Successive reforms have attempted to promote equal treatment for inmates and the general population, but it appears that access to health care remains problematic. Section A of this document will study the living conditions of the detainees and their health, and section B will focus on the security requirements which are often fore-grounded, as these are the main concerns of prison management. The decision to place a prisoner in isolation is taken for a period of three months, and may be renewed again for the same duration. This provision of the code has been amended not lesser than four times.
[...] CCNE seems to put a point on the issue of individual cells as it does not mince words in explaining that "detention in solitary confinement - which is sought for years as a measure to protect the physical integrity stipulated as the rule for the defendants, unless waived by the Code of Criminal Procedure, and whose application is constantly being postponed in jails - has been implemented as part of a punishment posing severe risks to the inmate for his mental health.” 3. [...]
[...] Thus, in theory, inmates in solitary confinement should have access to the ordinary prison regime. However, in practice one finds that it is not easy to provide an ordinary schedule, since by definition they are deprived of contact from the other inmates and stuck in the same activities. Therefore it becomes difficult not to consider isolation as a penalty. Under this measure, it should be noted that the prisoner has remedies available to him. Section D of the Criminal Procedure Code allows "the detainee or the parties” to lodge an administrative complaint to be referred to the regional director, a principal or the Minister of Justice. [...]
[...] Whatever the mode of decision, the prisoner must be notified at least three days in advance of the commencement of the period of solitary confinement, except in an emergency (in which case it will be a temporary investment justified by exceptional circumstances and that exceeds five days). Though the measure may seem necessary, it is nevertheless disturbing for the inmates. Keeping in mind the fact that one of the primary objectives of prison is to prepare the inmate for reintegration, one is compelled to question the advisability of such a measure. The Code of Criminal Procedure states that solitary confinement is not a disciplinary measure. [...]
[...] Section D of the Code of Criminal Procedure places the doctor in an uncomfortable situation because it requires him to undertake consultation (required by inmates or prison staff) and make visits to the segregation and isolation ward whenever they deem necessary and not less than twice a week. It has been revealed that the discomfort that exists among health care workers exist because a "real relationship of trust between doctor and patient could not be established” because the physician who is both the confidant and care taker of the patient is also the one who authorizes the continuation of disciplinary action which may jeopardize the inmate's mental health.” To conclude the discussion on these security measures, it is significant to highlight an apparent paradox. [...]
[...] " The public health code also affirms this principle by saying that "any person supported by a professional institution, a network of health or any other agency involved in the prevention and care are entitled the respect for private life and confidentiality of related information. While in theory medical confidentiality is clearly stated, it is nonetheless violated in practice. There is a constant presence of security forces during medical consultations in hospitals or during the administration of care. The circular of the Department of Corrections in 2004 is also incorrect in this sense since it provides for continuous monitoring. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
