Selected topics from 2016 In places where staff perceive control, or so-called “static security”, as an overriding priority, there is an increased risk of attitudes emerging where coercion and the use of force are seen as normal and necessary.4 The same applies in situations where the staff do not believe that they have alternative means at their disposal or lack knowledge about other ways of dealing with conflicts. The management can play a key role, in either a positive or negative sense. When the management tacitly accepts injustice, this sends a signal that such practices can continue without having any consequences for those involved. If the use of force is normalised or violations occur and the management does not react, this may create a sense of impunity from sanctions and punishment.5 When staff members cover things up for each other, or do not report injustices that are committed, they help maintain the culture of impunity. During the visits carried out in 2016, the NPM identified an ‘us/them’ attitude in some places of detention. Examples were found of detainees being talked about in ways that were perceived as dehumanising and that made them feel insecure and inferior. Deprived of their liberty, these people were unable to protect themselves from staff members’ negative or degrading comments. 25 At several of the places visited, the NPM also concluded that coercive measures had been implemented without an administrative decision. Such findings may indicate that some members of the staff regard using force as an integral part of normal practice and sometimes as punishment. At some of the sites, the organisation of the staff allowed for little or no interaction between different shifts, for example with specific groups of staff only doing night shifts. Such organisation increases the risk of unhealthy subcultures developing. When the management's attitudes and values are not clear, are not respected or are seen as supporting a negative culture, there is a markedly increased risk of institutional cultures developing that permit abuse. Examples were found during some visits where the management had not addressed detrimental attitudes among staff. Similarly, where there is a lack of common values promoted by a clear management, there is an increased risk of abuse. — When the management tacitly accepts injustice, this sends a signal that such practices can continue without having any consequences for those involved. — 4 See Norvoll and Husum (2011): Som natt og dag? – Om forskjeller i forståelse mellom misfornøyde brukere og ansatte om bruk av tvang (‘Like night and day? – About differences in understanding between dissatisfied users and staff on the use of force’), Work Research Institute, which states that: 'Several studies show that groups of personnel in hospital wards (especially those where control cultures prevail) are characterised, among other things, by a wish on the part of the staff to maintain a distance to the patients. […] This contributes to creating a view among staff of the patient as "the other" and significantly different from themselves.' (page 10) 5 Penal Reform International and the Association for the Prevention of Torture (2013): Institutional culture in detention: a framework for preventive monitoring.