87429NCJRS.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. - -- ---------=----...... _...... ----.. • .. -. This microfiche was produced from documents received for D· ..- j inclusion in the NCJRS data base. Since NCJRS cannot exercise • I • control over the physical condition of the documents submitted, the individual frame quality will vary. The resolution chai.i: on this frame may be used to evaluate the document quality. • • __ I 2 5 11111 . .2 1111.1 .; 111111.25 111111.4 III MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS-1963-A " • , r • •• ,. .! • ... - Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply with a the standqrds set forth in 41CFR 101-11.504. - Points of view or opinions statev in this document are. those of the author(s) and do not represent the efficial position or policies of the U. S. Department of Justice. ftC Q \ ...........c National Institute of Justice United States Dep~rtment of Justice ~--- Washington, D. C. 20531 II .~ "-, .... 0;: ..., '. 'J' "' " /; . 0 , " '~.'."'". .. ,". l:: ---~ -~~ ~ .. - . - ~:"=;;:,,,:::.,!,:;:;;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,_.:=..~_--'H"¢U':---- __-rn==""'m' o=:r .... .."......,.....tr.~'.<_-· c j , II l/ ,/ ADDENDUM h ~~g~ 94, last sentence. The words 'administratively prohibited' S?U e deleted. The situation now is that in many institutions pnsoners may be rep,resented. ' " " i d " :J Ii ~ " (.-' o , 1 ;, " j ,'1'1 87429' " 1- i\ U.S. Department of Ju.~lce Natlonannstltme of Jul1lce " This documenl has been reproduced exactly as regeived from ~he .II . person or organizatiOn originating il. Points of view or opinions staled '.~~~~L.~'~.~ (} in' Ihis document are those of the aUlhp~,and do not necessarily' '- ;:,< represenllhe official position or policies of the N<!tlonaJ Institute ,of \ Justice. ", Ii ~ Permission !o':,reproduce this copyrighted material in"mi- crofiche only ba:; b,een g@nted by;' , Austral.~an'J.nst~tute of 'I, ':: "Cr~m~nology , , Ii o ,. ~' ,~) i) 0 I Ii, , \ ,p' " c "-I r !t RIGHT'S AND --*LIGAtIO~ ,IN A PRISON I, By W. Cli,fford Director Australian Institute of Criminology (in collaboration with Australia's Correctional Administrators) '! ,fI ThiS paper was pr.epared by the author in collaboration with the Correctional Administrators of all States for the Conference (I. --:::; of Ministers responsible for Prisons, Probation and Parole. ", /: \ It is intended for discussion only and does not in any way " , 0' commi,t the Ministers ~ho have not yet considered it in detail. \ {I II' lr '';"> ,0 -.-~-------~ ;-r1t 1 I,v 'J,' ~i~ / fJ ? INTRODUCTION I.,'j )) }'If )) This paper is intended to promote much wider discussion of I, I II~r o t a subject which has become increasingly critical in our tiines - the I protection of human rights in a prison setting. f) © Australian Institute of Criminology 1982 Contrary to much of the current debate, exacerbated by Published and printed by the Australian special pleaqing in the media, human rights and dignities in a prison Institute of Criminology, 10-18 colbee Court, ~hillip, A.C.T., Australia. 2606 are not always provided for most efficiently by expanding facilities for grievance procedures, exposing the institutions to indiscriminate / media surveillanc~, appointing royal commissions or providing for legal aid on all sides. These are all useful and sometimes very necessary when powers have been abused or rights ignored. It is contrary to the interests o~ all concerned, however, to overlook the fact that the prison by definition is avery speCial type of social environment within which prisoners, officers and administrators are thrown together by circumstances not always of their own making or ,> to their own ICking. To a great extent they depend upon each other. They fulfil different roles and in given situations each group feels itself misunderstood, neglected and badly treated by society at large and the ,authorities in pai,rticular. Yet, of necesGity they spend hours together, sometimes years and they rely upon th~ir human and social o Clifford William 1918- inter-relationships (much more than they are sometimes prepared to Rights and obligations in a prison (f , admit) for satisf~,ction, security and peace of mind - all of which are " ": Tbis paper was prepared ~ ': .. .tn collaho:r.ation with the correctional'Adm~~1st~a~ors of all related of' course to the development of that understanding and estates for the conferenceo.,~' M~.t;r1sters , b t and Parole. resp~nsible 'for Prisons, P ro a, ~on~ considerationowhich is necessary for the real (&s opposed to the Includes bibliographical references. purely formal) protection of human rights. ISBN '0 €!42 8'8837 X. \, () 1. Pr1sorters. ' " - .C;v~•• '1 ~:;;9hts'i Australia. 2.p.riSoners - Legal <tatus, laws, etc. - \\ Australia. I. Australian Institute of o criminology. rI. Title Q 365.643 () o - 2 - - 3 - As the various groups which make up this prison community interests are only two of the special groups. Psychologically learn to use the mediq, exploit the law or to flex their industrial disturbed, homosexual or physically disabled inmates present classification problems,' a d th i k h h muscl~ there is a progressive and dangerous polarisation; and each n e r ssw ic a prisoner may rUn of being attacked by other prisoners has to be a group tends to rely more on c~~flict than on cooperation to get its constant concern of \( those responsible for th " i way and to promote sectional interests. Justice is an elusive ese 1.nst tutions. -'~rison officers too, no longer disappear 'into uniformity behind their insignia. mistress, however, and sometimes the benefits obtained may be of They differ in the extent of th i " . questionable value to human rights in general in a/~prison setting. e r exper1.ence, in their levels of education and , '.- training for the variety of special kill This is particularly the case if as a result of continuing conflict, s s which are needed to cope with situations in a modern prison. Th t h d conditions and relationships begin to deteriorate. This can happen ey 00 ave iverse attitudes to the requirements of their J"ob and they " - even where physical conditions, educational or vocational programmes vary 1.n the extent of their industrial militancy. and the offic.ers' conditions of service are'unexceptionable. There (( l are subtle ways of denying rights (or mak~,g them not worth having) which cannot be proved or captured by the camera. These can poison The study which is presented here was conducted at the j: request of the conference of Australian State Ministers in charge of the atmosphe~e in a prison Ylhicn canI');ot be faulted for its overt. JI If Prisons, Probation and Parole. Th e paper \-las compiled in respect of minimum rules. ii consultation with the Correctional Administrators of the several Moreover, the risks in prison are growing as the prisons are States of Australia aud its publication purely for discussion purposes '. i \ , \ used less for general offenders and more for those who have to.be approved by the Conference of Ministers at their Darwin meeting on j' segregated (for the ,security of society - or who are there because 5th May 1982. There have been some minor changes to accommodate there is no other way of expressing the public repudiation of their recommendations made by the Administrators on their reading of the conduct. With the death sentence abolished or rarely used and with paper before its final submission to the Ministers - and to bring the paper up to date ,by references to new legislation. exile or corporal punishment discontinued the prison as a last resort becomes more difficult to administer. There are far more prisoners requiring special attention. The variety and status of inmates and Rights ~nd obligations in a prison setting are in a state their attitudes to law breaking are different in a society of plural of flux as concepts and standards change - giving new meanings to old conditiorrs and procedures. Yes t er d ays privileges become today's values.. Sophisticated drug traffickers with access to funds outside .;1 ,. or professional corporate offenders who still have extensive busi'ti'ess ------_.. ----- ---.- 1'1 ;, ,Ii, rl' - 4 - - 5 - 1 J I THE BACKGROUND rights; and id eas 0,n necessities are affecte d by lifestyles outside. I' A publication of this kind will date veI1~quickly therefol;'re• What f The Victorian Correctional Services had had problems in are unlikely to change are the principles involved and the im,portance obtaining indictments under existing laws - particularly after a of the,', inter-relations hi ps to which attention i s d rawn • However serious disturbance in Pentridge. The usual'';' legal definitions of riot inappropriate and in bad t aste i,t may be to refer to happiness in " and tumult did not apply. This collection of incidents reinforced prisons there are indeed levels of minimum con,:::;entme~t and order \o~hich the previous experience of the Victorian Servic~ that, when such all groups in prison know about - and to which they directly problems aros.e in prisons, the set of Circumstances had not usually contribute by the'way in which they prosecute their rights and fulfil been provided fpr by the law. Moreover, staff were not trained to their obligations. collect the evidence ;required in a case. In this case tape recordings had been ruled'inadmissibl~ and after the disturbance the areas of disturbance had been cQnscientiously cleaned - thus destroying ,,.//"" evidence. The matter was discul3sed by J:he Victorian Director-General of Social Services with the Director of the Australian Institute of Crimi,nology. After a careiul study of the files and the legal advice already tendered to the serVice, it seemed that behind the cases of troublesome behaViour not covered by law or regulat~ons were much wider issues of the extent to wpich the general lcx.;D' needed to be o augmented in a prison sett;i.ng~ (I Th~s, in turn, raised issues of rights and obliga:tions for both prisoners and staff.