Last week, we were at the BC Court of Appeal, together with the Native Women’s Association of Canada, to argue once again, that the court must protect the rights of Indigenous women and women with disabling mental illness in federal prisons.
The BC Supreme Court ruled early this year that the laws that allow for “administrative segregation” violate fundamental rights protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The case was filed by our friends at the BC Civil Liberties Association and the John Howard Society of Canada, who were successful in arguing the case before the trial judge.
Photo Credit: Carles Rabada on Unsplash
Throughout, the government has dangled the possibility of reform before prison advocates. Some policy changes to administrative segregation were made part way through the trial. And just last month, the government proposed a law in Parliament (Bill C-83) which aims to replace administrative and disciplinary segregation with something called “structured intervention units.” The government is pitching its proposed law as an entirely different approach within a different system. However, the government’s actions and words are out of sync, as they have gone full steam ahead with their appeal. Bill C-83 is not the answer to the very real abuses that occur when guards have a lot of power, prisoners are seen first and foremost as bundles of risks and as security threats, and where isolation becomes a matter of convenience.
[W]e simply can’t pretend that all the correctional system needs are a few tweaks.
Now that the dust is settling, we thought we’d share why we at West Coast LEAF are against solitary confinement and why we see this work as vital in the fight for gender equality.
1. Whatever name you give it, isolating prisoners is harmful.
After hearing the evidence, including from former and current prisoners testifying to their direct experience of solitary confinement, the judge in the BC case concluded that indefinite periods of isolation cause significant harm to mental and physical health. Symptoms include psychosis, hallucination, panic attacks, and depression.
We know from the preventable and unacceptable deaths of Ashley Smith, Veronica Park, Camille Strickland-Murphy, Adam Capay, Eddie Snowshoe and others that isolation greatly increases not only the risk but the reality of prisoners harming themselves or ending their lives. When a prison sentence becomes a death sentence, we simply can’t pretend that all the correctional system needs are a few tweaks.
2. Solitary confinement harms everyone, but it especially harms particularly vulnerable prisoners.
Prisoner advocates have called attention to how isolation has especially harmful effects on Indigenous people, prisoners with existing disabling mental health conditions, youth, trans people, and those with multiple vulnerabilities.
By doing nothing to address their underlying problems, and piling on additional trauma and harm, we are simply setting ourselves up to fail.
This is a huge concern when we recognize that Indigenous women are the fastest growing prison population and are also overrepresented in high security institutions and in solitary confinement. Many are now calling “prisons the new residential schools.”
3. The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) has a terrible track record
Since at least 1994, when an inquiry was held into the strip searching and segregation of women prisoners at the Kingston Prison for Women, criticism has mounted against the CSC. Many taskforces and reports have since then documented the abuses of solitary confinement.
Calls for independent oversight and other changes have been largely ignored. Even when CSC makes changes, the way they are put into practice leaves much to be desired. Consider the policy change from last summer, described as an important change for managing prisoners with significant mental health needs. In reality this new process was effectively flagging only those prisoners who otherwise meet conditions for being committed to a mental health facility.
Bill C-83 is not the answer to the very real abuses that occur when guards have a lot of power, prisoners are seen first and foremost as bundles of risks and as security threats, and where isolation becomes a matter of convenience.
Changing the language in the law tells us nothing about how staff will understand their responsibility. Past practice doesn’t give us much cause for optimism.
4. Isolating prisoners is not the only option.
CSC often defends its use of isolation by saying that there are no other reasonable options to keep peace and order in prisons. This plays to a misconception that solitary confinement is only used to imprison “the worst of the worst.”
Photo Credit: Alex Ronsdorf on Unsplash
In fact, as recently as 2015, nearly half of all prisoners had spent some time in solitary confinement and the use of solitary has varied significantly across regions and across institutions.
Alternatives to solitary confinement exist and we can look to the experience of other jurisdictions to guide a human rights and dignity-based approach to corrections.
5. Isolating prisoners makes no sense at all.
If upholding human rights is not reason enough (and we definitely think it is), isolating prisoners makes no sense for safety and security either. The vast majority of prisoners in Canadian prisons are released. Isolating them is a near-guarantee that they won’t get the support, care, counselling, education, training or programming they need to succeed in community.
Group programs are proven to be the most effective. Yet these are out of reach for prisoners in isolation, and their options to learn marketable job skills are non-existent. By doing nothing to address their underlying problems, and piling on additional trauma and harm, we are simply setting ourselves up to fail at rehabilitation and reintegration. That’s not going to keep anyone safe.
Alternatives to solitary confinement exist and we can look to the experience of other jurisdictions to guide a human rights and dignity-based approach to corrections.
What are we talking about when it comes to solitary confinement?
“Administrative segregation” is the legal term that describes Canada’s solitary confinement of prisoners for up to 22 hours a day when prison authorities say it is necessary for “safety and security” reasons. These reasons include putting someone in solitary to stop them from possibly interfering with an investigation at the prison, or if guards think a prisoner could be a threat to the safety of another prisoner.
The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) says this “administrative” type of isolation is different from when solitary confinement is used to punish a prisoner (known as disciplinary segregation). CSC has argued that the difference is in their intention; specifically, that they are not using solitary confinement to punish a prisoner when they do it for safety and security reasons. The law does allow solitary confinement as a punishment when a prisoner has broken certain prison rules (such as fighting, destroying property, or failing to provide a urine sample, etc.).
The law gives prison authorities a lot of power over when to use solitary confinement as a “safety and security” response. There is a vast gray zone around what “safety and security” actually means. While there are limits on how much time a prisoner spends in solitary confinement for a disciplinary reason, to this day, there is no time limit on solitary confinement for an administrative reason, and no way to have it reviewed by someone outside the prison system.
These are just five reasons, among many, that are driving our work to seek justice for those who are criminalized.
Photo Credit: niu niu on Unsplash
Raji Mangat is the Director of Litigation with West Coast LEAF.
Questions? Feedback? Email us at blog@westcoastleaf.org