HUMAN RIGHTS CULTURE CHANGE IN PLACES OF DETENTION The appropriate processes and approaches will depend on the socio-political context, as will the existence of political will for change. Reform may be high on the agenda in countries in transition following conflict or authoritarian rule. Human rights principles may also be more readily accepted in democratic states as opposed to non-democratic ones. that they are committed to change, including through leading by example. In general, leaders who are visible and respectful,42 who have recognisable charisma and attract trust and confidence from staff,43 are more likely to be able to get others on board and achieve culture change within their organisation. Nevertheless, it is possible to draw on existing research40 and experience to highlight some key factors that can contribute to culture change. These include deliberate organisational culture change initiatives as well as other factors that help to drive change over time. Monitoring bodies can play an important role in both. c. Shifting the paradigm: a clear vision based on human rights 3. Organisational culture change initiatives Once a decision has been made to change the culture of a detaining organisation, it may need to undergo significant reforms to achieve this. Human rights culture change may also be one aim among others in broader institutional reform initiatives. The following outlines some components which can contribute to the effectiveness of processes aimed at changing culture. Many of these measures can also be taken independently, to contribute to on-going culture change. a. Participatory process Experience suggests that culture change initiatives are more effective when carried out through participatory processes involving multiple stakeholders, ie staff, persons deprived of their liberty and, where appropriate, members of the community. There is a risk that if detainees or staff, including staff associations, feel that reforms are purely cosmetic, or serve to only improve the situation for others, they may resist and thwart change efforts. Involving both groups helps to ensure that relevant concerns can be identified and addressed. As well as better informing the process, a participatory approach can therefore help to bring the stakeholders on board. b. Committed leadership The leadership of places of detention must be on board for change of culture to take place. This means understanding the history of the organisation, where it is at present, acknowledging that change is needed and setting the new direction.41 Leaders then need to show To drive positive culture change, there may be a need for a new organisational vision statement44 or management philosophy, which is based on human rights principles and puts people at the centre. Because closed environments are part of larger bureaucracies and also often regulated by legislation, policy or legislative changes can also feed into paradigm shift. However, to be effective, it helps if the new vision is articulated by the leadership, written down, explained and disseminated within the organisation. Such statements should be short and realistic and have some real meaning for staff, so they become a genuine point of reference in their work.45 The next step is then to review and adjust the organisation in line with the new vision. d. The operational structure The operational structure of a detaining organisation can influence the idea of what it does and why. At the broader level, culture change can involve shifting responsibility for the deprivation of liberty within government to departments whose mandate or philosophy is seen as more appropriate for this role. For example, the transfer of prison systems from the Ministry of the Interior to the civilian control of the Ministry of Justice is seen as an important step in the demilitarisation of prisons, transforming them into institutions ‘run on rehabilitative lines, and seeing prisoners as citizens rather than enemies’.46 Within the institution itself, culture change may involve adjusting the structure to better ensure accountability, changing the mandate of staff, for example so that the role of prison staff is to run the institution on rehabilitative lines, rather than to assist in criminal investigations, or introducing new roles that specifically look after the needs and wellbeing of detainees, such as custody officers in police detention or case managers in immigration detention. 40. See for example: T G Cummings & C G Worley, Organization Development and Change, South-Western College Publishing, 9th ed, 2009, pp526-528. 41. See A Coyle, Managing Prisons in a Time of Change, op. cit., chapter 4. 42. Former Australian Prison Director interviewed by the author. 43. A Coyle, Managing Prisons in a Time of Change, op. cit, p72. 44. T G Cummings & C G Worley, op. cit., p526. 45. Former UK police officer interviewed for this paper. 46. International Centre for Prison Studies, Guidance note 7, Moving Prisons to Civilian Control: Demilitarisation, 2004. Penal Reform International | Institutional culture in detention: a framework for preventive monitoring | 13