RISK FACTORS AND MEASURES TO REDUCE RISK their sexuality is repressed or denied, being searched can be extremely humiliating and even traumatising if undertaken by the opposite sex. In some systems where male guards are responsible for supervising women or where a mixed gender staffing policy is implemented, women detainees may be searched by male staff. This may include pat-down searches or frisk searches, where the staff may use the opportunity to grope or touch women inappropriately and to sexually humiliate them. It may also extend to strip searches and invasive (or intimate) body searches.58 In some countries women are subjected to strip searches on a routine basis in the presence of male staff, and may be humiliated during the process. Even where only women staff are involved in the process, strip searches and invasive body searches can cause immense humiliation for the women being searched, if they are conducted arbitrarily and on a routine basis, and if the dignity and privacy of women being searched are not respected. It is very important for monitoring bodies to check whether the provisions of the Bangkok Rules and the revised Standard Minimum Rules (Rules 50-52) relating to this highly sensitive issue are applied in women’s prisons. They require for searches to be governed by law and regulations which take into account international standards and norms and respect the principles of necessity and proportionality. They also provide that searches must be conducted in a manner that is respectful of the inherent human dignity and privacy of the individual being searched (Rule 50). Rule 19 of the Bangkok Rules mirrors these principles, requiring prison authorities to take effective measures to ensure the protection of women prisoners’ dignity during searches. Rule 51 of the revised Standard Minimum Rules explicitly emphasises that searches should not ‘be used to harass, intimidate or unnecessarily intrude upon a prisoner’s privacy’. Monitoring groups should take into account that invasive body searches (strip and body cavity searches) should either not be carried out at all or conducted only in exceptional circumstances prescribed by law, after all other means of investigation have been employed.59 The Bangkok Rules (Rule 20) urge the development of alternative screening methods, such as scans, to replace strip searches and invasive body searches, in order to avoid the harmful psychological and possible physical impact of invasive body searches – a rule which monitoring groups should use as a reference point in their fact finding and recommendations.60 Where searches are applied, Bangkok Rule 19 provides that they are carried out only by ‘women staff who have been properly trained in appropriate searching methods and in accordance with established procedures’.61 Medical personnel are often requested to carry out such searches. Normally, healthcare personnel should not be involved in the searching of prisoners, as searches are part of prison security procedures and physicians’ responsibility to protect and promote the health of their patients may be compromised by their involvement in such an act.62 However, in exceptional cases, and especially when requested by the prisoner concerned, physicians’ participation in invasive body searches may be justified to prevent any harm to the prisoner during the search. In such cases, the search may be carried out by a medical specialist other than the prison doctor,63 in order to protect the woman from any harm, while not compromising the prison doctor’s position of trust with the prisoner, given that the search is essentially a security issue, rather than a medical intervention.64 The physician carrying out such a search should explain to the prisoner that the usual conditions of medical confidentiality do not apply and that the results of the search will be revealed to the authorities. Alternatively, body cavity searches may be conducted by medically trained staff of the same gender that are not part of the regular health-care service of the prison or by prison staff ‘appropriately trained by a medical professional in standards of hygiene, health and safety’.65 Monitoring bodies should also ascertain whether appropriate records of searches are kept, in particular that every strip and invasive body searches is recorded, including the reasons for the search, the identities of those who conducted them, any outcomes, and authorisation for the search, in line with Rule 52 of the revised Standard Minimum Rules. 58. A strip search refers to the removal or rearrangement of some or all of the clothing of a person so as to permit a visual inspection of a person’s private areas. Invasive body searches involve a physical inspection of the detainee’s genital or anal regions. 59. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 52 (1). 60. Ibid. 61. See also Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 52. 62. See 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, Adopted by General Assembly resolution 37/194 of 18 December 1982, Principle 3. See also Rule 46 (1), Revised Standard Minimum Rules. 63. In line with Rule 52 (2) of the revised Standard Minimum Rules and the Statement on Body Searches of Prisoners, World Medical Association (Adopted by the 45th World Medical Assembly, Budapest, Hungary, October 1993 and editorially revised at the 170th Council Session, Divonne-lesBains, France, May 2005. (http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b5.htm), which states: […]. The purpose of the search is primarily security and/or to prevent contraband, such as weapons or drugs, from entering the prison. These searches are performed for security reasons and not for medical reasons. Nevertheless, they should not be done by anyone other than a person with appropriate medical training. This non-medical act may be performed by a physician to protect the prisoner from the harm that might result from a search by a non-medically trained examiner. In such a case the physician should explain this to the prisoner. The physician should furthermore explain to the prisoner that the usual conditions of medical confidentiality do not apply during this imposed procedure and that the results of the search will be revealed to the authorities. If a physician is duly mandated by an authority and agrees to perform a body cavity search on a prisoner, the authority should be duly informed that it is necessary for this procedure to be done in a humane manner. If the search is conducted by a physician, it should not be done by the physician who will also subsequently provide medical care to the prisoner. 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. […] 64. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rule 52 (2). See also Statement on Body Searches of Prisoners, World Medical Association, op.cit. 65. See Statement on Body Searches of Prisoners, World Medical Association, op.cit. 12 | Penal Reform International | Women in Detention: a guide to gender-sensitive monitoring