Detention Monitoring Tool Second edition FACTSHEET Instruments of restraint Addressing risk factors to prevent torture and ill-treatment ‘Prison staff will on occasion have to use force to control violent prisoners and, exceptionally, may even need to resort to instruments of physical restraint. These are clearly high risk situations insofar as the possible ill-treatment of prisoners is concerned, and as such call for specific safeguards.’ (European Committee for the Prevention of Torture)1 1. Definition and context • ‘low-technology’ mechanical restraints – such as ankle cuffs, anklets, hand- or leg-cuffs, fetters, waist Measures such as the use of instruments of restraint may bands, wristlets, plastic cuffs, wraps, belts, shackles, be necessary to provide security and order in a custodial chains, (weighted) leg irons or leg cuffs, gang chains,2 setting: to protect persons deprived of their liberty from finger- and thumb cuffs,3 soft/fabric restraints, inter-prisoner violence; for self-defence, to prevent self- straightjackets;4 harm and suicide; and to prevent escape. • so-called four/five/six-point restraints – such as However, instruments of restraint pose a high risk for restraint chairs, shackle boards and restraint beds,5 torture or other ill-treatment due to their highly intrusive isolation beds;6 and nature and the risk of causing injury, pain and/or humiliation, and are often deliberately used as a torture • body-worn electric-shock restraint devices7 – such as tool. Some devices have been prohibited or condemned stun belts, sleeves or cuffs. in general as degrading or painful. Others may be There are various other ways to manage the movement permitted in principle, but should be the exception when of detainees for permissible purposes in a custodial other methods have failed, rather than the rule. setting. The configuration and infrastructure of the Instruments of restraint are defined as external facility, adequate numbers of staff, who are well trained mechanical devices designed to restrict or immobilise the and have the relevant skills and competencies, an movement of a person’s body, in whole or in part. effective system for classification of detainees, and the separation of different categories of detainee, are all A large variety of devices, with differing features, are in key factors in ensuring safety and order in custody.8 use, and new technology continues to emerge. In broad By comparison, ‘poor prison management resulting in terms, instruments of restraint can be grouped into: dysfunctional forms of control emerges as a major cause of interpersonal violence, and by implication modification of these practices (especially the removal of arbitrary coercive controls) is effective in reducing violence’.9 1. European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT), 2nd General Report on the CPT’s activities 1 January – 31 December 1991, [CPT/Inf (92) 3], 13 April 1992, para. 53. 2. Restraint device with several cuffs chaining a group of prisoners together. 3. Such devices are designed to be fastened around the wrist, ankle, waist, fingers, thumbs or toes to restrain free movement of the hands or legs, and can be made of metal, cloth or leather. Some instruments of restraint are designed so they restrict the movement of more than one part of the body. These are generally known as ‘combination’ cuffs and are most widely available as handcuffs and leg cuffs linked together with a long chain. 4. A jacket with overlong sleeves which are crossed and tied across the chest or back once the arms are inserted, leaving little or no movement for the arms. 5. Movable or stationary chairs, beds or boards, tying various points of the body (torso, chest, hands, legs, ankles) with belts and/or cuffs. 6. Beds molded in one piece and enclosed on all four sides. 7. These encircle various parts of the subject’s body (usually the waist, but variants have been developed to fit on legs or arms) and deliver an electric shock when a remote control device is activated. 8. United Nations, Prison Incident Management Handbook, 2013, p26. 9. Homel R and Thompson C, Causes and prevention of violence in prisons, Griffith University: Sydney, 2005. Available at:http://www.griffith.edu.au/_ ata/ assets/pdf_file/0003/188706/causes2.pdf <accessed 22 October 2013> Penal Reform International | Instruments of restraint: Addressing risk factors to prevent torture and ill-treatment | 1 FACTSHEET The Standard Minimum Rules revised in 2015 (the As a consequence, the use of restraints that are ‘inherently Nelson Mandela Rules)10 explicitly acknowledge the degrading or painful’ is not permissible under any concept of dynamic security and encourage prison circumstances. This should be read in the light of the administrations ‘to use, to the extent possible, conflict commentary to Article 5 of the UN Code of Conduct for prevention, mediation or any other alternative dispute Law Enforcement Officials, which states that the term resolution mechanism to prevent disciplinary offences or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment to resolve conflicts’.11 ‘should be interpreted so as to extend the widest possible protection against abuses, whether physical or mental’. The use of restraints should be prescribed by law, and be 15 [G]enerally the literature supports the restricted by the principles of necessity and proportionality. International standards require that restraints are used “notion that the more coercive the prison restrictively, only in exceptional cases, where other methods environment the greater the potential for have been exhausted and failed. Standards developed violence. This is especially so where prison for the use of force and firearms indicate as permissible management and treatment of prisoners purposes: self-defence or defence of others against the are perceived by prisoners as unfair or imminent threat of death or serious injury; to prevent the illegitimate, as this strengthens prisoner perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave solidarity in opposition to the authorities. threat to life; to prevent escape; however, only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives.16 This in turn threatens the legitimacy of the regime and reduces prisoner compliance. Instruments of restraint should only be used for the Conversely, prisons that provide more shortest possible period of time, and should never be applied as a punishment.17 The role of doctors is guided – opportunities for prisoner participation in and limited – by standards developed on medical ethics.18 education and vocational programs and promote self-efficacy, generally report Main references reduced levels of rule violations and violence. 12 • UN Convention against Torture, Articles 1, 2, 4, 10, ” 11, 12, 13, 15 and 16 • UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms This Factsheet focuses specifically on the use of by Law Enforcement Officials mechanical restraints. It outlines risk factors deriving from • UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials19 the use of such devices in the penitentiary context – in police custody, prisons and during transfers. It does not • UN revised Standard Minimum Rules for the cover its use in psychiatric institutions,13 other places of Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules), Rules deprivation of liberty, or during deportation.14 47-49, 76 and 82 • UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, Rule 64 2. What are the main standards? • UN Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Prohibitions and limitations of use, as well as the manner Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the in which instruments of restraint may be applied, derive Bangkok Rules), Rule 24 from the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and from the • European Prison Rules, Rule 68 obligation to respect and protect the human dignity of • Principles of Medical Ethics relevant to the Role of persons deprived of their liberty. Health Personnel, particularly Physicians 10. Revised United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules), adopted by the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice on 22 May 2015, endorsed by the Economic and Social Council on 9 September 2015, UN-Doc. E/RES/2015/20 and adopted by UN General Assembly Third Committee on 5 November 2015, UN-Doc. A/C.3/70/L.3 (at the time of printing this Resolution was pending adoption by the plenary of the UN General Assembly.). 11. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rules 38 (1) and 76 (1c). 12. Ibid. 13. See European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) Standards, para. 36 et sqq and 47-50; and CPT 16th General Report on the CPT’s activities 1 August – 31 July 2006, 16 October 2006, [CPT/Inf (2006) 35]. 14. See CPT 7th General Report, [CPT/Inf (97) 10], 22 August 1997, paras. 24 to 36); 13th General Report [CPT/Inf (2003) 35]. 15. Article 3, Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials; Rule 48 of the revised Standard Minimum Rules; for the application of these guiding principles on restraints see Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, 23 December 2003, E/CN.4/2004/56, para. 18. 16. See revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 47 (2) and the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, Principle 9; see also UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, Articles 2, 3, 6 and 15; for application of these guiding principles on restraints see Special Rapporteur on Torture, 2003, UN-Doc. E/CN.4/2004/56, para. 18. 17. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rules 48 (1c) and 43 (2). 18. Principles of Medical Ethics relevant to the Role of Health Personnel, particularly Physicians; see also Rule 46 (1) of the revised Standard Minimum Rules. 19. Article 1(a): The term ‘law enforcement officials’ includes all officers of the law, whether appointed or elected, who exercise police powers, especially the powers of arrest or detention.