Alternative Penalties Under the Omani Legal System

This is a guest blog post written by Abdulmalik Al-Hasani – Lawyer at Mohammed Al Azri & Mohammed Al Ajmi Law Firm.

Punishment is one of the most important tools used by the State to combat crime and protect society. However, the development of modern criminal thought no longer views punishment merely as a means of deterrence, but also as a means of reform, rehabilitation, and reintegration of the convicted person into society.

What Are Alternative Penalties?

Alternative penalties, in the context of this article, refer to criminal sanctions that are not primarily based on restricting the convicted person’s liberty through imprisonment, nor are they limited to financial fines. Rather, they take other forms aimed at achieving the purposes of punishment, particularly reform, rehabilitation, and deterrence.

Examples of alternative penalties adopted by some legal systems include community service, house arrest, rehabilitation and training programmes, and other measures that may achieve the purpose of punishment without resorting, in all cases, to placing the convicted person in prison.

In this sense, an alternative penalty may be viewed as a criminal sanction imposed by a judicial judgment on a person whose responsibility for committing a crime has been established. It aims to achieve deterrence, reform, and rehabilitation while avoiding the effects that may result from custodial penalties, where the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the convicted person permit this.

Alternative Penalties in Omani Legislation

When reviewing Omani criminal legislation, it becomes clear that there are certain applications that move away from relying exclusively on custodial penalties and instead adopt treatment and reform as means of dealing with certain cases.

One example is provided by the Law on Combating Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances issued by Royal Decree 67/2026, particularly articles 41, 42, and 43.

Article 41 permits the court, in cases where a person is proven to be addicted to the use of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, to order—instead of imposing the prescribed penalty—that the person be placed in one of the rehabilitation facilities established for this purpose, or be subjected to treatment at a specialised psychological and social treatment clinic, in accordance with the programme prescribed by the psychiatrist or social specialist.

The same article also establishes conditions governing such placement. A person may not be placed in the facility if he has previously been ordered to be placed there twice pursuant to a previous judgment, or if five years have not elapsed since his release from the facility.

Article 42 complements this framework by providing that the release of a person placed in the facility following his recovery shall be by a decision of the court based on the recommendation of the committee referred to in article 68 of the Law, provided that the period of placement is not less than six months and does not exceed one year.

Conversely, if the placement proves ineffective, or the maximum prescribed period expires before the person has recovered, or he violates the obligations imposed upon him, or commits any of the offences provided for under the Law while in the facility, the matter shall be referred to the court through the Public Prosecution for the imposition of the prescribed penalty.

Treatment Instead of a Custodial Penalty

These provisions demonstrate a legislative approach towards addressing certain offences from a reformative perspective, particularly where the criminal conduct is connected to a condition requiring treatment and rehabilitation.

In cases of addiction to narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, imprisonment may not, in all cases, be the most appropriate means of achieving reform. Treatment and rehabilitation may instead be more closely connected to the underlying cause that led to the commission of the offence, within the limits prescribed by law and under the supervision of the competent authorities.

This does not mean disregarding society’s right to protection or diminishing the seriousness of offences related to drugs. Rather, it reflects an attempt to achieve a balance between protecting society from crime and addressing certain circumstances that may be connected to its commission.

From this perspective, the measures permitted by the legislator under the aforementioned articles may be regarded as forms of sanctions with a reformative nature, as they seek to treat and rehabilitate the convicted person rather than merely restrict his liberty.

Non-Initiation of Criminal Proceedings in Cases Where Treatment Is Requested

Another form worth highlighting is provided for in article 43 of the same Law, which provides—without prejudice to article 40—that no criminal proceedings shall be initiated against a person who uses narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances and voluntarily presents himself to the public authorities for treatment at a rehabilitation facility, or does so at the request of his spouse or one of his relatives, in accordance with the degrees of kinship specified by the provision.

This provision reflects an approach aimed at encouraging the user to seek treatment, rather than allowing fear of criminal prosecution to become a reason preventing him from approaching the competent authorities.

At the same time, the legislator has placed limits on this exception. It does not apply to a person who has been caught using narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, or against whom criminal proceedings have already been initiated for the offence.

Conclusion

It is clear from the foregoing that the concept of alternative penalties represents one of the modern trends in criminal policy, and that Omani legislation contains certain applications reflecting this approach, particularly in the areas of addiction treatment and rehabilitation.

The importance of alternative penalties lies in their potential to achieve a degree of balance between protecting society from crime, achieving deterrence, and providing an opportunity for reform and rehabilitation in cases where the law permits this.

Nevertheless, the application of alternative penalties must remain linked to the legal provisions and safeguards established by the legislator, as well as to the nature of each offence and the circumstances of its perpetrator. This ensures that an alternative penalty does not become a means of weakening the criminal protection of society, but rather an additional tool for achieving the objectives of justice and reform.