Socio-Political Determinants of Violence and Recidivism in North Macedonia: Short-Term Imprisonment and Probation

Abstract

Cycles of violence and recidivism in North Macedonia remain deeply shaped by intersecting socio-political and socio-economic determinants. Despite the enactment of a probation law in 2015, the criminal justice system continues to rely heavily on custodial sentences, particularly short-term imprisonment, which has repeatedly been shown to have limited rehabilitative impact. Penal statistics indicate persistently high recidivism rates among these offenders, suggesting imprisonment often reproduces, rather than disrupts, patterns of violent behaviour. The analysis situates these trends within the broader socio-political and economic landscape. Structural factors such as unemployment, poverty, and social exclusion aggravate reintegration, while ethnic tensions and political instability further limit the effectiveness of penal policies. At the same time, EU accession requirements and Council of Europe standards have introduced external pressure to reform, leading to gradual advances in probation services, conditional release mechanisms, and community-based alternatives to incarceration. Drawing on official statistics, national reform strategies, and international monitoring reports, the paper argues that violence prevention cannot be addressed solely through penal reform but requires a multidimensional approach. Effective policy must integrate socio-economic support, reintegration programmes, and community engagement with legal and institutional reform. By highlighting the interplay between structural determinants of violence and criminal justice policies, the case of North Macedonia offers broader lessons for post-socialist societies navigating democratic transition and European integration.

Keywords

violence recidivism probation penal reform North Macedonia European integration

Introduction

Across Europe, short-term imprisonment has long been criticized for its limited rehabilitative value (Schinkel, 2021) and its tendency to disrupt employment, family ties, and access to social support, thereby increasing rather than reducing the risk of reoffending (Mujoska Trpevska, 2017). In response, many European jurisdictions, particularly those undergoing post-socialist legal and institutional transformation, have formally expanded the use of probation and community-based sanctions as alternatives to custody. These reforms are commonly framed within broader commitments to proportionality, social reintegration, and the reduction of recidivism. Yet, despite these policy shifts, short-term imprisonment continues to function as a dominant sentencing response in several transition contexts, raising questions about the gap between formal reform and penal practice.

North Macedonia represents a particularly instructive case in this regard. Over the past decade, the country has undertaken significant legislative and policy reforms aimed at modernizing its sanctioning system, including the adoption of a dedicated Law on Probation and the gradual expansion of community-based measures. These reforms have been shaped by European integration processes and by broader efforts to align national criminal justice policies with European standards. At the same time, national penal statistics reveal the continued prevalence of custodial sanctions, especially short-term imprisonment, alongside persistently high levels of repeat offending. This apparent contradiction between reform-oriented legal frameworks and entrenched sentencing practices suggests that the drivers of penal decision-making and recidivism cannot be explained solely by crime trends or legislative design.

This article argues that the persistence of short-term imprisonment in North Macedonia is best understood through the interaction of structural socio-economic vulnerability and political-institutional constraints that limit the practical credibility and effectiveness of probation. Rather than functioning as a neutral response to offending, short-term custodial sentences in North Macedonia operate within a broader social and institutional environment characterized by structural vulnerability, a pattern examined in the empirical analysis below.

In this context, probation, despite its legal expansion, remains unevenly implemented and insufficiently resourced, limiting its practical credibility as an alternative to imprisonment.

The central research question guiding this study is therefore: Why does short-term imprisonment remain the dominant sentencing response in North Macedonia despite probation-oriented reforms, and how do socio-economic, political, and institutional determinants interact to sustain cycles of violence and recidivism? Addressing this question requires moving beyond descriptive accounts of social disadvantage or penal reform and towards an integrated analytical framework that connects structural conditions, institutional practices, and penal outcomes.

Drawing on classical and late-modern theories of punishment, as well as European normative frameworks on sanctions and probation, the article conceptualizes short-term imprisonment as part of a broader governance response to social vulnerability and institutional uncertainty.

Methodologically, the article adopts a qualitative case-study approach based on secondary data analysis and policy review. It synthesizes national penal statistics, prison and probation data, institutional reports, and strategic policy documents to examine sentencing patterns, recidivism indicators, and reintegration supports over time. While administrative data have inherent limitations, including issues of consistency and underreporting, their systematic analysis provides valuable insight into the structural and institutional conditions shaping penal practice in North Macedonia.

By integrating theory, empirical data, and policy analysis, this article makes three contributions. First, it offers an analytically structured account of why short-term imprisonment persists as a default sanction in a post-socialist, EU-accession context. Second, it demonstrates how socio-economic exclusion and political-institutional fragility jointly shape sentencing practices and reintegration outcomes, rather than operating as isolated determinants. Third, it provides a comparative-ready presentation of key penal indicators that situates the Macedonian experience within broader European debates on punishment, probation, and recidivism. In doing so, the article seeks to move beyond descriptive diagnosis and towards a clearer understanding of the mechanisms through which penal policy, institutional capacity, and social inequality intersect to shape violence and repeat offending.

Methods

This study employs a qualitative case-study design based on secondary data analysis and policy review. The empirical material consists of national penal statistics, prison and probation records, reports of the Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions, and publicly available strategic and policy documents relevant to criminal justice and penal reform.

Data were selected to capture longitudinal patterns in sentencing outcomes, prison population structure, prior convictions, and post-release social protection measures. Where appropriate, indicators are presented as percentages or ratios to improve interpretability across years, with reference to broader European trends where relevant.

The analysis combines descriptive trend analysis with interpretive policy analysis. Quantitative data are used to identify recurring patterns in the use of custodial and non-custodial sanctions, while qualitative interpretation situates these patterns within institutional practices and policy frameworks. The study does not test causal relationships statistically, but instead identifies plausible mechanisms linking structural vulnerability, institutional capacity, and sentencing outcomes.

Several limitations must be acknowledged. Administrative data may be affected by reporting inconsistencies, classification changes over time, and potential underreporting. In addition, official statistics reflect institutional outputs rather than individual experiences and cannot fully capture informal practices or discretionary decision-making. Nevertheless, triangulating multiple data sources allows for a robust examination of systemic patterns related to short-term imprisonment and recidivism in North Macedonia.

Empirical Overview: Sentencing Patterns (2017–2024)

Table 1 shows a persistent reliance on short-term imprisonment within the overall use of custodial sanctions in North Macedonia. From 2017 to 2024, sentences of up to 12 months account for roughly half to two-thirds of all imprisonment decisions, with the highest shares recorded in 2018–2019 and again in 2023–2024. This pattern remains stable despite year-to-year variation in total imprisonment, indicating that short-term custody functions as a routine sentencing response. The trend provides an empirical baseline for the analysis that follows, which examines how socio-economic vulnerability and institutional constraints shape sentencing choices and limit the practical reach of probation.

Table 1.

Share of Short-Term Imprisonment Among Custodial Sentences in North Macedonia (2017–2024).

Year	Total imprisonment (N)	Imprisonment ≤12 months (N)	Short-term imprisonment (% of total imprisonment)
2017	1,255	621	49.5
2018	1,246	796	63.9
2019	1,181	769	65.1
2020	914	569	62.3
2021	1,176	684	58.2
2022	1,372	707	51.5
2023	1,417	780	55.1
2024	1,413	769	54.4

Source. State Statistical Office (MakStat 2025).

When viewed in comparative perspective, the prominence of short-term imprisonment stands in contrast to broader European trends, where non-custodial sanctions increasingly serve as the primary response to less serious offences. According to the Council of Europe’s SPACE I annual penal statistics (Council of Europe, 2024a) imprisonment patterns vary widely across Europe, and in many jurisdictions, community sanctions constitute a larger share of responses to less serious offences. Council of Europe SPACE II data (Council of Europe, 2024b) further show extensive use of probation and other non-custodial sanctions across member states, highlighting the contrast with North Macedonia’s custodial dominance. In addition, the Council of Europe’s European Probation Rules set normative expectations for the organization and use of probation as a constructive alternative to custody (Canton, 2010). These patterns therefore suggest that short-term custody functions as a default sanction in North Macedonia, pointing to structural and institutional factors that shape sentencing practices beyond offence severity alone

Theoretical and Contextual Framework

Classical and Contemporary Theories of Punishment

The purpose and legitimacy of punishment have occupied a central position in both moral philosophy and penological theory. From classical formulations of retributive justice to contemporary arguments for rehabilitation and restoration, punishment remains a reflection of the values and tensions embedded in each society. Traditional justifications: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation, represent distinct conceptions of justice and social control (Boonin, 2008). Retributivist approaches, grounded in moral desert, view punishment as a response proportionate to wrongdoing, while utilitarian perspectives emphasize deterrence and the prevention of future harm (Kambovski & Mujoska Trpevska, 2020).

During much of the twentieth century, the rehabilitative ideal gained prominence as penal systems increasingly acknowledged the social and psychological dimensions of offending. However, the late twentieth century marked a significant shift, described by Garland (2001) and Blomberg (in Shoham et al., 2008) as a transition from penal welfarism to a “culture of control.” Feeley and Simon’s concept of the “new penology” captures this transformation: penal institutions began to prioritize risk management, classification, and administrative efficiency over individualized reform (Feeley & Simon, 1992). Whereas the “old penology” sought to change offenders, the “new” penology focuses on managing populations and perceived risks.

Critical and postmodern scholars such as Arrigo and Milovanovic (2009) challenged both retributive and utilitarian rationales, arguing for a constitutive view of justice that recognizes how penal systems reproduce social hierarchies and symbolic violence. Punishment, in this sense, is not only a response to crime but also an instrument for maintaining social order and political legitimacy (Kambovski, 2005). Penology, therefore, cannot be detached from its socio-political context; it reflects dominant ideologies, power relations, and collective anxieties shaping social control at a given historical moment.

Taken together, these theoretical perspectives suggest that in contexts characterized by limited rehabilitative capacity and weak institutional trust, punishment is more likely to emphasize control, risk management, and symbolic certainty over long-term reintegration. Short-term imprisonment, viewed through this lens, functions less as a corrective intervention and more as a routine mechanism for managing social and institutional uncertainty. This framework provides an analytical basis for interpreting the continued dominance of custodial sanctions in North Macedonia despite the formal expansion of probation-oriented reforms.

European Policy and Normative Frameworks

Within Europe, the philosophical debates on punishment have evolved towards principles of proportionality, human dignity, and social reintegration. The Council of Europe’s European Prison Rules (Recommendation R(2006)2) and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Mandela Rules) emphasize that the ultimate goal of imprisonment is rehabilitation and reintegration into society. These standards reflect a broader European consensus that imprisonment should be used as a measure of last resort, particularly in the case of short-term sentences, and that community-based alternatives are better suited to reducing reoffending and maintaining social ties.

This normative orientation is further developed in policy frameworks such as the Intelligent Justice model proposed by Hough et al. (2013), which advocates sentencing practices that balance accountability with reintegration through evidence-based and proportionate interventions. In a similar vein, the European Probation Rules (Council of Europe, 2010) institutionalize the principle that community supervision should actively support desistance rather than function solely as a mechanism of control. Together, these frameworks promote a model of penal intervention in which probation and other non-custodial measures play a central role in responding to less serious offending.

For post-socialist countries, these European standards have operated not only as normative benchmarks but also as drivers of legal and institutional reform. In North Macedonia, European integration has been a key catalyst for the adoption of probation-oriented legislation and the formal expansion of community-based sanctions. At the same time, the contrast between these normative commitments and persistent reliance on short-term imprisonment highlights the importance of examining how European models are translated into practice under conditions of limited institutional capacity and uneven implementation.

Macedonian Legislative and Institutional Evolution

The transformation of Macedonian penal policy has unfolded within the broader process of Europeanization and post-socialist institutional transition, marked by a formal shift from punitive legalism towards a rehabilitative orientation. The Law on Execution of Sanctions (2019) established a comprehensive framework for imprisonment, probation, and post-penal care, grounded in the principles of human dignity, equality, and non-discrimination. Its provisions align closely with the European Prison Rules (Council of Europe, 2006) and the Mandela Rules (United Nations, 2015), emphasizing humane treatment, individual sentence planning, and professionalization of prison staff.

The Law on Probation (2015), further amended in 2025, marked a decisive step towards introducing community-based sanctions. It created a nationwide probation service responsible for supervision, electronic monitoring, and coordination with social and employment services. The law’s implementation has been supported by the National Strategy for the Development of the Penitentiary System 2021–2025 and also, the National Strategy for the Development of the Probation 2021–2025, developed with the support of the European Union and the Council of Europe. These instruments explicitly prioritize probation development and recidivism reduction, reflecting formal convergence with European penal standards.

Despite this normative and legislative progress, structural and operational constraints continue to limit the effective functioning of probation in practice. Institutional capacities remain uneven, inter-agency coordination is inconsistent, and multidisciplinary support is limited. Although probation offices operate across judicial districts, disparities in staffing, resources, and professional expertise persist. As a result, short-term imprisonment continues to dominate sentencing practices, functioning as a familiar and administratively reliable response in a context where community-based sanctions lack comparable operational credibility. The persistence of punitive attitudes among judges, prosecutors, and the general public illustrates what Garland (2001) described as the “ambivalence of penal modernity” - the coexistence of reformist ideals with enduring impulses towards control and retribution.

Penal Reform, Governance, and Institutional Trust

From a broader socio-political perspective, penal reform in North Macedonia has been shaped not only by European normative pressures but also by domestic governance dynamics. Legislative reforms in the justice sector between 2010 and 2017 were characterized by frequent and expedited amendments that prioritized political expediency over systemic coherence (Kambovski & Mujoska Trpevska, 2020, p. 173–174). Rather than strengthening institutional capacity, this pattern of reform contributed to legal instability and weakened the predictability of judicial practice.

These dynamics were compounded by entrenched partocratic governance, selective justice, and low levels of institutional trust (Trpkovski et al., 2020). In such an environment, judicial actors tend to rely on sanctions perceived as procedurally secure and socially legitimate. Short-term imprisonment, despite its limited rehabilitative value, thus acquires a stabilizing function within the sentencing system, while probation, requiring coordination, discretion, and sustained institutional support, remains comparatively underutilized.

In this context, penological theory provides an analytical framework for understanding how socio-political structures condition the application of justice. As Shoham and colleagues (2008) emphasize, the effectiveness of a penal system lies in its capacity to balance control with care, discipline with dignity, and sanction with social responsibility. In North Macedonia, achieving this balance remains a central challenge shaping the implementation of penal reform. Understanding the persistence of short-term imprisonment in North Macedonia requires situating penal policy within its governance context. Sustainable reduction of violence and recidivism depends not only on legislative alignment with European standards but also on institutional trust, administrative capacity, and the credibility of non-custodial sanctions in everyday judicial practice (Lažetić & Mujoska Trpevska, 2024; Mujoska Trpevska, 2025).

Against this theoretical, normative, and institutional background, the following section examines sentencing patterns in North Macedonia in order to show how socio-political determinants shape the continued reliance on short-term imprisonment and contribute to cycles of violence and recidivism.

Socio-Political Determinants of Violence and Recidivism

Structural and Economic Determinants

Economic insecurity remains a key driver of social vulnerability and recidivism in North Macedonia. Despite gradual convergence towards EU averages, structural labour-market weaknesses persist, including high youth unemployment, pronounced regional disparities, and widespread informal employment. Although the share of informal work declined from 28.6% in 2008 to 11.8% in 2022, it remains concentrated in low-productivity sectors such as agriculture and construction and predominantly affects low-educated men engaged in precarious and underpaid jobs (Srbinoski et al., 2023).

Poverty, unemployment, and informality are closely intertwined. The National Development Strategy (2023) highlights that the weak rule of law, through corruption and inconsistent enforcement, discourages investment and reinforces structural unemployment. These conditions significantly constrain social mobility and disproportionately affect former prisoners, whose reintegration into the formal labour market is further hindered by stigma and the limited availability of targeted reintegration programmes (Baur et al., 2018). Research shows that ex-offenders often experience lower employment rates and earnings compared with the general population due to barriers in finding work after release, including employer discrimination and negative perceptions associated with a criminal record (Holzer et al., 2003; Miller, 2025).

While alignment with EU acquis and rule-of-law benchmarks is expected to strengthen the labour market (Mrak, 2021), progress remains uneven. Without stronger institutional accountability and targeted vocational measures, economic reforms risk bypassing vulnerable groups. Persistent informality and restricted access to stable employment continue to reproduce poverty and marginalization, factors consistently associated with higher levels of property crime and recidivism (Gruevska-Drakulevski, 2023).

Empirical evidence from North Macedonia indicates a strong association between unemployment, precarious post-release conditions, and recidivism. Although Centres for Social Work are legally mandated to provide post-penal assistance, their involvement in employment-related reintegration remains limited. Earlier national research found that 84.21% of recidivists were unemployed, while 73.11% of unemployed men were repeat offenders, compared to 26.89% first-time offenders (Gruevska-Drakulevski, 2010). More recent studies suggest that this pattern has changed little over time, reinforcing unemployment as a key predictive factor for repeat offending (Angova Hadjieva, 2025; Ramakers et al., 2017). International evidence also indicates that unstable employment or unemployment after release predicts higher recidivism, whereas stable work protects against reoffending (Błędowski et al., 2023).

Table 2 shows that repeat offenders slightly outnumber first-time offenders within the prison population, accounting for just over half of all incarcerated persons in 2024. The share of repeat offenders is particularly pronounced among individuals aged 25–29 and 41–50, while younger adults aged 19–24 show a lower proportion of repeat offending. This age distribution suggests that recidivism is most strongly concentrated among individuals in their prime working years, consistent with the link between labour-market exclusion, unstable livelihoods, and repeated contact with the criminal justice system.

Table 2.

Distribution of First-Time and Repeat Offenders in the Prison Population by Age Group, North Macedonia (2024).

Age group	First-time offenders	Repeat offenders	% repeat offenders
16–18	24	33	57.9
19–24	125	98	43.9
25–29	173	234	57.5
30–40	378	377	49.9
41–50	213	262	55.2
51–60	112	110	49.5
61+	55	33	37.5
Total	1,080	1,147	51.5

Source. Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions (DES, 2025).

While Table 2 highlights the concentration of repeat offending among working-age prisoners, Table 3 shifts attention to the post-release support mechanisms available to this population.

Table 3.

Adult Beneficiaries of Social Protection After Release From a Correctional Institution, by Sex and Age Group, North Macedonia (2017–2023).

Year	Sex	Total	18–21	22–25	26–45	46–59	60–65	65+
2023	Total	242	2	18	85	134	3	—
	Women	12	2	4	4	2	—	—
2022	Total	161	9	30	68	45	9	—
	Women	13	5	—	5	2	1	—
2021	Total	175	15	38	59	48	15	—
	Women	15	—	5	3	5	2	—
2020	Total	150	12	54	35	35	14	—
	Women	7	—	2	1	4	—	—
2019	Total	242	8	42	144	45	3	—
	Women	17	—	7	10	—	—	—
2018	Total	286	13	61	146	57	7	2
	Women	17	—	5	9	1	—	2
2017	Total	223	10	48	136	29	—	—
	Women	13	—	4	9	—	—	—

Source. State Statistical Office (MakStat 2024).

Table 3 indicates that the number of adults receiving social protection after release from correctional institutions remained relatively low and uneven between 2017 and 2023, ranging from 150 to 286 beneficiaries annually. Across all years, recipients were predominantly aged 26–59, corresponding to core working-age groups. Women consistently represented a small minority, accounting for approximately 5%–8% of beneficiaries.

The limited scope of post-release social protection, particularly among working-age former prisoners, highlights the weak integration between penal institutions and welfare mechanisms. In a context characterized by high unemployment and labour-market informality, the restricted reach of social assistance following release contributes to continued socio-economic insecurity, reinforcing conditions associated with an increased risk of repeat offending (Mujoska Trpevska & Lažetić, 2025b, pp. 68–80; Gruevska-Drakulevski, 2023, p. 16).

Prison Work and Economic Reintegration

Within the broader context of economic insecurity and labour-market exclusion, employment during imprisonment represents one of the few structured mechanisms for maintaining work habits and supporting future reintegration. Under the Law on the Execution of Sanctions, prison work is recognized not merely as a disciplinary measure but as a rehabilitative right aimed at preparing convicted persons for lawful employment after release. Assignments are formally based on inmates’ physical and psychological capacities, as assessed by medical services, with consideration given to personal preferences and vocational backgrounds.

In practice, prison labour is primarily organized within correctional institutions through workshops, agriculture, maintenance services, kitchens, laundry, and similar activities. Inmates in open or semi-open regimes may also work outside the institution under supervision or with approved employers. These arrangements are intended to foster basic work discipline, skills acquisition, and social responsibility, thereby reducing the risk of post-release unemployment.

Despite this normative framework, the actual scope and rehabilitative value of prison employment remain limited. Most correctional facilities lack adequate production capacity, market access, or sustained partnerships with local enterprises, resulting in restricted opportunities for meaningful work (Gruevska-Drakulevski, 2024). According to internal data from the Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions, fewer than one-third of prisoners are engaged in any form of paid work, and the majority of activities are service-oriented rather than vocational or skills-based (DES, 2024).

Remuneration for prison labour is modest and largely symbolic. Wages are calculated based on the type and quantity of work performed, with only a portion available for use during imprisonment and the remainder deposited until release. While such engagement contributes to institutional order and daily structure, it rarely leads to recognized qualifications or stable employment after release (Gruevska-Drakulevski, 2024). As a result, prison work currently functions more as a form of institutional management than as an effective pathway to economic reintegration, limiting its potential to reduce recidivism linked to post-release unemployment.

Social Determinants

Family Disintegration and Instability

Family relationships constitute a central context for moral, emotional, and social development. When families are disrupted through violence, divorce, or prolonged absence of a parent (Basto-Pereira et al., 2022), individuals experience weakened social bonds and reduced informal social control, factors consistently associated with offending and recidivism (Bosick & Fomby, 2018; Derzon, 2009).

In North Macedonia, long-term unemployment, poverty, and labour migration have contributed to widespread family fragmentation. Many children grow up in single-parent or transnational households, while adults affected by unemployment or imprisonment often experience similar patterns of family disruption, reinforcing intergenerational cycles of social exclusion (Kambovski et al., 2018; VasPsiholog, 2020). Economic dependency and joblessness further strain family relations, leading to separation, weakened parental contact, and heightened stigma (Gruevska-Drakulevski, 2024).

Divorce and domestic violence intensify these dynamics. National data indicate a continued rise in divorce rates alongside limited institutional support for families in crisis (Macedonia in Figures, 2023). Research shows that children raised in conflictual or neglectful family environments are more likely to experience behavioural difficulties and disengagement from education, patterns that often persist into adulthood (Dimitrijoska et al., 2019). Many incarcerated individuals report exposure to domestic conflict, substance abuse, or emotional neglect during childhood, suggesting continuity between early family adversity and later criminal involvement.

At the same time, family ties can function as a critical protective factor. Regional evidence from the PrisonLIFE project in Serbia indicates that family contact remains one of the few stable sources of well-being among prisoners, regardless of incarceration history, underscoring its importance for rehabilitation and reintegration (Stevanovic et al., 2024). Maintaining meaningful family relationships during imprisonment has been associated with greater motivation for treatment and improved post-release adjustment.

Gendered patterns are also evident. Among female offenders, family disruption often manifests through internalized trauma, including anxiety, depression, and withdrawal, which may later contribute to reactive aggression or delinquent behaviour (Kerig et al., 2010; Mujoska Trpevska & Lažetić, 2025b; UNODC, 2018). Studies of adult women offenders similarly highlight early experiences of neglect and violence as significant precursors of later criminal trajectories (Papavangjeli, 2014).

Overall, family instability operates as both a risk factor for offending and a constraint on successful reintegration. Conversely, stable and supportive family environments reduce the likelihood of repeat offending and facilitate post-release adjustment (UNODC, 2018). These dynamics underscore the importance of considering family relationships as part of the broader social context shaping recidivism, rather than as isolated background factors.

Educational Deficits and Reintegration Barriers

Education is one of the most consistent predictors of both initial offending and reoffending. Individuals with low or incomplete education often face limited employment opportunities, economic insecurity, and weaker attachment to legitimate social institutions, all of which increase the likelihood of antisocial and criminal behaviour (Hjalmarsson & Lochner, 2012; Lochner, 2020). Educational deprivation is also linked to poorer cognitive and social skills, lower self-control, and reduced problem-solving abilities, which hinder successful reintegration after imprisonment (Bäckman & Nilsson, 2011).

In North Macedonia, the educational profile of prisoners clearly reflects these risks. Data from the Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions (DES, 2025) show that nearly three-quarters of all incarcerated persons have not completed or have attained only basic education. Out of 2,227 convicted persons serving sentences as of December 2024, 1,157 (52%) had only primary education, while 335 were entirely illiterate. Merely 6% had completed higher education, underscoring the extent of educational marginalization among prisoners.

The situation among juveniles is even more alarming. According to DES data for 2024, of the 14 newly admitted children, 5 (35.7%) were illiterate, and the rest had only partially completed basic schooling. None had reached secondary education. These figures confirm the link between school failure, early dropout, and delinquent behaviour (Dimitrijoska et al., 2019; Kambovski et al., 2018).

Although free and compulsory education is guaranteed by law, children deprived of liberty have long been denied this right. For years, no state authority assumed responsibility for ensuring access to formal education in correctional institutions, leaving minors effectively outside the education system (Civil Media, 2024). Programmes were sporadic, dependent on NGOs or donor projects, and excluded from the national curriculum (Mujoska Trpevska & Lažetić, 2025, p. 4–5).

More systematic reform began only recently. In 2025, formal primary education was introduced at the Educational-Correctional Facility in Volkovija, Tetovo, through cooperation with the Makarenko Adult Education School (SDK.mk, 2025). Similar partnerships have expanded access to primary and secondary education for adult prisoners. While these initiatives represent progress towards compliance with national and international standards, their reach remains limited and uneven.

Extensive research demonstrates that structured educational programmes significantly reduce recidivism and improve post-release employability (Hjalmarsson & Lochner, 2012; UNODC, 2018). In North Macedonia, however, delayed and partial implementation means that many offenders are released with the same educational deficits that contributed to their initial marginalization, weakening reintegration prospects and sustaining cycles of repeat offending.

Social Exclusion and Stigma

Reintegration after imprisonment remains one of the most challenging stages of the criminal justice process. For many former prisoners, release does not represent a return to freedom but rather a transition into a new form of social exclusion. Upon leaving prison, they encounter persistent stigma, distrust, and discrimination from the community, employers, and even state institutions. In North Macedonia, reintegration is further constrained by the limited availability of structured post-penal support, weak coordination between probation and social services, and scarce employment opportunities for ex-offenders (Mujoska Trpevska & Lažetić, 2025a).

Public attitudes towards former prisoners remain strongly punitive. Survey data collected by the Macedonian Society of Penology (MSP, 2025) indicate widespread reluctance among citizens to employ or engage socially with individuals who have served prison sentences, reflecting persistent stereotypes that equate imprisonment with lasting moral failure. Such attitudes reinforce barriers to employment, housing, and social participation, undermining reintegration efforts even where formal sanctions have been completed.

Regional research similarly highlights the exclusionary effects of imprisonment. Kunović (2020) describes post-release marginalization as multidimensional, encompassing economic insecurity, social isolation, and psychological strain, all intensified by institutional barriers and public stigma. By contrast, research on alternative sanctions emphasizes their capacity to preserve family and community ties. Jovanov (2024) finds that community-based sanctions support social participation and responsibility, reducing alienation when compared with custodial sentences.

At the institutional level, the absence of coherent aftercare mechanisms further compounds exclusion. Although the National Strategy for the Development of the Penitentiary System (2021–2025) identifies post-release reintegration as a priority, implementation has remained uneven. Existing programmes are largely project-based, limited in scope, and often dependent on non-governmental or externally funded initiatives, with little continuity beyond project cycles (Council of Europe, 2023). As a result, many former prisoners remain structurally excluded from the social and economic resources necessary for sustainable reintegration, increasing the risk of repeat offending.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Issues

Substance-use disorders and mental health problems are highly prevalent among prison populations and represent significant drivers of recidivism. International research indicates that the vast majority of prisoners present with at least one diagnosable mental disorder, most commonly depression, anxiety, or personality disorders, while nearly half experience concurrent substance-use problems (Birmingham, 2003). Evidence further shows that comorbidity between mental illness and substance misuse substantially increases the risk of self-harm, suicide, and repeat offending after release (Fazel et al., 2016).

Patterns observed in North Macedonia reflect broader regional trends. Research in the Western Balkans documents high levels of opioid and poly-substance dependence among prisoners, alongside limited access to comprehensive treatment (Ignjatova et al., 2016). At Idrizovo Penitentiary, fewer than half of identified opioid users were enrolled in substitution therapy, primarily methadone-based, while national data suggest that only about one-quarter of persons convicted for drug-related offences receive any form of treatment during imprisonment (Institute of Public Health of the Republic of North Macedonia, 2022). These figures point to a substantial treatment gap within custodial settings.

A critical weakness lies in the lack of continuity of care. Substitution therapy and other interventions provided in prison are rarely linked to community-based mental health and addiction services after release, increasing the likelihood of relapse and reoffending (Ignjatova et al., 2016). Most correctional institutions lack multidisciplinary teams and systematic screening for dual diagnoses, while evidence-based interventions such as cognitive-behavioural relapse prevention remain limited in scope.

As a result, imprisonment often interrupts rather than stabilizes treatment trajectories. Without sustained coordination between prison health services, community clinics, and social welfare institutions, substance use and untreated mental illness continue to function as structural vulnerabilities that undermine reintegration and contribute to repeated contact with the criminal justice system (Fazel et al., 2016).

Political and Institutional Determinants

North Macedonia’s recent political trajectory has been marked by repeated cycles of reform, crisis, and institutional fragility, shaping public trust in state authority and the credibility of the rule of law. The period between 2008 and 2018, culminating in the 2015 wiretapping scandal, exposed systemic problems including politicized administration, selective justice, and patterns of state capture (European Commission, 2015; Politico, 2015). These developments significantly weakened institutional legitimacy and undermined confidence in legal accountability.

Public protests during the so-called “Colourful Revolution” reflected not only political dissatisfaction but broader societal disillusionment with elite impunity and unequal application of the law (Deutsche Welle, 2016). From a criminological perspective, environments characterized by selective enforcement and perceived injustice tend to erode normative compliance, weaken the deterrent effect of criminal law, and normalize informal or self-help responses to conflict (Matić & Bošković, 2021). For marginalized groups already affected by social and economic exclusion, such conditions heighten vulnerability to violence and repeat offending.

Subsequent events, including the violent storming of Parliament in April 2017 and the fragile political reconciliation that followed, further revealed the intersection between political instability and social conflict. The Ohrid Framework Agreement (2001) remains a milestone for interethnic coexistence, yet its incomplete implementation, uneven representation, local power asymmetries, and residual mistrust, continues to fuel latent tensions that occasionally spill into institutional settings, prisons included (Bieber, 2008). In this sense, political polarization functions not only as a reflection of societal division but as a factor that reproduces exclusion and insecurity.

Although the Prespa Agreement (2018) and renewed EU accession momentum signalled a turning point, institutional reform has often remained reactive rather than transformative. Assessments by the European Policy Institute (2022) and the Council of Europe (2023) indicate persistent shortcomings in depoliticizing the civil service, strengthening prosecutorial independence, and ensuring consistent accountability. The European Parliament’s report (2025) similarly notes that institutional resilience remains constrained by entrenched interests and selective implementation of reforms. Without strong domestic ownership of initiatives such as the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans (Government of the Republic of North Macedonia, 2024), progress risks remaining largely symbolic rather than binding.

Taken together, these political and institutional conditions shape the broader environment in which criminal justice operates. Weak institutional trust, inconsistent accountability, and politicized governance blur moral and legal boundaries, reducing confidence in formal justice mechanisms. This climate indirectly sustains patterns of recidivism by weakening the perceived legitimacy of law and limiting the capacity of penal institutions to function as credible agents of regulation and reintegration.

Ethnic and Cultural Determinants

Ethnic diversity in North Macedonia continues to shape access to institutions and perceptions of fairness within the criminal justice system. Persistent segmentation among Macedonian, Albanian, Roma, and other communities influences patterns of trust, participation, and representation, particularly in post-socialist contexts where civic consensus remains fragile (Chupeska, 2011). Unequal institutional treatment and limited intercultural dialogue contribute to mistrust towards state authorities, complicating reintegration processes for minority offenders (Kambovski, 2018, p.8).

Cultural pluralism has not consistently translated into equal justice outcomes. Parallel value systems and identity-based loyalties may affect cooperation with state institutions and the implementation of rehabilitation and reintegration programmes (Chupeska, 2011; Frčkoski, 2025). These dynamics are especially pronounced in relation to Roma and Albanian communities, which remain disproportionately exposed to socio-economic marginalization and, consequently, to criminal justice intervention.

Within the prison system, ethnic segmentation is reflected in differential access to services and uneven post-release outcomes. As Kambovski (2018) notes, unresolved issues of representation, trust, and institutional neutrality weaken the rehabilitative capacity of penal institutions. In such contexts, ethnic and cultural divisions function not as direct causes of offending but as structural conditions that shape vulnerability, institutional engagement, and the likelihood of successful reintegration, thereby indirectly contributing to patterns of recidivism.

Table 4 illustrates the ethnic composition of the prison population and highlights persistent disparities linked to social marginalization. Macedonians and Albanians together account for the majority of incarcerated persons, broadly reflecting their demographic weight. By contrast, Roma persons remain markedly overrepresented, with 364 prisoners, underscoring the well-documented intersection between ethnic minority status, poverty, limited educational attainment, and repeated contact with the criminal justice system.

Table 4.

Structure of Convicted Persons Serving Prison Sentences by National Affiliation, North Macedonia (31 December 2024).

National affiliation	Men	Women	Total
Macedonians	791	34	825
Albanians	718	29	747
Turks	133	0	133
Roma	340	24	364
Serbs	26	2	28
Other	128	2	130
Total	2,132	91	2,227

Source. Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions (DES, 2025).

Women constitute a small proportion of the prison population across all national groups, accounting for approximately 4% overall. While gender differences are not the primary focus of this analysis, the data confirm that ethnic disparities in imprisonment largely operate within a predominantly male custodial population.

These patterns suggest that ethnic affiliation does not function as a direct cause of offending, but rather as a structural marker of accumulated disadvantage. For Roma communities in particular, overrepresentation in prison reflects broader inequalities in access to education, employment, housing, and social protection, which continue to shape vulnerability to criminalization and recidivism before, during, and after imprisonment (Mujoska Trpevska & Bitrakov, 2019).

Probation and the Limits of Short-Term Imprisonment

The preceding analysis of structural, social, and institutional determinants provides the context in which sentencing practices in North Macedonia must be understood. Within this environment, short-term imprisonment continues to dominate judicial responses to lower-level offending, despite its limited capacity to address the underlying conditions associated with violence and recidivism. Empirical findings from the Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions and the Macedonian Society of Penology consistently show that brief custodial sentences disrupt employment, family relations, and access to treatment, while offering little opportunity for meaningful intervention in cases marked by social exclusion, addiction, or economic insecurity (DES, 2022).

Against this background, probation represents a potentially more proportionate and effective response, particularly for low-risk offenders whose criminogenic needs are rooted outside the prison setting. By allowing individuals to remain in the community under structured supervision, probation can combine accountability with access to social support, treatment, and monitoring. Evidence from probation practice in North Macedonia suggests that positive outcomes depend less on the formal availability of probation as a sanction than on its practical credibility, namely, the capacity for individualized assessment, multidisciplinary coordination, and sustained engagement over time (Mujoska Trpevska, 2025).

However, the continued reliance on short-term imprisonment reflects not only judicial preference but also the constraints identified earlier in this article: limited institutional coordination, weak post-penal support, and uneven access to social services. In this sense, probation’s underutilization is inseparable from the broader socio-political and institutional context in which it operates. Understanding the limits of short-term imprisonment therefore requires examining not only sentencing choices but also the conditions under which probation is expected to function as a viable alternative.

Conclusion

The findings of this study demonstrate that persistent violence and recidivism in North Macedonia cannot be attributed to sentencing policy in isolation, but must be understood within a broader configuration of structural, social, and institutional conditions. Within this context, short-term imprisonment continues to function as a default judicial response, despite its limited capacity to address the socio-economic vulnerabilities, health needs, and social disconnection that characterize much of the prison population. Probation, although formally expanded and normatively aligned with European standards, remains constrained by uneven implementation and limited institutional integration.

The Macedonian case illustrates a recurring pattern in post-socialist justice reform: legal and policy innovation advances more rapidly than the institutional and social capacities required to sustain it. Europeanization has introduced a framework emphasizing proportionality, dignity, and reintegration, yet these principles are unevenly translated into practice. As this analysis has shown, the underutilization of probation is inseparable from wider deficits in coordination between criminal justice institutions, social services, and community-based support mechanisms.

Reducing recidivism therefore depends not only on expanding non-custodial sanctions but on addressing the conditions under which such measures operate. Employment insecurity, educational disadvantage, family disruption, stigma, and untreated mental health or substance-use problems continue to shape both offending trajectories and post-release outcomes. Where these factors remain unaddressed, short custodial sentences risk reinforcing cycles of exclusion rather than promoting desistance.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of penal reform in North Macedonia will be measured not by the formal availability of probation or alternative sanctions, but by their practical credibility as instruments of reintegration. Strengthening the links between sentencing practices, probation supervision, and social support systems is essential if non-custodial measures are to function as genuine alternatives to imprisonment. In this sense, the challenge of recidivism reflects a broader test of institutional maturity: the capacity of the justice system to move beyond containment and towards sustained social reintegration in line with European standards.

Footnotes

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Elena Mujoska Trpevska

Author Biographies

Elena Mujoska Trpevska is a Senior Research Associate at the Center for Strategic Research, Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, and an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, University Goce Delchev in Shtip. She has held a PhD in Criminal Law and Penology since 2016 and passed the National Bar Exam in 2020. Dr. Mujoska Trpevska is a key contributor to judicial reform in North Macedonia, working on the Criminal Code, the Law on Execution of Sanctions, and the Law on Probation. She has authored numerous publications and led projects in criminal law, human rights, and penal reform. Since 2017, she has served as President of the Macedonian Society of Penology and remains actively engaged in the NGO sector.

Gordana Lažetić has been a Full Professor since 2012 and currently serves as Head of the Department of Criminal Law and Criminology at the Faculty of Law “Iustinianus Primus” in Skopje, North Macedonia. She is also a Corresponding Member of the Center for Strategic Research at the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Her professional engagement includes membership in the National Council for Higher Education and Scientific Research and the Macedonian Association of Criminal Law and Criminology, as well as serving as President of the State Council for the Prevention of Child Delinquency. Prof. Lažetić has authored more than 140 publications in domestic and international journals and has participated in over 200 scientific projects, conferences, and workshops.

References

Angova Hadjieva

. (2025). Criminological analysis of offender profiles most suitable for probation measures. Macedonian Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 32(1–2), 1.

Arrigo

B. A.

Milovanovic

(2009). Revolution in penology: Rethinking the society of captives. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Bäckman

Nilsson

(2011). Pathways to social exclusion—A life-course study. European Sociological Review, 27(1), 107–123.

Basto-Pereira

Farrington

D. P.

(2022). Developmental predictors of offending and persistence in crime: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 65, 101761.

Baur

J. E.

Hall

A. V.

Daniels

S. R.

Buckley

M. R.

Anderson

H. J.

(2018). Beyond banning the box: A conceptual model of the stigmatization of ex-offenders in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 28(2), 204–219.

Bieber

(2008). Power-sharing and the implementation of the Ohrid framework agreement. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

Birmingham

(2003). The mental health of prisoners. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 9(3), 191–201.

Błędowski

Felczak

Gałecka-Burdziak

Góra

(2023). Incarceration experience at older ages: Does employment protect against recidivism? Economics & Sociology, 16(1), 11–28.

Boonin

(2008). The problem of punishment (Vol. 85). Cambridge University Press.

10.

Bosick

S. J.

Fomby

(2018). Family instability in childhood and criminal offending during the transition into adulthood. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(11), 1483–1504.

11.

Canton

(2010). European probation rules: What they are, why they matter. Eurovista: Probation and Community Justice, 1(2), 62–71.

12.

Chupeska

(2011). Cultural identities in politics: Some aspects of multiculturalism. Konrad Adenauer Foundation.

13.

Civil Media. (2024, April 25). No institution in North Macedonia assumes responsibility for the long-standing violation of the fundamental right to education of children who have broken the law. https://civilmedia.mk/vo-rsm-nikoj-ne-snosi-odgovornost-shto-so-godini-ne-se-pochituva-osnovnoto-pravo-na-obrazovanie-na-detsata-koi-go-prekrshile-zakonot/

14.

Council of Europe. (2010). Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the Council of Europe Probation Rules. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

15.

Council of Europe. (2023, June 19). Post monitoring dialogue with North Macedonia. Strasbourg: Parliamentary Assembly. https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=28227&lang=en

16.

Council of Europe. (2024a). European prison statistics: SPACE I – Prison populations. https://wp.unil.ch/space/space-i/

17.

Council of Europe. (2024b). European probation statistics: SPACE II – Persons under probation supervision. https://www.coe.int/en/web/prison/space

18.

Criminal Code, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, No. 37/96, 80/99, 4/02, 43/03, 19/04, 81/05, 60/06, 73/06, 7/08, 139/08, 114/09, 51/11, 135/11, 185/11, 142/12, 166/12, 55/13, 82/13, 14/14, 27/14, 28/14, 41/14, 115/14, 132/14, 160/14, 199/14, 196/15, 226/15, 97/17 and 248/18 and Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, No. 36/23 and 188/23.

19.

Derzon

(2009). The role of the family in crime and delinquency: Evidence from prior quantitative reviews. Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, 6(2), 108–132.

20.

Dimitrijoska

Gordana

Saltirovska

(2019). Risk factors for recidivism in juvenile criminal offenders. European Journal of Social Science Education and Research, 6(1), 23–33.

21.

Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions. (2024). Annual reports. https://uis.gov.mk/zakoni/

22.

Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions. (2025). Annual report on the situation and operations of the penitentiary and correctional institutions in the Republic of North Macedonia for 2024. Ministry of Justice.

23.

Deutsche Welle. (2016, April 20). Protesters hit Macedonia’s capital with paint balls and soap suds in a “Colorful Revolution.” https://www.dw.com/en/protesters-hit-macedonias-capital-with-paint-balls-and-soap-suds-in-a-colorful-revolution/a-19201617

24.

Directorate for the Execution of Sanctions (DES). (2022). Probation service report: Risk assessment and recommendation for conditional sentence with protective supervision (Case No. 09 – 443/1, 12.05.2022). Ministry of Justice of the Republic of North Macedonia.

25.

European Commission. (2015). The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Recommendations of the senior experts’ group on systemic rule of law issues (Priebe report). European Commission. https://mdc.org.mk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/CRM-Priebe-Report-ENG.pdf

26.

European Parliament. (2025, July 9). Report on the 2023 Commission Report on North Macedonia (2023/2172(INI)). Legislative Observatory. https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/document-summary?id=1828883

27.

European Policy Institute. (2022). The Priebe report two years later: New government and new oppurtunities for resolving old problems. https://epi.org.mk/post/11216?lang=en

28.

European Prison Rules (Recommendation Rec(2006)2 of the committee of ministers to member states on the European Prison Rules). Council of Europe. https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectID=09000016805d8d25

29.

Fazel

Hayes

A. J.

Bartellas

Clerici

Trestman

(2016). Mental health of prisoners: Prevalence, adverse outcomes, and interventions. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(9), 871–881.

30.

Feeley

M. M.

Simon

(1992). The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30(4), 449–474.

31.

Frčkoski

D. L.

(2025). Negotiating identity conflicts. Templum.

32.

Garland

(2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford University Press.

33.

Government of the Republic of North Macedonia. (2024). Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans: Reform agenda of North Macedonia 2024–2027. Government of RNM.

34.

Gruevska-Drakulevski

(2010). The impact of imprisonment on recidivism [Doctoral dissertation]. Faculty of Law “Iustinianus Primus,” Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje.

35.

Gruevska-Drakulevski

(2023). The state of post-penal assistance and resocialization in the Republic of North Macedonia (Baseline study). Macedonian Society of Penology.

36.

Gruevska-Drakulevski

(2024). Work as a form of treatment toward successful resocialization and reintegration of convicted persons. Macedonian Society of Penology.

37.

Hjalmarsson

Lochner

(2012). The impact of education on crime: International evidence. CESifo DICE Report, 10(2), 49–55.

38.

Holzer

H. J.

Raphael

Stoll

M. A.

(2003). Employment barriers facing ex-offenders. Urban Institute Reentry Roundtable, 1, 23.

39.

Hough

Farrall

McNeill

(2013). Intelligent justice: Balancing the effects of community sentences and custody. The Howard League for Penal Reform.

40.

Ignjatova

., & Centre for Public Health – Institute of Public Health of the Republic of North Macedonia. (2016). Drug treatment systems in prisons in Eastern and South-East Europe: North Macedonia country profile. Council of Europe.

41.

Institute of Public Health of the Republic of North Macedonia. (2022). National Drug Situation Overview (NDSO) – North Macedonia. IPH. https://iph.mk/Upload/Documents/NDSO-North-Macedonia-final%281%29.pdf

42.

Jovanov

(2024). Advantages of the application of alternative sanctions in crime reduction. Macedonian Review of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1–2(30), 1–15.

43.

Kambovski

(2005). Current problems in the criminal policy. Macedonian Review of Criminal Law and Criminology, 12, 5.

44.

Kambovski

(Ed.). (2018). Human dignity and the contemporary challenges of tolerance. In Dialogue among civilizations (pp. 6–12). Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts (MANU).

45.

Kambovski

Lažetić

Nanev

Gruevska-Drakulevski

Maljanovski

Mujoska Trpevska

(2018). Analysis of the situation in the institutions for accommodation of children at risk and children in conflict with the law in the Republic of Macedonia. Macedonian Society of Penology.

46.

Kambovski

Mujoska Trpevska

(2020). Legal postulates on criminal justice reform: Study (Book 10). Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts.

47.

Kerig

P. K.

Becker

S. P.

Egan

(2010). From internalizing to externalizing: Theoretical models of the processes linking PTSD to juvenile delinquency. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): Causes, Symptoms and Treatment, 33(78), 3–42.

48.

Kunović

(2020). Resocialization of prisoners and reintegration after release from prison [Bachelor’s thesis, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Education and Rehabilitation Sciences]. University of Zagreb Repository.

49.

Law on execution of sanctions, Official Gazette, No.99/2019, 220/2019 236/2022 and 74/2024.

50.

Law on probation, Official Gazette, No. 226/2015.

51.

Lažetić

Mujoska Trpevska

(2024). Specialized treatment for inmates: The key to successful resocialization and adaptation. Macedonian Association for Criminal Law and Criminology.

52.

Lochner

(2020). Education and crime. In Bradley

Green

(Eds.), The economics of education (pp. 109–117). Academic Press.

53.

MakStat. (2024). State Statistical Office of the Republic of North Macedonia. Convicted adults by type of criminal offence, previous convictions, age and sex, by year (2017–2024). https://makstat.stat.gov.mk/PXWeb/pxweb/mk/MakStat/MakStat__Sudstvo__ObvinetiOsudeniStoriteli/425_SK2_Mk_T18_ml.px/table/tableViewLayout2/

54.

MakStat. (2025). State Statistical Office of the Republic of North Macedonia. Convicted adult perpetrators by types of criminal offences and applied main sentence - imprisonment, by year (2017–2024). https://makstat.stat.gov.mk/PXWeb/pxweb/en/MakStat/MakStat__Sudstvo__ObvinetiOsudeniStoriteli/300_SK2_Mk_T14_ml.px/table/tableViewLayout2/

55.

Matić

Bošković

(2021). Transitional justice and civil resistance: The case of the Colourful revolution in Macedonia. Review of Law and Religion, 12(2), 27–47.

56.

Miller

(2025). The mark of a criminal record: Unpacking stigma and barriers to reentry. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 1–11.

57.

Mrak

(2021, July 10). North Macedonia: Report on the integration of the EU accession process into the National Development Strategy. UNDP & Government of the Republic of North Macedonia.

58.

Macedonian Society of Penology (MSP). (2025). Resocialization and reintegration. https://msp.mk/category/projects/ресоцијализација-и-реинтеграција/

59.

Mujoska Trpevska

. (2017). Short term imprisonment. Vincent Graphics.

60.

Mujoska Trpevska

. (2025). Probation aimed at key challenges in establishing an effective system of resocialization and social adaptation, (advocacy initiative). Macedonian Society of Penology.

61.

Mujoska Trpevska

Bitrakov

. (2019). Fair and equal treatment of Roma in Macedonia prisons. Macedonian Society of Penology.

62.

Mujoska Trpevska

Lažetić

. (2025a). The path toward resocialization and reintegration: An analytical study on the role of institutions, policies, and the community in the reintegration of convicted persons. Macedonian Society of Penology.

63.

Mujoska Trpevska

Lažetić

. (Eds.). (2025b). Exploring the causes of violent behavior in female youth in North Macedonia: A risk factor analysis. In Women’s studies international forum (Vol. 112, p. 103164). Pergamon.

64.

National strategy for the development of the penitentiary system in the Republic of North Macedonia (2021–2025). Council of Europe Office in Skopje. https://manu.edu.mk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/posledna-verzija.za-pecatdocx-1-3-1-5.pdf

65.

National Strategy for the Development of the Probation. (2021–2025). Ministry of Justice, Directorate for Execution of Sanctions, Skopje. https://uis.gov.mk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Стратегија-за-пробација-2021-2025.docx

66.

National Development Strategy. (2023). Matrix for the national development strategy of the Republic of North Macedonia 2022–2042. Government of the Republic of North Macedonia. https://www.nrs.mk/content/Matrici/ANGmatrici/COMPETITIVEANDINNOVATIVEECONOMY.pdf

67.

Papavangjeli

(2014). Woman in conflict with the law – the gender perspective in the criminal justice system. The Netherlands Helsinki Committee.

68.

Politico. (2015, February 26). Wiretapping scandal hits Macedonia. https://www.politico.eu/article/wire-tapping-scandal-hits-macedonia/

69.

Prespa Agreement. (2018). Final agreement for the settlement of the differences as described in the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 817 (1993) and 845 (1993), the termination of the Interim Accord of 1995, and the establishment of a strategic partnership between the parties. Retrieved October 17, 2025, from https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280544ac1

70.

Ramakers

Nieuwbeerta

Van Wilsem

Dirkzwager

(2017). Not just any job will do: A study on employment characteristics and recidivism risks after release. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61(16), 1795–1818.

71.

Schinkel

(2021). Persistent short-term imprisonment: Belonging as a lens to understand its shifting meanings over the life course. Incarceration: An International Journal of Imprisonment, Detention and Coercive Confinement, 2(1), 2632666321989018.

72.

SDK.mk. (2025, October 4). Classes started in the Tetovo educational-correctional facility: The adult education school “Makarenko” now provides primary education. https://sdk.mk/index.php/makedonija/pochna-nastavata-vo-vospitno-popravniot-dom-tetovo-shkolata-za-vozrasni-makarenko-drzhi-chasovi-za-osnovno-obrazovanie/

73.

Shoham

S. G.

Beck

Kett

(Eds.). (2008). International handbook of penology and criminal justice. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group.

74.

Srbinoski

Petreski

(2023). Granular examination of the informal economy in North Macedonia: Insights into informal workers, undeclared work and income underreporting in households (Policy Study No. 50). Finance Think.

75.

Stevanovic

Ilijic

Vujicic

(2024). Previous prison experience and evaluation of the quality of prison life. NBP. Nauka, Bezbednost, Policija, 29, 1.

76.

The Ohrid Framework Agreement. (2001). Ohrid Framework Agreement. Retrieved October 17, 2025, from https://www.osce.org/sites/default/files/f/documents/2/8/100622.pdf

77.

Trpkovski

Magleshov

Dimitrievski

Kalajdziev

Preshova

Nikolovska

M. C.

Koco

Avramovsk

(2020). Blind justice: Towards a captured State in North Macedonia – Judiciary, Public Prosecution, and Police. Open Society Foundation.

78.

United Nations. (2015). United nations standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules). United Nations.

79.

UNODC. (2018). Introductory handbook on the prevention of recidivism and the social reintegration of offenders. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/18-02303_ebook.pdf

80.

VasPsiholog.com. (2020, June 8). Family factors contributing to the emergence of antisocial behavior in children. https://www.vaspsiholog.com/2020/06/porodicni-faktori-koji-doprinose-pojavi-antisocijalnog-ponasanja-kod-dece/