Abstract

Radicalization in French prisons is a growing threat, yet current responses focus more on repression than understanding. Isolation, stigma, and identity struggles drive inmates toward religion, but a lack of Muslim chaplains leaves a void exploited by extremists. Measures like the Radicalisation Evaluation Units (RAU), which group radicalized inmates, risk deepening divisions and reinforcing the idea of a state hostile to Islam. To break this cycle, prisons must include more chaplains and better staff training to distinguish faith from extremism. Without reform, prisons will remain breeding grounds for future violence.

In the 1980s, there was Peshawar. Today, there are French prisons. Behind the walls of correctional institutions, an invisible yet structuring phenomenon is unfolding: the radicalization of certain prisoners who, upon release, join the ranks of terrorism. Since the attacks of 2015, when Amédy Coulibaly and the Kouachi brothers had spent time in prison before moving into action, the authorities have become aware of the problem. Yet it must be acknowledged that the responses implemented remain largely insufficient.

While the media reported that 90% of the 1,700 detainees charged with terrorism or radicalization have been released between 2020 and 2025 (Stroobants, 2020), this figure is cause for concern among the population. Nevertheless, it is essential to recall that this statistic encompasses a wide diversity of profiles: from perpetrators of attacks to individuals convicted of inciting terrorism or suspected of radicalization but incarcerated for other offenses. Not all of these individuals are equally indoctrinated or dangerous. It would be erroneous, therefore, to view them as a homogeneous threat. But should we thus give in to a rhetoric of fear and a discourse of total security promoted by some political leaders? No, because prison radicalization is above all a phenomenon that must be understood before it can be effectively combated. Simple repression has never sufficed to stem such a complex process, which is based on deeper social, psychological, and structural factors.

Hence, it is essential to thoroughly analyze what drives certain individuals to become radicalized while incarcerated. Locked behind four walls, stripped of freedom and often of guidance, inmates in search of identity find in religion a refuge. Yet when the institutional religious offering proves insufficient, it is radical ideologues who monopolize the discourse. The prison thus becomes a space where extremism thrives, not so much through immediate ideological adherence as through a progressive psychological process fueled by isolation, humiliation, and a search for meaning to counter the experience of incarceration (Sarg, 2016).

Rather than succumbing to an alarmist narrative, it is imperative to analyze the underlying mechanisms that drive some individuals in prison toward extreme ideologies, in order to propose appropriate solutions. Without a deep understanding of this phenomenon, we risk being condemned to a purely repressive management that, far from curbing the threat, only nourishes it. The French prisons, lacking adapted strategies, continue to be incubators of radicalization where overcrowding and the shortage of Muslim chaplains further aggravate the problem. This situation, far from being inevitable, is nonetheless the product of institutional blindness and a lack of political courage to transform our penal system.

When Prison Destroys Identity, Religion Reconstructs It

For many individuals, incarceration is a brutal rupture that destroys social and familial points of reference. The loss of control over daily life, the stigma of being a detainee, and the violence of the prison environment drive inmates to seek a new psychological and social structure. In this context, religious adherence plays a key role. As Rachel Sarg (2016) explains, religious practice in prison allows inmates to regain dignity and reintegrate into an alternative hierarchy where their faith becomes a strength rather than a stigma.

Far from the fantasies about an automatic “radical conversion,” it is necessary to distinguish genuine spiritual seeking from a shift towards extremism. In fact, most inmates who discover or rediscover religion in prison do so in a peaceful manner, seeking to rebuild themselves (Radicalization Awareness Network, 2016). Yet this distinction is often misunderstood, and a generalized suspicion toward any Muslim religious practice in detention can paradoxically reinforce the attractiveness of more radical forms of belief.

A Religious Void Filled by Radicals

Moreover, prison radicalization does not rely solely on ideological conversion but on a progressive process of adhesion, often facilitated by the absence of a legitimate institutional offer. In other words, where the State is absent, others fill the void. Indeed, the shortage of Muslim chaplains in prison is a glaring problem. Today, there are only 151 Muslim chaplains compared to 655 Catholic chaplains, even though Muslim inmates are estimated to represent between 40 and 60% of the prison population, considering that in France it is forbidden to conduct studies on religious affiliations (Khosrokhavar, 2016). This disproportion is not only unjustifiable but also dangerous.

Within this religious vacuum, radical figures naturally emerge. Jihadist recruiters in prison do not merely impose a violent discourse; they offer a structuring framework to distressed inmates—a community where they find respect and protection. The phenomenon is so predictable that both Al-Qaida and Daech have made prison a strategic recruitment tool, systematically exploiting the absence of a legitimate and supervised religious alternative (The International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence, 2010).

As Gérald Bronner explains (2009, p. 242), radicalization offers inmates a means to reverse their stigma: they move from the status of criminal to that of “Allah’s fighter,” thus rehabilitating their self-image and remedying the humiliation they experience. Farhad Khosrokhavar (2007) demonstrated through several interviews with inmates affiliated with Al-Qaida how this phenomenon operates. One inmate he interviewed perfectly illustrates this dynamic:

"Islam makes me not feel like one of the beasts; the French are the ones who are beasts! They are not pure; they live like animals."

This testimony reflects a reversal of stigma: the inmate, who feels marginalized and despised, adopts a victimized posture where the dominated become the dominators. In this worldview, the “impure” are no longer those who break the law, but those who do not share the radical ideology (Farhad Khosrokhavar, 2007).

Isolation that Fuels Extremism

In response to this phenomenon, the French approach has been primarily security-oriented. The RAU (in French “Quartiers d'Évaluation de la Radicalisation” commonly abbreviated as QER), created in 2016, aim to identify at-risk inmates in order to isolate them or place them in adapted structures. Originally designed to evaluate the psychological profile of these detainees over a period of four months, the QER mixes different profiles and increases the risk of proselytism. Moreover, this policy has a perverse effect: it reinforces the perception of a “war” between the State and incarcerated Muslims. Indeed, many inmates in the QER denounce a system that labels them permanently; once placed in these units, they are perceived as “radicalized,” even though their journeys are more complex. As one inmate interviewed by Chantraine and Scheer (2022) explained:

"The French State created this group 'Islamic State in France.' And now, when we see that we are being locked up for political reasons, we start to think, 'Well, it’s true, we are oppressed Muslims by the justice system.' So the group forms just like that."

Rather than disrupting radicalization dynamics, the QER may inadvertently strengthen them by reinforcing inmates’ perception of a hostile State targeting Muslims, deepening the “us versus them” mentality.

Rehabilitate Rather than Repress

This requires several essential measures:

• Doubling or even tripling the number of Muslim chaplains in prison to offer a structured and supervised counter-discourse that promotes respect for the religion without veering toward extremism.

• Training prison guards to detect the early signs of radicalization, as well as to distinguish between normal religious practice and signals of indoctrination (The International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence, 2010).

• Developing individualized deradicalization programs similar to those implemented in Scandinavian countries, which have proven effective.

From Containment to Prevention: Rethinking Our Approach

Allowing our prisons to become incubators of radicalization is to accept that future waves of terrorism will be shaped behind bars. Rather than treating radicalized inmates as threats to be neutralized, we must understand why prison drives them toward extremism and offer them credible alternatives. Indeed, Islam in prison remains scarcely institutionalized, partly due to historical and legal reasons but also from a fear of disturbing the penal balance. However, by postponing the implementation of an adapted religious offer and by maintaining suspicion toward detainees and Muslim chaplains, the prison administration paradoxically reinforces the appeal of such practices. Hence, this marginalization, rather than containing radical influences, in fact contributes to their attractiveness.