RISK FACTORS AND MEASURES TO REDUCE RISK required by the Bangkok Rules.41 They should check whether a female doctor is made available to conduct such examinations, especially if this is specifically requested by the woman prisoner,42 and where this is not possible, whether a female chaperone is used, if the detainee so requests.43 The Bangkok Rules, Rule 7 sets out the prison authorities’ responsibilities in cases when the medical examination reveals that a woman prisoner has been subjected to ill-treatment or torture, including sexual abuse or rape, during previous custody.44 Monitoring groups should examine whether the provisions of this rule are reflected in the legislation governing prisons, whether they are included in staff training and assess whether they are implemented in practice. Medical examinations on admission are also crucial to assess women’s gender specific healthcare needs and to develop healthcare programmes based on individual requirements in order to ensure that women’s physical and mental health is protected and promoted during their period of detention. Therefore it is also important for monitoring bodies to examine policies and practices relating to healthcare screening on admission, in particular whether they include a determination of women’s gender specific healthcare needs, with reference to the Bangkok Rules45 and to develop recommendations to improve the scope and quality of such assessments, as necessary. Medical examinations on admission to prison to detect any signs of sexual abuse or to determine sexual and reproductive healthcare needs should never be confused with virginity tests undertaken in some countries for entirely different purposes. Virginity tests represent a gross form of discrimination against women and are considered to be a form of custodial violence against women.46 They should be explicitly prohibited. Where such a practice may exist, monitoring groups should include an examination of legislation and practice relating to virginity tests in their preventive activities and recommend their prohibition in law and practice, where such tests are carried out. In December 2011 a court in Cairo ordered forced virginity tests on female detainees in military prisons to be stopped. The court made the decision after a case was brought by a protester arrested during a protest in Tahrir Square. Human rights organisations had said the Egyptian military has used the practice widely as a punishment.47 c. Not separating male and female prisoners The revised Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (SMR) are very clear that, as a matter of principle, women deprived of their liberty should be held in accommodation which is physically separate from that of male prisoners, in order to protect them against sexual harassment and abuse.48 In order to protect young girls in prison from sexual and other forms of abuse from older prisoners, juvenile female prisoners should be separated from adult women.49 In some countries there has been a move towards limited contact between men and women prisoners, following careful selection and subject to close supervision. Such arrangements may bring some normality to prison life and enable female prisoners to participate in a larger variety of prisoner programmes. They must never be made, however, without the consent of the female prisoners concerned, and unless the prison administration is in a position to undertake the requisite selection and supervision of prisoners to guarantee their safety.50 The examples below from SPT country visit reports demonstrate the different ways in which this requirement may not be applied and how prison staff may turn a blind eye to or be complicit in the sexual abuse of women prisoners. “ The Subcommittee observed that men and women in San Pedro Sula Prison were not held separately, women being a small minority. It noted the easy relations between men and women prisoners, and the presence of men in the women’s cells. The Subcommittee had clear indications, on the basis of accounts corroborated by its own observations, that some women prisoners were working as prostitutes in the two prisons visited. … The women’s coordinator commented that the female prisoners did not wish to be separated from the male prisoners because they made a living from the products they sold during visits to male prisoners. When questioned by the Subcommittee, the coordinator said that the women are not sexually harassed by the men, since the general coordinator maintains order. The Subcommittee noticed that some of the women prisoners had been instructed in how to reply, and noted their apprehensiveness regarding certain subjects.51 41. Bangkok Rules, Rule 6 (e), see also Rule 30 of the revised Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. 42. Bangkok Rules, Rule 10 (2). 43. Bangkok Rules, Rule 10 (2). 44. See, PRI, Guidance Document on the United Nations Rules on the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the Bangkok Rules), 2013, p44. 45. Bangkok Rules, Rule 6. 46. Human Rights Council, Seventh Session, Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Manfred Nowak, A/HRC/7/3, 15 January 2008, para. 34. 47. ‘Egypt court stops virginity tests in military prisons’, BBC, 27 December 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16339398 <accessed 24 November 2015>. 48. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 11 (a). 49. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 11 (d). 50. The CPT Standards (2006), Extract from the 10th General Report, CPT/Inf (2000) 13, para. 24. 51. Report on the visit of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to Honduras, CAT/ OP/HND/1, 10 February 2010, para 259. 10 | Penal Reform International | Women in Detention: a guide to gender-sensitive monitoring