所谓自由刑，是指以剥夺或限制犯罪人的人身自由为重要内容的刑罚方法。自由刑是对一类刑罚的总称，而并不是一个独立的刑种。在理论上可按照不同的标准对自由刑进行分类。自由刑在发挥其刑罚功能的同时，也会带来一定的负面效果，所以对自由刑的运用要注意扬长避短。在历史上，自由刑存在一个产生、发展和不断演变的过程，并呈现出一定的规律性。自由刑的发展演变规律不仅反映和主导着自由刑的过去，而且在一定程度上也揭示着自由刑的未来。 我国自由刑内部包含四个独立的刑种，分别是无期徒刑、有期徒刑、拘役和管制。其中，无期徒刑、有期徒刑和拘役属于剥夺自由刑，管制属于限制自由刑。这四个刑种不仅刑罚内容各不相同，而且在刑法分则具体犯罪中的配置范围与比例以及具体的配置方式也都各不相同。我国自由刑的适用以罪责刑相适应原则和宽严相济的刑事政策为指导，并采用规范化的量刑方法。自由刑是我国司法实践中适用率最高的一类刑种。从近年来自由刑的司法适用情况来看，我国在自由刑的适用上是以监禁刑为主体，缓刑和管制刑的适用率相对较低，特别是管制刑，其适用率一直处于极低的局面。我国自由刑的执行可以分为两类情况，一类是监禁型自由刑的执行，另一类是非监禁型自由刑的执行。在监禁型自由刑的执行方面，我国确立了分押分管、分级处遇和减刑、假释等制度；在非监禁型自由刑的执行方面，我国还确立了社区矫正制度。从实践中的情况来看，我国监禁型自由刑执行的开放化和社会化程度较低，非监禁型自由刑的执行则侧重于对犯罪人进行监督和管理。 从总体上看，我国的自由刑因存在以下几个方面的问题，因而需要进行系统改革：第一，我国自由刑现状不符合应对转型期犯罪的刑罚要求；第二，我国自由刑现状与当前经济社会发展的总体指导理念不相契合；第三，我国自由刑现状不完全符合当前的基本刑事政策；第四，我国自由刑现状未能充分回应相关国际规则的要求。 我国的自由刑改革应坚持以下三项基本原则：其一，立足国情的原则。这是自由刑改革的基础性或前提性原则。其二，注重刑罚效益的原则。这是自由刑改革的目的性原则。其三，系统改革、逐步推进的原则。这是自由刑改革的方法性原则。 我国自由刑的系统改革包括三个部分的内容。第一部分是自由刑配置的改革。主要内容是对自由刑的刑种设置、自由刑的配置范围、配置幅度和配置方式进行改革。在自由刑刑种的改革方面，应当对无期徒刑、有期徒刑和管制刑加以完善，并同时将拘役刑予以废除。在自由刑配置范围的改革方面，应当减少无期徒刑的配置、普及有期徒刑的配置，并同时扩大管制刑的配置。在自由刑配置幅度的改革方面，不仅要对罪种间自由刑的配置幅度进行横向协调，而且还要对具体犯罪中自由刑的配置幅度进行纵向细化。在自由刑配置方式的改革方面，一是要增加自由刑与相关附加刑的搭配，二是要对自由刑与相关附加刑的搭配方式加以完善。 第二部分是自由刑适用的改革。主要内容包括自由刑裁量原则的具体化、自由刑裁量方法的科学化、缓刑适用制度的完善和禁止令适用的改进。为了提高罪责刑相适应原则在指导自由刑裁量方面的可操作性，可将这一原则进一步分立为以下三种具体的量刑原则：罪刑相当原则、刑罚个别化原则和刑罚适用程序公开公正原则。为了进一步实现自由刑裁量方法的科学化，应当对当前的规范化量刑方法进行相应的补充和完善。在缓刑适用制度的完善方面，应当完善缓刑适用的实质条件、建立缓刑适用人格调查制度，并改进缓刑适用的司法程序。在禁止令适用的改进方面，首先，应将禁止令的适用范围扩大至假释犯；其次，要确立禁止令的适用原则；最后，应对禁止令的适用程序加以完善。 第三部分是自由刑执行的改革。主要内容包括罪犯分类、分级处遇制度的改革，减刑、假释制度的改革，社区矫正制度的完善，以及恢复性行刑制度的构建。在罪犯分类、分级处遇制度的改革方面，应当对我国的罪犯分类制度加以完善，并建立起累进处遇制度。在减刑、假释制度的改革方面，应当在3年以上有期徒刑和无期徒刑的范围内废除减刑制度，仅适用单一的假释制度，从而在减刑、假释的适用上实现从“减刑为主、假释为辅”向“假释为主、减刑为辅”的格局转变。与此同时，还应当对减刑、假释的适用条件和适用程序加以完善。在社区矫正制度的完善方面，重点就是对社区矫正中的分类矫正制度、社会参与制度、帮困扶助制度和法律监督制度加以完善。在恢复性行刑制度的构建方面，应当注意以下几点基本要求：其一，恢复性行刑制度的构建应当立足于使犯罪人与被害人以及社区的关系全面恢复这一目标的实现，而不能只重点关注犯罪人和被害人能否就相关的物质性赔（补）偿达成协议；其二，恢复性行刑方案的设计应以犯罪人与被害人的和解为核心内容，并以此来带动其他方面社会关系的恢复；其三，恢复性行刑方案的实施应坚持自愿和平等的原则；其四，恢复性行刑的实施结果应当包含对犯罪人的一些从宽待遇内容。

Freedom penalty is a criminal punishment of which the important content is to deprivate or restrict the perpetrator`s personal freedom. Freedom penalty is a kind of theoretical classification，but not a kind of separate punishment. While freedom penalty plays its punishment function , it can also bring certain negative effect at the same time.Thus,when we use it ,we should pay attention to foster its strength and circumvent its weaknesses . There is a production, development and evolving process in the history of freedom penalty, which presents some regularity. The evolution rule of the freedom penalty does not only reflect and dominate the past of the freedom penalty, but also, to some extent, reveals the future of it. In our criminal law, the freedom penelty contains four kinds of independent punishment, respectively, they are life imprisonment, fixed-term imprisonment, penal servitude and public surveillance.Among them , life imprisonment , fixed-term imprisonment, penal servitude are penelty which deprive the criminal`s freedom,while public surveillance is a penelty which limits the criminal`s freedom.Not only are the contents different,but also are the configuration scope ,proportion and method. In our country, freedom penelty is applied by the principle of compatibility of crime,responsibility and punishment and the policy of tempering justice with mercy.Freedom penelty is used most in our judicial practice. According to the case of the judicial application in recent years, imprisonment is used most among the freedom penelty,while probation and public surveillance are ued less,especially public surveillance is used even less. The execution of freedom penalty can be divided into two categories,one is imprisonment and the orther is non-imprisonment. In imprisonment,there is implementing criminals respective management and escort scientifically, taking different management to different groups of prisoners,commutation and release on parole,which the open and socialization degree is low.While in non-imprisonment,there is community rectification,which focuses on the supervision and control of the delinquents. In general, due to the following several aspects of problems,the freedom penalty needs to be reformed systematically.First， it cannot meet the requirements of punishing the crime in the transition period. Secondly, it cannot fit in with the overall guiding ideology of the current economic & social development.Thirdly, it cannot fit in with the basic criminal policies.Fourthly, it cannot meet the requirements of the relevant international rules When carrying out the reform, we should adhere to three basic principles, one is to base upon the situation of our country, the other is to emphasize the benefit of the freedom penalty and the third is to promote the reform gradually and systematicly. The reform involves the whole operating system of the freedom penalty, including configuration, application and execution of it.The first reform is how to configurate the freedom penalty, which includes reforming its configuration kind, scope, range and pattern. When reforming the configuration kind , we should improve life imprisonment , fixed-term imprisonment and public surveillance while abolish penal servitude at the same time. When reforming the configuration scope , we should decrease life imprisonment, spread fixed-term imprisonment and expand public surveillance. When reforming the configuration range, we should make the punishment range transverse coordination between different crimes,and longitudinal refinement among concrete crimes. When reforming the configuration pattern, we should increase and improve the collocation of freedom penalty and related supplementary punishments. The second reform is how to applicate the freedom penalty, which includes reforming its discretion principle, discretion method, application of the probation and prohibition order.In order to improve the practicality of the principle of compatibility of crime,responsibility and punishment, it can be further divided into the following three specific principles ,that is , the principle of suiting punishment to crime, the principle of individualization of punishment , and open and fair principle. In order to implement it scientific, we should supplement and complete the current discretion method.When reforming the probation, we should improve its application condition, establish a personality investigation system and improve its judicial procedure. When reforming the prohibition order, we should expand the scope to parolee, form the applicable principles and improve the applicable procedure. The third reform is how to execute the freedom penalty, which includes reforming the criminal categorization, commutation, parole, community-based corrections and forming the recovery execution system.In the aspect of criminal categorization, we should establish a system of Progressive Treatment. In the aspect of commutation and parole,we should only applicate parole instead of commutation for those criminal whose statutory sentence are from fixed-term imprisonment of more than 3 years to life imprisonment and improve the applicatable conditions and procedure at the same time. In terms of improvement of the system of community correction, the focus is on how to improve the classification of community correction system, social participation system, relievingthe assistance system and legal supervision system. In building system of recovery execution, we shall pay attention to the following basic requirements.First, system of recovery execution should be based on the restoring relationship among the criminal, the victim and the community instead on the compensation agreement.Secondly, the core content of the design should be the reconciliation between the offender and the victim as, as well as the restoration of other social relations.Thirdly, the system should adhere to the principle of voluntary and equality. Fourthly, the results should contain some lenient punishment for the offender.