![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
As a result of intensive mobility and migration over the last twenty-five years, multiculturalism and multilingualism have become a reality in European prisons. This “superdiversity” poses a serious challenge to the various stakeholders who need efficient and reliable communication. Yet this topic has been underresearched. According to statistics for the year 2014 issued by the Council of Europe, Belgium has a high rate of foreign inmates (41%). Against this background, the aim of this exploratory research is to describe how the Flemish penitentiary system tackles this linguistic challenge. Data were gathered through qualitative research methods such as desktop research and in-depth interviews with 8 stakeholders (prison directors, prison staff, social workers, and interpreters). Due to the scarcity of financial resources and the presence of organizational hurdles, the Ministry of Justice rarely assigns jobs in prison to interpreters; instead, they are replaced by cheaper and immediately available alternatives. The results suggest that linguistic isolation of foreign detainees leads to social isolation and may jeopardize their release and social reintegration.
Acknowledgment
The author is grateful to Stefanie Jonckheere for conducting and transcribing the interviews. She also wishes to thank the participants and the Belgian Ministry of Justice for granting the permission to conduct the interviews.
Notes
1. Enck and Morrissey, “If Orange Is the New Black.”
2. Desbarats, “Orange Is the New Black,” 55.
3. Throughout this article, the following definition of “foreign” is used: “A person who does not have the nationality of the country in which he is imprisoned” (Aebi, Burkhardt, and Tiago, “Survey Citation2015,” 14). This idiom includes refugees: “Foreigners can be recognized as refugees on the basis of a reasonable fear of prosecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, social group or political conviction (Convention of Geneva 28 July 1951),” Snacken, “Belgium,” 138.
4. Baixauli-Olmos, “Description of Interpreting in Prisons,” 45, 58; Martínez-Gómez, “Interpreting in Prison Settings,” 321.
5. Aebi, Burkhardt, and Tiago, “Survey Citation2015,” 1.
6. Huyberechts, “Helft gevangenen komt uit buitenland.”
7. Council of Europe, “Main Figures.”
8. The “Masterplan Citation2008-2012-Citation2016 for a prison infrastructure in human conditions” (“Masterplan Citation2008-2012-Citation2016 pour une infrastructure pénitentiaire dans des conditions humaines”) provided for renovations and expansions of existing entities, the replacement of archaic institutions and the construction of seven new prisons. These measures are in line with the expansion of prison capacity and its modernization. International bodies, such as the Council of Europe’s Committee on the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment of the United Nations concluded on the basis of on-site visits in Citation2013 that the increase in prison capacity alone couldn’t solve the problem of overcrowding and that Belgium needed to find alternatives to deprivation of liberty to facilitate social reintegration, as stated in the report of the International Observatory of Prisons (OIP), 15-21.
9. OIP, “Notice Citation2016,” 13, 26, 30.
10. Arnaut et al., eds., Language and Superdiversity, 1.
11. Vertovec, New Complexities of Cohesion, 3.
12. Arnaut et al., eds., Language and Superdiversity, 1.
13. Pavlenko, “Superdiversity and Why It Isn’t.”
14. Arnaut et al., eds., Language and Superdiversity, 9.
15. Huyberechts, “Helft gevangenen komt uit buitenland.”
16. They are persons who have committed a crime and have been found to be irresponsible for their actions. They receive psychiatric treatment for reintegration into society during detention. More information is available on the website of the Forensic Psychiatric Center (FPC, Forensisch Psychiatrisch Centrum) of the city of Ghent.
17. This refers to the law of 12 January 2005 entitled “Law of principles concerning the administration of prisons and the legal status of detainees” (“loi de principes concernant l’administration des établissements pénitentiaires ainsi que le statut juridique des détenus”), known as the “Dupont Law.” http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/cgi_loi/change_lg.pl?language=fr&la=F&cn=2005011239&table_name=loi.
18. OIP, “Notice Citation2016,” 121.
19. Snacken, Foreigners in European Prisons, 130.
20. OIP, “Notice Citation2016,” 120, 14.
21. Martínez-Gómez, “Interpreting in Prison Settings,” 234. Among other things, we can cite the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and the European Prison Rules of the Council of Europe, and in particular article 59.e recommending that “prisoners charged with disciplinary offenses shall have the free assistance of an interpreter if they cannot understand or speak the language used at the hearing.”
22. Baixauli-Olmos, “Description of Interpreting in Prisons,” 49, 53, 58–59.
23. Martínez-Gómez, “Interpreting in Prison Settings”; Martínez-Gómez, “Prison Settings.”
24. Martínez-Gómez, “Criminals Interpreting for Criminals.”
25. Martínez-Gómez, “Facing Face,” 93.
26. Martínez-Gómez, “La integración lingüística,” 487, 497.
27. Snacken, “Belgium.”
28. Ibid., 141.
29. Baixauli-Olmos, “Description of Interpreting in Prisons,” 45.
30. Corbin and Strauss, Basics of Qualitative Research, 49, 51.
31. Braun and Clarke, “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology,” 88. An orthographic transcription was used to transcribe verbal elements. Some nonverbal elements were also written down (cough, silence). To facilitate referrals, each transcript and transcription line were numbered. This does not preclude reflection on the interpretative process of the transcription act and the investigator’s responsibility, as advocated by Braun and Clarke.
32. Corbin and Strauss, Basics of Qualitative Research, 220, 61, 11, 14, 26.
33. For interviews with federal staff, prior authorization was requested on a case-by-case basis with the Ministry of Justice.
34. In Sociologie de la prison, Combessie identifies four “stakeholders” within the prison: “1) the management team, 2) all uniformed staff in charge of keeping the order and preventing prison escapes, 3) all public servants, contractors, volunteers and various stakeholders who are in prison for the ‘welfare’ of the detainees, 4) all correctional officers whose work entails no regular direct contact with inmates (secretaries, accountants, maintenance engineers, etc.)” (86); my translation.
35. These people were contacted by e-mail or telephone and were informed briefly of the general research objective and interview topic. Participants were also informed of their right to terminate participation without any consequences and gave their free and informed consent in writing. Anonymity and confidentiality were guaranteed.
36. The Flemish regional authority supports citizens in six areas, namely: well-being (e.g., general welfare issues, support for people with disabilities, healthcare), employment (preparation for job interviews, assessment, follow-up), education (e.g., basic education, teaching, distance learning), culture (e.g., cultural activities, theatre, library, shows) and sport (e.g., fitness, team sports, animation). Through a service called “JWW” (“Justitieel Welzijnswerk”), the regional authority deals with the reception, support and the psychological and administrative follow-up of the prisoners and their families, provides legal information and advice and acts as a bridge between the prison and the various social services. JWW works on request, is independent, and provides a free and confidential service. We refer to the Strategic Plan Citation2015-2020 (Hulp- en dienstverlening aan gedetineerden) for more information.
37. For long-term prisoners, the psychosocial service prepares a detailed report, addressed to the authorities, specifying the conditions and contraindications to their parole. The prisoner’s reintegration efforts and volition will be considered (Act of 5 March 1998 on parole, art. 2§2), as well as various other factors (reintegration potential, personality, behavior in custody, risk of recidivism, attitude towards the victims).
38. Staff working in prisons located in Flanders are solely subject to the Dutch language regime. The knowledge of another language, such as French, tested in an examination, entitles them to a bonus.
39. More information on the project is available at www.prisonwatch.org.
40. Research in Wallonia might lead to different results given that French is globally more widely used there than Dutch.
41. Baixauli-Olmos, “Description of Interpreting in Prisons”; Martínez-Gómez, “Criminals Interpreting for Criminals”; Martínez-Gómez, “Facing Face.”
42. Delarue, “Quelques questions,” 42.
43. Van Kalmthout, Hofstee-van der Meulen, and Dünkel, “Comparative Overview,” 17.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Emmanuelle Gallez
Emmanuelle Gallez, PhD, works at the Faculty of Economics and Business and the Faculty of Arts at the Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, where she teaches French as a foreign language and interpreting. She graduated as a translator and a conference interpreter. Her doctoral research (KU Leuven, Citation2014) focused on interactional pragmatics and discursive identity construction in court interpreting.