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