Challenging, dangerous, or disruptive prisoners As noted above, in some jurisdictions prisoners who are classified as dangerous or chronically disruptive are placed in prolonged solitary confinement as a prison management tool. The practice of “isolating risk”, as one commentator termed it (Riveland 1999), is widely criticised. Supermax prisons in the United States, for example, have been criticised by the courts, the UN Human Rights Committee, the Committee Against Torture and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture. All have stated that conditions of confinement in these prisons may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in violation of international human rights law. Both the European Court of Human Rights and the Committee for the Prevention of Torture have expressed similar concerns about the ‘special security’ regimes imposed on prisoners in a number of European states. Referring to isolation at the Extra Security Institution (EBI) in the Netherlands, the CPT has stated that “to subject prisoners classified as dangerous to such measures could well render them more dangerous still” (CPT re Netherlands, 1998, para.69), and the ECtHR has stated on a number of occasions that it shares these concerns (for example, Mathew v. the Netherlands, 2005). Addressing the use of ‘reinforced security’ units for holding dangerous prisoners, the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers called on the Governments of Member States40: 1. To apply, as far as possible, ordinary prison regulations to dangerous prisoners; 2. To apply security measures only to the extent to which they are necessarily required; 3. To apply security measures in a way respectful of human dignity and rights; 4. To ensure that security measures take into account the varying requirements of different kinds of dangerousness; 5. To counteract, to the extent feasible, the possible adverse effects of reinforced security conditions; 6. To devote all necessary attention to the health problems which might result from reinforced security; 7. To provide education, vocational training, work and leisure time occupations and other activities to the extent that security permits; 8. To have a system for regular review to ensure that time spent in reinforced security custody and the level of security applied do not exceed what is required; 9. To ensure, when they exist, that reinforced security units have the appropriate number of places, staff and all necessary facilities; 10. To provide suitable training and information for all staff concerned with the custody and treatment of dangerous prisoners. Sourcebook on solitary confinement: The decision to place prisoners and detainees in solitary confinement 31