Parole 

(also known as provisional release or supervised release) is a form of early release of

A parole officer with the Missouri Department of Corrections interviews a drug-related offense probationer

Originating from the French word parole ("speech, spoken words" but also "promise"), the term
became associated during the Middle Ages with the release of prisoners who gave their word.
This differs greatly from pardon, amnesty or commutation of sentence in that parolees are still
considered to be serving their sentences, and may be returned to prison if they violate the conditions
of their parole.

Modern development[edit]
Alexander Maconochie, a Scottish geographer and captain in the Royal Navy, introduced the
modern idea of parole when, in 1840, he was appointed superintendent of the British penal colonies
in Norfolk Island, Australia. He developed a plan to prepare them for eventual return to society that
involved three grades. The first two consisted of promotions earned through good behaviour, labour,
and study. The third grade in the system involved conditional liberty outside of prison while obeying
rules. A violation would return them to prison and they would start all over again through the ranks of
the three-grade process.[1][2] He reformed its ticket of leave system, instituting what many consider to
be the world's first parole system.[3] Prisoners served indeterminate sentences from which they could
be released early if they showed evidence of rehabilitation[4] through participation in a graded
classification system based on a unit of exchange called a mark.[5] Prisoners earned marks through
good behavior, lost them through bad behavior,[3] and could spend them on passage to higher
classification statuses ultimately conveying freedom.[5]
In an instance of multiple discovery, in 1846, Arnould Bonneville de Marsangy proposed the idea of
parole (which he termed "preparatory liberations") to the Civil Tribunal at Reims.[6][7]

Canada[edit]
In general, in Canada, prisoners are eligible to apply for full parole after serving one-third of their
sentences.[8] Prisoners are also eligible to apply for day parole,[9] and can do this before being eligible
to apply for full parole.
Any prisoner whose sentence is less than two years is sent to a correctional facility in the province or
territory where they were convicted, whilst anyone sentenced to serve no less than two years will be
sent to a federal correctional facility and will thus have to deal with the Parole Board of Canada.[10]
Parole is an option for most prisoners. However, parole is not guaranteed, particularly for prisoners
serving life or indeterminate sentences. In cases of first-degree murder, one can apply for parole
after 25 years if convicted of a single murder. However, if convicted of multiple murders, either of the
first or second-degree, the sentencing judge has the discretion to make parole ineligibility periods
consecutive - thereby extending parole ineligibility beyond 25 years and, in rare cases, beyond a
normal life-span.[11][12] On May 27, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that extending parole
ineligibility beyond 25 years was unconstitutional for being "cruel and unusual" punishment.[13]

China[edit]
In China, prisoners are often granted medical parole or compassionate release, which releases them
on the grounds that they must receive medical treatment which cannot be provided for in prison.
Occasionally, medical parole is used as a less public way of releasing a wrongly convicted prisoner.
[14][15]

The Chinese legal code has no explicit provision for exile, but often dissidents are released on the
grounds that they need to be treated for a medical condition in another country, and with the
understanding that they will be reincarcerated if they return to China. Dissidents who have been
released on medical parole include Ngawang Chophel, Ngawang Sangdrol, Phuntsog
Nyidron, Takna Jigme Zangpo, Wang Dan, Wei Jingsheng, Gao Zhan and Fang Lizhi.[citation needed]

Israel[edit]
Until 2001, parole in Israel was possible only after the prisoner had served two thirds of their
sentence. On 13 February 2001, the Knesset passed a bill, brought forward by Reuven
Rivlin and David Libai, which allowed the early release of prisoners who had served half of their
prison term (the so-called "Deri Law"[16]). The law was originally intended to help ease overcrowding
in prisons.

Italy[edit]
Main article: Libertà condizionata
Libertà condizionata is covered by Article 176 of the Italian Penal Code. A prisoner is eligible if he
has served at least 30 months (or 26 years for life sentences), and the time remaining on his
sentence is less than half the total (normally), a quarter of the total (if previously convicted or never
convicted) or five years (for sentences greater than 7.5 years). In 2006, 21 inmates were
granted libertà condizionata.[citation needed]

New Zealand[edit]
See also: New Zealand Parole Board
In New Zealand, inmates serving a short sentence (up to two years) are automatically released after
serving half their sentence, without a parole hearing.[17] Inmates serving sentences of more than two
years are normally seen by the New Zealand Parole Board after serving one-third of the sentence,
although the judge at sentencing can make an order for a minimum non-parole period of up to two-
thirds of the sentence. Inmates serving life sentences usually serve a minimum of 10 years, or
longer depending on the minimum non-parole period, before being eligible for parole.[18] Parole is not
an automatic right and it was declined in 71 percent of hearings in the year ending 30 June 2010.[19]

United Kingdom[edit]
See also: Parole Board for England and Wales and Parole Board for Scotland
The Parole Boards in the UK are only involved in the release of prisoners with specific sentences.
Indeterminate sentences (life imprisonment and imprisonment for public protection) are always
handled by the Parole Board because they have no fixed release date. Some determinate or "fixed"
sentences, such as extended determinate sentences, are also handled by the Parole Board, but for
the majority of prisoners the Parole Board will not be involved in their release.[20]
The conditions of release are called a licence, and parole is called released on licence. There are
seven standard licence conditions for all prisoners:[21][22]

1. be of good behaviour and not behave in a way which undermines the purpose of the
licence period;
2. not commit any offence;
 3. keep in touch with the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by
the supervising officer;
4. receive visits from the supervising officer in accordance with instructions given by
the supervising officer;
5. reside permanently at an address approved by the supervising officer and obtain the
prior permission of the supervising officer for any stay of one or more nights at a
different address;
6. not undertake work, or a particular type of work, unless it is approved by the
supervising officer and notify the supervising officer in advance of any proposal to
undertake work or a particular type of work;
7. not travel outside the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man except
with the prior permission of your supervising officer or for the purposes of
immigration deportation or removal.
When a prisoner does not have to have their release approved by the Parole Board, further
"additional licence conditions" may be suggested by the Probation Service and set by prison
governors.[23] When the Parole Board is involved, the Probation Service may suggest additional
conditions, but the Parole Board is responsible for determining which additional conditions will be
added to the licence.[22] If an offender breaks any of these conditions, they can be "recalled" or
returned to prison.[24]
Since 2014 many of the probation and license monitoring functions have been carried out by private-
sector "community rehabilitation companies" (CRCs) as well as the National Probation Service.[25]
[26]
 In May 2019 the government announced that supervision of offenders, including supervision of
offenders released on licence, would be re-nationalised. The decision was made following multiple
criticisms of the system which led Chief probation inspector Dame Glenys Stacey to describe the
system as "irredeemably flawed".[27]