detention conditions

Posts

Report on the visit of the Miercurea Ciuc Closed Regime Penitentiary

08/07/2019/in Penitenciare /by Rasista

On April 1st, 2019, two APADOR-CH representatives visited the Closed Regime Penitentiary in Miercurea Ciuc. This was the first visit to this penitentiary.

General information, staff, detention areas

The Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary is one of the cleanest and well-maintained penitentiaries in the country, but a penitentiary where the issue of overcrowding is far from being solved.

On the date of our visit, this penitentiary held 278 inmates (all adult males) although it has a maximum capacity of 206. Furthermore, the penitentiary also has 37 places on the prison farm, but only 6 detainees were housed there. The prison director estimated that the occupancy rate of the penitentiary is currently at 132%, considering the 4 sqm/detainee ratio. However, in the prison population has decreased in the past years (e.g. at the end of 2018 the number of detainees was 304).

The penitentiary holds 35 rooms and 3 wings. The rooms have different sizes, ranging from 8.10 sqm (section 2) to 38.61 sqm (section 3). According to official documents, the total surface area of the detainment areas (bathrooms included) was 728.65 sqm. Thus, there were only 2.62 sqm for each inmate.

The prison director also stated that the only solution to overcrowding was the reduction of detainees (more outgoing detainees than incoming), which they don’t expect to happen any time soon. In addition, the director stated that due to the detainment conditions, all detainees benefit from a reduced sentence. According to the penitentiary’s annual report for 2018, 19 detainees have been released by Law No. 169/2017, by a recalculation of the remainder of their sentence.

The Miercurea Ciuc penitentiary can’t be extended, and there is no room for new detention facilities. The November 2018 audit of the Prison Inspection Authority concluded that, since the penitentiary is in a protected area for historical monuments, it would need a building permit for current maintenance repair works. Thus, under the Romanian building code, a formal complaint was filed by the Prosecutor’s Office for changing the roof tiles of pavilion 1 without a building permit.

Regarding the personnel, only 173 positions were filled out of 233. For example, there is a need for 1 deputy director, 2 psychologists, 4 social workers, 4 educational officers and 1 chief general practitioner. The position of chief general practitioner has been open since 2017, but nobody applied. The penitentiary’s representatives admitted that they also need a psychiatrist considering a large number of detainees suffer from mental health issues. The position of catholic priest is vacant since 2012, but a representative of the Catholic Church visits the penitentiary on a regular basis. Section 3 also hosts a chapel served by an Orthodox priest, employed by the Romanian National Prison administration. Some detainees the APADOR -CH representatives, talked to, said that there are no activities at the chapel.

Current maintenance works, investments

According to the data provided by the prison representatives, only regular maintenance works were carried out in 2018 and 2019. These included repainting of the walls, repairs of the installations, repairs of the doors and windows of 25 detention rooms (22 onsite and 3 of the prison farm unit, visitor’s waiting room, supervision outposts 1 and 3, regular outposts, kitchen for the officers and detainees, food storage). Furthermore, the panels on the prison farm were partially replaced, as well as the roof. Also, in 2018 the penitentiary purchased an ambulance for the transportation of the penitentiary.

The prison director expressed his regret that they weren’t able to build the treatment plant for the prison farm for with 100 k Lei were allotted in 2018. This was mainly due to the fact that they couldn’t work together with the company SC IGUT SRL Brasov, the initial technical planner of the objective in 2003.

Workplaces for the detainees

In 2018 the penitentiary continued its collaboration with SC Rilug SRL for shoe sewing. According to the data in the annual report, 53 detainees worked for this contract. However, on March 31, 2019, the company went into liquidation; thus, the collaboration ended. As a matter of fact, over recent years the number of companies asking for prison labour has significantly decreased since the area of the Miercurea Ciuc has limited industrial and agricultural potential; together with the lack of personnel who could ensure the security for the lucrative facility and last but not least the lack of detainees under open regime.

The food preparation area

The food preparation area is very well maintained and spotless. The pressure cookers date back since 2012 and still are in pristine condition. Six detainees help out in the kitchen, and the place is analysed twice a year. On the day of our visit, the lunch menu consisted of potato stew, sour vegetable soup, bean soup and cabbage stew, and pasta with cheese (for the detainees with special dietary requirements). According to the data provided to our association a part of the food for 2018 was obtained from the prison farm (which has 40 cows), thus covering the necessary beef, milk and cheese for the prison. Moreover, 30% of all potatoes, courgettes and herbs came were produced in-house.

During our visit, the detainees stated that they have the right to shop at the prison store, nut the prices were quite high (roughly 30% higher than prices on the outside).

Medical assistance

The most alarming aspect of our visit was the lack of a hired general practitioner for the facility. The nurse on Section 1 said that the position is open since 2014 after the last doctor resigned. Thus, the medical assistance in the penitentiary is ensured by 7 trained nurses, guided by the general practitioner of the Satu Mare Penitentiary (who consults on chronic illnesses and comes when needed). The trained nurses work in 12/24, 12/48 shifts, and they make their best efforts to maintain the quality of the healthcare provided.

Until 11 AM, when the association’s representatives interviewed the trained nurse on-site, had already offered 38 consults (with a daily average of 40-50). The most common conditions are cardiac conditions and mental health issues (almost 30% of all detainees suffer from mental health issues). There were no registered HIV positive detainees or addicts. There were 3 cases of viral hepatitis A in 2018. Emergency care is ensured by the Miercurea Ciuc County Hospital, and all hospital admissions are made at the Dej Penitentiary Hospital. There have been no recorded deaths in the past 5 years.

The trained nurse complained about the high responsibility they have, considering that there is no doctor on-premises. The nurse also mentioned that many of his colleagues will retire soon, and then there will be only 3 trained nurses left he declared that “if we are down to 3 nurses, I’ll leave too, my only advantage is my eligibility for early retirement, if this is revoked then we’ll all leave the ”. The penitentiary director admitted that ensuring medical assistance is one of the most significant issues and that they have no idea of what will happen in 6 months.

APADOR -CH recommends that the Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary director takes all necessary urgent measures to solve the issue of the missing permanent general practitioner. Furthermore, considering that some trained nurses will retire soon, the management must already come up with a plan to replace them, to avoid a potential staffing crisis.

Education and psychological assistance

At the moment of our visit, the class for primary school level Romanian had just ended to which 6 detainees had taken part of. The penitentiary has two classrooms (one for classes taught in Romanian and one for classes taught in Hungarian). 2018 saw a continuation of the efforts made to identify the educational needs of the detainees; in the school year of 2017-2018 28 detainees were enrolled in primary school, 15 in secondary school, thus a total of 43 detainees. The 2018-2019 school year saw 23 enrolled in primary school and 30 in secondary school, totalling up to 53 detainees.

The penitentiary’s library received a donation of 500 books from the Dexton Bucharest publishing house.

The judge for the supervision of the deprivation of liberty

The judge for the supervision of the deprivation of liberty was not at the penitentiary at the time of our visit. According to the information provided by the prison director, 96 complaints referring to the breach of rights of detainees had been filed in 2018. There was no situation in which the competent courts or the judge for the supervision of the deprivation of liberty ascertained that the prison administration had not breached any prisoner’s rights. Only in one instance, the court disposed that the penitentiary reconsiders their decision on a detainee’s petition to add a new phone number to the pre-defined list.

Visit of the individual sections

Section 3

Section 3 hosts 114 detainees in 12 rooms. Three of these rooms are set up for the detainees who work. There are 11 showers on the section’s ground floor, 9 of which were fully functional at the time of our visit. The detainees may shower twice a week, for maximum of 10 minutes. Our representatives noticed that the bathrooms were mouldy, and the ventilation system was out of order. According to the prison director, they were currently working at a feasibility study to establish whether they could fit in showers in the rooms. Until then, APADOR-CH recommends that the existing showers and ventilation systems are repaired. It is true that in-room showers are the best solution, especially considering that some detainees complained that they have to go to the first floor to shower, which can cause a lot of health issues (especially dental issues), especially in winter.

Room E 3.12

Room E 3.12 has a surface of 28.20 sqm and a legal capacity of 7 persons. At the moment of our visit, the room housed 16 detainees and had 18 beds. Thus, there are only 1.56 sqm for each detainee, way below the 4 sqm standard.

The persons detained in this room complained about the following: a) missing bed ladders for, thus getting to the bed on top was quite difficult, b) that the food was quite bad as it had too much flour in it, c) that the courtyards were too small and that the time they spend outside is minimal (2, 3 hours), d) that the soap they received was of subpar quality, e) the fact that the penitentiary does not provide envelopes and stamps and f) about the fact that they would like to work “even if they don’t receive any payment for it”.

Our representatives were able to observe the 6 courtyards of the penitentiary, all fitted with toilets, telephone and tables.

To avoid any accidents, APADOR -CH recommends that the penitentiary takes measures to install bed ladders for the bunk beds. Furthermore, the Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary must respect the rights of detainees to hold correspondence by providing stamps and envelopes. Moreover, the detainees should have more access to information regarding their rights during detainment by posting this information in visible places (such as rooms and visitation rooms).

Section 3 also has a barbershop which looked quite unkempt at the time of our visit. Its bathroom had a drainage problem. According to the annual report for 2018, the Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary considered the idea of offering barber training. However, this idea was not implemented due to several factors such as missing trainer, lack of space and lack of interest from the detainees. In addition, several meetings between potential employers and detainees were held, and 3 companies decided to accept applications based on the CV of the detainees. APADOR-CH strongly recommends that the Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary intensifies their efforts to offer vocational training to the detainees, so they have a real chance at reintegration after their release.

Section 2

The 2 inmates detained in Room E 3.12 described it as “like a coffin”. The surface of this room is 10.43 sqm, and its legal capacity is 2. The detainees complained that their right of information is breached because rollcalls are during 7 and 8 PM, coinciding with the most important newscasts of the day. Furthermore, they complained about the fact that the penitentiary doesn’t provide them with laundry detergent.

Room E 2.3 has a surface of 26.40 sqm and a legal capacity of 6 persons. At the moment of our visit, the room housed 18 detainees and had 18 beds (3 three-tier bunk beds). Thus, there are only 1.46 sqm for each detainee, way below the 4 sqm standard. The toilet and shower are in the same room. The detainees didn’t express any complaints on their conditions of detention, maybe because the penitentiary’s representatives were present. Considering that the penitentiary was a closed regime penitentiary, confidential discussions were not possible.

Room E 2.2 is tiny and has a surface of 13.93 sqm and a legal capacity of 3 persons. It housed 4 detainees at the moment of our visit and had 6 beds. Thus, there are only 3.4 sqm for each detainee, way below the 4 sqm standard.

According to the penitentiary representatives, the solitary confinement room (the only one in the penitentiary) had only been used once in 2018. This room has a toilet and sink and is usually used as a waiting room (for 1 – 2 hours at most). The quarantine room is also barely used; it had a two-year-old mattress and a ventilation system in place.

The room for conjugal visits from Section 2 was also clean and adequately fitted with refrigerator, TV, shower and toilet. This section of the penitentiary also holds a workshop where detainees can repair their clothing items (fitted with a sewing machine) or do metalworking or paint jobs.

Section 1

At the time of our visit room, E 1.14 housed 2 persons held under maximum security. The surface of this room is 8.10 sqm, and its legal capacity is 2.

The surface of room E 1.20 is 26.80 sqm, and its legal capacity is 6. It housed 7 detainees at the time of our visit.

Section 1 also contained 8 detainees under semi-open regime who were due to be transferred. The doors to the rooms were closed, and the penitentiary’s representatives admitted that due to the high fluctuation of the prisoners, they couldn’t provide a room for the detainees under semi-open regime. The Association recommends that the prison takes all the necessary measures to ensure that the detainees under semi-open regime have a room fitting their regime, regardless of their time spent in the Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary.

All the rooms we visited had a TV. The video-conferencing room is fully functional but rarely used because there were no requests from the courts to do so. It is used from time to time for video conferences with the Romanian National Prison Administration.

Concluding remarks and recommendations

The Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary is one of the cleanest and well-maintained penitentiaries in the country. However, it has two main issues: overcrowding and the absence (since 2014) of a general practitioner to ensure permanent medical assistance.

APADOR -CH recommends that:

The penitentiary takes all the necessary measures to solve overcrowding, including a medium- and long-term plan, considering that the area where the penitentiary is built doesn’t allow the extension or construction of a new penitentiary. It is vital that the penitentiary continues its collaboration with the Romanian National Prison Administration.

Furthermore, the penitentiary must take immediate measures to solve the issue of not having a general practitioner permanent on-site. Furthermore, considering that some trained nurses will retire soon, the management must already come up with a plan to replace them, to avoid a potential staffing crisis.

Georgiana Gheorghe

Nicoleta Popescu

Traducere Cristina Badea Guțu

Report on the visit to the Center for Preventive Arrest and Detention attached to the Iași County Police Inspectorate

13/05/2014/in Aresturi, Monitorizare condițiilor de detenție /by Rasista

On May 13, 2014, representatives of APADOR-CH and RHRN visited the Center for Preventive Arrest and Detention (CPAD) of Iași County.

1. Population, detention space, hygiene, food

Since 2006, the facility has been located on a temporary basis on the semi-basement of the Iași Municipal Police station (awaiting the refurbishment of the County Police Inspectorate custody facility in the Copou neighborhood). Only 40% of the costs for the new building have been covered before the works stopped for lack of funding. It is not known when it is to be completed and when the new CPAD will be ready.

The capacity of the current facility was of 81 persons (11 three-bed rooms measuring 6.21 sq. m each and 6 eight-bed rooms measuring 13.8 meters each). The overcrowding is extreme. At the time of the visit, the center held 29 detainees, of whom 5 women, but there have been times when the population went over 70.

The personnel scheme included 28 employees: one chief, 25 agents (one woman) and two vacant entry-level positions, (which were not filled because of the very low salaries).

The rooms had no lavatories, showers or sinks. The lavatory was located on the corridor. Detainees had to ask the supervisor to use it (they said that if someone needed to use the toilet, all occupants of the room had to go at the same time!), but only between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. During the night, they had to use plastic buckets. The signatory associations point out that the impossibility to use the toilet at any moment of day of night is tantamount to degrading treatment and is sanctioned by Article 3 of the European Convention for Human Rights.

The lavatory on the corridor included two cabins equipped with Turkish toilets and showers and two sinks, one of which was out of order at the time of the visit. The rooms were full of steam and water dripped on the moldy walls. Detainees could take a shower twice a week, always in groups.

The food storage room was equipped with a fridge and a combined fridge-freezer, where detainees could store the food they received from home.

On the grounds that the facility overlooked „the street”, windows were barred and covered with two thick perforated metal sheets – the perforations were very small so air and natural light were almost completely blocked. APADOR-CH and RHRN ask that, until the new facility is open, the current facility give up the metal shutters. If it is not possible to give up both, at least one should be removed, in order to improve ventilation and natural lighting.

The facility followed Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of custodial sentences, although the enforcement regulations for CPADs have not been approved yet. The staff of CPAD Iași knew that the regulations could be expected soon, because they had been placed under public debate. The Association points out that the Regulations had been under public debate since March 2014, but a final form failed to be approved to this day.

CPAD agents did the shopping for detainees twice a week, from a local shop. The signatory associations suggest that the CPAD Câmpina example should be followed, where the staff found a method beyond suspicion that does not make detainees dependent on members of the staff. Shopping there is provided by a private company, who buys the items on the lists collected by the staff and delivers them at the facility.

The facility provided detainees with bedding, but also soap and toilet paper, if they could not purchase their own.

The food for CPAD Iaşi was prepared and delivered on a daily basis by the Iaşi Penitentiary. The detainees who spoke with the two associations said that food was bad, almost impossible to eat. Their statements can be confirmed by the representatives of the association, who could see for themselves that the food offered to Iaşi Penitentiary inmates was low in calories.

2. Medical care

The medical office looked austere, equipped with old furniture. A doctor (who was also the family doctor for the staff) and two nurses worked here on a daily basis and could be called in if needed (at the time of the visit, the doctor was absent at 10 a.m.)

Emergencies were treated by calling 112. If detainees were brought to the facility before 4 p.m., they were examined by the doctor. If they arrived at a later hour, the doctor was called in if they declared they had prior medical problems, or they were examined on the next day. As there was no permanent medical staff, medical care upon arrival could not be provided.

The facility allowed medication prescribed by external doctors, but only pills, not capsules, injections or creams.

In 2013, a death took place in custody and an investigation established the cause of death (dead “by hanging”)

None of the detainees followed a drug substitution treatment and methadone was not allowed at the facility. There had been no cases of drug withdrawal (only alcohol withdrawal, which received no treatment whatsoever). Drug and alcohol addicts were seen by a psychiatrist after their arrival at the facility.

A drug user, C.V. – who could only be interviewed by the representatives of associations only after the case prosecutor gave his consent, by phone, to the chief commissioner of the facility – had been arrested two days before and suffered from insomnia. He had not been examined by the doctor upon his arrival (it was a Sunday). It was only a day later that anybody asked him whether he had any medical problems and at the time of the visit, he had yet to be seen by the psychiatrist.

3. Activities

The facility had two small courtyards (2.40×6.20 m each), uncovered and with no equipment whatsoever, where detainees could spend one hour per day in the open air. None of the detention rooms had a TV set – it would have been useless, anyway, since there was no TV cable connection. Detainees had no organized activity, not even going to the so-called club, as in other facilities (a room with a TV set and possibly some games). There was however a “library”, a couple of shelves with books, in a room occupied by one detainee, whom the staff called “the works inmate”. It was unclear whether the other detainees had access to this room, or books were available exclusively to the person held there.

4. Correspondence and visitation

The pay phone was located one meter away from the desk of the supervisor, who could not help hearing the conversations. Under such circumstances, the “confidentiality” of phone calls is a mere empty word. The signatory associations ask for concrete steps to ensure the right to confidential communication between detainees and their lawyers, families and any phone interlocutors.

Next to the payphone, Law no. 275/2006 (abrogated) was posted in plain view (“so that detainee may compare it with the new one”, the staff said. The new one was supposed to be available in a printed form, but was “just being read by one of the detainees”).

The visitation room had 4 places and a separator. The supervisor sat right by the visitors, so the confidentiality of meetings, with either legal counsels or family members, was not observed.

The CPAD provided paper and envelopes for those who could not afford them, but not the necessary postal stamps. Mail was picked up every day by a postal worker.

5. Discussion with detainees

Discussions with detainees took place in the presence of the chief commissioner or of a supervisor, who claimed they were obliged “to ensure the security of visitors” or that the case prosecutor had to be informed about each private interview with a detainee and had to approve it beforehand.

6. Detention rooms

Two women were held in Room 26, which measured about 12 sq. m and had 8 beds, 5 of them with mattresses. The room was dark, lit only by a feeble electric bulb, and the air was stale. If all beds had been occupied, the overcrowding and unbreathable air would have amounted to inhuman treatment.

Another room was occupied by two detainees, but had 8 beds installed. Detainees had plastic tubs to urinate in and had to ask to go to the bathroom, in a group, if they needed to defecate. The situation is an example of degrading treatment and similar circumstances have been encountered in other police custody facilities.

Conclusions:

The standards in terms of detention space, ventilation, hygiene, confidentiality of meetings and phone calls were not observed at this facility. The signatory associations ask for concrete measures to ensure confidential conversation between detainees and their attorneys or families, as well as confidential phone conversations.
Given the double layered perforated metal sheet on the windows, all rooms are devoid of natural light and air. APADOR-CH and RHRN urge that, until the new building is ready, the metal shutters be removed. If it is not possible to remove both, at least one should be taken out, in order to improve ventilation and natural lighting, at least to some extent
The associations took note that in some situations detainees were brought in to CPAD Iași without a medical exam and ask for measures to remedy this problem.

Dragos Roşca Nicoleta Popescu

RHRN APADOR-CH

Report on the visit to the Center for Preventive Arrest and Detention attached to the Prahova County Police Inspectorate

04/04/2014/in Aresturi, Monitorizare condițiilor de detenție /by Rasista

On April 4, 2014, representatives of APADOR-CH and RHRN visited the Center for Preventive Arrest and detention (CPAD) in Prahova County.

The facility was located in the semi-basement of the Câmpina city police, and was the only one in the county (functioning since December 2005). All detainees had to be transferred between Câmpina and Ploiești for court hearings, medical exams, etc. (according to the chief of the facility, transportation expenses for nine years would have covered the costs of a new building in Ploiești. The Prahova Police Inspectorate does plan to have such a facility built on the grounds of a former military base).

The average duration of stay at the facility was one month-one month and a half (the legal maximum is 180 days).

The 34 place facility held, at the time of the visit, 20 detainees (18 on preventive arrest and two convicted felons, all male) in six rooms (five six-bed rooms and one four bed room), separated for smokers and non-smokers. The rooms measured about 18-20 m².

APADOR-CH points out that detention space per person was below the 4 square meter standard; rooms would have been overcrowded if all beds were occupied (the resulting space being about 3.5 sq. m per detainee). Police custody facilities still use the old standard, of 6 cubic meters per detainee, although the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) insisted, in its 2010 report on Romania, that they should observe the 4 sq. m norm.

1. Population, detention space, hygiene, food

The staff of the facility included 28 agents (the chief of the facility, four shift managers, three drivers, 20 security agents).

The admission procedure for new arrivals included a medical examination at the Ploiești hospitals. If detainees were brought in during the night, they were taken for a medical exam at the local emergency room.

A small, clean room hosted the hairdressing shop, but detainees complained they were unable to have a haircut. Their requests were denied because, among other things, the electric hair trimmer was broken. Detainees were also not allowed to keep electric hair trimmers in their rooms.

Each room had a Turkish toilet. In each room, the hole had to be covered with a water-filled plastic bottle to prevent the stench and rats from coming in. The sanitization of the toilets must be done immediately. The lavatory was separated from the rest of the room by a piece of cloth nailed to the wall. The rooms had no furniture, so that personal belongings were kept on the floor (under the bed), in plastic bags.

Detainees bought their own cleaning materials and cleaned the room themselves. One of them said that he received no toilet paper or soap (he had been detained for 36 days), only bedding, which he didn’t use because it smelled bad. The mattresses were visibly worn, thin and broken. The two associations point out that new bedding is necessary.

Detainees were able to take a shower twice a week. The shower room had old installations and taps and smelled unpleasantly. Detainees washed their clothes at the shower because they had no access to the washing machine, used only for bed clothes. There were no TV sets in detention rooms. There could not be, since there were no electric sockets either, and the only electric appliances used by detainees were on batteries.

On the other hand, there was:

A permanently lit electric bulb (when used to artificial light, one gets dizzy in contact with natural light); APADOR-CH and RHRN point out that it is mandatory to provide natural lighting to detention places. Permanent artificial lighting may damage the sight and the Police is directly responsible for the health of persons under its custody. For all these reasons, we consider that light must be turned off during the night and decent lighting must be provided during the day.
Video camera installed next to the light bulb, permanently turned on. According to the staff of the facility, video cameras are „useful for the protection of detainees”. They were installed after „a detainee died after being injured by a room-mate” in 2001. APADOR-CH and RHRN deem the presence of video cameras in detention rooms an unacceptable breach of the right to intimacy of detainees and ask that the devices be removed;
Loudspeaker turned on from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. (detainees cannot change the radio channel or turn it lower, being forced to listen throughout the day to a radio program chosen by the staff). Each room must be provided with a loudspeaker switch that detainees may use.
Permanently open window – not clear if only during the daytime or also at night (under one door, newspapers were jammed to stop the air draft).
Very thick window bars, completely blocking the light into the semi-basement facility.

A generalized practice in Centers for preventive arrest and detention is for the staff to do the shopping for inmates, but this was not the case at the Câmpina facility, where a system was found that avoided suspicions and an unhealthy relation of dependence between detainees and the staff.

Shopping was provided by a company that bought whatever was written in the lists collected by the staff and delivered the items to the facility. At the time of the visit, several shopping bags waited to be distributed; each had a fiscal receipt next to the shopping list provided by the detainee. The two associations commend the solution and consider it a model of good practice, to be shared with other detention facilities. Each detainee was allowed to spend a maximum of 400 RON per month.

Food was provided by the Police School in Câmpina (on the day of the visit, it had not been delivered by 2:30 p.m., rather late for lunch). Detainees said that lunch was good. The kitchen was equipped with three fridges and a washing machine, but detainees only had access to the fridges.

2. Medical care

A medical office (created in March 2014) provided service from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., when a nurse was present. The doctor only came in if there were requests for examination. The medical office did not have an emergency kit containing medical supplies or drugs. Except for the occasional exam, the office only provided the regular medication for those under treatment.

Detainees complained about the quality of the medical care (they were examined „with the eyes”; in the record book, many of the consultations mentioned „medical education”, meaning that detainees were merely informed about their prescribed treatment).

A young man, A.M., serving time for drug dealing (convicted Article 16 of Law no. 143/2000) took „light calming medication” every day (three drugs, among which Alprazolam and Zolpidem, according to the nurse). He was not aware that he could request psychological counseling.

The same young man said that he was sent to hospital for a specialist exam one week after requesting assistance and received his medication two days after the psychiatrist wrote him a prescription with the adequate treatment. The two associations consider that delaying treatment for 10 days in the case of a psychiatric patient was unacceptable, given the possible medical consequences.

3. Activities

A „social interaction” room had been prepared at the facility. It was furnished with a table and two chairs and was used as file storage room, not as an activity club for detainees.

The two small courtyards – one about 4 sq. m large and one 2-3 sq. m – were covered in Plexiglas sheets. They were used for outings lasting 30-60 minutes per day.

4. Correspondence and visitation

A glass pane separated the payphone from the supervisor’s office. Detainees were allowed 10 minutes of phone calls per week. The Romtelecom prepaid cards were no longer available on the market, meaning that detainees had a drastically limited right to communicate with the outside, as long as they were in the impossibility to purchase phone cards. The supervisor stood in the immediate proximity of detainees while they met their attorneys, meaning that the privilege of attorney-client confidentiality was not observed. The situation was similar in the case of private, family conversations.

Envelopes were provided for detainees who wanted to send mail and could not afford it.

Interior regulations provided that both outgoing and incoming mail was to be recorded, with sender, recipient address and date of expenditure/arrival. The signatory associations consider that keeping track of sent mail is a limitation of the right to correspondence.

The visitation room (measuring about 10 sq. m) had two tables and a few chairs. There was no window or other separator, so the supervisor had to be present during the visits (30 minutes per week). This was an obvious breach of confidentiality. APADOR-CH and RHRN ask CPAD Câmpina to provide detainees and their visitors a proper space where supervision may be exclusively visual (the agents must keep at a distance where they may see but not hear what is being said).

Detainees were not present when their parcels arrived. Parcels were received in a different room and brought to the recipient after having been open and checked by the staff. In order to avoid possible suspicion, APADOR-CH and RHRN ask CRAP Câmpina that parcels be open and checked in the presence of both the visitor who brought it and the detainee who must receive it, as it happens throughout the penitentiary system.

5. Discussion with detainees

The representatives of the associations visited rooms 1 and 4. Information on facility regulations and on Law no. 275/2006 (abrogated) was posted on the door. Detainees complained that upon arrival they were made to sign some printed forms in a hurry, without reading what they contained: basically an abrogated piece of legislation (Law no.275/2006) and about five sheets of rights that they were not actually aware of. The staff explained that they had not updated the arrival information kit to include the new law on the execution of custodial sentences because they waited for the new regulations. Until then, detainees had to sign that they had been informed about a law no longer in effect.

Conclusions:

1. APADOR-CH and RHRN urge that video surveillance devices be removed from detention rooms. Their presence is a blatant violation of the right to privacy that needs to be observed even for persons who are deprived of freedom.

2. The associations ask for effective measures to ensure the right to confidentiality during meetings between detainees and their legal counsels, as well as for mail and phone calls. The visitation room must be urgently refurbished so as to allow exclusively visual supervision.

3. The posters providing information of outdated legislation must be replaced and the information kit distributed upon arrival must be updated. Detainees must be given sufficient time to read the list of rights they are asked to sign.

Dragoş Roşca Nicoleta Popescu

RHRN APADOR-CH

Report on the visit to the Arad Penitentiary

07/11/2013/in Uncategorized /by Rasista

Sorry, this entry is only available in Română. For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

Report on the visit to the Arad Penitentiary

On November 7, 2013, two representatives of APADOR-CH visited the central unit of the Arad Penitentiary. It was the first time the Association visited this facility.

1. General considerations

The central unit of the penitentiary was a new complex of buildings, started in 1994 and fully completed in 2011. The first detention building was inaugurated in 1998. The unit was located near an industrial area of the city and had a generous property allowing for many exercise yards and sports fields, both for detainees and for the staff.

The Arad Penitentiary was categorized a high-security facility, where most detainees served their sentences under the closed and maximum security regimes. The Arad Penitentiary also had an external section holding detainees under the open and semi-open regimes, as well as persons on preventive arrest who had been put on trial and therefore transferred out of police custody.

The Arad Penitentiary also had a downtown unit, in an old building where the women’s section held 145 detainees at the time of the visit. This section was not visited by the representatives of the Association.

The prison farm was still functional, raising cows and pigs for meat. It had its own slaughter house, where some repairs had been made but still more capital works were necessary. The investment was not justified, given the costs and the distance from the farm to the slaughter house. Detainees worked a 4.5 hectares vegetable garden and the crops were used to prepare the prison food.

The penitentiary obtained substantial revenue, that was used to make various purchases. In 2012, the facility acquired a 40 places bus to transport detainees; in 2013, it acquired a 16 place bus for detainees and in 2014, it planned to purchase a 22 place bus, for the same purpose. Following these investments, the penitentiary would have covered its necessities for transportation. The same source paid for a video surveillance system (covering the whole facility, even the kitchen area). For the future, the prison management planned to purchase a mini security system with centralized lock-up for the control room and for the kitchen area. Some of the revenues were used for current repairs. Future revenues were planned to cover the building of a new external section, on the penitentiary grounds, comprising 9,000 square meters of production sections – but no detention spaces.

2. Population, detention conditions, personnel

The central unit of the Arad Penitentiary held only male detainees, most of them serving under the closed and maximum security regimes.

At the time of the visit, the total prison population numbered 996 detainees, of whom 851 men and 145 women. Male detainees were categorized as follows: 120 – maximum security, 637 – closed regime, 30 – open regime, 1 – semi-open regime. The remaining 20 men were still under observation/in quarantine, while 43 were on preventive arrest. The 145 women held at the external section were categorized as follows: 10 – maximum security, 36 – closed regime, 25 – open regime, 57 – semi-open regime, 5 under observation/in quarantine and 12 on preventive arrest. At the time of the visit, the facility also held two minors, one convicted by the first instance court and the second on preventive arrest. The central unit held 821 detainees and the external section 175.

The total detention space at Arad Penitentiary was 5,560.5 sq m, meaning an average of 4.04 sq m per detainee; that meant there was no overcrowding at the central unit. The capacity of the facility was 1,422 and the average population was around 1,000 detainees. The Association noted that the external section was overcrowded: the women section provided 2.92 sq m of space per detainee, while the male section provided 2.66 sq m.

Detention conditions differed from one room to another. The general impression was that in some places sanitization and pest control would have been necessary. Most spaces were renovated and clean, but there were also rooms, like E.6.21, where persons on preventive arrest complained of bedbugs and where walls had not been painted in a long while. Natural light and ventilation were generally satisfactory and hot water was provided twice a week. The representatives of APADOR-CH noted that detainees went to the showers four at a time, without any separation system, so their right to privacy was infringed. Another problem was the advanced state of decay of the mattresses. The Association recommends that separating curtains be installed in the showers and that all worn-out mattresses be urgently replaced.

The number of employees was 479, although the personnel scheme had 531 positions. Most of the staff, 340, worked for the security and penitentiary regime department (which had 355 positions), 14 worked for the medical department (on 23 existing positions) and 25 worked for the social and educational department (which had 35 positions). The priest position was frozen following budget restrictions, so a contract was signed with the Orthodox Metropolitanate for a part time job, paid from the facility’s own revenues. APADOR-CH points out that the orthodox religious service offered by the prison may be considered as discriminating by followers of other faiths, such as Catholic, Greek-Catholic and other officially acknowledged denominations, who could not benefit from religious services paid by penitentiary.

3. Medical care

The Arad Penitentiary had two offices for general practice and a dental office, all appropriately equipped, and 14 medical workers, of whom 13 were employed by the facility. The 14^th person was a dentist who worked on contract. The employees were two doctors and 12 nurses. The GPs saw an average of 80-100 patients per day, of whom 10 were emergency cases. The number of daily consultations is too high for the number of doctors, so we recommend hiring more doctors in order to cover the medical needs of detainees. Detainees who talked to the representatives of APADOR-CH said that in general they had no complaints about health care, except the fact that dental treatments didn’t always solve the existing problems. The governor said that he had approved the request of a detainee to be treated by his personal dentist, who had come to the facility for that purpose, and another detainee who had an implant had been allowed to go and see his dentist for a check-up.

According to the doctors, the most frequent health problems were chronic illnesses (especially digestive ones), followed by mental conditions (about 130 detainees had been diagnosed with psychiatric conditions and other 100 had undiagnosed disorders). The medical staff said that one patient developed schizophrenia during detention and, upon release, the doctors worked with the family to have him transferred directly to a Neuro-Psychic Rehabilitation Center. APADOR-CH asks for all detainees who appear to have mental troubles to be examined by specialists, who should decide for each individual case what is the best course of treatment, whether it requires medication and when the patient should be examined again.

The medical office distributed free condoms, but they were not placed in visible, accessible places – detainees had to ask the doctor for one, when they needed. There was one place at the library where condoms were placed for anyone to take, but at the time of the visit there were none left. The Association asks the penitentiary to install a condom box near the medical office, so that any detainee could pick a condom without surveillance or recording. The doctors said that there were no drug-related medical problems because cannabis and ethno-botanic were the main drug used in the area and they did not create serious health problems. In 2012, a detainee died of a myocardial infarction and in 2013 a 90 years old man died of respiratory arrest.

The medical staff said there were no problems with the delivery/deduction of medication from the Colibaşi Hospital and that the Arad County Hospital cooperated well with the facility, never refusing to admit detainees and sending the ambulance whenever emergencies arose.

4. Food for detainees

The Arad Penitentiary had a kitchen that serviced both the central unit and the Arad police custody facility. The only problem there was the mould and damp ceiling. Otherwise, the rooms, storage areas and kitchenware were clean and well maintained.

The lunch menu on the day of the visit consisted of potato soup and meat stew for diet, or cabbage soup and baked beans with sausage for the rest of the prison population. The sausages were portioned so that each detainee could receive a piece. A special menu, including peasant soup and vegetable stew, was prepared for diabetes patients. For dinner, the menu included Transylvanian stew pork scraps or potato stew and milk pasta for diet.

Most detainees had their meals in their room, although each section had a space where meals could be served and which was currently used to store food before serving and dirty dishes, or in some cases was turned into a small club for detainees. APADOR-CH suggests that canteens should be organized in the respective spaces, so that meals could be served there, alternately with club activities.

5. The activity of the psycho-social assistance and education department, other activities

The social and educational department employed 25 people, of whom 6 psychologists. The number of psychologist was remarkable, especially as all detainees interviewed said they either had been tested by psychologists or had taken part in the programs they ran.

The department ran a drug prevention campaign entitled “Flight becomes fall when drugs break your wings” (in cooperation with CEPCA and the Arad School Inspectorate) during which detainees were able to share their experiences as drug users with high-school students. Another activity was the participation of 10 male detainees to a theatre project, The Adams Family, staged at the Multi Art Theatre Festival in 2013.

Sport activities were permanent, trying to include as many detainees as possible. The penitentiary had four gyms with fitness equipment, 6 tennis halls and two playfields. An in-house football championship had been organized, with the participation of 205 detainees.

A second qualification course for plant farmers was completed, as part of the SOP HRD project “Consolidating the functional capacity of integrated social services for detainees and former addicts for labor market reinsertion by developing innovative tools and work methods and formative programs”. Of the 14 detainees registered, 13 completed the course and one was declared unable to follow.

The facility organized instruction activities, run by teachers from Avram Iancu School and from Iuliu Moldovan Technological High-School. 100 detainees were registered for the classes: 25 for primary school, 40 for gymnasium and 35 for high-school. One detainee had completed his second years at Vasile Goldiş Western University.

The central unit of the Arad Penitentiary had a very well endowed library, counting 12,392 books, of which 2,123 at the external section, and was regularly used by 184 detainees. The unit also had a paining studio where art classes took place, including drawing, painting, and traditional crafts. All 4 buildings had rooms properly equipped for educational activities, including a club for minors, containing specific educational materials for teenagers.

Exercise yards, 15 in all, were generous in size. Two basketball/football fields were also available. The 7 exercise yards for maximum security detainees were located on top of the buildings and appropriately equipped, including with payphones. But since they were not covered, they could not be used in bad weather.

APADOR-CH considers that installing covers above the maximum security exercise yards, which can be done with minimal costs, would allow them to be used on rainy days or in snow as well.

6. Work for detainees

The Arad Penitentiary had work contracts with 12 companies. At the time of the visit, 408 of the 996 detainees worked and 270 of them received payment for their services. The employment rate was high compared to other facilities.

130 detainees worked inside the facility: 104 for services at the central unit, 25 for services at the external section, 5 at the farm, one as a help to another detainee, 4 as guards and 3 at the garage. Most of the detainees who received salaries (139) worked on contract for a shoe company, sewing parts of the products together. They worked in their rooms, at the central unit.

7. Other aspects

The Arad Penitentiary managed the Training and Qualification Center for Employees of the Penitentiary System, a 3040 sq m building located near downtown Arad, in former Palace of Justice. The Training Center was equipped with all necessary conditions for the preparation and re-qualification of the personnel: conference hall, classrooms, library, gyms, teacher’s lounge, medical office, offices for trainers, 23 accommodation rooms for course attendants with a total of 95 beds, common lavatories and shower rooms, kitchen, canteen, food storage rooms.

The Centre was closed because no courses were taking place, but the maintenance costs for the building were covered by the penitentiary’s own resources. APADOR-CH supports the proposal of the prison management that a separate budget line should be allocated for the maintenance of the building, covering all the required expenditure for the Center, even if the management is attributed to the Arad facility. APADOR-CH also suggests that the prison management should take into account the possibility of partially using that space to accommodate detainees under the open and semi-open regimes.

Conclusions and recommendations

Following their visit, the representatives of APADOR-CH recommend:

· Reducing overcrowding at the external section by reorganizing spaces used for other purposes;

· Passing all detainees who seem mentally disturbed through a psychiatric examination for diagnosis and treatment;

· Partial covering of all exercise yards, so they can be used during rain or snow as well.

Other conclusions and recommendations have been included in the report.

Nicoleta Popescu Cristinel Buzatu

Tag Archive for: detention conditions

Posts