theabsolute ingredients has become the norm. All these are the good signs for not only the sustainable
development of the community corrections approach, but for the situation of prison overcrowding
as well. The more oﬀenders who are diverted to other forms of rehabilitation, the more the prisonsremain last resorts for only the most dangerous criminals.
There is room for improvement, however, as many challenges remain with respect to theimplementation of community corrections and alternative measures. Since the time of the inception,
the present time is perhaps the most crucial for making real headway in Thailandʼs response toprison overcrowding. It is important that all concerned parties who shoulder the responsibilities of
implementing alternative measures put great effort into initiating, implementing, monitoring andevaluating the outcome of such programs, while maintaining the quality of work despite the risingdemands. Through a decade of hard work, pioneers involved in the process of reform, including the
Department of Probation, have been successful at - among other things - establishing the system ofprobation for adult oﬀenders as well as juvenile oﬀenders in Thailand. There are more than 100,000
persons under supervision annually, and the success rate has been satisfactory. Oﬀenders who areunder the supervision of parole are not, by deﬁnition, adding to the prison population, and therefore
this is a crucial piece in the work of decreasing the incarceration rate.
In the case of penal policy, there can be no shortcut to success. While the utilization of noncustodial measures to combat prison overcrowding can be viewed as a cheaper alternative to building
more facilities, such measures in Thailand, similar to many countries, are facing a chronic lack offunding and inadequate allocation of personnel. Although initiatives such as diversion and restorative
justice may in fact be a cheaper alternative, this does not mean that they can survive without adequateﬁnding and support. To ensure that Thailand maintains a prison population that is consistent with thecapacity of its facilities, it is necessary that non-custodial measures of treatment and rehabilitation
continue to be given their due consideration and support, to enable them to succeed during thisimportant period for continuing growth and maturity.

168