Impact of positive punishments

Birendra Laishram *

The type of punishment given to the border country of Myanmar is very stringent. In there, serious human rights abuses are rampant, particularly against political prisoners who face torture, overcrowding, and inadequate care, leading to dire consequences, including death. Hundreds of prisoners have reportedly died as a result of disease and ill-treatment.

Conditions on the Yangon to Mandalay road are so severe that prisoners working there have a saying: "If the corpses of prisoners who lost their lives working on the Yangon to Mandalay express highway are lined up, it would be longer than the length of the road already completed."

The residents of Myanmar are experiencing significant dissatisfaction and frustration with their overall quality of life, primarily stemming from persistently poor economic conditions that have plagued the country for an extended period. This environment has resulted in Myanmar having the lowest per capita income in the region, a situation that continues to adversely affect the ability of its citizens to meet their daily needs and maintain a decent standard of living.

Furthermore, for individuals who find themselves accused of criminal activity, the repercussions can be extremely severe; if they are imprisoned, they face harsh and often life-altering consequences that can further diminish their prospects for a better life. The combination of these factors contributes to an overarching sense of despair and hopelessness among the population.

Punishment serves to protect society from offenders by deterring crime, preventing repetition, reforming criminals, and upholding justice. Theories of punishment present different philosophical views on its purpose, generally classified into four types.

Deterrent Theory : Proposes that swift and severe punishment can prevent crime by instilling fear of consequences in potential offenders.

Retributive Theory : Focused on "an eye for an eye," “tit for tat,” and “tooth for tooth," it seeks proportional punishment to restore societal peace but is often criticized for its harshness and lack of compassion, necessitating a balance of factors in sentencing.

Preventive Theory : Aims at crime prevention by removing offenders from society, exemplified by solitary confinement for dangerous individuals.

Reformative Theory : Stresses rehabilitating offenders into law-abiding citizens, acknowledging that circumstance can lead to crime. Correctional facilities and training programs facilitate this recovery. Humanitarian principles such as these underpin India's approach to prisoner rights.

Right to Accommodation: Prisoners must receive humane living conditions.

Right to Shelter : Safe accommodation is mandatory even during overcrowding.

Medical Examination: Qualified medical officers must examine all prisoners.

Solitary Confinement: These cells must allow communication with staff.

Care for Sick Prisoners: Prompt medical attention is mandated.

Additionally, India’s Supreme Court has established vital guidelines to uphold prisoners' rights through its rulings.

Thus in Manipur, the heaviest form of punishment imposed for criminal activity is imprisonment, where inmates are typically provided with nutritious meals and access to various facilities that contribute to their well-being. When examining the living conditions within Indian jails, it becomes apparent that they are significantly better compared to those faced by many individuals residing in Myanmar.

This stark contrast in living conditions could foster a perception among the Kuki population in Myanmar that engaging in criminal behavior in Manipur and subsequently serving time in a relatively comfortable and accommodating jail presents an appealing option.

As a result of this perception, there has been a noticeable influx of Kuki individuals crossing into Manipur from Myanmar, seeking what they consider a more favorable situation. If authorities were to implement strict immigration control measures akin to those currently enforced in Myanmar, it stands to reason that instances of illegal immigration into Manipur would likely see a significant decrease.

Such actions could effectively dissuade potential migrants who view crime as a viable means to improve their circumstances. The implications of such a migration trend are multifaceted, raising concerns not only for the individuals seeking refuge but also for the socio-economic fabric of Manipur itself.

The influx of Kuki individuals, driven by the harsh realities of life in Myanmar, could strain local resources and services, potentially leading to tensions between the local population and new arrivals. This situation necessitates a careful balancing act for the authorities in Manipur, who must navigate the complexities of humanitarian obligations while ensuring the stability and security of their own communities.

Moreover, the perception of imprisonment in Manipur as a preferable alternative to the dire conditions in Myanmar could inadvertently encourage criminal behavior among migrants. If individuals believe that engaging in unlawful activities might lead to a more favorable living situation, it could perpetuate a cycle of crime that undermines the very principles of justice and rehabilitation that the Indian penal system aims to uphold.

This paradox highlights the need for a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of migration while also reinforcing the importance of lawful conduct.

To mitigate these challenges, it is essential for both Myanmar and India to engage in dialogue and cooperation regarding border management and human rights. Addressing the systemic issues that drive individuals to seek better lives through illegal means is crucial. This includes tackling the economic hardships in Myanmar, improving governance, and fostering an environment where citizens feel safe and valued.

Additionally, India could enhance its support for humanitarian initiatives that assist refugees and migrants, ensuring that their rights are respected and their needs are met without compromising the integrity of local communities.

In conclusion, the stark contrast between the penal systems and living conditions in Myanmar and India underscores a broader conversation about justice, human rights, and migration.

As the situation evolves, it is imperative for policymakers to consider not only the immediate effects of migration but also the long-term implications for both nations. By prioritizing humane treatment, economic development, and societal stability, it is possible to create a more just and equitable environment for all individuals, regardless of their circumstances.