Enforcement plan in a prison sentence in Austria: what is planned, who decides, how to prepare

The enforcement plan under section 135 StVG is the written determination of how a prison sentence is to be served in the individual case. It is drawn up by the prison governor, within the framework set by the law and the result of classification. In practice it is drawn up above all for longer sentences and updated over the entire term, that is, not fixed once but adapted to changing circumstances.

In substance the plan covers the central areas of life in custody: the form of enforcement (closed, relaxed or open regime), work or training, care and treatment, outside contact and supervision. These building blocks determine the concrete daily life of the imprisoned person and, at the same time, the path towards relaxations of the regime and conditional release.

The participation of the imprisoned person is decisive. Section 135 StVG expressly provides that the person concerned writes a curriculum vitae for the planning and must be heard. An interview about the reasons for classification and the content of the enforcement plan is to be held with that person. Anyone who prepares for this interview and brings concrete, documented ideas shapes the coming months or years noticeably.

Classification under section 134 StVG comes before the enforcement plan. Within six weeks at the latest after admission, the Federal Ministry of Justice determines in which prison institution, in which form and on which principles the sentence is to be served in the individual case. Decisive factors are personality, prior life, personal circumstances and the nature of the offence.

For classification, investigations may be ordered, where needed also observation in a specialised facility or a psychiatric, psychotherapeutic or psychological assessment. The result is communicated to the governors of the competent institutions; on this basis the prison governor draws up the enforcement plan.

It is important to know that the determination of the place of enforcement rests with the Ministry, not with the individual institution. A later change of the place of enforcement is governed by section 10 StVG and requires reasons. Anyone seeking proximity to home, a particular treatment offer or a particular form of enforcement should therefore raise this as early as possible, ideally already at classification.

The most effective preparation begins before or immediately after the start of the sentence. Anyone who has ready the documents that support the desired determinations gains a head start. These include existing diagnoses and therapy reports, proof of residence and family ties, training and employment records and, where available, an admission confirmation from an educational or therapeutic institution.

In the enforcement interview, precision pays off. Instead of general wishes, concrete requests help: a particular workplace in the institution, a specifically named educational measure, a particular therapy with a professional justification. Each of these points should have a recognisable link to rehabilitation and to later conditional release under section 46 StGB, because that is most likely to persuade the institution.

Because the plan is updated, ongoing documentation is worthwhile. Anyone who documents conduct free of objections, therapy progress or reliable work performance in writing creates the basis for the next step, for example the move to a relaxed form of enforcement or the build-up of relaxations. A consistent track over months carries more weight than a single positive note shortly before release.

The enforcement plan does not bind the institution like an enforceable contract; it is subject to the proviso of safety and order and of available resources. However, if the institution deviates from agreed steps without good reason or ignores the right to be heard, that can be challenged.

The remedy is the complaint under section 120 StVG. It must be lodged within two weeks of becoming aware of the decision or the conduct, and in principle it has no suspensory effect. Complaints against subordinate staff are decided by the prison governor; complaints against decisions or orders of the prison governor are decided, if no remedy is granted, by the enforcement court. That is the regional court (Landesgericht) sitting in criminal matters in whose district the sentence is served (section 16 StVG).

A further complaint against the decision of the enforcement court to the Vienna Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht Wien) is admissible only where a question of law of fundamental importance arises (section 16a StVG). A carefully reasoned complaint therefore sets out not only the facts but works out which determination of the plan was disregarded and which decision would have been required.