TRABALHO PRISIONAL PRIVADO: PARADOXO OU POSSIBILIDADE? AVALIAÇÃO DOS SISTEMAS MODERNOS E ESTABELECIMENTO DE UM MODELO DE ESTRUTURA ATRAVÉS DAS LENTES DA CONVENÇÃO SOBRE TRABALHO FORÇADO

Autores

Palavras-chave:

Trabalho Prisional, Prisão Privada, Sistemas de Justiça Punitiva, Convenção sobre o Trabalho Forçado, Direito Comparado

Resumo

Resumo: Superlotação, deterioração das condições, custos cada vez maiores, reincidência. Esses são os termos que vêm à mente ao pensar nos sistemas de justiça punitiva mundiais. Aparentemente, a comunidade internacional se propôs a combater essas questões e seria incorreto afirmar que medidas nessa direção não tem sido tomadas. No entanto, certos estados têm procurado remediar a reincidência e favorecer a reinserção, aumentando as oportunidades de emprego para prisioneiros e delegando esta tarefa ao setor privado. Em algumas jurisdições common law, as prisões foram inteiramente privatizadas (abordagem “wholesale”), enquanto em jurisdições civil law tendem a privatizar apenas serviços específicos, enquanto as funções de custódia permanecem com o Estado (sistema “semiprivée”). Independentemente disso, considerando que França, Alemanha e Autrália realizam essas práticas apesar de adotarem a Convenção sobre o Trabalho Forçado da Organização Internacional do Trabalho, que, prima facie se opõe ao trabalho prisional privado, é então necessário analisar as razões para esse desenvolvimento e avaliar esses sistemas. Esse artigo identifica o sistema Françês como o mais compatível com a Convenção, e propõe um modelo de estrutura que está em conformidade com a norma e atende aos objetivos dos sistemas penais modernos.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Mário Guido, University College London, UCL, Reino Unido.

LLM (University College London), LLB com Estudos Jurídicos na Europa (University of Reading, Uppsala University, University of Geneva), Certificado em Direito Transnacional (University of Geneva). 

Renata Queiroz Dutra, Universidade de Brasília, UnB, Brasil.

Doutorado e mestrado em Direito pela Universidade de Brasília (UnB). Professora Adjunta de Direito e Processo do trabalho da Universidade de Brasília (UnB). 

Fernanda Potiguara Carvalho, Universidade de Brasília, UnB, Brasil.

Graduação em Direito na Universidade de Brasília (UnB). Especialização lato sensu em Direito Processual Constitucional na Escola Superior da Magistratura do Estado de Goiás (ESMEG). Mestranda em Direito  (UnB).

Referências

ANDREW, Jane; BAKER, Max; ROBERTS, Philip. Prison Privatisation in Australia: The State of the Nation, University of Sydney, 2016.

ANELLI, Laure; MARCEL, Cécile. Inspecteur du travail en prison: un pouvoir limité. Dedans-Dehors, 14 de fevereiro de 2018. Disponível em <https://blogs.mediapart.fr/observatoire-international-des-prisons-sectionfrancaise/ blog/140218/inspecteur-du-travail-en-prison-un-pouvoir-limite> acesso em: 15 de julho de 2018.

ALLEN, Rob. Global Prison Trends 2015. Penal Reform International, 2015.

BAILEY, Victor. English Prisons, Penal Culture, and the Abatement of Imprisonment: 1895-1922. 36(3) Journal of British Studies, 1997.

COMBESSIE, Philippe. ‘France’ in Dirk van Zyl Smit and Frieder Dünkel (eds) Imprisonment Today and Tomorrow: International Perspectives on Prisoners’ Rights and Prison Conditions. 2ª ed., Kluwer Law International, 2001.

CONVENTION CONCERNING FORCED OR COMPULSORY LABOUR CONVENTION. (No. 29) of the International Labour Organisation, , 1930.

CRÉTENOT, Marie; LIARAS, Barbara. ‘Prison Conditions in France’ in European Prison Observatory, Detention Conditions in the European Union. Paris: 2013.

DE JONGE, Gerad. ‘Still Slaves of the State: Prison Labour and International Law’ in Dirk van Zyl Smit and Frieder Dünkel, Prison Labour: Salvation or Slavery? Ashgate Dartmouth, 1999.

DE VITO, Christian G; LICHTENSTEIN, Alex, Writing a Global History of Convict Labour (2013) 58 International Review of Social History.

DÜNKEL, Frieder; SMIT, Dirk van Zyl. Prison Labour: Salvation or Slavery? Ashgate Dartmouth, 1999, VII.

ELGOT, Jessica. MoJ seizes control of Birmingham Prison from G4S. The Guardian, 20 de Agosto de 2018. Disponível em <https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/20/moj-seizes-control-of-birmingham-prison-from-g4s> acesso em 21 de agosto de 2018.

ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA, Britannica on the treadmill. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 3ª ed. Disponível em <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Britannica-on-the-treadmill-1998450#ref1205851> acesso em 29 de junho de 2018.

EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND, Prison Work in Europe: Organisation and Management of Prison Workshops. Centre D’Iniciatives per a la Reinsercio 2007.

FELDMAN, Lindsey Raisa. Prison Labour. Oxford Bibliographies, 2018. disponível em: <http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195396607/obo-9780195396607-0236.xml> acesso em 28 de junho de 2018.

FENWICK, Colin. Private Benefit from Forced Prison Labour: Case studies on the application of Convention 29. Report to the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Centre for Employment and Labour Relations Law, University of Melbourne School of Law, 2000-2001.

FENWICK, Colin. Private Use of Prisoners Labour: Paradoxes of International Human Rights Law. 27(1) Hum.Rts.Q, 2005.

FENWICK, Colin. Regulating Prisoners' Labour in Australia: a Preliminary View. 2003. AJLL.

FENWICK, Colin. When Privatization means exploitation: Prison labour in privatized facilities’ in International Labour Organisation. Fundamental Rights at Work: Overview and Prospects. Labour Education 122(1). 2005.

HARDING, Richard; RYNNE, John. Private Prisons’ in Yvonne Jewkes. Jamie Bennett and Ben Crewe (eds), Handbook on Prisons. 2ª ed., Routledge, 2016.

HARDING, Richard. ‘Private Prisons’ 28 Crime and Justice, 2001.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), Report III, ILC 52nd Session, 1968.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Direct Request by the CEACR on C29, France, ILC 99th Session, 2009.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Direct Request by the CEACR on C29, France, ILC 101st Session, 2011.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Direct Request by the CEACR on C29, (France), ILC 104th Session, 2014.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Extension of the Labour Inspection Convention, (1947) (No. 81), to activities in the non-commercial services sector, Report VI (1), ILC 82nd Session, 1995.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Eradication of Forced Labour: General Survey by the CEACR, Report III (Part 1B), ILC 96th Session, 2007.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Fundamental Rights at Work: Overview and Prospects. n 64, Labour Education 122(1), 2005.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, General Survey on the Reports concerning the Forced Labour Convention. No. 29, 1930.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Giving Globalisation a Human Face: General Survey by the CEACR, Report III (Part 1B), 2012.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Observations and Information Concerning Particular Countries (Part 2), ILC 90th Session, 2002.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Prison Labour I. 25 International Labour Review, 1932.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Prison Labour II. 25 International Labour Review, 1932.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 4A), ILC 83rd Session, 1996.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 85th Session, 1997.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 86th Session, 1998.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 87th Session, 1999.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 89th Session, 2001.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 90th Session, 2002.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 92nd Session, 2004.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 98th Session, 2009.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 99th Session, 2010.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 101st Session, 2012.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 104th Session, 2014.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Report of the CEACR, Report III (Part 1A), ILC 106th Session, 2017.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Summary of Reports, Report III (Parts 1, 2 and 3), ILC 82nd Session, 1995.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION, Summary Reports on Ratified Conventions, Report III (Part I), ILC 38th Session, 1955.

JESUIT SOCIAL SERVICES, Outsourcing Community Safety: Can private prisons work for public good? 2017.

KNAEBEL, Rachel. Prison workers in Germany are organising. Equal Times, 2 de março de 2015. Disponível em: <https://www.equaltimes.org/prison-workers-in-germany-are#.VPWBnfmsWCk> acesso em 25 de julho de 2018.

LE VAY, Julian. Competition for Prisons: Public or Private? Policy Press, 2016.

LEIGHTON, Paul; SELMAN, Donna. Punishment for Sale: Private Prisons, Big Business, and the IncarcerationBinge. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010.

LOGAN, Charles. Private Prisons: Cons & Pros. OUP, 1990.

MANDY, Caroline. L’inspection du travail en prison, Direction Régionale des Entreprises, de la Concurrence, de la Consommoation, du Travail et de l’Emploi. Bordeaux: Dezembro de 2017.

MASON, Cody. International Growth Trends in Prison Privatisation. The Sentencing Project, Washington, 2013.

MASON, See Rowena. John Timpson’s workshops at Wandsworth Prison help inmates learn a trade. The Telegraph, 31 de maio de 2010. Disponivel em: <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/john-timpson/7790842/John-Timpsonsworkshops- at-Wandsworth-Prison-help-inmates-learn-a-trade.html> acesso em 29 Julho de 2018.

MCCONVILLE, Sean. The Victorian Prison. in Norval Morris and David J. Rothman (eds), The Oxford History of the Prison: The Practice of Punishment in Western Society (OUP1998).

MEHIGAN, James; ROWE, Abigail. Problematising prison privatisation: an overview of the debate. in Yvonne Jewkes, (ed.) Handbook on Prisons. Willan Publishing, 2007.

MUELLER-TÖWE, Jonas, Geheime Verträge, versteckte Kosten. Warum Private Dienstleister Deutchlands Gefängnisse nicht billiger, sondern teurer Machen, Correctiv. Correctiv, 12 de Novembro de 2015. Disponível em <https://correctiv.org/recherchen/stories/2015/11/12/teilprivatisierte-gefaengnisse-der-staat-zahlt-drauf/> acesso em 6 julho de 2018.

NATHAN, Stephen. Overview of prison privatisation. Annual Conference EPSU prison services network, Athens, 2011.

NOWAK, Manfred. Human Rights or Global Capitalism: The Limits of Privatization (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016.

O’DONNELL, Ian. The aims of imprisonment. In: Yvonne Jewkes, Jamie Bennett and Ben Crewe (eds), Handbook on Prisons 2ª ed., Routledge, 2016.

PENTER, Colin. The power of the corporate (private) prison industry. The Stringer, 14 de abril de 2014. Disponível em <http://thestringer.com.au/the-power-of-the-corporate-private-prison-industry-and-why-australia-has-thehighest-proportion-of-private-prisons-in-the-world-7189?cv=1> acesso em 15 de julho de 2018.

PHELAN, Lisa C. Making Prisons Work. 30 Loy.L.A.L.Rev, 1997.

PILKINGTON, Ed. US Inmates stage nationwide prison labour strike over modern slavery. The Guardian, 21 de agosto de 2018. Disponível em <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/20/prison-labor-protest-america-jailhouselawyers-speak> acesso em 26 de agosto de 2018.

PRISON REFORM TRUST. Private Punishment: Who Profits?. London: 2005.

PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION FOR THE STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE REVIEW OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE PROVISION. Report on Government Services 2017, (Volume C: Justice, 2017), Table 8A.4.

PULLIN V PRISONER COMMISSIONERS. [1957] 1 WLR 1186 (UK); State of New South Wales v Napier. Australia: 2002, NSWCA.

RICHARDSON, Genevra The Case for Prisoners’ Rights. In: Mike Maguire, Rod Morgan and Jon Vagg (eds), Accountability and Prisons: Opening up a Closed World. Tavistock Publications, 1985.

RIECKMANN, Johannes. Privatization of Security Services: Comparing approaches to policing and prisons across the Atlantic. American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, 5 de junho de 2017. Disponível em <https://www.aicgs.org/publication/privatization-of-security-services/> acesso em 6 de julho de 2018.

SEMMENS, Bob. The Public / Private Dilemma in Australia. 47(2) Journal of Correctional Education, 1996.

SHEA, Evelyn. A Comparative Study of Prison Labour in France, Germany and England. Penal Issues, 2005.

SOCIAL EXCLUSION UNIT, Reducing re-offending by ex-prisoners. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Julho de 2002.

SOZZANI, Joseph. Privatisation in the United States and Australia: A Comparative Analysis of the Modern Privatisation Movement in Corrections, 13(1) Bond Law Review, 2001.

SPIERENBURG, Pieter. The Body and the State: Early Modern Europe. In Norval Morris and David J. Rothman, (eds), The Oxford History of the Prison: The Practice of Punishment in Western Society (OUP 1998).

SWEPSTON, Lee. Prison Labour and International Human Rights. 52 Industrial Relations Research Association 2001.

THE HOWARD LEAGUE FOR PENAL REFORM, Business Behind Bars Making Real Work in Prison Work. London: 2011.

THE HOWARD LEAGUE FOR PENAL REFORM, Prison, work and social enterprise: the story of Barbed. Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, 2008.

THE HOWARD LEAGUE FOR PENAL REFORM, Rehabilitating Work: What are Prison Workshops For? London, 2000.

UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME, Roadmap for the development of prison-based rehabilitation programmes. United Nations Office at Vienna, 2017.

WHITE, Rob. On Prison Labour. 11(2) Current Issues in Criminal

Capa da Revista Direito.UnB Volume 4, Número 2 - Edição especial (Tomo II)

Downloads

Publicado

2020-12-22

Como Citar

GUIDO, Mário; QUEIROZ DUTRA, Renata; POTIGUARA CARVALHO, Fernanda. TRABALHO PRISIONAL PRIVADO: PARADOXO OU POSSIBILIDADE? AVALIAÇÃO DOS SISTEMAS MODERNOS E ESTABELECIMENTO DE UM MODELO DE ESTRUTURA ATRAVÉS DAS LENTES DA CONVENÇÃO SOBRE TRABALHO FORÇADO. Direito.UnB - Revista de Direito da Universidade de Brasília, [S. l.], v. 4, n. 2, p. 137–180, 2020. Disponível em: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/revistadedireitounb/article/view/33834. Acesso em: 20 jun. 2024.

Artigos Semelhantes

<< < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 > >> 

Você também pode iniciar uma pesquisa avançada por similaridade para este artigo.