Canada’s prisons consistently violate Mandela Rules

Dr. Anthony Doob and Dr. Jane Sprott have strong vocal cords. As academics and renowned criminologists they are more than comfortable speaking out when justice isn’t served. Yet, I imagine even their voices are getting hoarse these days.

Since October, both have publicly critiqued the Correctional Service of Canada for its refusal to release data on structured intervention units, which replaced the old solitary confinement system. Their latest report, released this week, paints a much darker picture.

According to their report, our prisons are in consistent violation of the Nelson Mandela Rules. For a country that prides itself on our human rights record, compliance with the Mandela Rules should be a foregone conclusion.

The Mandela Rules, which bear the namesake of Nelson Mandela, establish minimum standards for global prisoners. A prisoner himself for 27 years, the rights of the detained remained close to mind throughout Mandela’s life. Mandela’s suffering and his advocacy prompted others to recognize the need for peremptory minimum standards to all those incarcerated. A set of non-binding rules, these standards are often referenced in UN human rights proceedings and in domestic jurisprudence.

Despite our historic support of the Mandela Rules, our oncetrumpeted relationship to their name sake, and our calls on China to apply them to innocent Canadian citizens, our own prisons now flaunt these minimum standards with impunity.

It is in this context that Canada’s human rights ideals have drifted. We have fallen behind the righteous.

Doob and Sprott make consistent reference to Rule 44 of the Mandela Rules, which requires that each prisoner, each day, receive a minimum of two hours of meaningful human contact.

Their report indicates that for 89.5 per cent of structured intervention unit prisoners, this standard was violated at least once. For those prisoners in structured intervention units for 16 days or more, 63 per cent received fewer than two hours of meaningful human contact 76 per cent of the time. Doob and Sprott conclude that 195 prisoners qualify as having experienced torture as per the Nelson Mandela Rules.

These statistics demonstrate systemic disregard. These are not one or two missteps, but rather a fundamental indifference to international minimum standards. Despite training, jurisprudence, legislation and commissioner directives, these rules are flaunted.

Yet, all is not yet lost. In the past, with independent oversight from judicial inquiries, the human rights realities in Canada’s penitentiaries have slowly improved. If we want to be true to Mandela’s legacy, to to our international allies, to our domestic legislation and to our own reputation on human rights, then a judicial inquiry remains the only way forward.

Murray Fallis is an articling fellow with