Poročilo Varuha človekovih pravic Republike Slovenije o izvajanju nalog državnega preventivnega mehanizma za leto 2011 c) Preprečevalna administrativna osamitev Osamitev zapornika lahko traja zelo dolgo, saj so upravne odločbe pogosto izdane za nedoločen čas, oba ta dejavnika pa lahko zelo poslabšata negativne posledice ukrepa. Zato je nujen strog nadzor. CPT meni, da lahko administrativno osamitev odobrijo samo najvišji člani zaporniškega osebja. Vedno, ko je osamitev izrečena kot ukrep v sili, mora biti o tem takoj obveščen najvišji član prisotnega dežurnega osebja in čim prej tudi direktor zapora. Preden član osebja, ki je izdal odločbo, odide z dela, mora sestaviti popolno poročilo. V poročilu mora navesti razloge za to odločitev, natančen čas, ko je bil ukrep sprejet, in stališča zapornika, če jih je mogoče ugotoviti. Za vse primere osamitve je treba za prvih nekaj ur voditi neprekinjen dnevniški zapis dogajanja, prizadeta oseba pa mora biti izpuščena iz samice takoj, ko razloga za izrek ukrepa ni več. Vedno kadar ukrep traja več kot 24 ur, mora obstajati popoln pregled nad vsemi okoliščinami primera, da bi lahko ukrep čim prej preklicali. Če je daljša osamitev zapornika neizogibna, mora biti v odločanje vključen organ zunaj zapora, kjer je zaprt zapornik, na primer višji član uprave. Zapornik mora imeti pravico do pritožbe na neodvisni organ. Po potrditvi odredbe je treba sklicati interdisciplinarni zbor in povabiti zapornika, da temu organu poda pisne in ustne izjave. Glavna naloga revizijske skupine je izdelati načrt za zapornika, ki naj zajema vse zadeve, zaradi katerih je pridržan v samici. Revizijska skupina mora med drugim tudi preveriti, ali so nekatere omejitve, naložene zaporniku, nujno potrebne – zaporniku se morda lahko dovoli omejeno druženje z izbranimi zaporniki. Zapornik mora od revizijskega organa prejeti pisno in utemeljeno odločbo, ki navaja možnost pritožbe. Ko je izdana prva odločba, morajo biti opravljeni nadaljnji pregledi – najprej čez en mesec in nato vsaj vsake tri mesece. Pri pregledih je treba oceniti, ali je dosežen napredek v skladu z dogovorjenim načrtom, in po potrebi pripraviti nov načrt. Daljše kot je obdobje osamitve, temeljitejši mora biti pregled in več virov, tudi zunanjih, je treba vključiti v poskusu (ponovne) integracije zapornika v zaporniško skupnost. Zapornik mora imeti pravico, da kadar koli vloži zahtevek za pregled in da za tak pregled pridobi neodvisna poročila. Direktor zapora ali višji člani osebja bi morali vztrajati pri obiskovanju teh zapornikov in biti seznanjeni z individualnimi načrti zanje. Tudi medicinsko osebje bi moralo zapornikom v teh razmerah posvetiti posebno pozornost. d) Osamitev za zaščito zapornika »Osamitve na prošnjo zapornika« so manj vprašljive kot zaščitne osamitve po odredbi osebja, vendar kljub temu zahtevajo nekaj pozornosti. CPT meni, da je treba najprej preskusiti vse alternativne rešitve, kadar posamezen zapornik potrebuje zaščito ali kadar mu zaporniki povzročajo težave, tudi premestitev v drug zapor, mediacijo in vadbo socialnih veščin; zaporniku je treba pojasniti vse posledice odločitve za zaščitno osamitev. Seveda je treba obravnavati prošnjo vsakega zapornika, ki je v prostovoljni osamitvi, da bi se vrnil med druge zapornike, in prošnjo odobriti, če je vrnitev varna. Zaporniki, ki so v zaščitni osamitvi proti svoji volji, morajo imeti pravico enakopravno sodelovati v celotni razpravi odločanja in predlagati druge izbirne rešitve. Upravičeni so do celovite obrazložitve sprejete odločitve in do možnosti pritožbe na višji stopnji. Odločitev se mora pregledovati v predvidenih razmikih, da se osamitev lahko konča takoj, ko ni več potrebna. 166 Državni preventivni mehanizem v Republiki Sloveniji po Opcijskem protokolu h Konvenciji OZN proti mučenju in drugim krutim, nečloveškim ali poniževalnim kaznim ali ravnanju Implementation of the Duties and Powers of the National Preventive Mechanism in 2011 c) Administrative solitary confinement for preventative purposes This can result in very long-term placements under solitary confinement and the administrative decisions involved are often indeterminate; both these elements aggravate the negative effects of the measure. Consequently, there is a need for stringent controls. The CPT considers that placement in administrative solitary confinement should only be authorised by the most senior member of staff in the prison; any imposition of this measure as an emergency should be reported to the most senior member of staff on duty immediately and brought to the attention of the prison director as soon as possible. A full written report should be drawn up before the member of staff who makes the decision goes off-duty. This should record the reasons for the decision and the precise time the measure was adopted as well as the views of the prisoner as far as these can be ascertained. There should be constant, logged, monitoring of all cases for the first few hours and the person should be released from solitary confinement as soon as the reason for the imposition of the measure has been resolved. In all cases where the measure continues for longer than 24 hours, there should be a full review of all aspects of the case with a view to withdrawing the measure at the earliest possible time. If it becomes clear that solitary confinement is likely to be required for a longer period of time, a body external to the prison holding the prisoner, for example, a senior member of headquarters staff, should become involved. A right of appeal to an independent authority should also be in place. When an order is confirmed, a full interdisciplinary case conference should be convened and the prisoner invited to make representations to this body. A major task for the review team is to establish a plan for the prisoner with a view to addressing the issues which require the prisoner to be kept in solitary confinement. Among other things, the review should also look at whether some of the restrictions imposed on the prisoner are strictly necessary – thus it may be possible to allow some limited association with selected other prisoners. The prisoner should receive a written, reasoned decision from the review body and an indication of how the decision may be appealed. After an initial decision, there should be a further review at least after the first month and thereafter at least every three months, at which progress against the agreed plan can be assessed and if appropriate a new plan developed. The longer a person remains in this situation, the more thorough the review should be and the more resources, including resources external to the prison, made available to attempt to (re)integrate the prisoner into the main prison community. The prisoner should be entitled to require a review at any time and to obtain independent reports for such a review. The prison director or senior members of staff should make a point of visiting such prisoners daily and familiarise themselves with the individual plans. Medical staff should also pay particular attention to prisoners held under these conditions. d) Solitary confinement for protection purposes “Own request” protection cases raise fewer questions than those ordered to go on protection by staff, but they still need some consideration. The CPT considers that all the alternatives, including transferring to another prison either the individual prisoner in need of protection or the prisoners causing the problem, mediation and assertiveness training, should be tried first and the full consequences of a decision to go on protection explained to the prisoner. Of course, a request from any prisoner on voluntary protection to return to the mainstream should be considered and granted if this can be safely done. Those who are placed on protection against their will should have the right to play a full part in the discussion of the decision and to proffer alternative solutions. They should be given a full explanation of the decision and the opportunity to challenge it at a higher level. The decision should be reviewed on a regular basis so that solitary confinement can be ended as soon as it is no longer necessary. National Preventive Mechanism in the Republic of Slovenia under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 167