opened. At Rolleston prison and Auckland Men's, the night shift visited the pound only twice per night, whereas at Christchurch men’s we were told that they came five times at night. Other areas of concern included the three punishment cells at Christchurch Men's J Block which were of reasonable size, but the showers were located in the exercise yard and we were told that this had meant that in the winter those three cells could not be used. Finally, prisoners serving disciplinary punishments did not always receive minimum entitlements. Women serving Cell Confinement (CC) at Christchurch Women's, for example, could not receive any visits or make telephone calls and were only entitled to three showers a week. This may constitute a violation of their human rights, and it may also adversely affect the families, and in particular children, of these women. Lack of clarity on placement in, and exit from, segregation units and inappropriate cells The reasons for placements in Management units and At Risk units were not always clear, did not always correlate to the stated purpose of the units, and stays tended to be long. Although Management units were not meant to be punitive, the problems of bleak environment and impoverished regimes identified above were very much evident in them too. I was particularly concerned about use of the ‘silver cells’ – small cells made entirely of stainless steel (walls, bed slab, shelves, under-bed storage space, toilet), with a narrow and grilled glass pane overlooking a corridor – in Auckland Men’s Management unit. These claustrophobic cells were not fit for purpose, particularly not for segregated men who had to spend the majority of the day in them. Also of concern was the use of a section of five grill-fronted cells in one of the general population blocks for the segregation of a mixture of Management and At Risk prisoners, some of whom were mentally very unwell, in some cases for many months. These cells were small and windowless, and, though prisoners housed in them could have more personal possessions than was usually the case in segregation, these cells were inappropriate for longer stays. Segregation of vulnerable prisoners The most concerning aspect of prison segregation practices were the At Risk units (ARUs), where those deemed to be the most vulnerable in the prison were housed, sometimes for long periods of time. ARUs appeared to be very similar to other segregation units (by whichever name) both in terms of the material conditions, and in terms of the impoverished regimes. But ARUs also had the added disadvantage of potentially degrading practices such as requiring all 33

اختر الفقرة المستهدفة3