UNDERSTANDING DIGNITY AND SECURITY IN PRISONS corresponding dynamics in prison settings, as well as social care and assistance, including early detection of mental health issues, are also a requirement. The revised Standard Minimum Rules make reference to the obligation of administrations to ensure the safety and security of prisoners, staff, service providers and visitors at all times.9 2. Security in detention: a legitimate concern Providing for security and order is fundamental in places of detention. From a human rights perspective, security and safety constitute an integral part of the state’s responsibility to protect persons deprived of their liberty. The state ‘assumes a heightened duty of protection by severely limiting an individual’s freedom of movement and capacity for self-defence’.10 Inter-American Commission on Human Rights ‘The fact that States exercise effective control of the prisons implies that it must be capable of maintaining internal order and security within prisons, not limiting itself to the external perimeters of the prisons. It should be capable of ensuring at all times the security of the prisoners, their family members, visitors and those who work in the place.’11 Ensuring safety includes the provision of measures to prevent and respond to fires or other emergencies, and appropriate working conditions for prisoners and staff. It also includes policies to prevent and reduce levels of suicide and self-harm. Security in places of detention has several components. Firstly, there is the question of external security (sometimes called perimeter or physical security) aimed at the need to prevent escapes and other undesired and unlawful contact with the outside world. This is mainly achieved through physical structure, such as the prison buildings, walls and fences, alarms and detection systems. Secondly, there is the question of security within the prison, sometimes referred to as procedural security or control. Procedural security covers such matters as to how prisoners move around the facility, what possessions they are permitted to keep, how they and their visitors are searched, as well as the basic daily routine. Reasonable and proportionate disciplinary rules, that both prisoners and staff have the responsibility to observe, contribute to a well- ordered environment. Effective procedural security requires not only a clear set of regulations, but must be implemented by staff that are adequate in number, recruited on merit, well trained and adequately paid. UN Prison Incident Management Handbook ‘Effectively managing the movement of prisoners within a prison depends on: • staffing levels being commensurate with • • • • the number of prisoners; the level of staff skills and competency; the layout/configuration of the prison; the effectiveness of static security infrastructure; the ability to effectively classify and separate categories of prisoners.’12 Almost all prison systems have a range of different security levels to match the risks presented by prisoners. Prisoners will be subjected to a process of classification when they first arrive and are allocated to an appropriate level of security. In many countries a ���progressive’ system is applied which means that if prisoners comply with the rules they may later be moved to a less restrictive security categorisation. At one extreme, there are facilities or parts of facilities with very high levels of security, catering for individuals perceived to pose a high risk to other prisoners or themselves, a flight risk, or a high risk to the public if they were to escape. At the other extreme, there may be open prisons where prisoners go to work in the community, have keys to their rooms and live with relative freedom of movement. In between, most states have prisons with a variety of security levels or categories. One key aspect of safety within prison is the need to prevent violence between prisoners. This can have several dimensions, from isolated acts of violence against individual inmates, regular violence against the most vulnerable detainees, systems of violence by informal structures of gangs or leaderships, to systems of ‘selfgovernment’ where the prison’s internal security is left in the hands of inmates themselves.13 In many parts of the world, particularly where prisoners are held in dormitory style accommodation or in large halls, control is effectively in the hands of the most dominant prisoners. 9. Revised Standard Minimum Rules, Rules 1 and 76. 10. UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Report to the UN General Assembly, 5 September 2006, A/61/311, para.51. 11. Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), Report on the human rights of persons deprived of liberty in the Americas, 2011, para.77. 12. United Nations, Prison Incident Management Handbook, 2013, p26. 13. On this issue, see the IACHR report op.cit, para.79-93. The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture’s (CPT) Report on Latvia 2007 para.40 describes the informal caste based hierarchy common in post-Soviet countries. 4 | Penal Reform International | Balancing security and dignity in prisons: a framework for preventive monitoring