A System in Need of Reform: Addressing the Roots of Contraband Smuggling

Image Credit, Chuck Herrera

The recent seizure of contraband and unauthorized items at the Federal Training Centre in Laval, Quebec, on October 4, 2024, marks yet another instance in a troubling pattern within Canada’s correctional system. The haul, estimated at over $64,000 in value, included hashish and underscores ongoing efforts by Correctional Service Canada (CSC) to combat the flow of illicit items into federal institutions. Despite the deployment of advanced tools such as ion scanners, drug-detector dogs, and collaborations with law enforcement, contraband finds its way into these facilities with alarming regularity.

Why does this keep happening, particularly at a federal training centre like the one in Laval? The persistence of contraband within correctional institutions highlights deeper, systemic challenges that cannot be solved by heightened security measures alone. While CSC’s use of technology and partnerships with police forces aims to mitigate the issue, it is clear that the root causes of smuggling—such as inmate demand, inadequate oversight, and external facilitators—remain difficult to address.

Federal institutions, including multi-level security centres like the Federal Training Centre, are microcosms of broader societal issues, where drug dependency, organized crime, and the lure of financial gain persist. For some inmates, smuggling contraband is a way to maintain control, exert influence, or pay off debts incurred both inside and outside the walls of these facilities. The high institutional value of seized items demonstrates how much profit contraband generates within the prison system, which only fuels further attempts to circumvent security.

In addition to the internal demand, there is often collusion between external actors and individuals within the institutions, who are willing to take substantial risks for significant financial rewards. Whether through visitors, staff, or increasingly, drones delivering packages to inmates, the means of introducing contraband continue to evolve, making it difficult for correctional staff to stay ahead of smuggling operations.

While CSC should be commended for its efforts and vigilance, the repetition of these incidents suggests that the measures in place are reactive rather than proactive. As contraband continues to find its way in, it raises questions about the effectiveness of the current strategies. Is the reliance on technology enough, or do we need to address underlying factors like corruption, inadequate training, or systemic complacency?

The issue of contraband goes beyond mere safety concerns. The presence of illicit drugs, like hashish, in correctional institutions has severe consequences for rehabilitation efforts. The access to drugs compromises the CSC’s mission to reintegrate inmates into society, as addiction issues remain unaddressed and violence between inmates can escalate due to drug debts. For those struggling with addiction or mental health issues, the availability of drugs inside a supposed rehabilitative space undermines any real opportunity for recovery and reform.

This ongoing struggle against contraband demands more than tip lines, scanners, and dog searches. It requires a fundamental reassessment of how the system approaches security, rehabilitation, and the cultural issues that allow smuggling to thrive. Until then, the question will remain: why does this keep happening? And more importantly, what can truly be done to stop it once and for all?