1.1 Obiski v zavodih za prestajanje kazni zapora in mladoletniškega zapora 1.1 Visit to prisons and juvenile prisons V ZPKZ Maribor – Odprti oddelek Rogoza je bilo DPM pojasnjeno, da od prejšnjega obiska ni prišlo do nobenega disciplinskega postopka. V tovrstnih primerih so osebe sicer podvržene »tretmanski obravnavi«, rezultat tega pa je dopolnitev osebnega na��rta (odvzem ugodnosti). Obsojencu je vedno dana tudi možnost, da se izjasni o očitani kršitvi, kar podpira tudi podatek, da ni veliko pritožb obsojencev zoper dopolnitve osebnega načrta. Kljub temu je DPM zaprosil UIKS za podatek, koliko je takšnih pritožb in kako je bilo o njih odločeno. Zaprosil je tudi za pojasnilo, kakšno je stališče Generalnega urada UIKS o tem, kakšna mora biti razlika v znakih obsojenčevih dejanj, da njegovo »posedovanje alkoholnih pijač« (oziroma narkotikov) lahko šteje za hujši disciplinski prestopek obsojenca (po 87. členu ZIKS-1), kdaj pa le za lažjega (po 92. členu Pravilnika o izvrševanju kazni zapora), vendar pa DPM odzivnega poročila do priprave tega zapisa še ni prejel. V ZPMZ in KZ Celje so bila prisilna sredstva v 2013 uporabljena (le) dvakrat (leto pred tem do novembra 13-krat), v letu 2014 pa osemkrat. O vsaki uporabi je bila opravljena ocena upravičenosti in primernosti uporabe prisilnih sredstev. Ugotovljeno je bilo, da so bila prisilna sredstva vselej uporabljena strokovno in upravičeno. Ti podatki ne kažejo pretirane uporabe (pri)sile nad zaprtimi osebami, saj so kljub preseženi uradni zmogljivosti zavoda strožji ukrepi v upadu. DPM je zaključil, da sta praksa izpeljave disciplinskega postopka in delo pravosodnih policistov zgledna in dobra. Odstranitev v posebni prostor (medicinka) po 236. členu ZIKS-1 je bila v letu 2013 izvršena petkrat, v letu 2014 pa osemkrat (dvakrat v zaporednih dneh zoper isto osebo). V teh primerih so bile vselej izdane odločbe s pravnim poukom. V strožji režim v skladu z 206. členom ZIKS-1 (prej 6. člen PIKZ) so bili v letu 2013 nameščeni štirje obsojenci, v letu 2014 pa šest obsojencev (v času obiska DPM so bili v strožjem režimu nameščeni trije obsojenci). Pozitivno je, da se strožji režim čedalje manj uporablja. Zaključenih disciplinskih postopkov z oddajo v samico je bilo v letu 2013 10, v letu 2014 pa 16, kar je sicer manj kot v letu 2012. Skrb pa sta vzbudili dve (ločeni) pričevanji obsojencev, ki sta bila deležna disciplinske kazni oddaje v samico. Eden od njiju je zatrjeval, da je bil nazadnje v samici skupno štiri dni, pri tem pa je bil na dnevnem dveurnem sprehodu le dvakrat; drugi pa je podobno navajal, da ga nazadnje, ko je bil v samici, trikrat ali štirikrat »niso spustili na sprehod«. V zvezi s tem je DPM zaprosil za stališče zavoda do teh očitkov, ki pa naj v vsakem primeru vključuje tudi pojasnilo o tem, ali zavod vodi tozadevno evidenco oziroma na kakšen način zagotavlja, da je (tudi) obsojencem, ki prestajajo disciplinsko kazen oddaje v samico, dana pravica do dveurnega sprehoda na prostem dnevno (91. člen ZIKS-1). V ZPKZ Maribor – Oddelek Murska Sobota je DPM ugotovil, da v letu 2014 prisilna sredstva niso bila uporabljena, so pa bile izdane štiri disciplinske odločbe na podlagi prvega odstavka 90. člena ZIKS-1. The management of Rogoza Open Unit of Maribor Prison explained to the NPM that no disciplinary proceedings had been instigated since its last visit. In such cases, persons are subjected to “treatment consideration”, the result of which is the supplementation of a personal plan (withdrawal of benefits). The prisoners were also able to explain the alleged violation, which was also supported by the fact that not many prisoners’ complaints had been lodged against the supplementation of their personal plans. Nevertheless, the NPM requested the Prison Administration of the Republic of Slovenia to provide data about such complaints and how they are resolved. It also requested an explanation of the position of the head office of the Prison Administration of the Republic of Slovenia about the difference in prisoners’ actions when their “possession of alcohol” (or narcotics) was considered a severe disciplinary offence (as per Article 87 of the ZIKS-1) and when was it considered a minor offence (as per Article 92 of the Rules on the implementation of prison sentences); however, the NPM did not receive the response report before the drafting of this report. Coercive measures were used in Celje Prison and Juvenile Prison (only) twice in 2013; they had been used thirteen times by November 2012, and eight times in 2014. An assessment of justifiability and suitability was prepared for each coercive measure. It was established that coercive measures were always implemented professionally and justifiably. These data did not show the use of excessive force on prisoners, since the application of stricter measures was declining although the official capacity of the prison has been exceeded. The NPM concluded that the practice of implementing disciplinary proceedings and the work of judicial police officers were commendable and good. Removal to a special room as per Article 236 of the ZIKS-1 was executed five times in 2013 and eight times in 2014 (twice in successive days against the same person). Decisions on the removal to a special room with caution were always issued in these cases. Four prisoners were accommodated in the stricter regime as per Article 206 of the ZIKS-1 (previously Article 6 of the PIKZ) in 2013 and six prisoners in 2014 (three prisoners were under the stricter regime at the time of the NPM visit). It was commendable that the stricter regime was being implemented less. Ten disciplinary proceedings resulting in solitary confinement were held in 2013 and sixteen in 2014 which was less than in 2012. Two (separate) testimonies by prisoners who were in solitary confinement caused concern. One of them claimed that he had been in solitary confinement for four days, whereby he had been on the two-hour daily recreational walk only twice; the second prisoner similarly claimed that when he was in solitary confinement he was not “allowed to go for a walk” three or four times. In this regard, the NPM asked the prison for their position on these claims, which should in any case also include an explanation of whether the prison kept a record on solitary confinement, or in what way it ensured that prisoners in solitary confinement were also given the right to a daily two-hour outdoor recreational walk (Article 91 of the ZIKS-1). The NPM established that no coercive measures were used in Murska Sobota Unit of Maribor Prison in 2014; however, four disciplinary decisions were issued on the basis of the first paragraph of Article 90 of the ZIKS-1. 44 poročilo o izvajanju nalog DPM v letu 2014 DržavnI preventivnI mehanizEm po Opcijskem protokolu h Konvenciji OZN proti mučenju in drugim krutim, nečloveškim ali poniževalnim kaznim ali ravnanju IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE NPM IN 2014 National Preventive Mechanism under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 45