“Can imprisonment be considered a form of torture within the framework of universal judgments?”

Author: Att. Semih Temizer – 2025 – Istanbul Technical University – [email protected]

ABSTRACT

While the punishment for crime may vary from society to society, the essence of “crime” includes similar acts for every society. Although local judgments sometimes create polar opposites, it is known that universal acceptances lead to similar results. In this case, it has always been a matter of debate how punishments can be given to some exceptional crimes such as rape. Although methods such as castration, chemical punishments, prison sentences, and retaliation are frequently discussed for the execution of the punishment, the most widely applied punishment method is imprisonment. In this sense, in his own article, author Arandjelovic presents a striking view that long-term/punitive prison sentences are not just a type of punishment but a form of torture. Throughout our article, this multifaceted, multidimensional, and multilayered claim will be evaluated within an academic framework.

Keywords                  : Crime, Punishment, Imprisonment, Torture, Prison, Penalty

1.1 Introduction

Since the beginning of the world, social life has been an inevitable element for each of us. Individuals who make up a society are, by nature, pro-freedom and relatively selfish. This passion for freedom can sometimes lead to consequences such as exceeding boundaries. The boundaries that can keep a society together are, of course, law. Due to the passion for freedom and self-centeredness, individuals can exceed boundaries with their behaviors and commit “crimes” in the most basic sense.

“Crime” has been condemnable for all societies and it has always been desired to respond to crime with “punishment”. The types of punishment are also one of the most important elements in terms of the rehabilitation of the criminal. The types of punishment that can rehabilitate the criminal and deter society from crime have become valid. Of course, the execution of the type of punishment should also be possible. For example, although it is argued that the type of punishment in which a farm is established for each criminal is rehabilitative, it is not possible to accept this in terms of the national judicial system.

Throughout our article, we will first briefly examine the concept of crime. Then, we will briefly examine the concept of punishment positioned in response to crime. Then, we will look at the most common type of punishment, imprisonment, and its elements. After establishing the theoretical ground, we will examine the conceptual criticism of the article author Arandjelovic regarding imprisonment and the methods.

1.2 The Concept of Crime

In general meaning, “crime” as the concept refers to actions that violate laws then requires penalties or sanctions. The term “crime” comes from the Latin word “crimen” that at the beginning meant an accusation or charge later that concept evolved into wrongful acts.

In general meaning, crime as the concept refers to actions that violate laws then requires penalties or sanctions. Throughot the history, the notion of crime is deeply connected with the development of organized societies. First human communities  created norms to maintain/launch/protect the order. The violations of these norms were often matched with communal or ritualistic penalties. Of course, the concept of crime, its historical origins and its reflections on today can be discussed in pages. However, since the subject of this article is to analyze the argumentative aspect of Arandjelovic’s approach to long-term imprisonment, for now we will be content with this conceptual framework regarding the concept of crime and examine the concept of punishment.

1.3. The Concept of Penalty/Punishment

According to general acceptance, punishment refers to the imposition of a penalty or suffering upon an individual as a response to a perceived wrongdoing. In terms of etimology, the term “punishment” comes from the Latin punire, meaning “to inflict a penalty,” which itself is rooted in poena, signifying “penalty” or “pain.” In history, punishment has been having deep dimensions in human societies.

Modern criminal law, which has its roots in centuries ago, has not seen punishment as merely a feedback. Punishment should ensure the deterrence of crime and the rehabilitation of the criminal. If this concern were not pursued, such a variety of punishment types, prison types (T, F, K for Turkey), and such facilitations regarding execution would not have been provided. The aim of modern criminal law is to rehabilitate the criminal at an optimal level.

In this context, we need to categorize punishment types to explain better. Although the types of punishments vary from period to period, region to region, and country to country, the most basic types of punishments are: death penalty, imprisonment, corporal punishment, fines, and community-based punishments. Each type of punishment is specific to crimes committed under different conditions.

It is important to remember that: While one of two criminals who are complicit in the same crime receives a prison sentence, the other may only receive a fine. Actuall, even if both criminals receive a prison sentence, one may go to prison while the other may decide to postpone his execution due to the conveniences in the execution conditions. In this respect, each type of punishment should be explained in relation to each type of crime to which it is specific. In this respect, only prison sentences will be briefly explained in  this paper.

1.4. The Concept of Imprisonment                                                                                            

Although we might see “incarceration” using in similar conditions, the term “imprisonment” (it is known as prison sentence) is a legal penalty/punishment that includes the confinement of an individual within a designated facility (jail or prison) for a specific period. The term “prison” basically comes from the Latin prensione (taking or seizing). It is also coming from prehendere, meaning to grasp or apprehend.

Through the history, the use of imprisonment as a punitive measure/prison sentence/legal penalty can be seen in ancient civilizations (Egyptians, Mesopotamias, Greeks). Also detention is considered as a punishment but it is not. Basically, detention aims to protect evidences and make “potential” offender (each person is innocent up to decision.) away from fleeing and targeting victims again. Detention lasts –generally- until the stated risk is over.

Roman Era

Detention and incarceration was used in Roman era. The modern approach for imprisonment evolved during Enlightenment, in light of the rise of legal philosophies. Throughout history, it is possible to see that almost every society, state or organization similar to state mechanism has used the prison sentence. Of course, while some states in modern times have implemented this punishment for rehabilitation purposes, in ancient times the purpose was only to punish. The conditions of the prison sentence have been the most important factor in evaluating the human, psychological and legal status of the prison sentence. Because, while house arrest can also be evaluated as a prison sentence in a basic framework, a solitary confinement lasting 20 years can also be considered as a prison sentence.

For the reasons presented and explained above, it can be stated that prison sentences are deep-rooted punishments with a historical past, that they have been used by many nations and states, and that there are reasonable reasons for their use. Moreover, the subject of our article is not to analyze the historical and epistemological dimensions of prison sentences. The subject of our article is how the author Arandjelovic characterizes prison sentences in his article, how he establishes his argument, and how he shapes his thesis. Therefore, in the following sections, we will analyze the thoughts expressed by the author in the article, how he presents them in an argument system, and whether the propositions he presents are correct.

2.1. The perception of author Arandjelovic’s in his article over imprisonment (T)

The article that will be the subject of our analysis in this section basically reveals how the author approaches the crime and punishment dilemma. For this reason, he places the expression “rethink” in the title of his article. He states that the current evaluations are shallow and “hypocritical” (an extremely radical and academic evaluation), and suggests that we need to rethink the dialectic of crime and punishment.

In the simplest framework, the author Arandjelovic claims that long-term, punitive prison sentences are a form of torture (Arandjelović, 2023).

The article basically argues that imprisonment brings/creates/occurs with it a range of physical and psychological suffering. It asserts such punishments effect severe and varied forms of suffering on prisoners. He further says that it is “hypocritical” for modern societies/states/countries to gloss over this fact and to regard imprisonment as a more ‘civilised’ form of punishment (Arandjelović, 2023).

This claim is a surprising and devastating claim. Because almost all states use prison sentences as a method. The most modern and contemporary states in the world can also be included in this group. This claim declares every state that implements prison sentences as torturers, without exception, and this claim is remarkable. So, how did the author reach this conclusion? How did he establish his argument for this? We will examine this in the next section of our article.

2.2. Arandjelovic’s arguments in terms of his assessment

Although he explains his thesis with pages of various arguments, in the simplest sense, author says that punitive prison sentences disrupt/impair a person’s psychological, mental and emotional health, and that things that disrupt/impair a person’s psychological, mental and emotional health are a form of torture. That’s why, punitive imprisonment is a form of torture (Arandjelović, 2023).

This extremely striking assessment leads readers to believe that every situation that disrupts a person’s psychological, mental and emotional health is torture. Scientific data, psychological opinions, a posteriori based on tests and experiments reveal that the concept of torture cannot be reduced to such a simple form.

On the one hand, he is unable to provide concrete, empirical information beyond abstract and superficial thoughts on this subject. The concept of torture is a very specific concept with legal and medical basis. When discussing long-term prison sentences, our author, unfortunately, cannot provide a medical document, an analysis, a psychiatric data from the medical perspective; a legal framework, an international agreement, a high court decision or a piece of a report from the United Nations from the legal perspective.

2.3. Reconstruction of Arandjelovic’s arguments

The author classifies the arguments that he reached his thesis under three main headings: i) Restriction of Social Relations, ii) Weakening of Identity iii) Restriction of Economic and Personal Freedoms

The author gives striking examples of restrictions on social relationships. He presents the fact that prisoners can only meet with their relatives for limited periods of time under strict rules within the framework of legal regulations as a problem. According to the author, this situation weakens the bonds of individuals with their loved ones and increases the feeling of loneliness. For example, prisoners cannot attend a family dinner with their loved ones on special days (birth, wedding, graduation). If they have children, they miss important moments or cannot attend the funerals of their loved ones (Arandjelović, 2023).

Regarding the weakening of identity, the author complains that the personalities of criminals and the characteristics that distinguish them are generally reduced to the identity of a “convict” due to legal obligations.

The author wants to express that the economic freedom of the prisoners is restricted because they cannot work as they wish, and this will make them more insecure and timid.

2.4. Conceptual/epistemological fallacies in the author’s thesis and falsification of the thesis

Prison sentences do not mean locking the criminal in a closed room and making him wait in that room until he completes his sentence. There are closed prisons, open prisons and separate prison types. Conditions in open prisons are lighter than in closed prisons. In addition, there are vocational courses in prisons. Individuals can both earn income and gain self-confidence by learning a profession or producing. In addition, various rehabilitation studies are carried out in prisons. Moreover, criminals are tried to be rehabilitated in prisons classified according to the magnitude/size/effects of the crime.

In this process, as time passes – as a part of the sentence is served – prisoners are transferred to prisons that offer better conditions. Moreover, in the last 1 year – usually – they leave prison under the name of probation. During this one-year period, they may be assigned to do certain jobs, and it is intended that they be integrated into society on the condition that they sign on certain days.

P. Bacaksız’s sight

In her article, author P. Bacaksız states that necessary measures are taken for convicts to maintain or regain their physical and mental health from the time they enter the institution until their release, thus indicating that imprisonment can contribute to the rehabilitation process. The author also mentions that ‘rehabilitation programs’ are prepared for the criminals to continue their lives as legitimate and productive members of society. According to author P. Bacaksız, such programs help individuals maintain their psychological and emotional health. (Bacaksız, 2014)

In the continuation of her article, the author P. Bacaksız states that, on the contrary to Arandjelovic’s claims, working under a prison sentence allows criminals to feel valuable and contribute to the collective society. She frames his opinion with the idea that working in prisons should be made the rule, not an exception as it is now, provided that it is not turned into forced labor and the earnings of convicts are improved. She mentions that this situation can positively affect the psychological health of individuals. In her article, the author, P. Bacaksız, also mentions the healing aspect of prison sentences beyond being torture, by cooperating with professional organizations in order to reach the desired level in the rehabilitation process of criminals (Bacaksız, 2014).

Author Tokgöz, who has conducted research in a similar field, states that keeping criminals under control is a great assurance for people who do not commit crimes. She states that the society not feeling safe and people feeling anxious while walking on the street will be a greater source of trauma for the non-criminal segment of the society (Tokgöz, 2020).

Pennsylvania system

In a similar study conducted in this field, an example from the USA is given, stating that in the Pennsylvania system, prison sentences allow prisoners to be alone and think deeply about the crimes they have committed, thus encouraging repentance and the process of reform. The rest of the article includes a multifaceted observation. It is said that limiting the interaction of prisoners with each other during the implementation of the prison sentence prevents them from being exposed to bad influences, ganging up, contacting new criminal organizations, and learning new types of crime (Mehmet Emin Artuk, 2016).

Author Işıktaç, on the other hand, claims that the emergence of imprisonment as an alternative to punishments such as death, beating and forced labor is a reflection of the idea that punitive prison sentences have a healing effect on the prisoner (Işıktaç, 2013).

Medical aspect

Also, torture has a medical equivalent, origin, history, conditions, dimensions, degrees and limits. In this area, an article addressed the medical aspect of the subject. In this article, which addresses the definition of torture and the differences between it and similar traumatic events, the authors state that traumatic events can negatively affect the psychological health of people exposed to it; however, these situations are not always considered torture. The authors support their claims with a striking and extremely clear example. For example, they clearly state that events such as natural disasters, accidents or sudden losses can also disrupt a person’s psychological, mental and emotional health, but since they do not have the intention of causing intentional and systematic harm, they are not considered torture (Sayra Lotfi, 2017).

In her master’s thesis, which I believe thoroughly addresses the problem of psychological disorders being perceived as torture, K. Çağlan states that situations such as stigmatization, which arise as a result of the existence or misunderstanding of psychological disorders, are not considered torture, as they do not have the intention of causing intentional harm – contrary to Arandjelovic’s claim (Çağlan, 2019).

Arandjelovic’s thought

Arandjelovic’s argument included two propositions. With the first proposition, he claimed that prison sentences harm psychological, mental and emotional health. Of course, this proposition had a legal origin. We conveyed the rebuttal arguments of the relevant legal academics against this proposition in an appropriate academic language. With the second proposition, the author claimed that things that harm a person’s psychological, mental and emotional health were torture. Of course, this proposition had a medical origin. We conveyed the rebuttal arguments of the relevant medical academics against this proposition in an appropriate academic language. In this respect, we think that the above-mentioned propositions are sufficient to prove that the author Arandjelovic’s thesis is not true on academic grounds, with evidence, in terms of law and medicine.

2.5. Soundness and validity of the thesis

For an argument to be valid, the premises must follow each other in terms of logical rules. If the premises follow each other logically and a true conclusion emerges, then the thesis is valid. From this perspective, it is possible to say that Arandjelovic’s argument is valid.

For an argument to be sound, the argument must be valid and all of its premises must be true. It has been proven by legal and medical approaches that both of the premises above are false. From this perspective, it is possible to say that Arandjelovic’s argument is not sound.

Bibliography

Arandjelović, O. (2023). Crime and punishment: a rethink. Philosophies – 8 , 47.

Bacaksız, P. (2014). Cezalandırma ve topluma yeniden kazandırma. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi , 4917-4941.

Çağlan, K. (2019). Psikolojik hastalıkların yanlış yorumlanması ve inanç eksikliği olarak damgalanması sürecinde manevi destek ihtiyacı.

Işıktaç, Y. (2013). Ceza adaleti açısından hapis cezası ve rehabilitasyon ilişkisi. Journal of Istanbul University Law Faculty , 625-638.

Mehmet Emin Artuk, M. E. (2016). Hapis cezalarının ve cezaevlerinin tarihi gelişimi. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi , 297-338.

Sayra Lotfi, M. B. (2017). Travma sonrası stres bozukluğu ve sosyal hizmet.

Tokgöz, H. B. (2020). Cezalandırmanın amacı ve bu bağlamda ütopyalar üzerine bir değerlendirme. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi , 431-467.