4. RESTRICTIONS, DISCIPLINE AND SANCTIONS PROMISING PRACTICE: TOOLKIT TO END THE SOLITARY CONFINEMENT OF CHILDREN [4.3] The ACLU has developed a toolkit that provides comprehensive resources to end the solitary confinement of children. The toolkit accompanies the ACLU report, Alone and Afraid: Children Held in Confinement and Isolation in Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facilities,251 which gives a brief background on the problem of youth solitary confinement in juvenile facilities and solutions to it. The toolkit includes information on engaging affected youth in discussions about solitary confinement, advocacy materials and model legislation to limit solitary confinement and other forms of isolation in juvenile detention facilities, as well as details of national and international standards on juvenile detention. The ACLU also provides guidance on alternatives to the solitary confinement of children.252 Additional safeguards 61 The right to seek independent review of a decision to impose solitary confinement applies independently of the grounds on which it was imposed. 62 Monitoring bodies must have unhindered access to segregation facilities and to prisoners held in them. This applies regardless of the grounds for which the isolation was imposed. Monitoring bodies should also have access to relevant documentation related to solitary confinement. The role of internal inspection and external monitoring bodies is addressed in Chapter 1, paragraphs 221–232 and Chapter 7, paragraphs 01–24 of this guidance document respectively. 63 The use of solitary confinement needs to be carefully documented in individual prisoner files and its application monitored across institutions and within the overall prison administration. On this, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture has stated that: 4 “All assessments and decisions taken with respect to the imposition of solitary confinement must be clearly documented and readily available to the detained persons and their legal counsel. This includes the identity and title of the authority imposing solitary confinement, the source of his or her legal attributes to impose it, a statement of underlying justification for its imposition, its duration, the reasons for which solitary confinement is determined to be appropriate in accordance with the detained person’s mental and physical health, the reasons for which solitary confinement is determined to be proportional to the infraction, reports from regular review of the justification for solitary confinement, and medical assessments of the detained person’s mental and physical health.”253 PROMISING PRACTICE: MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM WORK IN SEGREGATION UNITS [4.4] A review of seclusion and restraint practices in New Zealand254 found that progression out of segregated environments is often supported by multidisciplinary team work and family involvement. There was a degree of multidisciplinary team work in most of the prisons visited, especially in reviewing the segregation of prisoners at risk. These reviews typically involved custodial staff, health and mental health staff, occupational therapists and representatives from the community mental health facility. For example, at Auckland Men’s prison, weekly meetings were held to discuss prisoners with complex needs, which included mental health, education and custodial staff, as well as representatives from a forensic psychiatry clinic. Similarly, all the women at the At Risk unit in Christchurch Women’s prison were assessed daily by a multidisciplinary team that included nursing staff, senior custodial staff, unit staff and the prisoner herself. Segregation review hearings in Auckland South prison included the prisoner himself as well as a cultural representative, mental health practitioner and custodial staff. 251 252 253 254 251. Alone and Afraid: Children Held in Solitary Confinement and Isolation in Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facilities, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), June 2014. 252. The toolkit can be accessed at www.aclu.org/report/alone-afraid. 253. Interim Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, A/66/268, op. cit., note 231, para. 93. 254. Sharon Shalev, 'Thinking Outside the Box?’ A review of seclusion and restraint practices in New Zealand, New Zealand Human Rights Commission, April 2017. Guidance document on the Nelson Mandela Rules 109