ESSEX PAPER 3: INITIAL GUIDANCE ON THE INTERPRETATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UN NELSON MANDELA RULES persons’ in the right to contact with persons outside, even though the English version does not reflect the original Spanish version in this regard (‘otras personas’ in the original version).156   à S ee Chapter 5, Restrictions, discipline and sanctions – searches of visitors Specific groups of prisoners In a report on children of incarcerated parents, the Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern ‘with regards to security matters and policies that often undermine the rights of the child’. It reiterated the ‘right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child’s best interests’.157 The Committee recommended that ‘[t]he rights of affected children should be regarded as a relevant factor in determining the security policy concerning incarcerated parents, including with regard to the proportionality of the measures in relation to areas that would affect the interaction with affected children’.158 The Essex group recalled the UN Bangkok Rules (Rules 26 and 43) which require prisons to encourage and facilitate visits for women prisoners. This is in recognition of their particular situation, including the usually lower number of visits women receive because of their particular stigmatisation and the higher physical distance from their homes. The Bangkok Rules stipulate that measures need to be taken to counterbalance disadvantages faced by women, including as a result of the smaller number of facilities for women. In view of the high rates of violence suffered by female prisoners prior to imprisonment and to prevent victimisation during visits, Bangkok Rule 44 calls on prison staff to consult women prisoners on who is allowed to visit them. Rule 23 of the Bangkok Rules states that disciplinary sanctions for female detainees shall not include a prohibition of family contact, especially with children. Family visits are also particularly important for juvenile prisoners, and arrangements should therefore be favourable. Mindful of the importance of supportive family relationships of children and adolescents, the CPT has recommended for juveniles to ‘benefit from a visiting entitlement of more than one hour every week’, and promoted that they should also be able to receive visits at weekends. The Committee has also welcomed juveniles being ‘authorised to benefit from longterm unsupervised visits’.159 Prison administrations should also consider visits of prisoners to their families, especially in the period leading up to their release. Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas, principle XVIII.   Note the original version in Spanish: ‘(…) a mantener contacto personal y directo, mediante visitas periódicas, con sus familiares, representantes legales, y con otras personas, especialmente con sus padres, hijos e hijas, y con sus respectivas parejas’. 156  Article 9(3) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. See also UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, Report and Recommendations of the Day of General Discussion on ‘Children of incarcerated parents’ 30 September 2011, undated, para. 35 (CRC DGD 2011 Report). 157  CRC DGD 2011 Report, para. 14. 158  European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), CPT Standards: “Substantive” sections of the CPT’s General Reports, 2015, CPT/Inf/E (2002) 1 – Rev. 2015, para. 123. The Committee has observed juveniles being allowed to communicate with family members on a regular basis by using free-of-charge Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services, and has highly welcomed such practices while stressing that they should not be considered as a substitute for visits. 159  Penal Reform International and the Essex Human Rights Centre | 46