As prison overcrowding pushes the government to expand alternative measures, the plan to double the number of places in day-release programs—announced for January 2025—raises questions. Will this announcement be accompanied by the human, social, and regional resources essential for the reintegration of inmates?
On January 23, 2025, during a visit to the National School of Prison Administration (ENAP) in Agen, Attorney General Gérald Darmanin unveiled two major measures. The first concerns the opening, scheduled for July 31, 2025, of a high-security prison specifically reserved for drug traffickers. At the same time, he announced that the number of spots in the day-release program would double by 2027, reaching a total of 3,000 spots. While the first measure is driven by a security-focused approach of control and isolation, the second is presented as a pragmatic response to the crisis of prison overcrowding. Together, these announcements reflect a political commitment to balancing a firm approach to criminal justice with a limited openness to rehabilitation.
From Monday through Friday and on Sundays, receive free analyses and insights from our experts for a different perspective on current events. Subscribe today!
How can we reduce prison overcrowding?
A study of U.S.criminal justice policies has identified three main approaches to addressing prison overcrowding: building new prisons, releasing inmates early, and amending laws to reduce the use of incarceration.
A recent example of this approach can be found in the United Kingdom, with the Standard Determinate Sentences program—known as SDS40—which allowed for the early release of certain inmates after they had served 40 percent of their sentence. Serious offenses, such as murder or stalking, are excluded from the program. This phenomenon, referred to as “bifurcation, ” aims to reconcile conflicting objectives and thus offer a political compromise, in which the desire to reduce incarceration for some is accompanied by the strict maintenance of incarceration for others.
The current situation in France reflects this mechanism, with the exception that the supposedly progressive measure—namely, the doubling of places in open prisons—warrants critical examination. Rather than reflecting a genuine structural commitment to rehabilitation, the doubling of places in open prisons announced by Gérald Darmanin appears to be a one-off adjustment in response to the prison crisis.
Admittedly, the minister mentions additional resources, but the concrete details regarding social, educational, or medical support remain unclear. In the absence of a fundamental reform of the conditions under which day release is implemented, this measure resembles more of a short-sighted, pragmatic response than a coherent strategy for reintegration and social justice.
What is day release?
Semi-liberty is a sentencing arrangement that allows convicted offenders to leave a detention facility at specified times to engage in outside activities (work, training, medical care, family life, etc.). It is granted by the judge responsible for the enforcement of sentences under certain conditions and often serves as a probationary phase prior to parole. However, the individual remains in prison: any unauthorized absence is considered an escape. This procedure has proven effective in preventing recidivism.
Places in semi-open facilities are distributed among 9 semi-open centers (CSL, autonomous institutions) and 22 semi-open units (QSL, attached to a prison), for a total of 1,635 available places in France, according to the Directorate of the Prison Administration (2025).
According to the report, as of January1, 2025, the occupancy rate was 88 percent, a sharp increase compared to 2021 (68.8 percent), illustrating the growth of this program. However, the distribution of these facilities is uneven. Some are located in rural areas with poor public transportation, which limits opportunities for reintegration. Others, such as the one in Grenoble, are located in urban areas, which facilitates the transition to civilian life.
The granting of a semi-liberty program is contingent on the convict’s active participation in a reintegration process, including seeking medical care, making amends for damages, looking for a job, participating in training, and maintaining family ties. However, these individual efforts are not enough. It is clear that the effectiveness of day release depends above all on structured support to help the prisoner rebuild a stable life.
Understaffed integration and probation services
However, the Prison Reintegration and Probation Services (SPIP) in France are facing an excessive workload and limited financial resources, which hinders their ability to effectively support individuals on day release, as shown in a Senate report. According to figures released by the prison administration for 2024, there is a shortage of 327 correctional reintegration and probation counselors, 61 correctional reintegration and probation directors, 51 psychologists, 45 cultural activities coordinators, and 36 social service assistants.
Although the prison system’s budget has increased, a significant portion of these funds is allocated to the construction of new prison beds. For example, in 2023, more than 680 million euros were spent on building 15,000 additional prison beds, with a total estimated cost of 4.5 billion euros by 2027. The 2024 budget bill called for a 3.9% increase in SPIP operating expenses, linked to the creation of 1,500 jobs between 2018 and 2022. However , the 2025 budget bill, adopted on February 14, calls for a reduction in the budget allocated to the SPIPs, from 123.2 million euros in 2024 to 121.8 million euros in 2025, raising numerous concerns about the functioning of sentence management programs and the effective reintegration of inmates.
Rethinking Reintegration Pathways
Furthermore, it is imperative to ensure that these facilities are firmly rooted in the local community and have easy access to transportation by strategically locating them based on employment opportunities. The location of open-prison facilities must therefore not be left to chance but carefully planned to maximize professional and social reintegration. [The involvement of local governments and citizens] is also a key factor, as it allows for the formation of lasting bonds between inmates and the community into which they are seeking to reintegrate. The success of the semi-liberty program depends on collaboration between the correctional administration, social service providers, and local businesses.
Finally, it is crucial that this collaboration be designed in such a way as to recognize prisoners not only as individuals in need of rehabilitation and reform, but also as agents capable of autonomy and possessing unique experiences, as I have attempted to demonstrate in the book *Prisoner Leaders: Leadership as Experience and Institution*.
The debate over semi-open detention and the observed phenomenon of divergence call for a broader reflection on the prison system. Certain international initiatives, such as Rescaled and Working in Small Detention Houses (WISH), inspired by Nordic models, demonstrate the value of specialized, locally integrated facilities. These approaches promote more personalized support and a gradual transition to freedom.
In France, the Inserre pilot program follows this approach by calling for the creation of a new category of correctional facility focused on reintegration through work. The first facility of this kind will open in Arras in 2026, and demonstrates a commitment to adapting correctional infrastructure to meet the challenges of reintegration.
While it is essential to rethink the role of reintegration in criminal justice policies—avoiding a purely punitive approach—it is crucial to view prison not as a geographically and symbolically isolated space, but as an institution integrated into the community, fostering ongoing connections between inmates and social actors throughout their sentence, and not just at its conclusion. This new conceptualization is fundamental to effective rehabilitation, the prevention of recidivism, and the maintenance of social cohesion.
This article was written in collaboration with Céline Bertetto, Patrick Malle, Marie-Odile Théoleyre, Bénédicte Fischer, and Jean-Charles Froment.
