Notes

1 Introducing Human Rights in Prisons

1 . This foundational assumption builds on findings in previous ethnographic studies, initially studies by Jefferson (2013; 2012; 2010; 2004) on his own (in Nigeria and Sierra Leone), and later in a joint venture with Gaborit and co-researchers. 2 . The PhD dissertation of Lilian Ayete-Nyampong (2013) also adopted this frame as she considered juvenile justice institutions in Ghana. 3 . The idea of the prison as fundamentally relational can be seen to be in productive tension with our third key concept, the notion of institutional agency, through the dialectical alternation between a focus on the institu- tion as an agent and the relations between the agents that constitute the institution. 4 . Measuring Quality of Prison Life (MQPL) (Liebling and Arnold 2004). 5 . These accounts draw on accounts provided by the co-researchers. More about them later. 6 . The communist groups were never the only opposition group subject to coun- terinsurgency tactics. In Mindanao in the southern part of the the Moro National Liberation Front (MNFL) fought for autonomy. Peace nego- tiations have been ongoing in this conflict between the MNFL, a breakaway group (Moro Islamic Liberation Front, MILF), and the government. 7 . Such as the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire, Hopkins Symptom Checklist and WHO-5. 8 . Since 1998 26 June has been the UN international ‘day against torture’. 9 . Further information can be found in Christensen and Utas 2008; Hoffman 2011; Keen 2005; Kelsall 2009; Richards 1996. 10 . EULEX is the EU rule-of-law mission that works to support and strengthen rule of law in Kosovo through activities like monitoring, mentoring, and advising. 11 . See Berdal and Zaum 2012; Murdoch 2013; van Willigen 2013. 12 . See Guerrero 1979; Hedman and Sidel 2000; Quimpo 2009. 13 . Kwernas are prisoners not affiliated with a pangkat , a gang or group of some sort, discussed later in this chapter. 14 . In 1992 there was a split in the Communist Party of the Philippines, leading to the creation of a reaffirmist group, who reaffirmed their commitment to the party programme and Maoist Marxism, and the rejectionists, who rejected the party programme and called for new ways to seek the revolu- tion – that is, mainly to engage inside cities as well as in the countryside and to revolutionise through the existing political system instead of over- throwing it. 15 . Since colonial times the Philippine prison system has been subject to outside curiosity through prison tourism. In the 1920s Old Bilibid prison attracted

198 Notes 199

American tourists (Brown 2007), and even today Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm and Sablayan Prison Farm feature in Lonely Planet (Bloom et al. 2012). 16 . At the start of this study, Gate 1 was used for entrance of NGOs, but after an incident when a hand grenade was smuggled into the prison and detonated, new management was installed and security procedures tightened. One of the changes was the alternate entrance procedures for NGOs. 17 . Pangkat is the term used to describe gangs and other groups. Contrary to the negative connotation that can be connected to the word ‘gang’, pangkat has a more positive ring to it, more like a brotherhood than a gang (Gamo, 2004) 18 . KFOR stands for Kosovo Force, an international military force led by NATO. 19 . Edward Wilmot Blyden (1832–1912); John Clarkson (1764–1828); William Wilberforce (1759–1833); Luke Howard (1772–1864). 20 . In this regard we are particularly inspired by the work of Jean Lave on a rela- tional theory of social practice (Lave 2011).

2 Encountering Ourselves: A Critically Reflexive Practice Research Project

1 . The conference ’Resisting the Eclipse’ held in the autumn of 2013 symbolised this resurgence. The special issue of Criminal Justice Matters edited by Drake and Earle emerging from the conference made it manifest, as did the special issue of Qualitative Inquiry edited by Yvonne Jewkes (2014). 2 . As will become clearer later, our orientation utilises what might tradition- ally be seen as the risk of bias. Our design essentially privileges the unique vantage point of the implicated actors. 3 . Attention to conditions, meanings, and reasons was the original point of departure for the German and Scandinavian varieties of critical psychological theorising. 4 . Brooke Harrington (2003) argues that this relationship demands stronger theorising. 5 . See Drake (2014) for an account of an action research project featuring prison officers. 6 . Helen Arnold, personal communication: ‘I have found that when inter- viewing staff, many are motivated to agree to participate for the reason you outline here despite not working for an NGO; they are keen to have a voice to help improve things not just for themselves but for prisoners too. Most grasp that knowledge is needed before change – that’s how I put it to them. They also recognise, however, that change may not happen. Any resistance or scepticism often quickly recedes once interviews are underway.’ 7 . Another was that we were not able to engage in more interaction with staff from the NGOs beyond the co-researchers. This represents one of the chal- lenges of integrating research and practice. There is always a tendency that one gets subordinated to the other. 200 Notes

3 First Encounters: Accessing Prisons

1 . For interesting discussions of access from a research methodology point of view, we direct the reader to Harrington 2003; Jewkes 2014; Drake and Harvey 2013. 2 . By granting such a permit, the correctional services in Sierra Leone actually show a remarkably open attitude towards research and the possible value of subjecting their institutions to scrutiny through an international research project. 3 . This ‘no man’s land’ or in-between space shares similarities with prisoners’ more prolonged experiences of being ‘in limbo’, which we describe in Chapter 6 as experiences of judicial limbo and uncertainty. 4 . Reflections upon this topic are described in Jefferson 2014.

4 Close Encounters with Prison Staff

1 . There is also evidence of in-country variation, but we will predominantly draw out the broad patterns that emerged to enable meaningful comparisons between the countries. 2 . The question ‘what matters?’ might sound generic but has been usefully framed by Liebling and Arnold when they argue for the importance of establishing what, qualitatively, really matters to the occupants of prisons (Liebling and Arnold 2004). 3 . Exceptions being Kauffman (1988), Lombardo (1981), Thomas (1972). 4 . Still, the vast majority of research on prison staff is about prison officers, that is, guards. Some of our material suggests that further attention to the different types of staff working in prison would be important, not only the distinction between uniform and civilian staff but also distinctions between different types of uniformed staff. Prison staff groups are not homogenous. 5 . See Jefferson (2013) for a more thorough introduction to anti-dualist analysis and Jefferson (2011) for discussion of the extent to which the assistant to the hangman in northern Nigeria in the 1980s could be said to embody state power. 6 . See Kauffman 1988. 7 . Cf. Removals of uniforms by Sierra Leonean prison staff when fleeing rebel attacks during civil war, and refusal to wear uniforms during business outside prison because of stigma and shame. 8 . Later we consider how at second glance NGOs can be conceived of as part of entangled institutional complexes, that is, as inseparable from the prison. 9 . UNMIK is the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, which is mandated to help ensure conditions of peace for all inhabitants of Kosovo and to advance regional stability. 10 . Here a methodological challenge is highlighted in that we see the interviewee clearly hears the question in terms of the external NGO (KRCT) who is asking it, and he address the co-researcher directly: ‘We expect from you to influence for good’. Notes 201

5 Close Encounters with Prisoners

1 . Different definitions of political prisoners exist. See McEvoy (2001) for a discussion of the use of different definitions. We are inclined to agree with Yvonne Jewkes when she surmises that given the politicised nature of imprisonment, since it is concerned with the relationship between State and citizen, ‘it might be argued that all prisoners are political prisoners’ (2007, 199). 2 . This quote is a striking example of some of the interesting gender dynamics at stake in the data of this study as the female prisoner refers to the average prisoner as male. Though gender dynamics often surface, especially in encounters between our female co-researchers and male prison staff, the topic will not be a focus of this particular study. For analysis of gender dynamics at stake in masculinised prison climates, see, for example, Bandyopadhyay 2006. 3 . In 2009 Prison Watch reported 35 cases of illness-related deaths in Pademba Prison only, where the prison population is approximately 1300 (Prison Watch Sierra Leone 2011). 4 . This may be because emphasis is on getting out, not on how to survive. Or it may reflect the limits of the data acquired via relatively distant encounters between co-researchers and prisoners. The stories about care in Sierra Leone and the Philippines touch upon sensitive issues and personal stories of the pains of imprisonment, stories that might not have been possible for KRCT co-researchers to elicit due to their struggle to establish trust.

6 Close Encounters between Prisoners and Prison Staff

1 . This orientation is in some ways a recapitulation of ideas to be found in an exploration of the effects of power in a therapeutic prison (Jefferson 2003). 2 . The term perpetrative institution is neither a replacement for nor a contradic- tion of the relational institutions we have described the prison as so far, but emphasises a certain aspect of the way in which institutions are relational, namely that they act. 3 . This does raise the question of whether all institutions are not fundamentally relational. And, if so, how are prisons special? What makes this quality of paramount importance to understanding prisons? Although these questions deserve further reflection, for now, let us settle with the observation that relational qualities of space gain importance in institutions like a prison, where occupants are spatially confined. Being spatially confined gives added poignancy and power to the space-relation link. 4 . Part of the New Peoples Army under the Communist Party of the Philippines. 5 . Interesting work is forthcoming from Dominique Moran and Yvonne Jewkes based on their project “‘Fear-suffused environments’ or potential to rehabili- tate? Prison architecture, design and technology and the lived experience of carceral spaces” (see also Moran 2014). 202 Notes

6 . Buryong is an emic term originating in prison. It has multiple meanings. Jensen usefully explores these, drawing attention to senses of hopelessness, weariness, boredom, madness, and to the fact that buryong is ‘something that one falls prey to, as well as something one does’. (2014, 44) 7 . Later in the interview she seems to retract this impression of flexibility, stating ‘We will entertain anyone who comes through that gate provided that they have valid IDs. I want to stress how important being vigilant is ... ’ 8 . Officers are transferred between jails regularly to avoid corruption. These constant changes of staff hinder close relationships. 9 . It is interesting to note that the warden at this time actively seeks contact with prisoners (at least with chairmen) and prides himself on going into the jail, while telling his staff not to do so. His stories about going into the jail were characterised by a masculine story about being brave enough to go in there and instructing his officers not to negotiate if he was kidnapped, just to shoot. He supplemented this with the fact that young officers were afraid to go inside, and was surprised that co-researchers did so. This adds an interesting perspective to the fact that Balay works inside the prison, allowing its staff to have closer encounters with prisoners than even some officers have. 10 . It is worth noting that there is something intimate and playful about the cat/dog metaphor, nevertheless. It’s not that cats and dogs are sworn, totally intolerant enemies. They can co-exist under conditions of shared domes- ticity, presumably more or less harmoniously depending on whether they are adequately fed and watered. 11 . This fits with a conceptualisation of confinement as site, practice, and state of mind (Jefferson 2012). 12 . This speaks also of the extent to which Prison Watch staff feel the emotional strain of the prison in similar ways to prisoners, as mentioned toward the end of Chapter 3. 13 . For theoretical work on recognition, see, for example, Honneth 1996; Fraser 2000; Ricoeur 2007.

7 Critical Encounters

1 . This represents a shift from over-individualised concerns with ‘bad apples’ to a task of analytically mapping and dissecting the ‘poisoned orchards’ (Gregory 2006; 2009). Craig Haney (2006) has made a convincing argument that despite the fact that the history of Western law and its judicial system rests upon a version of the ‘bad apple’ thesis – personal responsibility for wrongdoing – human activity is in fact radically contingent on context and relationships. The ‘poisoned orchards’ thesis emphasises situational and institutional conditions rather than personal dispositions as key drivers of abusive practices. 2 . We are very grateful to Dave Whyte and Steve Tombs for insightful exchanges on these matters. Notes 203

3 . This theory-laden and, to us, intriguing remark was made at the workshop ‘From Situated Learning to Social Practice Theory – Historical Process and Practice’ at Department of Education, Aarhus University, August 2014. 4 . This relates to what Douglas observes, drawing on Hume: ‘It is we ourselves who attribute causality’ (Douglas 1986, 11). 5 . Nissen gives examples of singular collectives and emphasises their range: ‘from fleeting conversational encounters between two strangers, through tightly regulated institutions, to massive enduring collectivities like states’ (under review, 10) 6 . At a late stage in the writing of this volume we became aware of incipient work along very similar lines being done by criminologist Sarah Armstrong. She calls for a reconceptualisation of the prison as both ‘stage and actor’, paying explicit attention to the agentic qualities of penal institutions in an attempt to demythologise and question the givenness of prisons (see Armstrong and McAra 2006). 7 . For further elaboration on the latter point, see Jefferson (2011). Discussing the case of a Nigerian prison officer who served as assistant to the execu- tioner during a series of , Jefferson argues against a notion that the officer simply embodies the punitive state. Applied to our material, we might say that neither the NGO staff member nor the prison staff member simply embodies his or her institution. 8 . These formulations owe a huge debt to Jean Lave’s work in developing a theory of social practice, formulated most clearly in her book on critical ethnographic practice and under further elaboration in a manuscript called Changing Practice . 9 . In reformulating this sentence we sought to identify from whence these ‘best practices’ emanate. It is in fact unclear. We agree with Rejali, who writes of his suspicion that ‘there is a striking recirculation of materials between agen- cies, each one citing the other, but none checking to confirm whether these are best practices or not. One gets the impression that calling such practices the “best” simply means that other anti-torture organisations recommended them so they must be the best because they are in circulation. “Best” at this point is a tautological claim’ (Rejali 2014). 10 . ‘Confinement viewed through the prism of the social sciences: Contrasting facilities, confronting approaches’, an international symposium organized by the TerrFerme research project, October 2013. 11 . Though it should be noted that Balay and KRCT do not limit their activi- ties to prisons. Both organisations also have activities not concerned with prisons. In fact the same is true of Prison Watch, though to a slightly lesser degree. Nevertheless, relative to one another it is safe to say that the NGOs matter less to prisons than prisons matter to the NGOs. The NGOs care about prisons. Prisons care to the extent that NGOs appear on their radar either as a potential irritant or a potential help. 12 . While it may be the case that the prison is the heaviest party in relation to the NGOs in our study, one can easily imagine dynamics where it would be the weaker or even neglected part – for example, in relation to the state. At the same time, under certain circumstances prisons can be a key part of a 204 Notes

repressive state apparatus and therefore weigh in quite heavily in that rela- tion, too. 13 . In the mid-1980s (1984), when he was preoccupied with the history of the human sciences, Nikolas Rose proposed the notion of the psy-complex to speak about the variety of discursive and institutional practices informed by ‘psychological’ thinking. We borrow this notion of the complex. 14 . See Sim (2009), Carlen (2002), and Mathiesen (1980) on the way prisons mystify their own punitive function.

8 What Encounters Count? What Matters?

1 . Analysis of permits granting Balay access to prisons is instructive in this regard (see Chapter 3). References

Aitchison, Andy. 2007. ‘Police Reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina: State, Democracy and International Assistance.’ Policing and Society 17 (4): 321–43. APT. 2004. Monitoring Places of Detention: A Practical Guide. Geneva: Association for the Prevention of Torture. APT, OSCE, and ODIHR. 2002. Monitoring Places of Detention: A Practical Guide for NGOs. Geneva; Warsaw: Association for the Prevention of Torture; Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe; Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). Arieli, D., V. J. Friedman, and K. Agbaria. 2009. ‘The Paradox of Participation in Action Research.’ Action Research 7 (3): 263–90. Arnold, Helen. 2008. ‘The Experience of Prison Officer Training.’ In Understanding Prison Staff , (eds) Jamie Bennett, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. Cullompton. Portland: Willan Publishing. Bandyopadhyay, Mahuya. 2006. ‘Competing Masculinities in a Prison.’ Men and Masculinities 9 (2): 186–203. ——. 2010. Everyday Life in a Prison: Confinement, Surveillance, Resistance. New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan. Bennett, Jamie, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. 2008. Understanding Prison Staff . Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. Berdal, Mats R., and Dominik Zaum, (eds). 2012. Political Economy of Statebuilding: Power after Peace. Routledge Studies in Intervention and Statebuilding. New York: Routledge. Bloom, Greg, Adam Karlin, Kate Morgan, Trent Holden, and Michael Grosberg. 2012. Lonely Planet: Philippines, 2012. Footscray, Vic. London: Lonely Planet. Blundo, Giorgio, and Pierre-Yves Le Meur. 2009. The Governance of Daily Life in Africa: Ethnographic Explorations of Public and Collective Services. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. Bosworth, M. 2010. ‘Introduction: Reinventing Penal Parsimony.’ Theoretical Criminology 14 (3): 251–56. Bosworth, Mary, Debi Campbell, Bonita Demby, Seth M. Ferranti, and Michael Santos. 2005. ‘Doing Prison Research: Views from Inside.’ Qualitative Inquiry 11 (2): 249–64. Brown, Ian. 2007. ‘South East Asia: Reform and the Colonial Prison.’ In Cultures of Confinement . Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. Candaliza-Gutierrez, Filomin. 2012. ‘Pangkat: Inmate Gangs at the Maximum Security Compound.’ Philippine Sociological Review 60: 193–237. Carlen, Pat. 2002. Women and Punishment: The Struggle for Justice. New York: Willan Publishing. Cheliotis, Leonidas K. 2014. ‘Our Violence and Theirs: Comparing Prison Realities.’ South Atlantic Quarterly 113 (3): 443–46. Christensen, Maya, and Mats Utas. 2008. ‘Mercenaries of Democracy: The “Politricks” of Remobilized Combatants in the 2007 General Elections, Sierra Leone.’ African Affairs 107 (429): 515–39.

205 206 References

Christie, Nils. 1978. ‘Prisons in Society, or Society as a Prison – A Conceptual Analysis.’ In Prisons Past and Future, (ed.) John Freeman. London: Heinemann Educational Books. Cohen, Stanley, and Laurie Taylor. 1972. Psychological Survival, the Experience of Long-Term Imprisonment . Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Coyle, Andrew. 2008. ‘Change Management in Prisons.’ In Understanding Prison Staff , (eds) Jamie Bennett, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. ——. 2009. A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management: Handbook for Prison Staff . London: International Centre for Prison Studies. Crawley, Elaine. 2004. Doing Prison Work: The Public and Private Lives of Prison Officers . Cullompton; Devon; Portland: Willan. Crawley, Elaine, and Peter Crawley. 2008. ‘Understanding Prison Officers: Culture, Cohesion and Conflict.’ In Understanding Prison Staff, (eds) Jamie Bennett, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. Crawley, Elaine, and Richard Sparks. 2006. ‘Is There Life after Imprisonment? How Elderly Men Talk about Imprisonment and Release.’ Criminology and Criminal Justice 6 (1): 63–82. Crewe, Ben. 2005. ‘Prisoner Society in the Era of Hard Drugs.’ Punishment & Society 7 (4): 457–81. ——. 2014. ‘Not Looking Hard Enough: Masculinity, Emotion, and Prison Research.’ Qualitative Inquiry 20 (4): 392–403. Crewe, Ben, and Yvonne Jewkes. 2011. ‘Introduction.’ Punishment & Society 13 (5): 507–8. Dembour, Marie-Bénédicte. 2010. ‘What Are Human Rights? Four Schools of Thought.’ Human Rights Quarterly 32 (1): 1–20. Douglas, Mary. 1986. How Institutions Think. New York: Syracuse University Press. Drake, Deborah. 2012. Prisons, Punishment and the Pursuit of Security. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Drake, Deborah H. 2014. ‘Researching Prisoner Experiences with Prison Officers: An Action Research-Inspired Approach.’ Action Research 12 (1): 94–109. Drake, Deborah H., and Joel Harvey. 2014. ‘Performing the Role of Ethnographer: Processing and Managing the Emotional Dimensions of Prison Research.’ International Journal of Social Research Methodology 17 (5): 1–13. Dreier, Ole. 2003. Subjectivity and Social Practice. 2. udg. Århus: Center for Sundhed, Menneske og Kultur, Institut for Filosofi, Århus Universitet. ——. 2008. Psychotherapy in Everyday Life. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. Egelund, Anne. 2014. ‘Masculinity, Sex and Survival in Zambian Prisons.’ Prison Service Journal, Special Edition: Everyday Prison Governance in Africa, March 2014 (212): 16–20. Fine, Michelle, and María E. Torre. 2006. ‘Intimate Details: Participatory Action Research in Prison.’ Action Research 4 (3): 253–69. Foucault, Michel. 1973. Madness and Civilization, A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason . New York: Vintage Books. ——. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Random House. Fraser, Nancy. 2000. ‘Rethinking Recognition.’ New Left Review, II, no. 3 (June): 107–20. References 207

Gaborit, Liv S. 2013. ‘Subjectification in Philippine Jails: How Inmates Cope with the Objectifying Power of Confinement.’ Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen. Gamo, Marina D. 2004. ‘Journeying the Road to Transformation: A Case Study on Incarcerated Inmates in a National Penitentiary.’ Res Socialis Journal of UST Social Research Center 1 (1): 52–59. Goerg, Odile. 2003. ‘Colonial Urbanism and Prisons in Africa: Reflections on Conakry and Freetown, 1903–1960.’ In A History of Prison and Confinement in Africa , (ed.) Florence Bernault & (trans.) Janet L. Roitman. Social History of Africa Series. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Goffman, Erving. 1961. ‘On the Characteristics of Total Institutions: The Inmate World.’ In The Prison, Studies in Institutional Organization and Change , (ed.) Donald R. Cressey. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Gregory, Derek. 2006. ‘The Black Flag: Guantánamo Bay and the Space of Exception.’ Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 88 (4): 405–27. ——. 2009. ‘Vanishing Points: Law, Violence, and Exception in the Global War Prison.’ In Terror and the Postcolonial, (eds) Elleke Boehmeressor and Stephen Morton, 55–98. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Grounds, Adrian. 2006. ‘Psychological Consequences of Wrongful Conviction and Imprisonment.’ Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue Canadienne de Criminologie et de Justice Pénale 46 (2): 165–82. Grounds, Adrian, and Ruth Jamieson. 2003. ‘No Sense of an Ending: Researching the Experience of Imprisonment and Release among Republican Ex-Prisoners.’ Theoretical Criminology 7 (3): 347–62. Guerrero, Amado. 1979. Philippine Society and Revolution. 3rd edition. Oakland, CA: International Association of Filipino Patriots. Hacking, Ian. 2002. Historical Ontology . Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Halsey, Mark. 2007. ‘On Confinement: Resident and Inmate Perspectives of Secure Care and Imprisonment.’ Probation Journal 54 (4): 338–67. Haney, Craig. 2006. Reforming Punishment: Psychological Limits to the Pains of Imprisonment . Santa Cruz: University of California Press. Harrington, Brooke. 2003. ‘The Social Psychology of Access in Ethnographic Research.’ Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 32 (5): 592–625. Hedman, Eva-Lotta E, and John Thayer Sidel. 2000. Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century Colonial Legacies, Post-Colonial Trajectories. London: Routledge. Hillier, Bill, and Julienne Hanson. 1988. The Social Logic of Space. Paperback edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hoffman, Danny. 2007. ‘The City as Barracks: Freetown, Monrovia, and the Organization of Violence in Postcolonial African Cities.’ Cultural Anthropology 22 (3): 400–28. ——. 2011. The War Machines: Young Men and Violence in Sierra Leone and Liberia . Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Holland, Dorothy C., and Jean Lave, (eds). 2001. History in Person: Enduring Struggles, Contentious Practice, Intimate Identities. Santa Fe; Oxford: School of American Research Press. Holzkamp, Klaus. 1985. Mennesket som subjekt for videnskabelig metodik . Copenhagen: Kommunistiske Studenter på Psykologi ved Københavns Universitet: Bogbutikken Spartakus. 208 References

——. 2013. Psychology from the Standpoint of the Subject: Selected Writings of Klaus Holzkamp . Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Honneth, Axel. 1996. The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts . Cambridge: MIT Press. Jamieson, Ruth, and Adrian Grounds. 2006. ‘Release and Adjustment after Long- Term Imprisonment: Perspectives from Studies of Wrongly Convicted and Politically Motivated Prisoners.’ Temida 9 (3): 3. Jefferson, Andrew M. (forthcoming). ‘Performing Ethnography: Infiltrating Prison Spaces.’ In Palgrave Handbook of Prison Ethnography, (eds) Deborah H. Drake, Rod Earle, and Jennifer Sloan. Palgrave Macmillan. ——. 2003. ‘Therapeutic Discipline? Reflections on the Penetration of Sites of Control by Therapeutic Discourse.’ Outlines. Critical Practice Studies 5 (1): 55–73. ——. 2004. ‘Confronted by Practice: Towards a Critical Psychology of Prison Practice in Nigeria.’ Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen. ——. 2008. ‘When You Can’t Tell Warders from Prisoners.’ Wiser Review , June 3. ——. 2010. ‘Traversing Sites of Confinement Post-Prison Survival in Sierra Leone.’ Theoretical Criminology 14 (4): 387–406. ——. 2011a. ‘On Hangings and the Dubios Embodyment of Statehood in Nigerian Prisons.’ In State Violence and Human Rights. Routledge-Cavendish. 2011., (eds) Steffen Jensen and Andrew M. Jefferson. Copenhagen: Routledge-Cavendish. ——. 2011b. ‘Comparisons at Work – Exporting “Exceptional” Norms.’ In Nordic Prison Practice and Policy, Exceptional or Not? Exploring Penal Exceptionalism in the Nordic Context, (eds) Thomas Ugelvik and Jane Dullum, 100–17. Abingdon, Oxon ; New. York: Routledge. ——. 2011c. ‘Glimpses of Judicial Limbo in West Africa.’ Amicus Journal , 26. ——. 2012. ‘Conceptualizing Confinement: Prisons and Poverty in Sierra Leone.’ Criminology and Criminal Justice , November. ——. 2013. ‘The Situated Production of Legitimacy: Perspectives from the Global South.’ In Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: An International Exploration. New York: Oxford University Press. ——. 2014. ‘Lines of Flight – On the Desire to Know but Not Know Prisons.’ Newsletter of European Group for the Study of Deviance and Social Control. May. http://www.europeangroup.org/media/242#overlay-context=content/ newsletters. Jefferson, Andrew M., and Lotte Huniche. 2009. ‘(Re)Searching for Persons in Practice: Field-Based Methods for Critical Psychological Practice Research.’ Qualitative Research in Psychology 6 (1–2): 12–27. Jefferson, Andrew M., and Steffen Jensen. 2011. State Violence and Human Rights. Routledge-Cavendish. 2011. Copenhagen: Routledge-Cavendish. Jensen, Steffen. 2014. ‘Stunted Future: “Buryong” Among Young Men in .’ In Ethnographies of Youth and Temporality: Time Objectified, (eds) Anne Line Dalsgard, Martin Demant Frederiksen, Susanne Højlund, and Lotte Meinert. Global Youth. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Jewkes, Yvonne. 2007. ‘Introduction.’ In Handbook on Prisons , (eds) Yvonne Jewkes, Ben Crewe, and Jamie Bennett. Cullompton ; Portland: Routledge. ——. 2012. ‘Autoethnography and Emotion as Intellectual Resources: Doing Prison Research Differently.’ Qualitative Inquiry 18 (1): 63–75. ——. 2014. ‘An Introduction to “Doing Prison Research Differently.”’ Qualitative Inquiry 20 (4): 387–91. References 209

Jewkes, Yvonne, and Jamie Bennett. 2008. Dictionary of Prisons and Punishment . Cullompton: Willan Publishing. Kauffman, Kelsey. 1988. Prison Officers and Their World . Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Keen, David. 2005. Conflict and Collusion in Sierra Leone. Oxford: James Currey Publishers. Kelsall, Tim. 2009. Culture under Cross-Examination, International Justice and the Special Court for Sierra Leone . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. King, Roy D. 2008. ‘Prison Staff: An International Perspective.’ In Understanding Prison Staff , (eds) Jamie Bennett, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. King, Roy D., and Kenneth W. Elliot. 1978. Albany Birth of a Prison – End of an Era . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. KRCT. 2012. Summary of Findings in Correctional and Detention Centers in 2012 . Kosovo Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims. Lave, Jean. forthcoming. ‘Social Practice Theory.’ In Changing Practice . ——. 2011. Apprenticeship in Critical Ethnographic Practice . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Le Marcis, Frédéric. ‘Everyday Prison Governance in Abidjan, Ivory Coast.’ Prison Service Journal, Special Edition: Everyday Prison Governance in Africa, March 2014, (212): 11–15. Liebling, Alison. 1992. Suicides in Prison . London: Routledge. ——. 1999a. ‘Doing Research in Prisons – Breaking the Silence.’ Theoretical Criminology 3 (2): 147–73. ——. 1999b. ‘Suicide and Prisoner Coping.’ Crime and Justice 26: 283–359. ——. 2008. ‘Effects of Imprisonment.’ In Dictionary of Prisons and Punishment , (eds) Yvonne Jewkes and Jamie Bennett. Cullompton: Willan. ——. 2014. ‘Postscript Integrity and Emotion in Prisons Research.’ Qualitative Inquiry 20 (4): 481–86. Liebling, Alison, and Helen Arnold. 2004. Prisons and Their Moral Performance . New York: Oxford University Press. Liebling, Alison, Helen Arnold, and Christina Straup. 2011. An Exploration of Staff- Prisoner Relations at HMP Whitemoor: 12 Years On . Ministry of Justice – National Offender Management Service and Cambridge Institute of Criminology Prison Research Centre. Liebling, Alison, and Shadd Maruna. 2005. The Effects of Imprisonment . Cambridge Criminal Justice Series. Cullompton; Devon; Portland: Willan. Liebling, Alison, and David Price. 1999. ‘Staff-Prisoner Relationships.’ Prison Service Jounral , no. 120: 3–6. Liebling, Alison, David Price, and Guy Shefer. 2010. The Prison Officer . 2nd edition. Abington, OX: Willan Publishing. Lindegaard, Marie Rosenkrantz, and Sasha Gear. 2014. ‘Violence Makes Safe in South African Prisons: Prison Gangs, Violent Acts, and Victimization among Inmates.’ Focaal 2014 (68): 35–54. Lombardo, Lucien X. 1981. Guards Imprisoned: Correctional Officers at Work . New York: Elsevier Science Limited. Martin, Tomas Max. 2014. ‘Embracing Human Rights, Governance and Transition in Ugandan Prisons.’ International Development Studies, Roskilde University. 210 References

Martin, Tomas Max, and Andrew M. Jefferson. 2014. ‘Editorial Comment: Everyday Prison Governance in Africa.’ Prison Service Journal, Special Edition: Everyday Prison Governance in Africa, no. 212: 2–4. Martin, Tomas Max, Andrew M. Jefferson, and Mahuya Bandyopadhyay. 2014. ‘Sensing Prison Climates: Governance, Survival, and Transition.’ Focaal 2014 (68): 3–17. Mathiesen, Thomas. 1980. Law, Society, and Political Action: Towards a Strategy under Late Capitalism . New York: Academic Press. Mbembe, Achille. 2001. On the Postcolony. Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of California Press. McEvoy, Kieran. 2001. Paramilitary Imprisonment in Northern Ireland: Resistance, Management, and Release . New York: Oxford University Press. McEvoy, Kieran, Kirsten McConnachie, and Ruth Jamieson. 2007. ‘Political Imprisonment and the “War on Terror.”’ In Handbook on Prisons . Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. Medlicott, Diana. 2005. ‘The Unbearable Brutality of Being: Casual Cruelty in Prison and What This Tells Us About Who We Really Are.’ In Minding Evil: Explorations of Human Iniquity, (eds) Margaret Sönser Breen. Amsterdam; New York: Editions Rodopi BV. Merry, Sally Engle. forthcoming. The Seductions of Quantification: Human Rights and the Rise of Indicator Culture . ——. 2006. ‘Transnational Human Rights and Local Activism: Mapping the Middle.’ American Anthropologist 108 (1): 38–51. Moran, Dominique. 2013. ‘Carceral Geography and the Spatialities of Prison Visiting: Visitation, Recidivism, and Hyperincarceration.’ Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 31 (1): 174–90. Mørck, Line Lerche, Khaled Hussain, Camilla Møller Andersen, Tülay Özüpek, Anne-Mette Palm, and Ida Hedegaard Vorbeck. 2013. ‘Praxis Development in Relation to Gang Conflicts in Copenhagen, Denmark.’ Outlines – Critical Practice Studies 14 (2): 79–105. Morelle, Marie. ‘Power, Control and Money in Prison: The Informal Governance of the Yaoundé Central Prison.’ Prison Service Journal, Special Edition: Everyday Prison Governance in Africa, March 2014 (212): 21–26. Morris, Terence, and Pauline Morris. 1963. Pentonville; a Sociological Study of an English Prison, . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Murdoch, Danielle. 2013. ‘Criminal Justice Reform in Post-Conflict Environments: A Case Study of Corrections Reform in Kosovo.’ Burnaby: Simon Fraser University. Newbold, Greg, Jeffrey Ian Ross, Richard S. Jones, Stephen C. Richards, and Michael Lenza. 2014. ‘Prison Research from the Inside The Role of Convict Autoethnography.’ Qualitative Inquiry 20 (4): 439–48. Nissen, Morten. under review. ‘The Subject of Critique.’ Mind, Culture, and Activity. ——. 2000. ‘Practice Research: Critical Psychology in and through Practices.’ Annual Review of Critical Psychology 2: 145–79. ——. 2012. The Subjectivity Of Participation . Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. OHCHR. 2010. National Human Rights Institutions – History, Principles, Roles and Responsibilities . 4. Professional Training Series. New York and Geneva: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. References 211

Ospina, Sonia, Jennifer Dodge, Bethany Godsoe, Joan Minieri, Salvador Reza, and Ellen Schall. 2004. ‘From Consent to Mutual Inquiry Balancing Democracy and Authority in Action Research.’ Action Research 2 (1): 47–69. Osterkamp, Ute. 2009. ‘Knowledge and Practice in Critical Psychology.’ Theory & Psychology 19 (2): 167–91. Pratt, John, and Anna Eriksson. 2011. ‘In Defence of Scandinavian Exceptionalism.’ In Nordic Prison Practice and Policy, Exceptional or Not? Exploring Penal Excpetionalism in the Nordic Context , (eds) Thomas Ugelvik and Jane Dullum. Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge. Prison Watch Sierra Leone. 2011. Prison Watch Sierra Leone Submission to the UN Universal Periodic Review . Freetown: Prison Watch Sierra Leone. Quimpo, Nathan Gilbert. 2009. ‘The Philippines: Predatory Regime, Growing Authoritarian Features.’ The Pacific Review 22 (3): 335–53. Reiter, Keramet. 2014. ‘Making Windows in Walls Strategies for Prison Research.’ Qualitative Inquiry 20 (4): 417–28. Rejali, Darius. 2014. ‘Torture Prevention: A Literature Review.’ Rhodes, Lorna A. forthcoming. ‘Repetition, Entropy and the Institutional Interior.’ ——. 2001. ‘Toward an Anthropology of Prisons.’ Annual Review of Anthropology 30 (1): 65–83. ——. 2013. ‘Ethnographic Imagination in the Field of the Prison.’ Criminal Justice Matters 91 (1): 16–17. Richards, Paul. 1996. Fighting for the Rain Forest: War, Youth & Resources in Sierra Leone . Oxford: The International African Institute in association with James Currey. Ricoeur, Paul. 2007. The Course of Recognition. Cambridge; London: Harvard University Press. Rocheleau, Ann Marie. 2013. ‘An Empirical Exploration of the “Pains of Imprisonment” and the Level of Prison Misconduct and Violence.’ Criminal Justice Review 38 (3): 354–74. Rowe, Abigail. 2014. ‘Situating the Self in Prison Research Power, Identity, and Epistemology.’ Qualitative Inquiry 20 (4): 404–16. Sarkin, Jeremy, (ed.) 2008. Human Rights in African Prisons . 1st edition. Cape Town; Athens, OH: Ohio University Press. Scott, David. 2008. ‘Creating Ghosts in the Penal Machine: Prison Officer Occupational Morality and the Techniques of Denial.’ In Understanding Prison Staff , (eds) Jamie Bennett, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. Sim, Joe. 1995. ‘Tougher than the Rest?’ In Just Boys Doing Business? Men, Masculinities and Crime, (eds) Tim Newburn and Elizabeth A. Stanko. New York: Psychology Press. ——. 2003. ‘Whose Side Are We Not on? Researching Medical Power in Prisons.’ In Unmasking the Crimes of the Powerful: Scrutinizing States and Corporations , (eds) Steve Tombs and Dave Whyte. New York: Peter Lang International Academic Publishers. ——. 2008. ‘An Inconvenient Criminological Truth: Pain, Punishment and Prison Officers.’ In Understanding Prison Staff , (eds) Jamie Bennett, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. 212 References

——. 2009. Punishment and Prisons: Power and the Carceral State. London ; Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. Simon, Jonathan. 2000. ‘The “Society of Captives” in the Era of Hyper- Incarceration.’ Theoretical Criminology 4 (3): 285–308. Sloan, Jennifer, and Deborah H Drake. 2013. ‘Emotional Engagements: On Sinking and Swimming in Prison Research and Ethnography.’ Criminal Justice Matters 91 (1): 24–25. Smith, Dorothy E. 2005. Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Sparks, Richard, Anthony Bottoms, and Will Hay. 1996. Prisons and the Problem of Order . Oxford; New York: OUP Oxford. Sykes, Gresham M. 1958. The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison . Princeton Classic Editions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Thomas, J. E. 1972. The English Prison Officer since 1850. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Tolman, Charles W. 1991. Critical Psychology Contributions to an Historical Science of the Subject . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van Willigen, Niels. 2013. Peacebuilding and International Administration: The Cases of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. Routledge Advances in International Relations and Global Politics 103. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Wacquant, Loïc. 2002. ‘The Curious Eclipse of Prison Ethnography.’ Ethnography 3 (4): 371–97. Warr, Jason. 2008. ‘Personal Reflections on Prison Staff.’ In Understanding Prison Staff , (eds) Jamie Bennett, Ben Crewe, and Azrini Wahidin. Cullompton; Portland: Willan Publishing. ‘World Prison Brief.’ 2013. http://www.prisonstudies.org/world-prison-brief. Index

access, 47–70 conditions of service, 77, 82, 95 basis for, 48–55 Convention against Torture (CAT), as process, 62–9 9, 190 action research, 26, 30, 31, 35, 35n. co-researchers, 28–46, see also practice 5, 37, see also participatory action research research; practice research corruption, 13, 129, 144, 152 adaptation Coyle, A., 72, 73 of prison staff, 75–9, 94, 178, 189 Crawley, E., 73, 74, 102 adjustment, 78, 101, 109–20, 126, critical psychology, see practice 178, 180–2, see also adaptation research advocacy, 7–9, 11, 174, 187 critical reflection, 5, 33, 180, 192 agency, 155, 158, 160–2, 168, see also institutional agency danger, 91, 109, 111–12, 119, 148 Amnesty International, 67, 169 Dembour, M., 175 anti-torture law, 6, 187 demoralisation, 66–7, 77–8, 84 appreciative inquiry, 36 deprivation, 20, 101, 102, 106, 121, Association for the Prevention of 126, 130, 156, 158 Torture (APT), 109 DIGNITY – Danish Institute Against authority Torture, 2, 5, 180 distribution of, 22, 131–2, 153–7, discipline, 74, 78, 121 see also self-governance discrimination, 96, 122 exercise of, 51–2, 69, 71, 75, disenchantment 88–95, 100 of prison staff, 82, 149 Douglas, M., 160, 161, 163, 165, 166 Balay Rehabilitation Center, 5, 6–7, Drake, D., 31, 73 33, 173–5 Dubrava correctional centre, 17–19, Bosworth, M., 34, 35 76, 89, 97, 137, 146, 148 bureaucracy, 49, 50, 73 education, 182–5 carceral apparatus, 22 effects, 2, 4, 7, 37, 62, 76, 77, 101, care, 103, 117–21 102, 116, 117, 132, 150, 160, 162, Central Prison, Pademba Road, 20–2, 167, 170, 180 51, 105–6, 136, 157, 184 emotion/s, see demoralization; Christie, N., 139 frustration; hope; humiliation; Cohen, S., 101 pride; resignation; vulnerability collateral damage, 130 emotional toll, 27, 47, 62–70, 117–19 colonial history, colonialism, 15n. 15, encounters 134, 189 characteristics of, 24, 160, 171 communist, 6, 12 constitutive, 1, 45 comparison, 23, 31, 196 introducing, 1, 3–4 of styles of encounter, 47, 171–5, 178 thinking through, 160, 167–71 compassion, 93, 100, 141, 145, entangled institutional complexes, 147, 154 160, 176

213 214 Index entanglement, degrees of, 3, 132, 153, identification, 63, 68, 70, 109 169, 174, 189, see also encounters immersion, 4, 89, 100, 196–7 epistemology, 23 impunity, 162, 169 Eriksson, A., 74 independence, 1, 24, 169, 177–9, 189, ethnographic zoom, 27, 38 190–3, 196 ethnography, 26–7, 31, 36, 37–8 inspectors, see monitoring EULEX, 12, 96 institutional agency, 2, 4, 37, 160, European Union, 12 162–8, 176–7, 180, 186, 191, evidence, 37 192, 196 evil, 180 institutional consciousness, 162 institutions faith, 37 defined, 165 familiarity, 48–70, 134, 181, 195 interlocking, 176 favouritism, 66, 96 inter-subjectivity of, 169 , 6, 12, 104 relational, 2, 130–2, 158, 166, 196 focus jails, 7 situated, 130 frustration, 57, 66–7, 75–80, 86, 90, social, 3 111, 115, 124, 126, 127, 141, 144, insurgency, 12, 104, 198 145, 146, 188 intentionality, 162 funding , 191, 194–5 imagined, 4, 161, 163 interdependence, 2, 157, 170, 178, Gillespie, K., 170 191–2, 194, 195, 196 global penology, 2, 45 international community, 12, 13 Goffman, E., 101, 161, 170 interpretive science, 37 governance, 101, 154, 156 intervention, 6, 25, 30, 33, 37, 38, Grounds, A., 103, 117 70, 71, 158, 159, 170, 174, guards, see prison staff 179, 189 intimacy, 52, 99, 103, 121, 143, 171, Heidegger, M., 162 181, 186, 189 history in institutions, 160, 169 intimidation, 69 history in person, 160, 168–9 isolation, 7, 28, 62, 73, 124, 126 Hoffman, D., 139 hope, 67, 88, 96, 97, 98, 125 Jamieson, R., 103, 117 human rights Jewkes, Y., 27, 46, 62, 103 abuses, 6, 18, 73 judicial limbo, 13, 101, 126–30, 179, based approach, 2, 73 188 discourse, 23, 64, 73, 169 juveniles, 20, 69, 183 norms, 5, 8, 103, 159, 170, 196 organisations, 6, see NGOs Kenema prison, 20, 22, 120, 123 paradigm, 73 King, R., 74, 134 practice, 169, 190 knowledge, 27, 29, 30, 37, 60, 63, 67, promotion, 177 70, 155, 179, 187, 195 standards, 9, 23, 61, 159, 186, 190 Kosova Rehabilitation Centre for trickle-down of, 190 Torture Victims (KRCT), 5, 8–9, Human Rights in Action, 42 33–4, 171–2 Human Rights Watch, 169 Kosovo humanitarian services, 187 country context, 8, 9, 12, 13, humiliation, 64 17–19, 33, 55, 76, 95, 122, humour, 81, 145 189, 193 Index 215

Lave, J., 164, 165, 166, 168 order, 23, 74, 119, 120, 135, 137, 146, law, 6, 7, 53, 73, 175 154, 155, 156, 157, 161, 164, 172 legal cases, 98 organic, 166, 175 Liebling, A., 26, 36, 39, 72, 101, 102, Ospina, S., 37 107, 133, 140 outreach jails, 7 limbo, see judicial limbo Lipjan correctional centre, 17, 19, 20, paramilitarism, 74 106, 137, 149 Paris Principles, 190, 192, 195 lobbying, 8, 9, 11, 50 parole, 119, 126, 129, 130 participation mandate paradox of, 34 of NGOs, 48, 55, 104, 188, participatory action research, 30, 35, 192–6 38, see also practice research Martin, T., 73, 79, 101, 151, 154 partners, 4–5, 7, 28, 103, 113, 173, Medlicott. D., 101 175, 188 Mindanao, 6, 12, 115, 141, 198 partnership, 7, 35, 98–100, 176, 194 mockery, 69 perception management, 49 monitoring, 5, 8–11, 23, 32, 33, 45, perpetrative institutions, 132n. 2 50, 171, 186–7, 190, 194, 195 persons in practice, 168 Moro National Liberation Front Philippines (MNFL), 12, 198 country context, 6, 12–13, 189 Muslim(s), 6, 12, 14, 15, 16, 58, 104, pixilation, 27, 28, 34, 38 107–10, 114–16, 118–19, 125, pluralism, 190, 193 127, 141, 154, 173, 193 policy, 9, 13, 73, 176, 185 policymakers, 7 naming and shaming, 169 political prisoners, 5, 6, 7, 16, 56, 63, National Human Rights Institutions 70, 103, 104, 117, 125, 127, 158, (NHRIs), 190–1, 194–5 173, 188, 195 National Preventive Mechanism poverty, 12, 13, 20, 82, 102, 104, 122, (NPM), 9, 195 124, 127, 128, 172, 183 New Bilibid Prison (NBP), 7, 14, power, 2, 23, 28, 34, 39, 40, 65, 72–3, 15–17, 56 89–90, 97, 99, 103, 118, 131, 132, New People’s Army, 12 134, 135, 147, 148, 153–7, 158, Nigeria, 3, 134, 151, 170 163, 171, 175–6, 179 Nissen, M., 160, 163, 164, 165, practice research, 24, 26–38, 46, 166, 168 see also co-researchers non-governmental organizations Pratt, J., 74 (NGOs), 1–11, 23–5, 30–1, 38, pre-trial detention, 20 95–100, 103–5, 153, 158–9, pride 163, 165–9, 170–1, 173–7, 178, of prison staff, 77, 79–80, 82, 85, 94 186–90, 191–7, see Balay; Kosova Prishtina detention centre, 17, 61, 137 Rehabilitation Centre prison/s, see specific prisons norms, see also human rights norms authorities, 5, 9, 39–41, 48, 50, 53, global, 189, 190, 196 55, 64, 66, 67, 71, 99, 103, 107, practical, 169 139, 154–7, 172–5, 181, 183, 185, 187–9, 194, 195 Optional Protocol to the climate, 5, 27, 61, 71, 73, 79, 80, 86, Convention against Torture 94, 100, 101, 106, 112, 121, 131, (OPCAT), 9, 190, 195 154, 158, 188, 192 216 Index prison/s, see specific prisons – punishment, 17, 20, 22, 26, 39, 83, Continued 119, 151, 153, 156, 182, 184 conditions, 4, 11, 19, 33 criticism of, 22, 23, 169 Quran, 115, 118 humane, 5, 22, 23, 71, 173, 192 the marks of, 62–9, 188, see also recognition, 132–3, 141, 145, 158 emotional toll reform non-western, see global penology agencies, 1, 4, 75, 78, 79, see also overcrowding, 13 NGOs pain, 3, 5, 7, 66, 101–5, 118, 121, effects, 1, 2, 37, 167 123, 125, 126, 130, 135, 141, 181, ideals, 178–9 185, 188 as purpose of prison, 182–6 population rates, 13 in relation to practice, 2, 5, 22, presence, 27, 56, 103, 158, 174 43, 167 regimes, 19, 20, 147 rights-based, 4, 34, 75 as relational, 2–3, 24, 131, 132, 158, rehabilitation, 74–5, 178, 182–6, 194 166, 196 Reiter, K., 26, 28, 34, 38, 55 as resistant to research, 27, 28 relationality, 3, 23 spaces, 49, 105, 131 research methods, see practice research unquestioned nature, 22–3, 35 resignation visits, 44, 54, 67, 69 of prison staff, 77–8, 98, 124 worlds, 188 resocialisation, 178, 182–6 prison staff, see also adaptation; revolutionary struggle, 6, 104, 114, 124 disenchantment; pride; Rhodes, L., 160, 163–6, 175 resignation; shame; staff-prisoner rights, see human rights relationships; stress conceptualising, 71–5 safety, 107, 146, 148, 149 conditions of service, 77, 82, 95 salary, 20, 82, 87, 92, 93, 96, 97, 182 self-perception, 79–88, 95, 98 security prisoner-guard relations, see staff- checks, 11, 21 prisoner relations levels, 15, 58, 138 prisoners, see also adjustment; pain loss of, 102 under prison; staff-prisoner and order, 156, 164 relations; survival personal, 91 conceptualising, 101–5 sector reform, 12 families of, 6, 11, 115, 117, 118, threat, 52, 145, 188 121–5, 128 as trump, 58 spaces, 105–9 self-governance, 106, 107, 134, 157, Prison Watch, 5, 9– 1, 32 –33, see also authority 172–3 shame, 3, 82, 93 privileges, 19, 20, 97, 122, 146–8, Sierra Leone 156, 181 country context, 12, 13, 95, 96, 102, professional(ism), 30, 32, 49, 62, 90, 157, 189 96, 143, 150, 171, 174, 187, 188, Sim, J., 72 193–4 Smrekovnica correctional centre, proximity, degrees of, see 17, 79, 137 entanglement Special Intensive Care Area (SICA), psychosocial, 7, 19, 32, 116, 179 7, 14–15, 55, 58, 63–6, 86, 87, 93, Index 217

98, 107, 109, 115, 116, 125, 137, Tombs, S., 162n. 2 138, 142–3, 149, 150, 154, 185 torture staff-prisoner relationships, 22, 72, prevention, 8, 177, 194 107, 113, 131–58 rehabilitation, 8 state survivors, 8 building, 9, 12 trafficking, 59, 65, 144, 151 compliance, 8, 159, 169 transcription, 36, 41, 44 consolidation, 13, 171 transdisciplinarity, 32, 34 elite-dominated, 189 transition fragile, 12, 99, 172 democratic, 6 in-the-making, 189 governance, survival and, 101 power, 6, 12, 72–3, 104, 118, 157, trust, 5, 28, 39, 41, 58, 61, 64, 66, 179, 188 67, 70, 93, 115, 135, 142, 149, representing the, 95 157, 181 skeletal, 189 and subject-citizens, 153, 156 uncertainty, 13, 88, 101, 125, 126–30, in waiting, 12 181, see also judicial limbo stress uniforms, 88–9, 90, 91, 94 of prison staff, 20, 41, 75–8, 81, United Nations Interim 86–8, 89, 90, 95, 119, 148, Administration Mission in Kosovo 150, 181 (UNMIK), 9, 12, 18, 68, 95, 69, 97 subjectification, 100, 167, 168 survival vulnerability, 70, 93, 103, 115, 116, organizational, 10, 32, 33, 195 117, 145, 146, 149, 170, 180, 194 of prison staff, 93, 135, 152 of prisoners, 32, 59, 92, 101–2, Wacquant, L., 27, 69 120–1 Warr, J., 135 of prisoners and staff, 93, 182 what matters, 71, 100, 101, 120, Sykes, G., 101, 102, 134, 135 171, 178 Whyte, D., 162n. 2 Taylor, L., 101 team composition, 192–4 Yugoslavia, former, 8, 12