Should Prisons Officers Pay Damages for Beating Inmates?

The issue of prisoner abuse in Trinidad and Tobago took a new turn recently. While an historic National Restorative Conference was taking place in Port of Spain, a High Court Judge was adjudicating the award of damages for 2 inmates who had sued the State for injuries sustained during a beating received from prisons officers.

“Justice Frank Seepersad, in delivering a ruling at the Hall of Justice in Port of Spain yesterday in favour of two prisoners who were beaten by officers, said taxpayers were being over-burdened by their money being used to pay such costs”. He opined that prisons officers may not engage in such use of unreasonable force against inmates if they knew that they would be required to pay part or all of the Court’s award of damages.

Seepersad said the time had come for the State to stop “abdicating its responsibilities” and implement prison reform, pointing out there was an urgent need to train and equip officers who, on a daily basis, were required to deal with difficult conditions and operate under “psychological warfare” as they carried out their duties.

He said despite there being talks concerning the abuse of prisoners, there were still inadequacies relating to the implementation of systems to deal with the issue. The judge said proper training of officers might ensure they did not overstep their boundaries when faced with situations where they were met with resistance by inmates, but would instead employ other methods apart from that of unreasonable force.

He added that despite being convicted, prisoners still had their constitutional human rights, saying there was a need for a review of prison rules and even though draft rules were in circulation, the system was still operating under archaic ones. “The urgent implementation of new systems must be done as a matter of urgency,” he said.

In view of the intention of the Ministry of Justice to proceed with the development of a national restorative justice policy, it would be interesting for them to take the initiative to have restorative conferences or circles around these issues. Such interventions would bring together inmates, officers, their respective supporters and key community stakeholders discuss the issues of prisoner abuse and arrive at solutions to repair the harm caused, address causal factors of the officers’ behaviour and develop possible policy and operations changes to reduce the likelihood of future inmate abuses through use of unreasonable force.

While the learned judge may well be correct in his recommendations, we believe that having the Prisons Service and the particular officers participate actively in a discussion of the issues and agree with other stakeholders (including key officials of the Ministry of Justice) as to the way forward would bring genuine change to the prisons for the benefit of officers, inmates, the State and taxpayers alike.

For more on this news item, please see the Trinidad Express article here.

Country Report on T&T Human Rights Practices

In March 2008 the United States Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor published its annual Country reports on Human Rights Practices worldwide.

With respect to Trinidad and Tobago, the report expressed concern over incidents of alleged cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment:-

“Although the constitution and the law prohibit such practices, there were credible reports that police officers and prison guards mistreated individuals under arrest or in detention.”

In referring specifically to prison and detention center conditions, the report conceded that, while conditions in the prison system’s eight facilities were somewhat upgraded, they continued to be harsh.

In purporting to quote the Prison Service Commissioner, the report states that the number of prisoners at the Port of Spain prison, originally designed to accommodate 250 inmates, increased to 599 in 2007, compared to 554 in 2006. The average number of prisoners in each 10- by 10-foot cell increased to a maximum of eight.

According to prison authorities, at the end of 2007 they had brought charges against 23 prison officers for assault and battery or for poor conduct on the job, including possession of narcotics and provision of cell phones to inmates.

One notable incident of death in custody which raises concerns for the safety of prisoners in general is that of the August 3rd death of Letroy Beepath. Mr. Beepath died from alleged blunt trauma to the chest while in remand at Golden Grove Prison.

On August 22, 2007 the police completed their investigation into Beepath’s death and submitted the case to the chief of homicide investigations, where it remained at year’s end.

The September 19, 2007 alleged suicide of Golden Grove Prison inmate Kurt Alexander also raises questions of the safety of incarcerated persons. Mr. Alexander allegedly hanged himself in his cell while awaiting trial for sexually assaulting a four-year-old boy in 2004.

Despite recommendations that he be isolated due to two unsuccessful suicide attempts, Alexander was kept in a cell with six other prisoners.

CURB calls for an independent inquiry to be launched by the Office of the Ombudsman into deaths in custody of remanded and convicted persons over the past 20 years.

We also desire that the Forensic Sciences Department of the Ministry of National Security be mandated to investigate and make notes as to the state of the genital organs and anal cavities of all inmates who die in custody.

It is only in this way that the loved ones of those who die in custody would be able to obtain true justice.