Report of the Human Rights Defender on the Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism in Poland in 2010
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Report of the Human Rights Defender on the activities of the National Preventive Mechanism in Poland in 2010 Warsaw, June 2011 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3 2. THE ORGANISATION OF THE ACTIVITY OF THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM WITHIN THE OFFICE OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER .................................................... 3 3. FINANCING OF THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM IN POLAND ............................ 4 4. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ................................................................................................. 5 5. COOPERATION BETWEEN THE DEFENDER AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS .............................................................................................................................. 8 6. REVIEWING LEGAL ACTS .............................................................................................................. 9 7. ESTABLISHMENTS VISITED BY THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM IN 2010 ...... 11 7.1. ROOMS FOR DETAINED PERSONS WITHIN THE POLICE HEADQUARTERS ................................................. 16 7.2. PRISONS AND PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CENTRES ..................................................................................... 24 7.1. POLICE EMERGENCY CENTRES FOR CHILDREN ................................................................................. 47 7.2. YOUTH CARE CENTRES AND YOUTH SOCIOTHERAPY CENTRES ......................................................... 59 7.3. JUVENILE SHELTERS AND JUVENILE DETENTION CENTRES. .............................................................. 76 7.4. SOBERING-UP STATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 95 7.5. PSYCHIATRIC ESTABLISHMENTS ...................................................................................................... 104 7.6. SOCIAL CARE CENTRES ..................................................................................................................... 114 7.7. CENTRES FOR FOREIGNERS .............................................................................................................. 118 8. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM. ........................... 133 8.1. ROOMS WITHIN THE POLICE ORGANISATIONAL UNITS FOR DETAINED PERSONS OR PERSONS BROUGHT TO SOBER UP .................................................................................................................................. 133 8.2. PRISONS AND PRE-TRIAL DETENTION CENTRES ............................................................................... 133 8.3. POLICE EMERGENCY CENTRES FOR CHILDREN ............................................................................... 135 8.4. YOUTH CARE CENTRES AND YOUTH SOCIOTHERAPY CENTRES ....................................................... 135 8.5. JUVENILE DETENTION CENTRES AND JUVENILE SHELTERS ............................................................. 136 8.6. SOBERING STATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 137 8.7. SOCIAL CARE CENTRES ..................................................................................................................... 138 8.8. PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITALS ................................................................................................................. 139 8.9. CENTRES FOR FOREIGNERS .............................................................................................................. 139 9. THE TEAM VISITING ESTABLISHMENTS IN 2010 UNDER THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM (IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER) ............................................................................. 140 1. VISITS UNDER THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM IN 2010 –BY DATE ............... 145 2. VISITS UNDER THE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM IN 2010 – TABLE BY UNITS 155 Prepared by: Magdalena Chmielak – 1, 2, 6, 7.2, 7.4, 7.7, 7.8. Karolina Chytła – 7.5. Justyna Jóźwiak – 1, 7, 7.3, 8. Przemysław Kazimirski – 3, 7.1, 7.2. Dorota Krzysztoń – 5, 7.9. Marcin Kusy – 4, 7.4, 7.6. Wojciech Sadownik – 7.2. Grażyna Kalisiewicz – 10, 11. 1. Introduction The reason for introducing permanent monitoring of places of detention is the fact that persons staying in such places, which are by definition closed to the outside world, are more at risk of various malpractices. They can result from, among others, state criminal policy, lack of funds for the provision of suitable conditions, inappropriate training of the personnel or the lack of an appropriate monitoring system. Respecting the rights of detained persons depends fully on the authorities responsible for places of detention. Social processes taking place in such places’ structure, as well as behaviour of persons often subject to strong stress and pressure, generate situations leading to human rights violation. Therefore, the system of detention places should be as transparent as possible and open to cooperation with the outside world, owing to which the risk of malpractices is likely to decrease. Therefore, in 2002 the United Nations General Assembly in New York adopted an Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, hereinafter referred to as OPCAT.The Protocol was ratified by the Republic of Poland on 8 July 2005. It constitutes a part of the Polish legal order and is directly applicable, pursuant to Article 91 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Moreover, by ratifying the abovementioned Protocol, Poland has undertaken to designate or establish the independent National Preventive Mechanism for the prevention of torture at the domestic level (Article 17 of OPCAT).Therefore, on 18 January 2008 the Human Rights Defender was officially entrusted with the function of the National Preventive Mechanism (hereinafter referred to as NPM, Mechanism).The performance of the tasks of the Mechanism by the Polish Ombudsman guarantees its functional independence and the independence of its personnel required by the Protocol. The present Report is the third report of the National Preventive Mechanism in Poland, which Poland is obliged to prepare and publish, pursuant to Article 23 of the OPCAT. The Report of the Human Rights Defender on the activities of the National Preventive Mechanism in Poland in 2010 was drawn up in two languages in order to disseminate it among international institutions and national preventive mechanisms in other countries. 2. The organisation of the activity of the National Preventive Mechanism within the Office of the Human Rights Defender In 2010, as in the previous year, the tasks of the National Preventive Mechanism were performed mainly by six employees of the Criminal Executive Law Department, delegated to carry out the tasks of the Mechanism. Others members of the Department (ten persons, including the Director) participated in the NPM preventive visits where necessary. The employees of the Criminal Executive Law Department visited prisons, pre- trial detention centres, juvenile detention centres, juvenile shelters, youth care centres and sociotherapy centres, police emergency centres for children, rooms for detained persons within the Police organisational units and sobering stations. In addition, the tasks of the Mechanism were performed by four employees of the Public Administration, Healthcare and Protection of Aliens Department, who carried out visits to centres for aliens applying for refugee status or asylum, deportation centres, guarded centres for foreigners and psychiatric hospitals. The employees of that Department also supported the Labour Law and Social Insurance Department on visits to social care centres (two employees). The abovementioned employees of the Office of the Human Rights Defender are employed full time, and the majority of them have performed NPM tasks from the moment this function was entrusted to the Human Rights Defender. In addition, the tasks of the National Preventive Mechanism were performed by: two employees from the Local Group in Katowice, one from the Local Group in Wrocław and two from the Local Group in Gdańsk. All of them have been trained in the methodology of visits. It should nevertheless be pointed out that until the end of December 2010 all employees mentioned above had also performed statutory tasks of the Defender, i.e. examined numerous motions sent by citizens. On 14 October 2010, the “National Preventive Mechanism” Group was sectioned off based on the new statute of the Office of the Human Rights Defender granted by the Marshal of the Sejm. Since 2011, the Mechanism activity has been carried out by one Group visiting all places of detention referred to in Article 4 of OPCAT.The Group comprises eight persons, including the Director and a secretary. 3. Financing of the National Preventive Mechanism in Poland Along with entrusting the Polish Ombudsman with the tasks of the National Preventive Mechanism as of 18 January 2008, the Government of the Republic of Poland did not allocate funds necessary for the performance of tasks stemming from the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention Against Torture, Inhuman or Other Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which is its obligation pursuant to Article 18(3) of the OPCAT.Only on 1 July 2008 did the Minister of Finance, pursuant to the Decision amending the state budget for 2008, allocate PLN 426 thousand