Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Senate committee approves compassionate-release bill after contested testimony on victims’ safeguards and placements
Loading...
Summary
The committee voted to pass HB 16-28, HD2 with amendments after supporters emphasized humanitarian and cost arguments while DCR and victims’ advocates pressed for clearer victim-notification procedures and placement safeguards for medically fragile people.
The Senate public-safety committee voted to pass House Bill 16-28, HD2 — a measure to codify and expand a compassionate-release process — after a day of split testimony that juxtaposed humanitarian arguments with operational and victims’-rights concerns.
Proponents, including advocacy groups, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and national experts, described compassionate release as a best practice that saves money, advances humane care and eases burdens on corrections and hospitals. Molly Crane of FAM urged two modest changes — adding an effective date and permitting other incarcerated people to help initiate applications — and said the bill’s medical eligibility mirrors widely used standards: "Medical criteria in the original bill matches the Department of Corrections’ existing policies and aligns with best practices across the country," she said.
Opponents and commenting agencies raised two persistent operational concerns. Director Johnson (DCR) said staff and placement capacity are limiting factors, noting that while HPA had 13 compassionate-release grants in recent years, not all resulted in release because there was nowhere appropriate for people to go. Gene DiMello Jr. of the Hawaii Paroling Authority confirmed that of 13 grants, eight resulted in release, four were granted but had no placement, and one person died before placement could be secured. Pamela Ferguson Bray, executive director of the Crime Victim Compensation Commission, said the bill as drafted lacks meaningful mechanisms for victims to be heard and allow sufficient time for safety planning: "We do not believe there's meaningful protection for crime victims in the bill," she said.
The Attorney General’s Office recommended clarifying definitions (for example, what constitutes a qualifying "terminal illness" or "debilitating condition") and suggested safeguards so the paroling authority can require evidence of a community plan and placement. Oversight commissioners and advocates pressed for statutory embedding of the process, arguing that the state’s current informal practice should be codified to ensure timely, consistent decisions for the relatively small number of potentially eligible people.
Given multiple drafting suggestions and time constraints, the chair recommended passing HB 16-28 with amendments to incorporate language from a related Senate bill and to flag areas for further committee attention. The committee adopted the recommendation and the bill will proceed with the committee’s amended language for follow-up consideration.
