Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:11 pm
Time: 8:11 pm
Results for correctional institutions (india)
1 results foundAuthor: Karnam, Murati Title: Conditions of Detention in the Prisons of Karnataka: 2007-08 Summary: In the sixty years of Indian independence no specific study on Karnataka’s prison conditions has ever been commissioned by any government. The members of the All India Commission on Prison Reforms (1980-83) visited the state’s prisons but did not devote any chapter or part of their report to prisons in Karnataka. CHRI had, by chance, received favourable signals from the then head of the state’s Prison Department, Mr. S. T. Ramesh regarding the possibility of undertaking a study, and approached him with a proposal to study the prison conditions from the perspective of prison visitors. An earlier experience of conducting a study of prisons revealed that “permission” did not always guarantee full or sufficient access on the ground. Governments in the past had granted CHRI limited permission to study certain aspects of prisons after repeated lobbying and recommendation from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), but the permission itself had several restrictions on the purview of the study. This makes any study extremely limited, leaving very little room for analysis or intervention. CHRI began the study in Karnataka by focusing on the assessment of the day-to-day functioning of the prison visiting system. It was discovered that the system was so politicised that it was nearly dysfunctional. Consequently, CHRI expanded its focus to include other important aspects of civil society and government engagement with the prisons. Gradually, we found we were given access without restrictions although this was unexpected. These factors conditioned the nature and purview of this report and the fluid boundaries in terms of time frame and the subject of investigation reflect the gradual and negotiated access granted as the study progressed. The lesson we learnt was that one needs to adopt a step-by-step engagement approach, which to a large extent, conditions civil society interventions in prisons. The members of the All India Commission on Prison Reforms (1980-83) visited the state’s prisons but did not devote any chapter or part of their report to prisons in Karnataka. CHRI had, by chance, received favourable signals from the then head of the state’s Prison Department, Mr. S. T. Ramesh regarding the possibility of undertaking a study, and approached him with a proposal to study the prison conditions from the perspective of prison visitors. An earlier experience of conducting a study of prisons revealed that “permission” did not always guarantee full or sufficient access on the ground. Governments in the past had granted CHRI limited permission to study certain aspects of prisons after repeated lobbying and recommendation from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), but the permission itself had several restrictions on the purview of the study. This makes any study extremely limited, leaving very little room for analysis or intervention. CHRI began the study in Karnataka by focusing on the assessment of the day-to-day functioning of the prison visiting system. It was discovered that the system was so politicised that it was nearly dysfunctional. Consequently, CHRI expanded its focus to include other important aspects of civil society and government engagement with the prisons. Gradually, we found we were given access without restrictions although this was unexpected. These factors conditioned the nature and purview of this report and the fluid boundaries in terms of time frame and the subject of investigation reflect the gradual and negotiated access granted as the study progressed. The lesson we learnt was that one needs to adopt a step-by-step engagement approach, which to a large extent, conditions civil society interventions in prisons. The members of the All India Commission on Prison Reforms (1980-83) visited the state’s prisons but did not devote any chapter or part of their report to prisons in Karnataka. CHRI had, by chance, received favourable signals from the then head of the state’s Prison Department, Mr. S. T. Ramesh regarding the possibility of undertaking a study, and approached him with a proposal to study the prison conditions from the perspective of prison visitors. An earlier experience of conducting a study of prisons revealed that “permission” did not always guarantee full or sufficient access on the ground. Governments in the past had granted CHRI limited permission to study certain aspects of prisons after repeated lobbying and recommendation from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), but the permission itself had several restrictions on the purview of the study. This makes any study extremely limited, leaving very little room for analysis or intervention. CHRI began the study in Karnataka by focusing on the assessment of the day-to-day functioning of the prison visiting system. It was discovered that the system was so politicised that it was nearly dysfunctional. Consequently, CHRI expanded its focus to include other important aspects of civil society and government engagement with the prisons. Gradually, we found we were given access without restrictions although this was unexpected. These factors conditioned the nature and purview of this report and the fluid boundaries in terms of time frame and the subject of investigation reflect the gradual and negotiated access granted as the study progressed. The lesson we learnt was that one needs to adopt a step-by-step engagement approach, which to a large extent, conditions civil society interventions in prisons. The CHRI team familiarised itself with the basic features of different categories of prisons and jails and tried to study every segment in order to arrive at a comprehensive picture of their functioning. As on 15 January 2008, only 83 out of 99 institutions were functioning, which were under the general supervision of the Prison Department. Of the remaining institutions, the oldest ones were closed owing to defects in the buildings, such as leaking roofs and clogged drainage systems; while the newly built ones were not open due to a shortage of staff. The team visited 39 institutions of various categories. These included all seven central prisons; seven of the eleven functioning district prisons; three of the four district headquarter sub-jails; seven of the 30 taluka sub-jails under the Prison Department; 12 of the 28 taluka sub-jails under the control of the Revenue Department; and one of the two special sub-jails. Details: New Delhi: Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, 2010. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 11, 2011 at: http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/prisons/conditions_of_detention_in_the_prisons_of_karnataka.pdf Year: 2010 Country: India URL: http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/prisons/conditions_of_detention_in_the_prisons_of_karnataka.pdf Shelf Number: 120747 Keywords: Correctional Institutions (India)Jails (India)Prisons (India) |