1. PRISON MANAGEMENT 1.8. INTERNAL INSPECTIONS 221 Internal inspection mechanisms refer to inspections conducted by central prison administrations in order to monitor compliance with prison regulations. They are not tailored or limited to assessing human rights compliance or to prevent torture or other forms of ill‑treatment, but can cover a wide range of topics, such as security, finance or staff training. 1 Rules 83, 84 and 85 deal with different forms of oversight, including internal inspections and external monitoring.88 Both internal and external oversight mechanisms are tools of professional prison management and serve “to ensure that prisons are managed in accordance with existing laws, regulations, policies and procedures, with a view to bringing about the objectives of penal and corrections services, and that the rights of prisoners are protected”.89 Internal and external oversight mechanisms are meant to complement each other. External monitoring mechanisms,90 by comparison, must be independent from the prison administration although their mandates may overlap in parts with those of internal inspectors. External monitoring is dealt with in Chapter 7 of this guidance document. WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? 222 While independent, external monitoring has proven highly effective in identifying and assessing systemic deficiencies in places of detention, in particular when it comes to preventing torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, central authorities have a duty to scrutinize whether prisons are acting in compliance with national laws and regulations more broadly. In many countries, therefore, there is a separate internal or administrative inspection mechanism in place. 223 Rule 83 of the Mandela Rules suggests that internal inspections and external monitoring mechanisms are required for professional prison management. PUTTING IT INTO PRACTICE Scope of inspections 224 ICPS have noted that an internal inspection “is a more formal type of inspection which is carried out on individual prisons by staff from the central prison administration. This type of inspection often takes the form of an audit of procedures. It can cover a wide range of topics, such as security, finance, activities for prisoners, staff training or discrimination. In many administrations these procedures will be measured against standards which have been developed centrally so as to ensure consistency between prisons. Some administrations also appoint supervisors to their prisons who are responsible for monitoring compliance with prison regulations. These audits frequently concentrate on administrative processes. This form of inspection or audit is very important but is not in itself sufficient.”91 88. Rules 83 (1)(b), 84 (2) and 85 (2) apply only to external monitoring whilst Rule 83 1(a) applies only to internal inspections. 89. The Mandela Rules, UNGA, op. cit., note 1, Rule 83 (2). 90. Essex paper 3, Penal Reform International and the University of Essex, op. cit., note 4, p. 38, notes, that: “there is no clear differentiation between the terms ‘inspection’ and ‘monitoring’. ‘Inspection’ may be used more often amongst criminal justice actors describing internal prison inspections, whereas the term ‘monitoring’ may be in use more in the human rights community and referring to enquiries by an external, independent body”. 91. A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management, ICPS, op. cit., note 29, p. 122. Guidance document on the Nelson Mandela Rules 49