Implementing OPCAT through prison monitoring: the relevance of rehabilitation. Issue 1 (2nd January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Naylor, Bronwyn; Winford, Stan
• Is Part Of: Australian journal of human rights. Volume 25:Issue 1(2019)
• Page Start: 113
• Page End: 129
• Publication Date: 2019-01-02
• Subjects: OPCAT -- prisons -- rehabilitation -- monitoring -- prevention of illtreatment; Human rights -- Australia -- Periodicals; Human rights -- Periodicals; Human rights; Australia; Periodicals; 342.085
• DOI: 10.1080/1323238X.2019.1588060
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1323-238X

Abstract

ABSTRACT: The purposes of imprisonment are always debated but it is expected that people leaving prison are changed such that they do not reoffend: that they are rehabilitated. Indeed the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights spells out rehabilitation as the 'essential aim' of imprisonment. Rehabilitation in the prison context may involve (for example) provision of education, training, work experience, addressing offending behaviours, and maintaining family contacts. Yet Australian prison statistics show that our prisons are not proving rehabilitative, and specifically are not preventing reoffending. Ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) requires establishment of comprehensive monitoring frameworks to prevent 'torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment' in places of detention. This article examines the scope for the inclusion of rehabilitation in prison monitoring under OPCAT. It makes the argument that the rehabilitative orientation of a prison is linked to the risk of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and that prevention of such treatment requires attention to whether the prison is 'rehabilitative'. It concludes that Australian jurisdictions should ensure the widest scope for OPCAT monitoring to support the rehabilitative goal of Australian prisons.