RISK FACTORS DERIVING FROM AN OVEREMPHASIS ON SECURITY Detainees should only be searched by a staff member of the same gender, as emphasised by the revised Standard Minimum Rules,65 UN Bangkok Rules,66 the Human Rights Committee,67 in Rule 54(5) of the European Prison Rules,68 and in the standards developed by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture.69 mental health’ is in contravention of medical ethics for health personnel.73 It is therefore recommended that body cavity searches are performed by medically trained staff who are not part of the regular health-care service of the prison or by prison staff with sufficient medical knowledge and skills to safely perform the search.74 For the purposes of accountability, appropriate records of searches must be kept, and should include the reasons for the search, the identities of those who conducted it, and any results of the search.70 Considering the high risk of abuse during searches, in particular body searches, monitoring bodies need to analyse carefully the reasons why such searches are conducted, whether they are based on individual risk assessments or constitute a routine, disproportionate policy. They should also carefully assess how the searches are carried out in practice.75 Annual report of the French NPM (searches) The 2011 annual report of the French NPM, the General Controller of Places of Deprivation of Liberty, contains a whole section devoted to the issue of searches in prisons. The thorough analysis covers factual data as well as a review of the legal basis and its development. It also includes a broader sociological perspective on the use of searches in prisons. ‘The conclusion to draw from all this data is simple: staff attachment to systematic searches is legitimate in view of their ability to maintain order in prisons. However, it is only a last resort (…). The key to a justified – and hence limited – use of strip searches lies in the manner in which prison staff is able to distinguish the real troublemakers (a minority) from the others. (…) This will not require new analysis of the ‘dangerousness’ of individuals but rather a careful and daily observation of the life of detainees.’71 Standards of medical ethics emphasise that the ‘physician’s obligation to provide medical care to the prisoner should not be compromised by an obligation to participate in the prison’s security system’72 and therefore, involvement in ‘any professional relationship with prisoners or detainees the purpose of which is not solely to evaluate, protect or improve their physical and 5. Isolation and solitary confinement Solitary confinement is a term used to describe the physical isolation of individuals by confinement to their cell for twenty-two to twenty-four hours a day. In many jurisdictions prisoners under such regimes are allowed out of their cells for one hour of solitary exercise. Meaningful contact with other people is typically reduced to a minimum. The reduction in stimuli in such a prison regime is not only quantitative but also qualitative. Usually the available stimuli and the occasional social contacts are seldom freely chosen, are generally monotonous, and are often not empathetic.’76 In the security context, solitary confinement is applied in three main ways in prison settings. During pretrial detention, solitary confinement is often used as a technique for ‘softening-up’ detainees before and between interrogation sessions. For sentenced prisoners, it is applied as a disciplinary punishment; as a way of managing specific groups of prisoners considered to pose a high risk; and as a way to (allegedly) ‘protect’ prisoners from violence by other detainees. This justification is often used for placing persons with mental disabilities or illnesses, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) detainees in solitary 65. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 52(1). 66. Rule 19 of the UN Bangkok Rules: ‘Effective measures shall be taken to ensure that prisoners’ dignity and respect are protected during personal searches, which shall only be carried out by women staff who have been properly trained in appropriate searching methods and in accordance with established procedures’. For body searches on LGBTI detainees see PRI/APT, LGBTI persons deprived of their liberty: A framework for preventive monitoring, 2nd edition, 2015. 67. Human Rights Committee in General Comment 16 on Article 17 of the ICCPR, para. 8: ‘(…) So far as personal and body search is concerned, effective measures should ensure that such searches are carried out in a manner consistent with the dignity of the person who is being searched. Persons being subjected to body search by State officials, or medical personnel acting at the request of the State, should only be examined by persons of the same sex’. 68. Recommendation Rec(2006)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the European Prison Rules, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 11 January 2006. 69. CPT Standards, para. 26.: ‘(…), the CPT wishes to stress that, regardless of their age, persons deprived of their liberty should only be searched by staff of the same gender and that any search which requires an inmate to undress should be conducted out of the sight of custodial staff of the opposite gender; these principles apply a fortiori in respect of juveniles’. 70. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 51. For more detail, see PRI/APT, Detention Monitoring Tool: Factsheet on body searches, 2nd edition, 2015. 71. Le Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté, Rapport d’activité 2011, 2012. 72. WMA Statement on Body Searches of Prisoners, adopted by the 45th World Medical Assembly, Budapest, Hungary, October 1993, and editorially revised by the 170th WMA Council Session, Divonne-les-Bains, France, May 2005. 73. Principle 3 of the Principles of Medical Ethics relevant to the Role of Health Personnel, particularly Physicians, in the Protection of Prisoners and Detainees against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 74. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 51(2). 75. See, for example, the thorough analysis on searches carried out by the French National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) in its 2011 annual report, p238256. Le Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté, Rapport d’activité 2011, 2012. 76. The Istanbul Protocol on the use and effects of solitary confinement, adopted on 9. December 2007 at the International Psychological Trauma Symposium, Istanbul. Penal Reform International | Balancing security and dignity in prisons: a framework for preventive monitoring | 13