VISITS BY THE JOINT COMMISSION
deportation. At the time of the visit the facility was
holding 72 male and seven female detainees awaiting
deportation and 168 sentenced prisoners. The male
detainees awaiting deportation (Block 2) are kept
separate from prisoners (Block 1).
The Joint Commission visited various parts of the
facility, including the specially secured room, the
enhanced supervision room, the various units accommodating male and female detainees awaiting deportation plus their tea kitchens and common rooms, the
family room, the sanitary facilities, the visiting and
admissions area, the medical section, the outdoor
sports facilities, as well as the sports and recreation
section. The Joint Commission also spoke to several
detainees awaiting deportation, to the prison doctor,
the Catholic priest, a representative of the staff council and a member of staff of European Homecare
(EHC).
Block 2, in which male detainees awaiting deportation are accommodated, is divided into three units:
one admissions unit (closed unit) and two open units.
A “suitability check” is carried out in the admissions
unit to establish whether there is an increased risk of
flight and the detainee awaiting deportation’s level of
social competence. Detainees generally spend three to
four days in this unit.
Block 3 is used to accommodate female detainees
awaiting deportation separately from the male detainees.
Further, the furnishings and fittings in the specially
secured room give occasion to draw attention to the
need to protect detainees’ privacy. The specially secured room in the facility is a very large room which
has a squat toilet. This toilet is also visible via a CCTV
camera installed in the room. Human dignity demands
that where CCTV monitoring of a cell, including the
toilet, is in operation, the detainee’s genital area must
be obscured on screen. Unrestricted monitoring of
the specially secured room can at most be considered
on the basis of a carefully weighed up, well-founded
and documented decision in an individual case where
there is an acute risk of suicide or self-harm.
However, mention should also be made in this context of the possibility of pixellating the images, which
helps protect privacy and at the same time shows the
detained person’s actions in outline. The Joint Commission witnessed this approach being applied in
Frankfurt am Main I Prison, for instance. Reference
must also be made to the fact that Lower Saxony has
already started pixellating images as standard procedure, including those captured in specially secured
rooms.
Response: The recommendation made regarding the enhanced supervision room in the infirmary, namely that the
sanitary facilities should at least be partially screened off to
prevent them being visible, and the recommendation made
regarding the specially secured room, namely that the detainee’s genital area be obscured by pixellating the CCTV
footage, cannot be implemented for security reasons. Detainees are placed in these rooms after examining each individual case where there is an acute risk of suicide. In such situations the protection of the life which is at risk has absolute
priority over the protection of privacy.
The head of the institution reported that detainees
awaiting deportation are not returned to Büren Prison
after a failed deportation procedure. By order of the
Ministry of Justice of North Rhine-Westphalia of 12
November 2012 (ref. 4431-IV.28), after a failed deportation procedure the persons concerned must be
taken to another prison in North Rhine-Westphalia.
The order contains a breakdown for the entire year,
according to which a different prison is obliged to
take in detainees awaiting deportation every six
weeks. Other than Büren Prison, there are no other
prisons in North Rhine-Westphalia which are
equipped to accommodate detainees awaiting deportation. However, other prisons would also have to
guarantee that they can hold detainees awaiting deportation separately from prisoners. If the principle of
the separation of prisoners and detainees awaiting
deportation cannot be observed, the Joint Commission recommends rethinking this modus operandi.
Response: The recommendation regarding the procedure
to be adopted following a failed deportation procedure has
Recommendations and response
The enhanced supervision room in the infirmary
is equipped with “riot-proof” furniture. This is regarded as a less severe measure than detention in the specially secured room and is in particular used where
there is a risk of suicide. The toilet in the enhanced
supervision room is visible through a window in the
door.
The Joint Commission would like to emphasise that
it follows from Article 1 of the Basic Law that each
person has the right to the protection of privacy when
performing their bodily needs. The CPT has also
repeatedly stressed that privacy must be protected
when a person is using the toilet or washing. (In-cell)
sanitary facilities must at least be partially partitioned
64
off. According to the CPT’s report, this also applies
to high security cells, which are comparable to an
65
enhanced supervision room. The Joint Commission
is of the opinion that measures must also be taken in
the enhanced supervision room to protect detainees’
privacy.
64
cf. CPT report on Finland CPT/Inf (2009) 5, paragraph 109
cf., e.g., CPT report on Hungary, CPT/Inf (2010) 16, paragraph
17
65
62
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents