Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:48 pm
Time: 11:48 pm
Results for immigrant detainees
1 results foundAuthor: Parliamentary Ombudsman, The, Norway Title: Visit Report: The Police Immigration Detention Centre at Trandem 19-21 May 2015 Summary: The NPM visited the police immigration detention centre at Trandum in the period 19-21 May 2015. The visit was unannounced. The detention centre has the capacity to hold 140 detainees, and the plan is to extend the capacity to include another 90 places in 2016. The detainees do not have legal residence in Norway and have been detained on grounds of suspicion that they have given a false identity or to prevent them from evading the enforcement of a final decision requiring them to leave the country. Being detained at Trandum is not the consequence of a criminal offence and does not therefore constitute punishment. During the visit, an inspection was carried out of the detention centre's premises, meetings were held with the administration, union representatives, lawyers and medical personnel, and necessary documentation was obtained. The most important part of the visit was to conduct private interviews with detainees. The NPM interviewed a total of 60 of the 100 detainees. The NPM was accompanied by two government authorised interpreters (Russian and Arabic/French). Telephone interpreting was also used. The administration and staff at the detention centre provided good assistance during the visit, by obtaining the requested information and providing free access to all areas of the detention centre. The NPM's right to conduct private interviews with the detainees was adequately provided for. In the early hours of 21 May, the NPM also observed an escorted deportation of eleven individuals from the time that they left the detention centre until they boarded a chartered flight from Gardermoen airport. The NPM emphasises as a positive factor that the detainees mostly had positive things to say about the detention centre staff. Many of them stated that they were treated with respect and received the necessary assistance in their day-to-day pursuits. Another positive finding was that, according to the NPM's observations, the deportation on 21 May was performed in a dignified and professional manner. One of the main findings during the visit was excessive attention to control and security at the expense of the individual detainee's integrity. This has also been pointed out by the Parliamentary Ombudsman after previous visits. Many of the detainees felt that they were treated as criminals, even though they had not been convicted of a crime. Several described the humiliation of undergoing a body search on arrival and after all visits. The body search entailed the removal of all clothing and that the detainee had to squat over a mirror on the floor so that the staff could check whether they had concealed items in their rectum or genital area. The detainees perceived it as especially upsetting that a full body search was conducted after all visits, even when staff members had been present in the room during the visit. Many were also frustrated that they were not given access to their mobile phone and that they were locked in their rooms during evenings, at night and for shorter periods during the day. The detention centre uses largely the same security procedures as the correctional services, including procedures for locking detainees in and out of their rooms, the use of security cells and solitary confinement, and room searches. In some respects, as in the case of full body searches after visits, the procedures appear to be more intrusive than in many prisons. In addition to concerns about the overall control regime, it should be noted that all these control measures can result in more unrest and undesirable incidents rather than a sense of security. The immigration detention centre does not appear to be a suitable place for children. In 2014, 330 children were detained, 10 of them without adult guardians. There were no children at the detention centre at the time of the NPM's visit. The atmosphere at the detention centre appears to be characterised by stress and unrest. Several incidents have taken place at the detention centre in 2014 and 2015, including major rebellions. The incidents have included breaking of furniture and fixtures, self-harm, suicide attempts and use of force. This is not deemed to be a satisfactory psychosocial environment for children. In two instances, children have also witnessed parental self-harm. Several weaknesses were also found to exist in the delivery of health services. A clear majority of the detainees were critical of the health services offered by the detention centre. Among other things, the criticism concerned factors such as a lack of confidentiality, availability and follow-up. The immigration detention centre purchases health services from a private health enterprise based on a contract between the enterprise and the National Police Immigration Service (NPIS). The contractual relationship between the health enterprise's doctors and the NPIS raises questions about the health service’s professional independence. This may undermine the relationship of trust between patients and medical personnel and may weaken the health service's assessments. The health service also includes two nurses. They are temporarily employed by the police. This arrangement may also give rise to doubt about the health service's professional independence. Health interviews with newly arrived detainees were not conducted as a matter of routine, despite clear recommendations from the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). Detainees are often particularly at risk of poor somatic and mental health. A medical examination on arrival can provide an overview of the detainee's immediate medical needs, document any physical injuries and detect infectious diseases and suicide risk. The detainees also did not have access to mental health care over and above emergency assistance, among other things because of a lack of rights. In addition, the health department lacked procedures for systematic follow-up of persons who are particularly vulnerable as a result of long-term detention. Other findings during the visit include shortcomings in administrative decisions on the use of isolation and security cells, few organised activities, unclear legal authority for locking detainees in their rooms, lack of information on arrival, whether the food that is served is sufficiently nutritious, routine visit control and lack of access to mobile phones. Details: Oslo, Norway: Parliamentary Ombudsmen, 2015. 44 p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 12, 2019 at: https://www.sivilombudsmannen.no/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2015-Rapport-Police-immigration-detention-centre-Visit-report-EN.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Norway URL: https://www.sivilombudsmannen.no/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2015-Rapport-Police-immigration-detention-centre-Visit-report-EN.pdf Shelf Number: 154083 Keywords: European Committee for the Prevention of Torture Immigrant DetaineesImmigrantsImmigration DetentionNational Prevention Mechanism against Torture and |