Poor prison practices

THE parade of reports from the Ombudsman outlining issues of serious concern in prisons continues.

This week it was the turn of the Otago Corrections Facility, with the release of a report into an unannounced weeklong visit by a team of inspectors from the Ombudsman’s Office in October 2020.

While this report identified some good practices, including work to improve relationships with mana whenua, increased hours outside cells and focus on reintegration activities and opportunities, serious shortcomings were also raised.

Several of these related to privacy, including the excessive use of closedcircuit television (CCTV).

Prisoners could be seen on CCTV when using the toilet and in various stages of undress in several areas, including the receiving office.

Chief Ombudsman Judge Peter Boshier said the issue of CCTV coverage of showers and toilets was something he continued to find in Corrections facilities.

‘‘As a minimum, the men in the care of Otago Corrections Facility should be able to carry out their ablutions with some privacy.’’

He considers this may be degrading treatment and a breach of the Convention against Torture.

His recommendation that prisoners being processed in the receiving area be afforded privacy, including when using the toilet, is a repeat recommendation.

Judge Boshier says he recommended in 2016, and in his report on a 2019 visit, that the cameras should not cover toilets at the prison.

Corrections’ view is that it is legally required to observe some prisoners, including those at risk of harm, but says it is considering options, including for pixellating footage, and a review of the regulatory framework.

Judge Boshier said while this work was welcome, repeated recommendations had been made on this issue and the review of regulations relating to privacy screening and work on CCTV needed to be completed urgently.

Sloppiness around documentation in useofforce incidents at the prison is concerning. Records of these not being completed in a timely fashion and with signatures and dates often missing suggests poor management.

Lax recordkeeping around prisoners’ property was also noted. When staff could not identify a property owner, items would be disposed of.

Across six months there were 56 property claims, half of them approved and settled under the euphemistic term ‘‘staff error’’.

This is not a good look in terms of staff attitude. Nor is the observation by inspectors of some staff dismissing reasonable requests and using derogatory terms to describe prisoners. Also, some called prisoners by their surname or referred to them as ‘‘inmate’’.

This was not universal, of course, but treating prisoners properly involves seeing them as real people, not demeaning them, and there should be no tolerance by management for lack of basic courtesy.

Corrections has not accepted ongoing concerns about the high use of pepper spray in incidents, saying it is relatively low for the size of the prison and often safer than physical interventions. The department does not seem to be getting the message from Judge Boshier that he is concerned pepper spray is overused in prisons generally and that Corrections must guard against the normalisation of its use.

The Otago Corrections Facility report highlights again the issue of prisons not addressing repeated recommendations.

More than a year ago, Judge Boshier announced an investigation into how Corrections had responded to repeated calls for reforms aimed at improving conditions for prisoners.

He said he was fed up with the lack of significant and sustained improvements to prisoners’ welfare and rehabilitation, despite his and others’ calls for change.

The same issues were coming up repeatedly and there was a need to determine if there were systemwide issues which might prevent the department making changes he and other oversight agencies were calling for.

He expected then the report would be completed this year.

Whatever it finds, it must not be ignored.