Community Justice File 28

AuthorDr Nick Flynn
Pages89-92
Community Justice Files 28
89


 !"#$%$&'
To accord with the longstanding principle that unconvicted prisoners are treated as
innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, legally binding entitlements for remand
prisoners are set out in The Prison Rules 1999. Yet, following inspections and surveys at 33
local prisons (published between January 2009 and June 2011), as well as interviews and
focus groups with remand prisoners and staff at five local prisons, HM Inspectorate of
Prisons has found that unconvicted prisoners are held in worse conditions, have a poorer
regime, and receive less support than sentenced pris oners. Assessed against four primary
tests of a ‘healthy prison’: safety, respect, purposeful activity and resettlement, inter alia,
the report found that:
Remand prisoners are at a heightened risk of self-harm and suicide. 40 per cent
of prisoners who reported an emotional well-being or mental health problem had
not received any help.
Four out of the five heads of resettlement were not aware of the right of
unconvicted prisoners to see their own GP.
47 per cent of remand prisoners reported difficulties in receiving bail
information; and 45 per cent found it difficult to contact their solicitors. Prisoners
undergoing a trial described staff as unaware and insensitive to their needs.
Remand pris oners were found to be sharing cells with convicted prisoners
without being asked for their consent. Some prisoners felt staff were not able to
distinguish remand from sentenced prisoners.
Remand prisoners were restricted from exercising their right to wear their own
clothes
40 per cent of unconvicted prisoners reported they were not involved in any
activities. The inspection reports found limited op portunities and a lack of priority
for remand prisoners to engage in work and education activities.
British Journal of Community Justice
©2012 Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield
ISSN 1475-0279
Vol. 10(2): 89-92

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT