Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:14 pm
Time: 10:14 pm
Results for solitary confinement (u.s.; north carolina)
1 results foundAuthor: Bowers, Mark Title: Solitary Confinement as Torture Summary: The Immigration/Human Rights Policy Clinic (I/HRP)(now the Human Rights Policy Seminar) at the University of North Carolina School of Law is committed to exposing violations of the basic human rights of both citizens and visitors of this state and nation. This policy report seeks to contribute to a growing national advocacy movement that has identified solitary confinement as cruel, inhuman, and degrading form of punishment that is - or at the very least approximates - torture and a severe form of human rights violation and seeks to bring about the end of its use. Torture is one of the basest violations of human rights and shared democratic ideals. Under North Carolina's state constitution, the federal constitution, as well as international law, the nation and the state of North Carolina must not be complicit in any act that falls within this category of atrocity. The duty to take responsibility for human rights violations encompasses the obligation to enlarge an understanding of that which constitutes torture and how it is manifested in various institutions and implemented by various actors. In this interest, as citizens, as concerned human beings, and as advocates, students, faculty, and collaborating advocacy partners endeavored to investigate and shine a light on the realities of the use of solitary confinement within the prison system with a focus on the state of North Carolina. To this end, the authors have relied on a wide range of sources to parse out not only the practice and the outcomes of isolation, but also the evolution of the substantive response to this condition of confinement. This report examines the U.S. Constitution and its protections, the international standards that the United States as a nation has endorsed, as well as North Carolina state legal protections. The conclusion reached is stark and straightforward: solitary confinement is ineffective at decreasing violence within prisons; it is ineffective at preserving public safety; it is ineffective at managing scarce monetary resources; and it violates the boundaries of human dignity and justice. Present efforts to redress this injustice have been, thus far, largely ineffective. Laws and the courts that interpret them must evolve according to the growing body of research that demonstrates that solitary confinement violates basic constitutional and human rights. This report is presented in three parts. SECTION ONE gathers data on the issue of solitary confinement and seeks to define, expose, and delegitimize the practice as inhumane and ineffective. It commences with the narratives of prisoners who have suffered or are suffering long term isolation. These in-depth stories are complemented by the results of a survey that was sent to North Carolina prisoners as a means to get a broader view of conditions of confinement from those on the inside. Added to this evidence are statistics derived from the Department of Public Safety's own database. SECTION ONE also recounts narratives from prisoners in other states who tell similar stories of deprivation and the struggle to maintain their sanity while confined to conditions of isolation. It then reviews the findings of research and studies by mental health professionals, penologists, and criminologists and summarizes the effects of solitary confinement from the perspectives of these experts. SECTION ONE concludes with an overview of the findings from other national advocacy and reform efforts. SECTION TWO explores the substantive legal policy issues related to solitary confinement. It begins with an overview of constitutional jurisprudence, with a focus on Eighth Amendment concerns and the applicability of due process protections. It demonstrates how the current state of the law fails prisoners who would try to challenge their conditions of solitary confinement as a matter of conceptual legal norms and application. It reveals the obstacles prisoners face even when they can show objectively that solitary confinement puts them at extreme risk of irreparable mental or other harm, and the difficulties they face in overcoming the burden of showing deliberate indifference by the officers who sent them to solitary because those officers can point to forty years of jurisprudence holding otherwise. It reveals the need for a different and evolved Eight Amendment interpretation - one that is based on the reality of the practices of prolonged isolation, the research that demonstrates its wrongfulness and ineffectiveness, and basic principles of human dignity. SECTION TWO then turn to the standards of international human rights that have been established by various treaties to which this nation is a signatory. The Convention Against Torture, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as other firmly established international and regional human rights norms prohibit the use of torture under any circumstances, and these prohibitions are fully applicable to solitary confinement. Lastly SECTION TWO considers national standards promulgated by the American Bar Association and the American Correctional Association, possible approaches and remedies based on the laws of state of North Carolina and then compares North Carolina to such national standards. Finally, SECTION THREE offers recommendations for reform. It begins from the premise that solitary confinement is both immoral and ineffective. It considers, as preliminary steps toward the abandonment of the use of isolation as a form of punishment, "technical" reforms that would strictly limit and regulate the practice. More to the point, it then suggests systemic reforms including reducing prison populations, emphasizing rehabilitation, changing institutional prison culture, and ultimately advocates for a complete ban on solitary confinement. SECTION THREE identifies advocacy strategies for reaching reform goals, including litigation, legislative initiatives, and community outreach and organizing. As stated at the outset of this Executive Summary, the conclusion reached is stark and straightforward: solitary confinement is ineffective at decreasing violence within prisons; it is ineffective at preserving public safety; it is ineffective at managing scarce monetary resources; and it violates the boundaries of human dignity and justice. Details: Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina School of Law Immigration/Human Rights Clinic; North Carolina Prisoners Legal Services; In Cooperation With American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, 2014. 225p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 12, 2014 at: http://www.law.unc.edu/documents/academics/humanrights/solitaryconfinement/fullreport.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.unc.edu/documents/academics/humanrights/solitaryconfinement/fullreport.pdf Shelf Number: 134023 Keywords: Human Rights AbusesIsolationPrisonersPunishmentSolitary Confinement (U.S.; North Carolina)Torture |