release, may also infringe the right to a fair hearing if a prisoner is not given the opportunity to answer allegations made against him and to put his case. Punishments which involve interference with a prisoner's contact with their family or the outside world may also raise human rights concerns if used excessively. Rights to Contact with Family and the Outside World The Civil and Political Rights Covenant states that "the penitentiary system shall comprise treatment of prisoners the essential aim of which shall be their information and social rehabilitation". Such reformation and rehabilitation will be much harder if someone comes out of prison without a family to return to. In addition imprisonment imposes a loss of family contact on those family members, such as wives, husbands or parents who are not sent to prison. It is therefore important that prison systems are run in such a way as to reduce the damaging effect on family unity. Letters and visits are the main ways by which such contact is maintained Human rights law recognises that prison authorities may interfere with a prisoner's right to privacy in their correspondence by reading and in some cases censoring letters. However both the European Court of Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee have clearly indicated that total prohibition on prisoners sending and receiving letters is in violation of their humans rights. Restrictions on letters should be few in number (where a letter discusses an escape plan or issues a threat against someone they may clearly be stopped) and should be set out in law. The authorities should also provide facilities to enable regular visits by family members to take place, subject to reasonable security considerations. Denia1 of visits over a long time may infringe the right to family life of both the prisoners and the other family member. The European Court of Human Rights has also recognised the rights of prisoners being able to have confidential contact with their lawyer and the courts. Such contact is vital if prisoners are to be able to vindicate their rights. Where a prisoner clearly indicates that a letter is being sent to his lawyer, or has been received from a lawyer, then the authorities should not stop or open it unless they have good reasons to suspect that something is wrong. When prisoners meet with their lawyers, for example to prepare their defence, their are entitled to a confidential conversation with them. As I indicated before this is only a brief summary of the most significant implications that human rights law has for the operation of prisons. Before ending though I would only like to make a few brief comments on what the most important requirements are for the guaranteeing of these rights in practice. I would highlight two. Firstly prisons must not become entirely cut off from the outside world. In addition to contact with that world through correspondence and visitors it is important that some impartial outsider, perhaps a judge, regularly visits prisons to inspect them and that he or she then makes public their findings. Secondly, and most importantly, there must be a prison staff who do not see the protection of human rights as an impediment to their work but as something which helps them run a prison in a safe, efficient and professional way. I would like to thank the ODIHR for their assistance in possible my attendance at this workshop. About the Author Stephen Livingstone is a Reader in Law at the University of Nottingham and a member of its Human Rights Law Centre. He has previously taught at Queens University Belfast and the University of Detroit. He is the author of Prison Law: Text and Materials (with Tim Owen) and of a number of law journal articles on issues of prisons and human rights law. 18 OSCE ODIHR Bulletin Vol. 4 No. 3