ESSEX PAPER 3: INITIAL GUIDANCE ON THE INTERPRETATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UN NELSON MANDELA RULES The participants mentioned the problem that security breaches of individuals often result in sweeping changes affecting the whole prison population. For example, misuse of the ability to deliver items to prisoners (e.g. hiding prohibited items in goods) may lead to the prohibition of the respective good or goods brought by relatives overall. However, the experts reasoned that such measures have the effect of collective punishment and are particularly problematic in countries/ locations where prisoners depend on family members to bring food, medication and hygiene products. Restrictions on family visits The experts noted that solitary confinement must not be compounded by restrictions on family contact unless strictly required for the maintenance of security and order (Rule 43(3)). Family contact in 43(3) must be understood to include visits and other means of contact as defined in Rule 58(1b). The experts clarified that restrictions on family contact may be imposed if visiting rights were abused to break prison rules and regulations (e.g. a family member smuggling illegal items into the prison during the visit), but that restrictions should only be imposed on the particular family member involved, and not on the family as a whole. The Essex group highlighted Principle 19 of the UN Body of Principles, which stipulates that access to the outside world can only be denied subject to reasonable conditions and restrictions as specified by law or lawful regulations. For juveniles, the CPT has stressed that their ‘contact with the outside world should never be denied as a disciplinary measure; nor should it be limited unless the disciplinary offence relates to such contact’.311 The experts recalled Rule 23 of the Bangkok Rules which states that disciplinary sanctions for women prisoners shall not include a prohibition on family contact, especially with children. à S ee Chapter 3, Contact with the outside world – contact with family and friends/ restrictions Solitary confinement The Essex group recalled the rationale for introducing provisions on solitary confinement in the course of the review of the SMR, in particular the severe and long-lasting damage isolation can cause to human beings. Medical research confirms that the denial of meaningful human contact can cause ‘isolation syndrome’, the symptoms of which include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, paranoia, psychosis, self-harm and suicide, and can destroy a person’s personality.312 European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), 24th General Report of the CPT: 1 August 2013-31 July 2014, Strasbourg, 2014. 311  Grassian S, ‘Psychiatric effects of solitary confinement’, Journal of Law and Policy, Vol. 22, 2006, pp. 325-383 (Psychiatric effects of solitary confinement); Craig Haney, ‘Mental health issues in long-term solitary and “supermax” confinement’, Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 49, No. 1, 2003, pp. 124-156; Sharon Shalev, A sourcebook on solitary confinement, Mannheim Centre for Criminology, London School of Economics, 2008 (A sourcebook on solitary confinement); UN General Assembly, 66th Session, Interim report of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, 5 August 2011, A/66/268 (Special Rapporteur on Torture report 2011). 312  Penal Reform International and the Essex Human Rights Centre | 86