Monitoring Places of Imprisonment in Albania
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Monitoring places of imprisonment in Albania Building free of torture and impunity societies in Western Balkans An EU‐funded project Podgorica, June, 2016 Youth Initiative for Human Rights (MNE), Montenegro The Albanian Rehabilitation Centre for Trauma and Torture, Albania June, 2016 For publisher Edina Hasanaga Çobaj Ardian Kati Authors Erinda Bllaca Ariel Como Translation Sabra Decević Print and Design Copy Center DOO, Podgorica Circulation 300 copy Kaталогизација у публикацији Национална библиотека Црне Горе, Цетиње ISBN 978‐9940‐608‐02‐6 COBISS.CG‐ID 30459152 About the Project The project “Building Free of Torture and Impunity Societies in Western Balkans” im- plemented as leading partners Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR MNE)- mem- ber of Civic Alliance, Albanian Rehabilitation Center for Trauma and Torture (ARCT), Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR SR) and International Council for Rehabil- itation of Victims of Torture from Denmark (IRCT). The project is financially sup- ported by the European Union. This project has been implemented since 2013, until September 2016. Goal of the project is to contribute to the society without torture through activities di- rected against torture and other cruel and inhuman and degrading treatment or pun- ishing, and promotion of international standards, especially OPCAT. Goal of the project is promotion of human dignity in prisons through eliminating of torture and inhuman treatment of vulnerable persons in prisons in Montenegro, Serbia and Albania. Electronic copy of this report can be downloaded from the internet pages: www.freeoftorture.com www.arct.org Albanian Rehabilitation Centre for Trauma and Torture Street Kont Urani, 10, Tirana Albania Tel: +355 422 56522 Fax:+355 422 39121 Email: [email protected] The contents of this manual are the sole responsibility of YIHR Montenegro and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union. Table of Contents Preface................................................................................................................5 Monitoring places of imprisonment: Results ..................................................12 Monitoring missions, findings and recommendations for each instituion ..27 IECD ALI DEMI ............................................................................................................27 IECD TROPOJE ..............................................................................................................33 IECD KORCE..................................................................................................................34 IECD VLORE ..................................................................................................................41 IECD FUSHE KRUJA ....................................................................................................49 IECD BURREL ................................................................................................................51 IECD DURRES................................................................................................................56 IECD FIER ........................................................................................................59 IECD ZAHARIA, KRUJE ............................................................................................59 IECD VAQARR................................................................................................................61 IECD KAVAJA ................................................................................................................63 IEVP RROGOZHINA ....................................................................................................68 IECD PEQIN ..................................................................................................................73 IEVP KUKES ..................................................................................................................79 IECD LUSHNJE..............................................................................................................80 PRISON HOSPITAL CENTRE, TIRANA ............................................................84 IEVP LEZHE ..................................................................................................................86 IECD SARANDE ............................................................................................................91 IEVP MINE PEZA ..........................................................................................................93 IECD ELBASAN ............................................................................................................100 IECD TEPELENE ..........................................................................................................103 4 Preface Torture and other forms of maltreatment are without doubt among the heaviest violation of basic human rights. They destroy the dignity, body and the mind of the victim and have huge effects on the family and the community. However, regardless the absolute prohibition of torture and other forms of maltreatment according to the international law, unfortunately the practice remains widespread globally, especially on places out of the public eye. Even in places expected to have high protection of human rights, monitors continue to document abusive physical acts and conditions of custody that are in conflict with the minimal international standards. Unfortunately, this includes Albania. International law offers a particular group of norms that regulate the way countries can exercise competences, that define minimal standards for prison conditions, and offer guidance about the way and treatment of persons deprived of liberty. Countries must secure an effective implementation of these standards through the adoption of appropriate measures at the national level. Unfortunately, countries often fail to iden- tify or to admit that their policies, regulations, legislations and administrative practices are inadequate for the basic objective for prevention of the acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or humiliating acts or punishment (IDTP) from happening. Many countries can do more to end torture practices and other forms of maltreatments in their prisons, and to develop public trust for the authorities in implementing the law. Practical experience has shown that independent visits in the prisons are one the most effective tools to prevent torture and to improve the custody conditions. In general, as well as in the other cases of force, we cannot say that all the criminals are immoral psychotics – and indeed having in mind the number of professional per- sons we have talked to, we are convinced that they are doing a good job, by securing help for persons in need. Experts that work in big institutions are understood by the outdoor monitors as “changed” during the time – almost transformed by the institu- tions. And again, based on our knowledge there are no clear “trainings” or definitions of rules that can be set for a newcomer: it seems that he has a secret in the process of learning, or putting an institutional system, and through the implied system of theo- ries or “stories”, attitudes, rituals and rules that creates discrimination. We can see that this “discrimination system” can easily burst into institutional violence and torture. This is a “theory” or story that easily transforms quiet people into potential violators and criminals that are in centre of our research. Avoidance of the word “torture” is a testament for the fact that we are generally very sensitive in using the word torture. We immediately recognise efforts to deeply defend 5 our sensitivity toward torture by using euphemisms such as “stress positions”, “ gravely interrogations” , “obliged questions”, “fear, savagery”, “cigarettes” for the imprisoned and “expanded techniques of interrogation” (Cole, 2008; Roth, 2005, Shane, 2007, McKelvey, 2007; Mendez 2005). There is a large law and moral discourse on torture that is not allowed under any circumstances. In the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treat- ment or Punishment, 10th December 1984, torture is defined as “every act”: Causing severe physical or mental pain or suffering To act intentionally For any of the following reasons (this is an illustrative list) To obtain information or a confession form the person under torture or from any other person To punish the person for something that they, or another person, has com- mitted or is suspected to have committed To frighten or to force that person or another person For every reason “based on discrimination” “An official person” or “a person acting in an official capacity” should either cause pain, urge action, or to agree with what is being done. This element is not a core one for ethic debate – an action can continue to be a torture without “official persons” being engaged Actions shouldn’t be part of a legal punishment This is a fairly obvious trail and is not part of an ethic debate – someone might argue that a legal penalty can lead to torture and in this way become illegal.(www.unhchr.ch) The Convention further stresses that “There are no exceptional circumstances of any kind, if a threat of war or any other public urgency, can identify rationalization for tor- ture”. Joint Article of the Geneva Convention III, defines violence against life and per- son, particularly murder in every case, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; and “offensive acts upon personal