2)Expert Reports in Ashker v. Brown
August 3, 2015
On March 13, 2015, CCR (Center for
Constitutional Rights) and co-counsel submitted 10 reports in Ashker v. Brown,
our federal class action lawsuit on behalf of prisoners held in the Security
Housing Unit (SHU) at California’s Pelican Bay State Prison who have spent a
decade or more in solitary confinement. The reports were authored by experts in
the fields of psychology, neuroscience, medicine, prison classification, prison
security, international law, and international corrections. Together, these
reports provide an unprecedented and holistic analysis of the impact of
prolonged solitary confinement, and document severe physical and psychological
harm among California SHU prisoners as a result of their isolation.
- Collins Expert Report.pdf
- Coyle Expert Report.pdf
- Hawkley Expert Report.pdf
- Keltner Expert Report.pdf
- Lieberman Expert Report.pdf
- Mendez Expert Report.pdf
- Redacted_Austin Expert Report.pdf
- Redacted_Haney Expert Report.pdf
- Redacted_Kupers Expert Report.pdf
- Sparkman Expert Report.pdf
According to the experts, prisoners
subjected to prolonged solitary experience a form of “social death” that is not
cured upon release, but rather lingers as a “post-SHU syndrome” characterized
by social withdrawal, isolation, and anxiety. The profound impact of solitary
is not just psychological; plaintiffs' experts also uncovered evidence
that SHU prisoners experience unusually heightened levels of hypertension,
placing them at risk for serious health consequences. The international and
domestic experts agree that such prolonged isolation is not only unnecessary
for prison security, but actually counter-productive, as well as a violation of
international law.
Finally, plaintiffs’ experts
demonstrate that social interaction and physical touch are basic and
fundamental human needs, the deprivation of which has serious and irreversible
impacts. These reports provide valuable new evidence for prisoners and
advocates fighting to end solitary confinement across the country. For more
more information on the case, see Ashker v. Brown.
Last
modified
August 3, 2015
18 October 2011 – A United Nations expert on
torture today called on all countries to ban the solitary confinement of
prisoners except in very exceptional circumstances and for as short a time as
possible, with an absolute prohibition in the case of juveniles and people with
mental disabilities.
“Segregation, isolation, separation, cellular,
lockdown, Supermax, the hole, Secure Housing Unit… whatever the name, solitary
confinement should be banned by States as a punishment or extortion technique,”
UN Special Rapporteur on torture Juan E. Méndez told the
General Assembly’s third committee, which deals with Segregation,
isolation, separation, cellular, lockdown, Supermax, the hole, Secure Housing
Unit… whatever the name, solitary confinement should be banned by States as a
punishment or extortion techniqueal, humanitarian and cultural affairs, saying the practice could
amount to torture.
“Solitary confinement is a harsh measure which
is contrary to rehabilitation, the aim of the penitentiary system,” he stressed
in presenting his first interim report on the practice, calling it global in
nature and subject to widespread abuse.
Indefinite and prolonged solitary confinement
in excess of 15 days should also be subject to an absolute prohibition, he
added, citing scientific studies that have established that some lasting mental
damage is caused after a few days of social isolation.
“Considering the severe mental pain or
suffering solitary confinement may cause, it can amount to torture or cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment when used as a punishment, during
pre-trial detention, indefinitely or for a prolonged period, for persons with
mental disabilities or juveniles,” he warned.
The practice should be used only in very
exceptional circumstances and for as short a time as possible, he stressed. “In
the exceptional circumstances in which its use is legitimate, procedural
safeguards must be followed. I urge States to apply a set of guiding principles
when using solitary confinement,” he said.
Summary
In the present report, submitted pursuant to General Assembly
resolution 65/205, the Special Rapporteur addresses issues of special concern
and recent developments in the context of his mandate. The Special Rapporteur draws the attention of the General Assembly
to his assessment that solitary confinement is practised in a majority of
States. He finds that where the physical conditions and the prison regime of
solitary confinement cause severe mental and physical pain or suffering, when used as a
punishment, during pre-trial detention, indefinitely, prolonged, on juveniles
or persons with mental disabilities, it can amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment and even torture. In addition, the use of solitary
confinement increases the risk that acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or
punishment will go undetected and unchallenged.
The report highlights a number of general principles to help to
guide States to re-evaluate and minimize its use and, in certain cases, abolish
the practice of solitary confinement. The practice should be used only in very exceptional
circumstances, as a last resort, for as short a time as possible. He further
emphasizes the need for minimum procedural safeguards, internal and external, to ensure
that all persons deprived of their liberty are treated with humanity and respect
for the inherent dignity of the human person.
The
purpose of the statement
Recent years have seen
an increase in the use of strict and often prolonged solitary confinement
practices in prison
systems in various jurisdictions across the world. This may take the form of a
disproportionate
disciplinary measure, or increasingly, the creation of whole prisons based upon
a
model of strict
isolation of prisoners.
While acknowledging
that in exceptional cases the use of solitary confinement
may be necessary, we consider this a very problematic and worrying development. We
therefore consider it timely to address this issue with an expert statement on
the use and effects of
solitary confinement.
Preamble
Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the
Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the inherent dignity and of the
equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the
foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.
Recognizing that these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the
human person.
Recognizing that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom and
freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created
whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his
economic, social and cultural rights.
Considering the obligation of States under the Charter of the United
Nations to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and
freedoms.
Realizing that the individual, having duties to other individuals and
to the community to which he belongs, is under a responsibility to strive for
the promotion and observance of the rights recognized in the present Covenant.
Even before the adoption of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (a non-legally binding document) in 1948,
broad agreement existed that the rights which were to be enshrined in the Declaration were to be transformed into legally
binding obligations through the negotiation of one or more
treaties. The International Convention on the Elimination of all forms
of Racial Discrimination (ICERD)was the first treaty to be negotiated
and it was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on
21 December 1965 and entered into force on 4 January 1969.The International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial
Discrimination
The Convention in general
The Convention defines “racial discrimination” as: ‘any
distinction,exclusion, restriction or preference based on race,
colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or
exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental
freedoms
in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other
field of public life’ (article 1). The Convention requires States
parties, at all levels, to eliminate all forms of racial
discrimination and to prohibit any form of racial discrimination by any
persons, groups or organizations (article 2), and to adopt measures to
prohibit
any forms of dissemination of ideas based on racial
superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination and acts
of violence and incitement of such acts, and any form of assistance
to such activities (article 4). States parties by signing and
ratifying the Convention undertake to guarantee civil, political,
economic,
social and cultural rights, without any form of racial
discrimination,regarding: participation in elections; security of
person; freedom of movement; nationality; freedom of thought, conscience
and
religion; freedom of opinion and expression; work;
housing; public health and medical care; education; and the right
to equal participation in cultural activities (article 5). The
Convention also assures to everyone within the State party’s jurisdiction
effective protection and remedies against any acts of racial
discrimination,
and the right to seek just and adequate reparation for
any damage suffered following discrimination (article 6).
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK
With the support of the Nuffeld Foundation
Email: sharon.shalev@solitaryconfinement.org
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 What is the
Sourcebook about? 1
1.2 How is the
Sourcebook structured? 1
1.3 Definition: what
constitutes solitary confinement? 2
1.4 Brief historic
context 2
1.5 Legal and
regulatory framework 3
2 The health effects of
solitary confinement 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 The health effects
of solitary confinement: a brief review of the literature and
prisoners’ accounts 10
2.3 The negative health
effects of solitary confinement: reported symptoms 15
2.4 What makes solitary
confinement harmful? 17
2.5 The duration of solitary
confinement 21
2.6 Sequelae of
isolation: the lasting effects of solitary confinement 22
2.7 Concluding remarks
about the effects of solitary confinement 23
3 The decision to place
prisoners and detainees in solitary confinement 25
3.1 When and why are
prisoners and detainees placed in solitary confinement? 25
3.2 Placement in
solitary confinement: procedural safeguards, and special provisions and
recommendations
regarding the isolation of specific categories of prisoners 28
3.3 The human rights
position and case law regarding the placement of prisoners in
solitary confinement 33
4 Design, physical
conditions and regime in solitary confinement units 39
4.1 Introduction 39
4.2 International
standards regarding prison conditions and regime 40
4.3 Research findings
and recommendations regarding prison design and
environmental factors
49
4.4 Human rights case
law regarding regime and physical conditions in segregation units 51
4.5 Concluding remarks
on regime and conditions of confinement in segregation and
high security units 53
5 The role of health
professionals in segregation units:
ethical, human rights and
professional guidelines 57
5.1 Introduction:
ethics as applied to prison medicine 57
5.2 Issues regarding
prison medicine in solitary confinement units 58
5.3 Case law regarding
the provision of medical care in prison 65
6 Monitoring and
inspecting solitary confinement units 69
7 Summary of
recommendations 73
Appendix 1 75
Selected texts
Appendix 2 78
The Istanbul statement
on the use and effects of solitary confinement
Acronyms and abbreviations
83
Links & Resources 84
Bibliography 85
UNITED NATIONS
CATConvention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
6 February 2007
UNITED NATIONS
CATConvention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
6 February 2007
