CONVICTION INDIVIDUALISATION

The up to date legislations has gone that far, as they foresee the type and the length of conviction regarding each penal charge. However, this stage presents a specific development of public reaction against criminality, and its essence consists of a theoretical and practical engagement that individual conviction should be adjusted to the subjective attributes and qualities of the author who has committed the penal act. Analysing the background of this individualism, it was concluded that the aim of this engagement initially has been to avoid arbitraries and misuse, especially the violence of citizen's equality. Over the years and with the evolution of judicial-penal system through this individualisation, the misinterpretation expectation in determining the way of importance of the subjective -objective circumstances regarding the authors of the penal acts, in the completion of this misinterpreted element that legal individualisation contained was considered. Hence, the penal judicial science processed a formal -procedural theory which was known as judicial individualisation. This theory comprises of various laws which defines the basic criteria of the conviction terms; while the court based on each individual case as well as based on the mitigating and aggravating circumstances defines the type and the length of conviction even though this individualisation has as a main criteria, the penal culpability and responsibility of the author. Thus, this type of individualisation is not majorly supported. Such result probably has come as a consequence of the necessity of deep recognition of the author's personality who has committed the penal act by the side of the respective penal preceding authority based on the studied circumstances. Over time and actions, the basic conditions to issue a conviction, definitively in order to grant it the case evolution is that it will be laid in the execution space of the penal conviction. Precisely, for this execution to be in the spirit of the above mentioned individualisations, the practice had the need for the relative rationalisation in the framework of sentence suffering. This necessity has led to what is called the "administrative individualisation". This presents a sort of sentence individualisation by which the viewpoints in the penology literature is applied by the organs and the personnel of the entities, and the improving punishment institutions. This individualisation is narrower and has to do with the suitability of one's convicted personality during the time that he is suffering the sentence in such institutions. According to the criteria of penology science, this individualisation is being made on the basis of knowing the personality of the convicted person, on the observation basis and on the analytical study of the respective experts