Thursday, July 13, 2006

The Will to Reform

Reading the proposed reform plans recently published by the CDCR-Division of Juvenile Justice (look up the Safety and Welfare Plan, filed on December 1, 2005, which in the DJJ’s own view, is one of the most comprehensive of the Farrell Vs. Hickman inspired remedial plans, and outlines the department’s commitment to fundamental change), is a lot like reading a State Department plan on democracy promotion and the development of free trade in the developing world. The challenges and proposed solutions are nearly identical, since at question is the same basic problem: Institutional failure. Administrative inefficiency and incompetence, rampant corruption, fiscal irresponsibility, etc., are enumerated as the core problems to be tackled by a ‘fundamental’ re-structuring of the administrative and bureaucratic process, mainly through enhanced oversight and funding.


Prisons are indeed much like developing nations in many of their core characteristics, not least in the absence of respect for the rule of law. The irony of this statement, I hope, will be grasped immediately.


Recently I finished reading a book on the subject of rule of law promotion in the developing world, Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad: In Search of Knowledge, ed. Thomas Carothers. I was struck by the similarities between institutional development and reform in the developing world, and institutional development and reform in the California youth prison system (DJJ).


In Thomas Carothers’ view (founder and president of the Democracy and Rule of Law Project at the Carnegie Endowment), historically, the biggest problems facing rule of law promotion have been “political and human. Rule of law reform [succeeds] only if it gets at the fundamental problem of leaders who refuse to be ruled by the law. Respect for the law will not easily take root in systems rife with corruption and cynicism. Since entrenched elites cede their traditional impunity and vested interests only under great pressure…Western nations and private donors have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into rule of law reform, but outside aid is no substitute for the will to reform, which must come from within” (pg. 4).


This is an extremely astute summation of the core problem that confronts rule of law reform both in the developing world and in the prison system.


I am sure many of you saw the movie Shawshank Redemption. In my case, I was able to see it both before and during my incarceration. The second time around, sitting there in a prison classroom, I was amazed at how differently the film impressed me. Whereas I had focused on “Andy” before my incarceration, when I saw it a year ago, I became fixated on the prison warden. On a slightly different reading, the warden could be the main character of the story. Nearly every turning point in the main portion of the film hinges on the warden’s activities. His corruption and cynicism become the focal point of Andy’s covert subversion of the criminality of the prison-a criminality most apparent in the lawlessness of the prison authorities. Indeed, the irony the story weaves, of criminals guarding criminals, narrates the sad reality that, before I came to prison, I could hardly have believed was true.


Although the day seems to have passed when a prison warden can orchestrate and temporarily succeed in exploiting his power for personal enrichment, that same kind of flouting of the rule of law that is supposed to ground correctional institutions is very much alive today.


Perhaps it is the extreme disparity in the nature of the power-relationship between prison authorities and inmates that are at the root of this seemingly irrepressible urge to overstep both the letter and the spirit of the law.


Whatever the deeper reasons, for a very long time this rule-above-the-law has operated as the status quo in the California juvenile justice system.


But, since the Ferrell vs. Hickman settlement, a fundamental shift has occurred. The administrative levels of the DJJ have mustered the will to reform. Their change of heart has been truly shocking. They have been truly humbled (nothing like a pro-reform governor and a whole lot of bad press), and now they are listening.


So, what’s the problem?


In Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad, Carothers makes the point that frequently institutional reforms are stymied, not because of a lack of will from the leadership, but because of an entrenched culture of corruption and cynicism at the lowest levels (most clearly observed in many para-military police forces of the developing world). The California juvenile justice system now reflects this state of institutional dysfunction. For far too long, corruption and cynicism have marked every facet of the system; and even a change of heart from above has not produced the kind of trickle down effect relied upon in the reform implementations.


As far as I can tell, the face of this institutional corruption and cynicism is the CCPOA.


As I write, adequate structural and institutional reforms are being implemented by motivated administrations. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that the lower levels of the system (mostly prison guards and counselors), are not possessed of the same purpose and will.


There can be little doubt that the root of this resistance are the vested interests and lassitude that for many, many years has leached into the lower levels of the system through the inordinate influence and proxy-management of the DJJ (the former CYA) by the California Peace Officers Association.


CCPOA is not only independent of public accountability, but it represents the exclusive interests of prison guards and counselors in the DJJ (as well as the much larger adult system).


How would you feel if your political representatives were unabashedly more beholden to their campaign contributors than to their districts? If your doctor published on his office door the fact that he was more concerned with your insurance coverage of the medication you take, than its safety and effectiveness to heal? Or, if the judge appointed to your case proudly sported a municipal police badge on the bench?


What kind of political, medical, or legal system would allow for such a deliberate undermining of their most fundamental guiding principles, “service to the people”, “do no harm”, and “equality before the law”, respectively. These are, if you will, the respective “spirits” of the laws of politics, medicine, and the legal system.


It is ironic that each of these principles has been proclaimed in years past and in the present reforms, as guiding lights for the juvenile justice system. It is ironic because it brings to light the extreme fragility of the institutions of the modern world. They stand or fall based on the content of their respective cultures.


It’s the people, people.

No comments: