Experiencing human rights protections in prisons: The case of prison monitoring in Ireland
| Author | Mary Rogan,Sophie van der Valk |
| Published date | 01 January 2021 |
| Date | 01 January 2021 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1477370820960024 |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370820960024
European Journal of Criminology
2021, Vol. 18(1) 101 –119
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1477370820960024
journals.sagepub.com/home/euc
Experiencing human rights
protections in prisons:
The case of prison
monitoring in Ireland
Sophie van der Valk and Mary Rogan
The University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Abstract
The protection of human rights in prison gives rise to unique challenges. The power differentials
and dynamics involved, the need to balance considerations of security with those of dignity,
and the lack of openness to the outside world mean that the implementation of human
rights principles takes on a particular importance in these environments. International human
rights law has increasingly emphasized the importance of external oversight of prisons as a
way to prevent torture and ill-treatment and to uphold fundamental rights more generally.
Although the monitoring of prisons is now quite well established as a principle of European and
international human rights provisions, we know surprisingly little about how people in prison
experience and understand monitoring bodies. This gap in our understanding is part of a wider
lack of literature on how prisoners experience their rights and protections of their rights. This
article addresses that gap, reporting on qualitative findings from a study with people in prison
in Ireland on their views and perceptions of a monitoring body: the Inspector of Prisons. The
article finds evidence of a lack of awareness of, and a deficit of trust in, monitoring. However,
this picture is complex, with people in prison also viewing the concept of monitoring as a good
way to protect rights, believing that the visibility of monitors, clarity in their role and powers,
and ensuring that a variety of voices are heard by monitoring bodies are important elements of
a good system of prison oversight.
Keywords
Human rights and imprisonment, prison life, OPCAT, Mandela Rules, European Prison Rules,
prison monitoring
Corresponding author:
Mary Rogan, Trinity Research in Social Sciences (TRiSS), Arts Building, The University of Dublin, Trinity
College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Email: mary.rogan@tcd.ie
960024EUC0010.1177/1477370820960024European Journal of Criminologyvan der Valk and Rogan
research-article2020
Special Issue: Human rights, prisons and penal policies
102 European Journal of Criminology 18(1)
Introduction
Human rights frameworks offer the promise of the protection of fundamental rights in
places where they are vulnerable. As Kerr states, prisons ‘present a special context for
the interpretation of constitutional rights’ (2015: 483), where respect for the rule of law,
the promotion of human dignity, and the maintenance of security all come into sharp
relief in day-to-day decision-making. These challenges mean that, all too often, there is
a gap between the promise offered by human rights protections and their realization
(Cliquennois and Snacken, 2018; van Zyl Smit and Snacken, 2009). One strategy aimed
at bridging this gap is through visits from independent bodies with the purpose of over-
seeing what happens in prison. The monitoring of prisons has now become a well-estab-
lished principle of international human rights law. Prison monitoring bodies were a
requirement of the 1955 formulation of the United Nations’ Standard Minimum Rules
for the Treatment of Prisoners (SMR); a similar requirement is found in the European
Prison Rules (EPR) and other human rights instruments. Further advances were made in
this field through the adoption of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture
(OPCAT), which established National Preventive Mechanisms, with the remit to visit
places where people are deprived of their liberty with the intention of supporting the
prevention of torture and ill-treatment thereby (Bicknell and Evans, 2017; Murray et al.,
2011). This development has been followed by strengthened provisions concerning
prison monitoring bodies in the SMR of 2015 (also known as the Mandela Rules – United
Nations, 2016) and in recent revisions to the EPR.
Although the monitoring of prisons is a well-established principle of international
human rights law, how such bodies and their activities are experienced by prisoners,
prison staff and the staff of such bodies remains poorly understood (Padfield, 2018). This
article seeks to contribute to the understanding of how monitoring bodies are viewed and
experienced by prisoners by presenting findings from a broader study of prison oversight
mechanisms. Here, we examine how people in prison view Ireland’s prison monitoring
body: the Inspector of Prisons. Through its focus on the perspectives of people in prison,
the article also seeks to respond to Piacentini and Katz’s call for a greater analysis of how
prisoners actually experience rights-protecting structures. By helping us to understand
how prisoners view bodies established to protect their rights and prevent rights viola-
tions, this study gives us an insight into how prisoners view their position as rights-
holders and responds to their call for criminologists to ask ‘how do prisoners themselves
conceptualise their own rights?’ (Piacentini and Katz, 2016: 221).
Inspection and monitoring of prisons: Defining the terms
Thus far, we have referred to prison monitoring, but other terms also exist in the domain
of prison oversight, including ‘inspection’. Prison inspection and monitoring are pro-
vided for in several international human rights instruments and these terms need some
clarification. Rule 9 of the European Prison Rules states the basic principle that ‘all
prisons shall be subject to regular inspection and independent monitoring’, drawing a
distinction between these two concepts (Council of Europe, 2020). Under the EPR,
inspection is carried out by bodies internal to the prison system, called a ‘State agency’
To continue reading
Request your trial