In the XXI century, informal prison hierarchies are one of the main problems in prison systems across the world. They are a fact recognised by the authorities of almost all states. As a result, prison subcultures become significant and have serious impact even on free society and taxpayers (not to mention the prison system itself, prison staff, prisoners, and their families).

The phenomenon of informal prison hierarchies and corresponding prison (prison-criminal) subcultures is global and universal but has distinct political and geographical features. Despite the anti-state nature of informal prison hierarchies and the declared ‘war on torture’, the simulacrum of prison subculture and the corresponding caste systems do not exist in a vacuum apart from states and their agents. In most cases, they are the result of tacit agreements between the upper castes of informal prison hierarchies and state agents.

The external symbols of the prison-subcultural simulacrum only mask the true economic, social and political nature of this phenomenon, which is aimed at the organised and permanent extortion of material assets from prisoners and other individuals by representatives of the upper castes and obtaining financial or other material benefits from the organisation or support of criminal activities, with the direct or indirect assistance of agents of the state. In turn, agents of the state are the ultimate beneficiary of such illegal distribution of material resources.

Even from this position, the classic academic and political views on the prisoner’s informal code are replaced with more detailed and complicated informal codes based on the illegal distribution of material resources and black markets in prisons.

Informal prison hierarchies and corresponding prison subcultures have gained normative significance in the UN reports, the ECtHR judgments, and the CPT reports. The mentioned above international actors have emphasised the explicit simulacrisation of this phenomenon and the existence of special power relations in the formation and implementation of local, regional and/or national prison subcultural norms.

For the needs of prevention and combatting ill-treatment in prisons, it is necessary to accept the fact that any total institution is a place with its own unique subculture and power relations. In the rapidly growing literature on the social organisation of prisons, it has become common to discuss prison subcultures in terms suggesting that the behavior systems of various types of prisoners stem from the conditions of imprisonment themselves.
Trying to shape a complex view of modern prisons and prison systems, it is impossible to avoid prison hierarchies and violence produced by informal prison hierarchies.

The modern discourse of informal prison hierarchies, which is limited only to classic categories like ‘violence’, ‘ill-treatment’, and ‘inter-prisoner violence’, is not sufficient for the complex analysis of contemporary person landscapes in prisons. For the purposes of preventing ill-treatment and inter-prison violence, it is necessary to have a broader look at the nature of these phenomena, where such a broader approach demands considering the economic and political aspects of informal hierarchies in modern prisons, as well as the issues of corruption.

From the European perspective, there is a sharp distinction between prison landscapes in post-Soviet and other states. In many European states, prison violence is a sphere of personal relations and personal habits of individual prisoners. In contrast, post-Soviet prisons have hierarchical and well-organised violence based on illegal economic activities, black markets, and extortion of money from prisoners.

Prison violence has many faces and manifestations. However, as soon as an independent reviewer finds evidence of any ritual codes of conduct in a particular prison system, one can be sure that the State has lost control over the concrete prison or even the national prison system. The existence of violent-based or violent-oriented rituals in prison means that such rituals have been implemented in prison with the aim of hiding the organised violence based on the permanent extortion of money and corruption.

The latter situation is typical for post-Soviet states. Here, following our conclusions, we can take the pessimistic approach that in most post-Soviet jurisdictions, the State lost control over the prison system as it must be controlled according to contemporary international human rights standards. There is no doubt that such a State controls its prison system but does it for the aims of legitimized criminality, increasing the level of restrictions for prisoners.

Finally, informal prison hierarchies undermine totally the main feature of the criminal law, namely the aims of criminal punishment. Instead of rehabilitation, incapacitation, protection of society and deterrence, we have only deterrence, but not the deterrence of potential offenders but the illegal deterrence of prisoners aimed at forcing them to join or at least to support informal prison hierarchies.

The amalgamation of criminal and prison subcultures creates a very dangerous trend that also undermines basic principles of the protection of society, which are declared to be protected by the criminal justice system. Informal prison hierarchies shape a very dangerous stereotypic view of prisons as useless places run under the control of professional organised criminals with international roots and connections, which, in turn, undermine the trust of taxpayers in the police, prosecution services and courts.

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official position of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) or any other organizations with which the author is affiliated.

Source