Over time, through its visits to places of detention in Europe, the Committee for the Prevention of Torture has developed the following safeguards concerning the isolation of pre-trial detainees36: • • • • • Solitary confinement of pre-trial detainees should only be resorted to in exceptional circumstances, should be strictly limited to the requirements of the case, and should be proportional to the needs of the investigation; Restrictions should be authorised by a court; Detainees should have an effective right of appeal to a court or another independent body; Detainees should have access to a doctor whose written report should be forwarded to the competent authorities; Detainees should be offered purposeful activities in addition to outside exercise and guaranteed appropriate human contact. These safeguards should be followed as a minimum in all cases. Isolating pre-trial detainees may also pressurise them to provide confessions in order to ease their conditions of confinement. The CPT has reported that in Denmark, for example, it was ‘not unusual’ for confessions to be immediately followed by a discontinuation of solitary confinement regimes37. This amounts to a form of coercion which, as stated in the introduction, should be prohibited. The use of solitary confinement for those who have not yet been charged with any offence must be strictly limited by law and must only be used in exceptional circumstances, with judicial oversight, for as short a time as possible, and never for more than a matter of days. The misuse of solitary confinement in secret detention centres, particularly those linked with the so-called ‘war on terror’ as a means of coercing or ‘softening up’ detainees for the purpose of interrogation should be prohibited, as the deliberate infliction of mental and physical suffering for such purposes amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and even torture. The mentally ill There is consensus amongst observers, experts and, increasingly, the courts, that the mentally ill and those at risk of self harm should not be held in solitary confinement – “The already mentally ill, as well as persons with borderline personality disorders, brain damage or mental retardation, impulse-ridden personalities, or a history of prior psychiatric problems or chronic depression ... For these inmates, placing them in [isolation] is the mental equivalent of putting an asthmatic in a place with little air to breath” (Madrid v. Gomez judgement, 1995). Yet, reports indicate that segregation is widely used to manage mentally ill prisoners, and that mentally ill prisoners are overrepresented in segregation units38. The particular vulnerability of mentally ill prisoners means that prison authorities must be especially vigilant in their treatment. The Inter-American Court on Human Rights has stated that “... when the person kept in isolation in a penitentiary institution has a mental disability, this could involve an even more serious violation of the State’s obligation to protect the physical, mental and moral integrity of persons held under its custody”39. Thus, those suffering from mental illness must not be placed in solitary confinement and under no circumstances should the use of solitary confinement serve as a substitute for appropriate mental health care. 30 Sourcebook on solitary confinement: The decision to place prisoners and detainees in solitary confinement