Human Rights and Prisons - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

Treatment
Example Of Degrading Treatment (Poland)
Wiktorko v Poland [2009] ECHR 14612/02 (31 March 2009)
The European Court of Human Rights held that the treatment of a Polish
national while detained at a government-run „sobering-up centre‟, constituted
degrading treatment in violation of the substantive protection of art 3 of the
European Convention on Human Rights. The applicant in this case was
forcibly undressed by two male employees and was immobilised by
restraining belts for a period of ten hours. Further, the Court held that
subsequent investigations and proceedings carried out by Polish authorities
were inadequate, in violation of the procedural limb of art 3 of the Convention.
Obligation Of Government To Conduct Investigation (UK)
AM & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home
Department & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 219 (17 March 2009)
The UK Court of Appeal affirmed that the government has an obligation to
conduct an independent investigation where there is credible evidence of a
potential breach of arts 2 (right to life) and 3 (prohibition against ill-treatment)
of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Treatment Of Aboriginal Man A Violation Of Detention Rights (Australia)
Brough v Australia (UN Human Rights Committee, Communication No
1184/2003)
In March 2006, the UN Human Rights Committee published a landmark
finding concerning alleged breaches of articles 2(3) (right to an effective
remedy), 7 (right to freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment), 10 (rights of persons deprived of their liberty) and 24 (right to
adequate protection for children) of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR) in a New South Wales prison. The case involved a
17 year old Aboriginal youth, who suffered from a mild intellectual disability.
Corey Brough was placed in a solitary confinement cell for 72 hours, where
the artificial lights were on all the time and where he was stripped to his
underwear and his blanket was taken away from him. The Court noted “his
status as a juvenile person in a particularly vulnerable position because of his
disability and his status as an Aboriginal” and found that this treatment
violated the provisions of the ICCPR relating to humane treatment, separation
of juveniles and adults, and article 24(1) which requires that children be
protected by society and the State without discrimination.
Handcuffing (England And Wales)
Faizovas, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2009]
EWCA Civ 373 (13 May 2009)
This case sets out a requirement for prisons to undertake detailed risk
assessments if they deem it necessary for handcuffs to be used on a prisoner
during hospital visits. The England and Wales Court of Appeal found that the
140