RISK FACTORS DERIVING FROM AN OVEREMPHASIS ON SECURITY rehabilitation of prisoners; staff sick leave increases when they have to deal with violence; and there are wider healthcare costs of physical injuries. The UN Committee against Torture has raised the concern that overcrowding and understaffing are conducive to inter-prisoner violence, including sexual violence, in detention facilities, especially during the night.120 As well as improving conditions and staff numbers, the Committee recommended action to address the lack of purposeful activities, the availability of drugs, and feuding gangs. Particular groups, such as LGBTI detainees or detainees with psycho-social disabilities are frequently at a higher risk of inter-prisoner violence, and require adequate protection. Where incidents occur, they need to be properly investigated and proportionate sanctions imposed on those responsible. The key to a secure and humane prison system lies with the staff and the nature of its relationship with the prisoners.121 Maintaining security requires investment in terms of the configuration of the prison, and in particular in an adequate staff to prisoner ratio. Professional staff who are carefully selected, properly trained and supervised will be able to deal with prisoners in a humane way while paying attention to matters of security and good order. Early intervention by staff, challenging the harmful behaviour that leads to, or escalates, conflict is far more effective in reducing the costs of running prisons than staff reacting with force to violent incidents after they occur. Prisons can be made safer by meeting people’s basic human needs; teaching more effective ways of managing conflict; confronting tactics that escalate disputes; and working with the social context to promote conflict resolution. Revised Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (2015): Rule 38(1): Prison administrations are encouraged to use, to the extent possible, conflict prevention, mediation or any other alternative dispute resolution mechanism to prevent disciplinary offences or to resolve conflicts. Rule 76(1): Training (…) shall include, at a minimum, training on: (c) Security and safety, including the concept of dynamic security, the use of force and instruments of restraint, and the management of violent offenders, with due consideration of preventive and defusing techniques, such as negotiation and mediation. Prisons which make use of dynamic security or direct supervision have been shown to produce better outcomes than those which continue to employ a traditional guarding and surveillance role. However, in some countries, prison staff are still required to maintain formal and distant relations with the detainees in the name of security or in order to reduce risks of corruption. Staff may only be allowed to talk to prisoners to give instructions, while other conversations are prohibited. Prisoners may have to stand facing a wall or keep their hands behind their back in the presence of guards. The CPT has stated that such ‘practices are unnecessary from a security standpoint’ and that ‘the development of constructive and positive relations between prison staff and prisoners will not only reduce the risk of ill-treatment but also enhance control and security’.122 Although Rule 40(1) of the revised Standard Minimum Rules prohibits using prisoners in disciplinary capacity, in many countries the authority to maintain order is delegated to privileged detainees through informal or recognised self-management systems. Detainees to which prison management is partly ‘outsourced’ in this way can control every aspect of a detainee’s life, from access to phone calls, to meetings with relatives and contact with the authorities. Not surprisingly, these prisoners often misuse this power, resulting in threats, intimidation and violence. The UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture has noted that internal self-management can lead to arbitrary use of power and violence ‘to the detriment of vulnerable prisoners, or [be] used as means of coercion or extortion’ if not regulated and managed properly.123 The High Commissioner for Human Rights has pointed out that overcrowding not only increases tensions, but results in the rule of the most powerful detainees, riots, disturbances and hunger strikes in protest against the conditions of detention.124 Monitoring bodies, including NPMs, should pay attention to occupancy rates in the facility, as well as the nature of the staff-prisoner ratio and relationship and how it is affected by security measures. This can include examining relevant standard operating procedures and training, as well as the day-to-day relations observed. Monitoring bodies need to attend to the problem of inter-prisoner violence, which is a threat to the safety and dignity of both prisoners and staff. 120. Committee against Torture, Concluding observations, Bulgaria, 14 December 2011, CAT/C/BGR/CO/4-5. 121. Andrew Coyle, A human rights approach to prison management: handbook for prison staff, International Centre for Prison Studies, 2002, p13. 122. European Committee for the Prevention of Torture, CPT Standards, Extracts from the 11th General Report, CPT/Inf (2001)16, para.26. 123. Fourth annual report of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT), 3 February 2011, CAT/C/46/2, p15-16. 124. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Human rights implications of overincarceration and overcrowding, 10 August 2015, A/HRC/30/19, para. 14, with reference to CAT/OP/MEX/1, para. 166; CAT/C/BGR/CO/4-5, para. 23; and Council of Europe document CPT/Inf (2015) 12, para. 54. 18 | Penal Reform International | Balancing security and dignity in prisons: a framework for preventive monitoring