Prisons and Human Rights Approach - Essay Example

Prisons and Human Rights Approach Introduction “Managerialism can be described as a set of beliefs and practices, at the core of which Is the assumption that better management is an effective solvent for a wide range of economic and social ills (Pollit 1993, cited in Crawley, 2004, p.3). Prison management may be considered as one of the most challenging tasks as it involves managing different types of people with at least, some undesirable happenings in their past. As such, many a times, force is used to exert control over those kept within prisons as a form of subjugation and control leading to rebellion and resentment amongst the prisoners. This essay shall briefly analyze the challenges involved in approaching management of prisons in a humane manner, and the possible solutions that can be practised in order to overcome those challenges. Prison Environment and Goffman “Every institution captures something of the time and interest of its members and provides something of a world for them; in brief, every institution has encompassing tendencies” (Goffman E. 1961A/1, p. 13). This is especially true of prisons wherein overcrowding and violence abound in present day conditions. Erving Goffman’s research work is of particular importance to prison management. Two of Goffman’s works - The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959) and Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates (1961) are particularly relevant to this essay since they help one understand the reasons that underlie the behaviour of human beings how are in control of prisons that is the managerial staff, and also, those kept under surveillance that is, the prisoners. Goffman (1959) has illustrated the importance of the process of role-play in human behaviours, and observed the impact it has had on shaping the survival instinct of human beings. According to Goffman (1959) the brain identifies one particular role to be followed or taken as a role-model, and simplifies much of its thought process by emulating the behaviour of the role-model and responding to situations within the scope of that character on which the role-play has been modelled. Therefore, the individual tries to enact the chosen role as best as possible to win the approval and attention of the public. In terms of prisoner, if the precedent has been set that prisoners are trouble-makers and prone to violence, the individuals in the prison cells automatically imbibe the roles of violent prisoners and behave thus to the best of their ability. Simply put, a bad prisoner tends to behave badly because he/she does not expect to be respected and therefore strives to live up to the poor image of a bad prisoner. Goffman (1961) describes prisons as ‘closed’ or ‘total institutions,’ where there is a fundamental gap between the two main sections of persons inhabiting it; the prisoners and the managerial staff and supervisors. While the former live totally within the closed walls of the prison with very restricted contact with the outside world, the latter have more access to the outside society in their non-duty hours; this paves the way for mutually antagonistic conceptions the other (Goffman, 1961, p.18), leading to problems and challenges in prison management. The Stanford Prison Experiment Testimony Above theories and observations of Goffman have been proved to be almost accurate and significant in prison management studies, as has been demonstrated by social psychologist and researcher Philip Zimbardo (1971) and his colleagues. His “functional simulation of a prison” (http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-10.htm) experiment, with volunteers dressed like real prison guards –complete with dark glasses that “prevented anyone from seeing their eyes or reading their emotions” (http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-13.htm) and whistles. Similarly the prisoners were chained, heads shaved and given numbers instead of names like in real prisons. The observations at the end of a six-day experiment have proved to be interesting and very relevant to Goffman’s findings and pertinent to prison management in the following ways: Zimbardo (1971) found that the volunteers started identifying themselves with the roles they put on, and tried to become the role itself, to the extent that they cried did not even excise the option to come of the experiment at point of time; they rather chose to seek the remedial and redress methods accepted within the frame work of prisoner’s behaviour, like asking the Catholic priest ((http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-29.htm) who offered to contact a lawyer to argue on their behalf. Some prisoners were also prone to violence and others internalized the harassment and developed physical and mental problems in the process. Similarly the guards were also observed to be of different types, the ones who were fair and just, the others who enjoyed subjugating others and the third who wanted to avoid trouble makers or potentially volatile situations (www.prionexp.org.). Moving Towards a Human Rights Perspective Having understood Goffman’s theories and observations on role-play human behaviour and its indisputable testimony in the form of Philip G. Zimbardo’s (1971) Stanford Prison Experiment Research, one wonders what then, is the solution to the challenges of prisoner – staff conflict in prison environment? Much of the solution may lie in observing and following Andrew Coyle’s “A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management – Handbook for Prison Staff (2002). The author has not only described the qualifications and criteria required for people who undertake prison work, but has also cited international laws and codes to make his observation on current situations; furthermore, the author has also suggested practical ways and means of putting into practice some procedures with a humane approach, so as to diffuse suspicion and tension in potentially conflict filled situations. This makes the handbook valuable, since it does not stop with merely describing the dangers, but also suggests pragmatically some possible solutions keeping in mind the human rights approach. One can understand the amount of thoughtfulness and sense of equality required for prison staff if they are to practice the human rights way of managing prisoners, on reading Coyle’s (2002) handbook. He observes in the second chapter that deals with treating prisoners as human beings that, “Their humanity extends far beyond the fact that they are prisoners. Equally, prison staffs are human beings; The extent to which these two groups recognise and observe their common humanity is the most important measurement of a decent and humane prison” (p.33). Further, he has warned that in places lacking such recognition, there potential danger of human rights being abused. Having said this, Coyle (2002) cites Article 10 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to describe that everyone who has been deprived of their liberty (in this case the prisoners) should be treated with humanity and with respect deemed fit for the inherent dignity of the human person (p. 33). Coyle (2002) has usefully spelled out what this respect precisely meant in practical terms by giving a detailed description of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (SMRs), approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1957. The SMRs are useful, observes Coyle (2002), since they help in handling the essential aspects of daily routine in prison, “while making clear that some aspects of the treatment of prisoners are nonnegotiable and reflect legal obligations, the text of the SMRs also recognizes that a variety of legal, social, economic and geographical conditions prevail in the world” (p. 34). The author rejects torture or ill-treatment in any form and states that there should be strict admission laws to differentiate between vulnerable and violent prisoners, and protect all of them (37-9). In the chapter “Disciplinary Procedures and Punishments” Andrew Coyle (2002) has expressed precisely what Goffman (1961) had theorized regarding the potential conflicts in prison atmosphere, “by their nature prisons are closed institutions in which large groups of people are held against their will in confined conditions; From time to time it is inevitable that some prisoners will break the rules and regulations of the prison in a variety of ways” (p. 75). As a part humane approach to the disciplinary challenges arising in prisons, Coyle (2002) cites international instruments to point out that various individual aspects regarding a prisoner, like for example, the prisoner’s literacy, age, physical condition, also and mental and intellectual conditions, should be considered before arriving at a disciplinary measure for any misconduct. Similarly, the prisoner is entitled to be informed of the misdeed and the disciplinary steps about to be given to him/her (pp. 75-7). Putting the laws into practice requires commitment and Coyle has suggested some ways to this end too. He has suggested humane approach to disciplinary measures that include informal warnings to the concerned prisoner even before taking formal action, of the probable disciplinary measures; in case the prisoner is illiterate, then have the laws and disciplinary measures read out in an understandable way; and most importantly, punishments should be fair, “just and proportionate to the offence in question” (p. 77). Similarly in the chapter dealing with “Juvenile and Young Prisoners” Coyle (2002) has indicated appropriate and clear ways of meeting problems related to treatment of young prisoners. Firstly, the demarcation age for juvenile and adulthood is given as eighteen years, as per many world nations. Extreme care should be taken to ensure that these young adults maintain good relationships. International codes and the United Nations have stipulated a number of practices to safeguard the rights of children and utilize their time and energy in a productive and educative manner, by training them in various skills, and at the same time, preventing abuse, sexual, physical or work exploitation (pp. 126-7). Coyle’s (2002) practical suggestions for a human right approach to this particular challenge includes, ensuring education for juvenile prisoners with civil society teachers, especially trained staff for sympathetic handling of young inmates, minimizing coercive influences on them and so on, which will ensure their seamless integration into the civil society at a future date, as productive and positive individuals (p. 128-9). Lessons to Learned Abu Gharib Prison What shall happen if human rights are totally ignored in prison management? The recent torture at Abu Gharib prison in Iraq of young juveniles (Hersh, 2004), women and innocent adult males at the hands of untrained military personnel from America and Britain is a sound warning of what can go wrong if human rights are not respected in prison management. The Stanford Prison Experiment research website too cites the shameful events at the Abu Gharib prison to illustrate the different types of guards with different type of self-images (personalities) and their consequences in prison management (http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-33.htm). This highlights the importance of the role that self plays in posing problems to humane prison management, and also the need for education and training of prison staff. Conclusion Goffman’s observations and works on self (1959) and prisoners and inmates (1961) has great significance in understanding the role of personalities and self-images in management of prisons. The simulated experiments conducted by Zimbardo (1971) and the findings of the research have shed further light on how people are likely to behave give a particular situation, as proved vividly in the terrible example of Abu Gharib prison torture in Iraq. The human rights approach put forth by Coyle (2002) are indeed helpful and essential to diffuse problems and potential conflicts that arise in real life closed atmospheres like prisons. This study has undoubtedly thrown deep insight in better practices of prison management, and shall go a long way in improving relationships with prisoners in a humane manner. References Coyle, Andrew (2003). A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management available online accessed on 22 February, 2009. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/downloads/human_rights_prison_management.pdf Crawley, Elaine (2004). Doing Prison Work. Willan Publishing, Devon, United Kingdom. p.3 Goffman E. 1961A/1 On the Characteristics of Total Institutions Extracts accessed on 08 March, 2009 at http://studymore.org.uk/xgof.htm webpage available at http://www.mdx.ac.uk/WWW/STUDY/xGof.htm#Encounters Hersh, Seymour (2004). “Annals of National Security - Torture at Abu Ghraib American soldiers brutalized Iraqis. How far up does the responsibility go?” in The NewYorker dated May 10, 2004. Accessed on 08 March, 2009. http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/10/040510fa_fact Stanford Prison Experiment(1971). Website accessed on 08 March, 2009. http://www.prisonexp.org/ Read More