1. Prisons Background and key developments since 2016/17 There was a clear, and very welcome shift in the Department of Corrections’ willingness to engage more openly about solitary confinement (or ‘segregation’) practices. This review was afforded every possible assistance in accessing facilities and data, and our questions were answered openly. It is my sincere hope, and belief, that the increased transparency and willingness to engage will also translate into more openness and better practices on the ground. The mandate of Corrections’ Inspectorate, the body charged with prison inspections, investigating prisoner complaints and investigating deaths in custody, has widened since my last visit and, with the regular publication of inspection reports (even if partially redacted), the Inspectorate has become much more visible publicly. Though not a body operating under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture ((OPCAT), see Appendix 2), the Inspectorate’s work is guided, inter alia, by international principles and guidance. This was a welcome development. Responding to our request for information on developments since the original review and the degree to which recommendations were met, the Department of Corrections highlighted a number of issues: On oversight of placement into and routes out of segregation, the Department pointed to a strengthened role for the Office of the Inspectorate. In relation to At Risk Units, the Department pointed to initiatives on the back of the ‘Transforming the Management of At-Risk Prisoners Review’ to better assess mental health issues, guide placements and provide individualised care. They noted that this had been supported by the recruitment of more clinical staff and a significant mental health training programme for staff. The Corrections Amendment Act that came into effect in October 2019 had introduced a new regime for managing at risk prisoners, increasing opportunities for association and input from health professionals. 14