Conditional Release Conditions in Turkish Execution Law

Conditional Release Conditions in Turkish Execution Law. This report analyzes the “conditional release” (parole) mechanism, a fundamental institution of Turkish execution law, within the framework of the most current legislation in effect as of 2026. The report examines the complex relationship between Articles 107 (conditional release) and 108 (execution regime specific to recidivists) of the Law on the Execution of Penalties and Security Measures (LEPSM), Law No. 5275, and Article 105/A (probation).

The main findings of the analysis are threefold:

Calculation Hierarchy: The actual release date of a convict from prison is subject to a two-stage calculation. First, the “conditional release date” (CR) is determined based on the objective execution ratio (e.g., 1/2, 2/3, 3/4) set according to the nature of the crime and the status of the offender. Then, the “probation” (DS) period (1 year, 3 years, or 5 years, depending on the crime date) is subtracted from this date to find the actual release date.
Transformation of the ‘Good Conduct’ Condition: As of 2021, the “good conduct” assessment has shifted from an automatic process to a subjective evaluation based on the discretion of the Administrative and Observation Boards (AOB). It is no longer sufficient for the convict to merely complete the mathematical duration of their sentence; they must also be found “ready for social integration” by the AOB based on criteria such as “remorse,” “participation in education programs,” and “risk of re-offending.”
Impact of the 10th Judicial Package (2025): Law No. 7550 (the 10th Judicial Package), which entered into force on June 4, 2025, has created a radical change in the execution regime. The prohibition on conditional release for “second-time recidivist” convicts under LEPSM Art. 108/3 has been abolished, opening the way for these convicts to benefit from conditional release at a 3/4 ratio and from probation.

This report presents the philosophy of conditional release, its substantive and formal requirements, the execution ratios for different types of crimes, the revolutionary recent changes to the recidivism regime, and its relationship with probation, all in the format of a detailed legal opinion with practical calculation examples.

Introduction: The Fundamental Dynamics of Execution Law: The Purpose of Punishment and the Institution of Conditional Release

The Turkish penal execution system defines the primary purpose of imprisonment not only as isolating the offender (retribution) but also as rehabilitating and reintegrating the convict into society (special prevention). One of the most important tools for this philosophy is the institution of “conditional release” (colloquially known as şartlı tahliye or parole), regulated in Article 107 of the Law on the Execution of Penalties and Security Measures (LEPSM), Law No. 5275.

Conditional release is not an amnesty or a pardon of the sentence. It is an execution method that allows a convict who has served a specific portion of their sentence in a penal institution with “good conduct” to serve the remaining part of their sentence in the community under supervision. This institution is the primary motivational tool that encourages the convict to maintain good conduct throughout the execution process.

The Fundamental Conceptual Distinction: Conditional Release (CR) vs. Probation (DS)

The two most frequently confused concepts in execution calculations are conditional release (CR) and probation (DS – denetimli serbestlik). These two institutions are related but have different legal natures:

Conditional Release (LEPSM Art. 107): This is the release date (parole date) that a convict is entitled to upon completing the basic legal time (the execution ratio, e.g., 1/2) they must spend in prison. The CR date is the “main skeleton” of the execution regime, and all other calculations are based on this date.
Probation (LEPSM Art. 105/A): This is not a type of release, but a method of execution. It allows the convict to serve a specific period remaining until their (above-calculated) CR date (e.g., 1 year) outside the penal institution, subject to obligations such as electronic monitoring, signing in, or attending rehabilitation programs.

This distinction creates a clear hierarchy in execution calculation. The path to finding out when a convict will actually be released from prison is as follows:

The CR date (eligibility date) is calculated based on the convict’s total sentence according to the execution ratio they are subject to (detailed in Chapter 2).
The DS (probation) period that the convict is entitled to (determined by the crime date, e.g., 1 year, 3 years) is subtracted from this CR date.
The resulting date is the date the convict will actually leave the prison to begin their probation.

Therefore, analyzing a convict’s conditions for conditional release first requires examining the CR ratio (objective condition) and their good conduct status (subjective condition), and then applying the DS reduction to this foundation.

Chapter 1: The Indispensable Conditions for Conditional Release

The decision for conditional release is not an “absolute right” for the convict; it depends on the simultaneous fulfillment of two basic conditions specified by law: the objective (duration) condition and the subjective (good conduct) condition.

A. The Objective Condition: Execution of a Specific Portion of the Sentence

This condition requires the convict to have actually served the portion of their prison sentence (e.g., 1/2, 2/3) in the penal institution, as specified by law for different types of crimes. Which crime is subject to which ratio forms the core of the execution regime and will be discussed in detail in Chapters 2 and 3.

When calculating this period, the time the convict spent in pre-trial detention for the crime is deducted (subtracted) from the total sentence and the time to be served.

B. The Subjective Condition: The Convict Must Have “Good Conduct” (LEPSM Art. 89)

The law does not deem the mere completion of the duration sufficient; it also requires the convict to be of “good conduct,” meaning they must demonstrate a positive change during the execution process and prove they are ready to be reintegrated into society.

The “good conduct” decision, which was largely a formality in the past, has become the most critical and subjective element of the execution regime since new regulations (Law No. 7242 and related bylaws) came into effect on January 1, 2021.

Structural Change: The Rising Role of the Administrative and Observation Board (AOB)

The good conduct decision is no longer given automatically; it is left to the discretion of the Administrative and Observation Boards (AOB – İdare ve Gözlem Kurulu) established in penal institutions. This board is a multidisciplinary body chaired by the institution’s director and composed of the deputy director responsible for observation and classification, an administrative officer, the prison doctor, a psychiatrist, a psychologist, a social worker, an education specialist, and the chief corrections officer.

Convicts are subject to a comprehensive evaluation by this board before decisions on transfer to an open prison, probation, and conditional release, and in any case, at least once every six months.

Good Conduct Assessment Criteria (2021 Regulation)

When deciding whether a convict is of “good conduct,” the AOB does not simply look at whether they have received disciplinary penalties. The board assesses whether the convict is ready for social integration and their risk of re-offending. The main criteria considered in the assessment are:

Compliance with the rules and security of the penal institution.
Whether they exercise their rights in good faith.
Whether they fulfill their obligations (e.g., cleaning, provisions).
Whether they show sincere remorse for the crime they committed.
Their participation and progress in implemented improvement, education, and rehabilitation programs (social, cultural, sporting activities, art programs).
Certificates obtained and reading habits.
Social relations with other convicts/detainees and staff.

This transformation signifies a shift in execution law from a mathematical process to a behavioral one. In the past, execution was largely a predictable calculation process based on the “müddetname” (duration certificate). In the current system, even if a convict serves their required ratio (e.g., 1/2) day by day, they may receive a “not of good conduct” decision based on the AOB’s subjective evaluation (e.g., “showed no remorse,” “did not attend education programs”).

This decision directly blocks not only the convict’s conditional release but also their right to probation and transfer to an open penal institution, which are prerequisites for conditional release. Therefore, modern execution law expects convicts not to passively “serve time,” but to actively participate in the rehabilitation process. This situation has dramatically increased the importance of appeals (Chapter 6) to the Execution Judgeships against negative AOB decisions.

Chapter 2: Calculation of Conditional Release Periods (Execution Ratios)

The execution ratios that determine the minimum time a convict must spend in prison (the objective condition) vary according to the type of sentence (indefinite/termed) and the nature of the crime (common/terror/sexual, etc.).

A. Execution Periods for Indefinite Prison Sentences (Objective Condition)

For indefinite prison sentences, specific net periods must be completed, rather than ratios:

Aggravated Life Imprisonment: The convict may benefit from conditional release after serving 30 (thirty) years of the sentence in the institution with “good conduct.”
Life Imprisonment: The convict may benefit from conditional release after serving 24 (twenty-four) years of the sentence in the institution with “good conduct.”

Upper Limits for Aggregation of Sentences (İçtima)

If a convict is sentenced to multiple indefinite prison terms, the time to be served is extended as follows (due to aggregation rules):

Multiple aggravated life sentences: 36 years.
One aggravated life and one life sentence: 36 years.
Multiple life sentences: 30 years.
One life sentence and one termed sentence: A maximum of 30 years.

B. Execution Ratios for Termed Prison Sentences (By Crime Date)

For termed prison sentences, the milestone that fundamentally changed the execution regime is March 30, 2020 (Law No. 7242). Calculations vary depending on whether the crime was committed before or after this date.

General Rule (Post-Law 7242): 1/2 (Half)

For crimes committed after March 30, 2020 (excluding the exceptions below), the basic conditional release ratio is 1/2 (half) of the sentence. (Note: The 1/2 ratio also applies to crimes committed before July 1, 2016, under Provisional Article 6).

Increased Ratios (Exceptional Crimes): 2/3 (Two-Thirds)

For certain serious crimes and special offender statuses, the execution ratio is 2/3 (two-thirds) of the sentence:

Serious Crimes under the TPC: Intentional homicide (TPC Art. 81, 82, 83), intentional injury resulting in aggravated consequences (TPC Art. 87/2-d), torture (Art. 94, 95), and torment (Art. 96).
Organized Crime (TPC Art. 220): Crimes of forming, leading, or being a member of an organization to commit crimes.
Recidivism: Convicts who are first-time recidivists (detailed in Chapter 3).

Highest Ratio (Exceptional Crimes): 3/4 (Three-Fourths)

For crime categories where the state is most sensitive and public reaction is highest, the execution ratio is 3/4 (three-fourths) of the sentence:

Counter-Terrorism Law (CTL): For those convicted of crimes falling under the scope of Law No. 3713 (terrorism offenses), the execution ratio is 3/4.
Crimes Against Sexual Inviolability: TPC Art. 102/2 (Aggravated sexual assault), Art. 103 (Child’s sexual abuse), Art. 104/2-3 (Aggravated forms of sexual intercourse with a minor).
Manufacture and Trafficking of Narcotics or Psychotropic Substances: TPC Art. 188.
Second-time Recidivists: After the 10th Judicial Package (detailed in Chapter 3).

C. Prohibition on Conditional Release (LEPSM Art. 107/16)

Turkish execution law provides an exception that completely eliminates the “right to hope” for some crimes. According to LEPSM Art. 107/16, in cases of conviction for aggravated life imprisonment due to “Crimes Against the Security of the State” (Art. 302-308), “Crimes Against the Constitutional Order and Its Functioning” (Art. 309-316), and “Crimes Against National Defense” (Art. 317-325) in the TPC, when committed within the framework of an organization’s activity (e.g., under the CTL), the provisions for conditional release do not apply.

Convicts in this situation serve their entire sentence (until death) in the penal institution; this is a de facto “absolute life” implementation.

Summary Table of Conditional Release Ratios (As of 2025)

The following table summarizes the complex execution ratios analyzed in Chapters 2 and 3:

Sentence Type	Crime/Offender Type	Relevant Legislation (LEPSM)	Conditional Release Ratio/Period
Aggravated Life	Standard (General Rule)	Art. 107/2	30 Years
Aggravated Life	Aggregation (Multiple)	Art. 107/3	36 Years
Aggravated Life	Recidivist (1st or 2nd Time)	Art. 108/1-a, Art. 108/3	39 Years
Aggravated Life	Organizational Activity (Art. 107/16)	Art. 107/16	Not Applicable(Prohibited)
Life Imprisonment	Standard (General Rule)	Art. 107/2	24 Years
Life Imprisonment	Aggregation (Multiple)	Art. 107/3	30 Years
Life Imprisonment	Recidivist (1st or 2nd Time)	Art. 108/1-b, Art. 108/3	33 Years
Termed Imprisonment	Common Crimes (General Rule)	Art. 107/2	1/2 (Half)
Termed Imprisonment	Exceptional Crimes (Homicide, Torture, Org. Crime)	Art. 107/2	2/3 (Two-Thirds)
Termed Imprisonment	Terrorist Offenses (CTL)	Art. 107/4, CTL Art. 17	3/4 (Three-Fourths)
Termed Imprisonment	Sexual Crimes (TPC 102/2, 103 etc.)	Art. 107/4	3/4 (Three-Fourths)
Termed Imprisonment	Drug Trafficking (TPC 188)	Art. 107/4	3/4 (Three-Fourths)
Termed Imprisonment	Recidivist (1st Time)	Art. 108/1-d	2/3 (Two-Thirds)
Termed Imprisonment	Recidivist (2nd Time) (After June 4, 2025)	Art. 108/3 (Amended)	3/4 (Three-Fourths)

Chapter 3: Special Case: Execution Regime Specific to Recidivists (LEPSM Art. 108)

Execution law makes a clear distinction between first-time offenders and those who make crime a habit (recidivists). “Recidivism” (recidivism) is the commission of a new crime within a specified period after the sentence for a previous crime has become final. When a court decides to apply “recidivism provisions” under TPC Art. 58, the execution regime is aggravated according to LEPSM Art. 108.

A. Recidivism (First-time Recidivist)

The execution regime for a convict subject to recidivism provisions for the first time is aggravated as follows:

Conditional Release Ratio: The general rule of 1/2 for termed sentences does not apply; the conditional release ratio is applied as 2/3 (two-thirds). (This ratio was reduced from 3/4 to 2/3 by Law No. 7242 in 2020, a significant improvement in favor of first-time recidivists).
Probation: These convicts can benefit from probation 1 year before their conditional release.
Post-Execution Supervision: After the sentence is executed via conditional release, a separate “supervision period” is determined by the Execution Judge, and the convict remains under supervision during this time.

B. Second-time Recidivism and the 10th Judicial Package

The strictest rule in Turkish execution law, and the area of the most radical change as of 2025, is the case of “second-time recidivism.”

Historical Situation (Before June 4, 2025)

According to the legislation before this date, if “second-time recidivism” provisions were applied to a convict (i.e., they were a recidivist while already being a recidivist), LEPSM Art. 108/3 stipulated, “In the event of the application of second-time recidivism provisions, the convict shall not be conditionally released.”

This meant that the convict in question had to serve their entire sentence (until the “bihakkın tahliye” or full-term release date) in the penal institution and could not benefit from probation. This rule reflected a strict penal policy, similar to “three-strikes” laws, aimed at completely isolating the offender from society.

Critical Legislative Change (10th Judicial Package – Law No. 7550)

Law No. 7550, known to the public as the “10th Judicial Package,” entered into force on June 4, 2025, and fundamentally changed this regime.

The package amended the phrase “shall not be conditionally released” in LEPSM Art. 108/3 and completely abolished the prohibition on conditional release for second-time recidivists.

New Calculation (For Second-time Recidivists – After June 4, 2025)

Following this revolutionary change, the execution calculation for second-time recidivists (provided they are of “good conduct”) is as follows:

Termed Prison Sentences: The conditional release ratio is applied as 3/4 (three-fourths).
Aggravated Life Imprisonment: The conditional release period is 39 (thirty-nine) years.
Life Imprisonment: The conditional release period is 33 (thirty-three) years.

These convicts will also be able to benefit from the right to probation 1 year before their conditional release.

This change signals a radical shift in penal philosophy. The state has granted the chance for rehabilitation and reintegration (the “right to hope”) even to a group of convicts it had labeled as “incorrigible” and from whom it had cut off hope of returning to society. Underlying this change are the permanent burden these convicts place on the prison population and the indirect influence of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence on the “right to hope.” As of 2025, this is the most significant structural change in execution law, and the one expected to lead to the most releases.

Chapter 4: Early Release via Probation (LEPSM Art. 105/A)

The final stage in determining when a convict will actually be released from prison is the application of the probation (DS) reduction to the conditional release (CR) date. DS is the execution of the final part of the sentence, up to the CR date, within the community.

However, the provisional and permanent articles in the current legislation have created a complex and confusing tripartite structure regarding DS periods. Which DS period applies depends entirely on the “date the crime was committed” and “whether the convict was on Covid-19 leave.”

A. Calculation of Probation

The basic conditions for benefiting from DS are that the convict has earned the right to be transferred to an open penal institution (or is already in one) and has been found to be of “good conduct” by the Administrative and Observation Board. Once these conditions are met, the applicable DS periods are as follows:

Basic Rule (1 Year): For crimes committed after March 30, 2020, convicts can be released to probation 1 (one) year before their conditional release. For exceptional crimes subject to the 3/4 ratio, such as terrorism, sexual crimes, and drug trafficking, the DS period is also, as a rule, 1 year.
Temporary Regulation (3 Years): For crimes committed before March 30, 2020 (excluding terrorism, sexual crimes, drug trafficking, and recidivists), the DS period is applied as 3 (three) years under LEPSM Provisional Article 6.
Special Cases (Additional Time): Regardless of the crime date, the DS period is 2 years for female convicts with children aged 0-6, and 3 years in cases of serious illness, disability, or advanced age.

B. Covid-19 Leaves (Provisional Article 10) and the Constitutional Court Decision

During the pandemic, tens of thousands of convicts were sent on Covid-19 leave under Provisional Article 9/5 to reduce prison overcrowding. When these leaves ended on July 31, 2023, the legislature (with Law No. 7456) enacted a special DS regime (Provisional Article 10) to prevent these convicts from returning to prison.

According to this regulation, convicts who were on Covid-19 leave as of July 31, 2023, and who had 5 (five) years or less remaining until their conditional release, (dissimilarly from the 1 and 3-year rules above) gained the right to serve their remaining sentences on probation without returning to prison at all.

This situation created a blatant inequality in execution justice:

Of two convicts who committed the same crime in 2021 and received a 10-year sentence, the convict whose sentence became final early and was on Covid leave on July 31, 2023, received a 5-year DS right (CR: 5 years – 5 Years DS = 0 days served).
However, the convict whose sentence became final later (perhaps because they appealed) and was in prison on or entered after July 31, 2023, is only entitled to 1 year of DS (CR: 5 years – 1 Year DS = 4 years served).

This inequality was brought before the Constitutional Court (AYM) on grounds of violating Articles 2 (Rule of Law) and 10 (Equality) of the Constitution.

However, the AYM rejected this application in its decision dated November 21, 2024 (No. 2024/165, Case 2024/82). The AYM’s reasoning was that the legislature (the Parliament) has very broad discretion in determining “penal policy.” The Court ruled that the legislature could, for “public interest” purposes such as managing pandemic conditions and protecting society, establish different execution regimes based on convicts’ prison entry dates or leave status, and that this did not violate the Constitution. This decision confirmed that inequalities in execution law, even if favorable, can be deemed legitimate on grounds of public interest.

Chapter 5: Applied Calculation Examples (Case Analysis)

To concretize the theoretical information from Chapters 1-4, execution calculations as of 2025 are shown below with case analyses for different scenarios. (Calculations assume the convict is of “good conduct”).

Example 1 (General Rule – 1/2 Ratio, 1 Year DS)

Case: A convict (common offender, non-recidivist) who received a 12-year prison sentence for intentional injury (TPC Art. 86) committed after March 30, 2020.
Calculation:
1. CR Date (General Rule 1/2 Ratio): 12 Years / 2 = 6 Years.
2. DS Period (Basic Rule): 1 Year.
3. Actual Prison Release (with DS): 6 Years (CR Period) – 1 Year (DS Period) = 5 Years.
- Result: The convict will stay in a closed/open prison for 5 years and will spend the last 1 year on probation outside.

Example 2 (Temporary Article – 1/2 Ratio, 3 Years DS)

Case: A convict who received a 12-year prison sentence for the same crime (intentional injury) committed before March 30, 2020.
Calculation:
1. CR Date (General Rule 1/2 Ratio): 12 Years / 2 = 6 Years.
2. DS Period (Provisional Art. 6): 3 Years.
3. Actual Prison Release (with DS): 6 Years (CR Period) – 3 Years (DS Period) = 3 Years.
- Result: Because the crime date was before 2020, the convict will stay in a closed/open prison for 3 years and will spend the last 3 years on probation outside.

Example 3 (Exceptional Crime – 3/4 Ratio, 1 Year DS)

Case: A convict who received a 20-year prison sentence for drug trafficking (TPC Art. 188) (crime date is irrelevant, as it’s an exceptional crime).
Calculation:
1. CR Date (Exception 3/4 Ratio): 20 Years * (3/4) = 15 Years.
2. DS Period (Basic Rule): This crime is outside the scope of Provisional Art. 6 (3 years) and Provisional Art. 10 (5 years). The DS period is 1 Year.
3. Actual Prison Release (with DS): 15 Years (CR Period) – 1 Year (DS Period) = 14 Years.
- Result: The convict will stay in a closed/open prison for 14 years and will spend the last 1 year on probation outside.

Example 4 (Recidivist – 2/3 Ratio, 1 Year DS)

Case: A first-time recidivist who received a 9-year prison sentence for theft (TPC Art. 141).
Calculation:
1. CR Date (Recidivist 2/3 Ratio): 9 Years * (2/3) = 6 Years.
2. DS Period (Basic Rule): Recidivists are outside the scope of Provisional Art. 6 (3 years). The DS period is 1 Year.
3. Actual Prison Release (with DS): 6 Years (CR Period) – 1 Year (DS Period) = 5 Years.
- Result: The convict will stay in a closed/open prison for 5 years and will spend the last 1 year on probation outside.

Example 5 (10th Judicial Package – Second-time Recidivist – 3/4 Ratio, 1 Year DS)

Case: A second-time recidivist who received a 12-year prison sentence (execution starting after June 4, 2025).
Calculation (Post-10th Judicial Package):
1. CR Date (New 3/4 Ratio): 12 Years * (3/4) = 9 Years.
2. DS Period (Basic Rule): 1 Year.
3. Actual Prison Release (with DS): 9 Years (CR Period) – 1 Year (DS Period) = 8 Years.
- Result: This convict will stay in a closed/open prison for 8 years. This demonstrates the magnitude of the change in the execution regime compared to the pre-June 4, 2025, legislation, under which they would have had to serve the full 12 years (full-term).

Chapter 6: Conditional Release Procedure and Consequences of the Decision

Conditional release does not occur automatically when the objective and subjective conditions are met; it is granted by a judicial decision following a specific procedure.

A. The Decision-Making Process (Procedure)

The process of granting conditional release consists of administrative and judicial stages:

Administrative and Observation Board Report (Administrative Stage): When the convict’s conditional release date approaches, the Administrative and Observation Board (AOB) convenes to evaluate whether the convict is of “good conduct” (based on the criteria in Chapter 1-B) and prepares a report.
Application by the Penal Institution Administration: If the AOB report is positive, the Penal Institution Administration sends a reasoned report requesting the convict’s conditional release, along with the convict’s file, to the competent Execution Judgeship.
Public Prosecutor’s Opinion: The Public Prosecutor responsible for execution submits a legal opinion (mütalaa) on the file to the Execution Judgeship.
Execution Judgeship’s Decision (Judicial Stage): The competent authority authorized to make the decision is the Execution Judgeship in the jurisdiction where the penal institution is located. The Execution Judge examines the file (without holding a hearing). By evaluating the AOB report and the prosecutor’s opinion, the judge decides whether to grant or deny the conditional release.

B. Legal Remedies (Appeal)

An appeal (legal remedy) is available against the decisions of the Execution Judgeship (both for the decision to deny conditional release and for the AOB’s negative “good conduct” assessment).

Appellate Authority: An appeal against the Execution Judgeship’s decision can be made to the local High Criminal Court (Ağır Ceza Mahkemesi).
Appeal Period (Current Change): Law No. 7499, known as the “8th Judicial Package,” resolved the confusion regarding the appeal period for Execution Judgeship decisions, effective June 1, 2024, and clearly set the period as two weeks (14 days).

C. Revocation of Conditional Release (Violation)

After a convict is conditionally released, their sentence is not considered fully executed; a “supervision period” begins. This supervision period continues from the date the convict is conditionally released until the date their sentence would have “fully terminated” (bihakkın).

If the convict commits certain violations during this supervision period, the conditional release decision is revoked.

Conditions for Revocation (LEPSM Art. 107/12)

Committing a New Crime: Committing an intentional crime during the supervision period AND being sentenced to a prison sentence (which is finalized) for this new crime.
- Important Nuance: If the convict commits an intentional crime during the supervision period but receives an administrative fine (APC) for it (or the prison sentence is converted to an APC), the conditional release decision is not revoked.
Failure to Comply with Obligations: Failing to comply with the obligations imposed on the convict (e.g., signing in, attending rehabilitation) and persisting in this behavior despite a warning from the Execution Judge.

Consequence of Revocation

When the conditional release decision is revoked, the convict is returned to the penal institution to serve their remaining sentence. After revocation, (once the sentence for the newcrime is served), the remaining part of the old sentence is executed, and the convict cannotbenefit from conditional release again during this second execution period.

General Assessment and Conclusion

This comprehensive analysis reveals that the Turkish execution regime is not static, but a highly dynamic and multi-layered structure. The changes introduced, especially by Laws No. 7242, 7499 (8th Judicial Package), and 7550 (10th Judicial Package), have complicated the system.

The main conclusions of the report are:

The “Golden Rule” in Calculation is the “Crime Date”: How long a convict will stay in prison (execution ratio) and when they will be released (probation period) depends on a single variable: the “date the crime was committed” (e.g., before 2016, before/after 2020). This situation undermines the principle of “legal predictability” in execution and leads to significant execution inequalities (such as 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years) among convicts who committed the same crime but are in the same prison.
Radical Change in Penal Policy (10th Judicial Package): Law No. 7550, which took effect on June 4, 2025, abolished the “second-time recidivist” prohibition, showing a clear shift (at least in theory) from a philosophy of “absolute isolation” to one of “rehabilitation” and the “right to hope” in criminal justice. This can also be read as a pragmatic move aimed at reducing the burden on prisons.
The Shift from Mathematics to Behavior: The quietest yet most effective revolution in the execution regime is the delegation of the “good conduct” assessment to the Administrative and Observation Boards (AOB). This change has transformed the execution process from a mathematical operation carried out via a “duration certificate” to a behavioral evaluation based on subjective elements like “remorse” and “risk.” This has increased the administration’s discretion over execution and expanded the field of legal battles before the Execution Judgeships.

Our Latest Articles

« Previous Post