Imprisoned for Debt
| DOI | 10.1177/026455059704400207 |
| Published date | 01 June 1997 |
| Date | 01 June 1997 |
92
Imprisoned
for
Debt:
Who
Protects
the
Vulnerable?
Though
enforcement
procedures
for
non-payment
of
fines
and
local
taxes
are
necessary,
Rona
Epstein
of
Coventry
University’s
Division
of
Law
argues
that
enforcement
by
imprisonment
is
not
only
inefficient,
in
that
the
sums
owed
are
cancelled
by
committal,
but
operates
without
any
of
the
safeguards
which
normally
govern
use
of
this
remedy
of
last
resort,
so
that
we
fail
to
protect
vulnerable
defaulters.
research
project’
conducted
JL
between
July
1995
and
July
1996,
on
committals
for
fine
default
and
for
poll
tax
arrears,
revealed
the
extent
of
vulnerability
among
people
imprisoned
on
this
basis.
Imprisoned
defaulters
come
from
the
poorest
sector
of
society -
83%
of
imprisoned
fine
defaulters
were
on
state
benefit
or
without
a
source
of
income,
as
were
78%
of
poll
tax
debtors.
High
levels
of
illness
and
disability
were
found:
42%
were
suffering
from
physical
or
mental
ill-
health
or
disability
at
the
time
of
committal.
A
suspended
committal
may
be
activated
when
the
defaulter
is
ill
or
facing
a
family
crisis,
and
has
mounting
debts.
More
than
one-quarter
of
all
prison
receptions
are
fine
defaulters.
The
fine
may
have
been
imposed
for
an
offence
which
was
non-imprisonable
or
trivial
(in
this
study,
for
example,
imprisonment
was
found
to
have
followed
a
fine
imposed
for
having
under-inflated
tyres,
for
underpayment
of
£1.20
on
a
bus
ticket
and
for
non-payment
of
a
television
licence).
There
are
also
the
smaller
but
still
significant
numbers
gaoled
for
not
having
cleared
arrears
of
the
poll
tax:
in
1993
1,426
committals
for
poll
tax
arrears
were
made;
in
1994
there
were
1,361.
Absence of Safeguards
The
usual
protections
afforded
defendants
in
the
criminal
justice
system
are
not
available
to
defaulters.
Civil
debtors
(ie
poll
tax
or
council
tax
defaulters)
do
not
even
have
the
benefit
of
early
release
provisions.
Legal
Aid
Though
an
accused
has
the
right
to
be
granted
legal
aid
where
’brought
before
a
magistrates’
court
following
an
earlier
remand
in
custody
when
unrepresented,
and
is
at
risk
on
this
occasion
of
a
further
remand
in
custody ...
and
is
not
legally
represented
but
wishes
to
be’
(Legal
Aid
Act
1988
s21(3)),
this
does
not
apply
to
civil
debtors
(those
facing
up
to
three
months’
imprisonment
for
poll
tax
or
council
tax
arrears)
or
to
fine
defaulters.
In
all
cases
where
there
is
jurisdiction
to
grant
criminal
legal
aid
under
Part
V
of
the
Legal
Aid
Act
1988
but
its
grant
is
not
obligatory
by
virtue
of
s21 (3)),
the
court
has
a
discretion
to
grant
aid
should
it
appear
’to
be
desirable
to
do
so
in
the
interests
of
justice’
(Legal
Aid
Act
1988
s21 (2)).
Section
22
(2)
provides
that
certain
factors
must
be
taken
into
account
in
deciding
To continue reading
Request your trial