Secretary of State Robert Buckland appears before the Joint Committee on Human Rights on Monday. He and Prisons and Probation Minister Lucy Frazer deserve
credit for making themselves available to Parliamentary scrutiny before and during
the recess, even if their evidence has not satisfied those who wish to see
bolder action to safeguard the health of prisoners.
The Committee has signalled that it will be asking him whether, inter alia, that to protect the right to family life for children of mothers in prison, he will
institute early release for non-violent women offenders.
As well as pressing Buckland on this specific question, MPs
and Peers may well want to clarify how many prisoners altogether have been
released on Corona Virus Temporary Release and whether as was reported at the
end of last week the scheme had been suspended. Buckland will probably say that the prison population has fallen by 1,135 in the last fortnight with a proportionately greater
fall among women than men.
But given that the Howard League and Prison Reform Trust have threatened to seek judicial review of Buckland’s limited action to
cut prison numbers in part because it is contrary to human rights duties to
protect life and health- especially of those most vulnerable to the disease-
the Committee has every right to press him on his plans and their
implementation .
The Human Rights Committee should also take an interest in the conditions
facing people who remain in detention and how these are being monitored. The UK
National Preventive Mechanism, comprising the 21 statutory bodies that
independently monitor places of detention wrote to Buckland on 30 March but
have not so far published any reply from him.
As well as raising the need to reduce detained populations
to mitigate the inherent risk of maintaining people in close confinement, the
NPM asked how the government will ensure skype, adapted mobiles and any other
forms of contact are available to prisoners in the absence of visits. Harriet Harman
should ask for an update on this as well as how the Prison Ombudsman and Independent Monitoring Boards are fulfilling their duties during the crisis.
The Justice Committee have an opportunity to put similar questions
to Chief Inspector of Prisons Peter Clarke on Tuesday when they take evidence
from him in their relaunched inquiry on the ageing prison population. Clarke has so far refrained from making public
statements on what prisons should be doing to manage the crisis– ironic given that
their inspection methodology across all forms of detention “consists of a series of broad thematic judgements known as healthy establishment tests”.
The Prison Governors Association -who were wrong in my view
not to support Clarke’s proposals for one day light touch inspections- were
however fully justified in asking him to join with others to seek a significant
reduction in overcrowding. I don’t know why he hasn’t done so. MPs should ask him.
Sir Bob Neill’s committee should also ask whether Clarke has
been consulted about the new accommodation that is being constructed at pace to
provide hundreds or even thousands of new single cells. If he is going to
inspect them, its surely better for the prison service to involve him in their
design.
These and many other matters could be raised by MPs - not least Buckland's new shadow David Lammy -in Justice questions scheduled for Tuesday. At the time of writing, they are still on the Order paper, although there's a suggestion they have been postponed.
If that's the case, Lammy should ask an Urgent Question on the releases at least, as soon as he can.
These and many other matters could be raised by MPs - not least Buckland's new shadow David Lammy -in Justice questions scheduled for Tuesday. At the time of writing, they are still on the Order paper, although there's a suggestion they have been postponed.
If that's the case, Lammy should ask an Urgent Question on the releases at least, as soon as he can.
No comments:
Post a Comment