UK immigration detention centre mortonhall

“Removal from Association (DC Rule 40) and Temporary Confinement (DC Rule 42) : introduction of Solitary confinement in Britain’s immigration detention centres, “even if it could kill them”.

Source 

(Picture : Morton Hall Immigration Removal Centre)

Immigration centre staff told: Put ‘disobedient’ detainees in solitary confinement – even if it could kill them

Exclusive: Revised Government policy described as ‘new charter for cruelty’

  • Jon Stone Political Correspondent 2 August 2016

People held at Britain’s immigration removal centres can be thrown into solitary confinement against medical advice and held for hours without any explanation, according to new guidance set to be issued to guards by the Home Office.

A draft “detention services order”, spelling out guidance to staff at the immigration prisons on the use of solitary confinement, says the sanction can be applied even if medical advice explicitly warns that it would be “life-threatening”.

The practice, described by campaigners as “cruel”, can also be handed out by guards to anyone who is judged to be “stubborn” or “disobedient” – despite concerns by official watchdogs that vulnerable people with mental health problems are being being seriously affected.

The new draft document, “Removal from Association (DC Rule 40) and Temporary Confinement (DC Rule 42)” advises staff that anyone who is being “stubborn, unmanageable or disobedient” may be thrown into solitary confinement, described euphemistically in the rules as “rule 40 or rule 42 accommodation”. It further advises staff that they can wait up to two hours before telling a person why they have been detained in such a way. Staff on location can authorise solitary confinement for up to two weeks; area managers only have to be consulted for longer detainments.

6-Solitary-Confinement-Rex.jpg
The new draft document advises staff that anyone who is being ‘stubborn, unmanageable or disobedient’ may be thrown into solitary confinement (Rex)

Staff at the centres are also effectively given the go-ahead to disregard medical advice that solitary confinement could kill a particular detainee if they think they have a good reason for doing so. “When medical advice is given that locating the detainee in [solitary confinement] would be seriously detrimental to a detainee’s health or is life threatening, the multidisciplinary team should urgently consider this advice,” it says. The document however continues, stating that the medical advice may then be ignored as long as a note in made in a booklet “clearly stating the rationale”.

“Limitless immigration detention is a dark stain on our country’s human rights record. Adding the cruel practice of solitary confinement to the mix is a grave injustice which risks causing serious harm to innocent and vulnerable individuals,” she said. “But instead of abolishing this inhumane system, the Home Office’s latest order would compound the problem by authorising the segregation of those who are deemed stubborn or suffer mental health problems, even where confinement may be life-threatening.” Ms Ogilvie admonished the Government, saying it “should be ashamed at its failure to afford even the most basic dignity and security to those within its care”.

Case studies provided in the board’s report from 2015 include a person with “schizophrenic and bi-polar conditions” who was detained for a 54-day stint in solitary confinement, as well as a detainee with “serious mental health issues” who was confined for 39 days before being sectioned under the Mental Health Act. The board said solitary confinement was used against detainees “unable to integrate onto the normal regime, including individuals with serious mental health issues”.

“They are vulnerable and confinement is not a humane way to address the problems they experience,” it concluded.

Ministers caused controversy last month after The Independent reported that families with children would be moved back into such prison-style immigration detention centres, albeit in a “discrete” unit from other detainees. The move was decried by campaigners as effectively reversing the 2010 Coalition government’s pledge to end child detention in the immigration system.

A spokesperson for the Home Office told the Independent that it would take criticism into account when finalising the draft order.

 “It is important that maintaining safety and security of the detention facility is balanced against showing due regard for the dignity and welfare of the detainees,” she said.

“Detainees are only separated from others in exceptional circumstances. This is done for reasons of safety, either their own or for others, for security reasons or when an individual is being violent. Temporary confinement is never used as a punishment.”

 


Tagged:


About

Prison activist and editor. Currently preparing a book on the introduction of maximum security prisons in Belgium and Europe, including the practice of solitary confinement. In 2008, Luk started the Belgian Prisoners' Family & Friends Association. (http://familiesfriendsassociation.blogspot.be/ In 2009, with Farida Aarrass he launched the Campaign Free Ali Aarrass (www.freeali.eu ). In 2012 he organised the Committee of the Families of European detainees in Morocco (http://prisonnierseuropeensaumaroc.blogspot.be/). Luk Vervaet is the author of « Le making-of d'Anders B. Breivik » (Egalité=Editions, 2012), « Nizar Trabelsi : Guantanamo chez nous ? (Editions Antidote, 2014). He is co-author of « Kim et Ken, mes enfants disparus » (Editions Luc Pire, 2006), « Condamnés à la prison? Ecrits sur un monde caché » (Revue Contradictions, 2008) et « L'affaire Luk Vervaet : écrits sur un interdit professionnel » (Revue Contradictions, 2011). Contributions : « Etats généraux sur les conditions carcérales en Europe : La condition pénitentiaire, regards belges, français et européens"» (2010, éditions MGER) ; « The violence of incarceration: a response from mainland Europe »(2010, Race & Class) ; « Gevangenissen: spiegel van onze samenleving » (2013, MO Mondiaal Nieuws) Publishing house : www.antidote.be


'“Removal from Association (DC Rule 40) and Temporary Confinement (DC Rule 42) : introduction of Solitary confinement in Britain’s immigration detention centres, “even if it could kill them”.' have no comments

Be the first to comment this post!

Would you like to share your thoughts?

Your email address will not be published.

Images are for demo purposes only and are properties of their respective owners. Old Paper by ThunderThemes.net Admin by Numic