Practicing Human Rights in Prisons - Literature review Example

Practicing Human Rights in Prisons An Analysis “Human rights” is a modern term but the principle that it invokes is as old as humanity. It is that certain rights and freedoms are fundamental to human existence. They are inherent entitlements that come to every person as a consequence of being human, and are founded on respect for the dignity and worth of each person. They are not privileges… They cannot be denied, nor can they be forfeited because an individual has committed any offence or broken any law. (The UN, 2005, p.4) Introduction Prisons and prison-management have gained great significance because, prison place side by side, at least a few law-breakers along with many law-enforcers; a clash of interests naturally occurs creating tensions between the two groups. While on the one hand the number of law-breakers in a society increases, the need for maintaining law-order too increases on the other, reflecting the inherent chaos and violence in the situation. The recent Geneva conventions and instruments advocated by the United Nations have stressed on the practice of Human Rights in prison management. In the following few pages, the challenges posed by a human rights approach to prison management shall be examined and evaluated, taking into account some psychological theories like Goffman (1959& 1961) and research findings like the Stanford Prison Experiment (1971) with regard to the role of the self and personality in human behaviour. These findings have significantly modified our understanding of prisoners, prison life and also the psychology of law-enforcers in prisons, and in the process of analyzing them it is envisaged to gain some insights on specific role of the self in the human rights approach to prison management. Abu Gharib Torture Recently, news regarding torture and ill-treatment of prisoners and inmates at the West Asian prison of Abu Gharib in the strife-torn nation of Iraq hit the deadlines of many newspapers and TV media. Seymour M. Hersh’s (2004) reported of the secretly recorded torture and ill-treatment at the hands of General Karpinski, and other military personnel from her battalion and put the entire civilized world into shame at the inhuman treatment. Furthermore, it was reported that, these military officers who were given the task of running the prison, did not have any idea regarding how to go about their task, nor had had any training on that kind of job. The tortures ranged from forcing the prisoners commit cheap sexual acts on one another, keeping them naked, or smearing them with human excrement, to killing them for no reason (Hersh, 2004, pp. 1-3). One wonders, what makes these ordinary men and women who wear the military attire and protect their homeland from enemies, commit such unspeakable, heinous and inhuman crimes on innocent, fellow human beings? What makes these men and women act like animals? Is the helpless condition of the prisoners? Or the dress, the power vested on the prison administrators or it is the society with its wrong social attitudes or is it a combination of all the above? It is also pertinent to note that most of the inmates who were tortured were innocent teenagers, women and harmless adult men, who had nothing to do with terrorism or the state (Hersh, 2004). What are the lessons to be learned from this prison torture episode with regard to prison management? Human Behaviour - Cognitive Dissonance & Role of Self The answer to the above may lie in educating ourselves on the interesting subject of human behaviour. For example, the above phenomenon of one group of human beings torturing others without remorse or regret can be explained by the theory of Cognitive Dissonance constructed by Leon Festinger (1957). This theory concerns the relationships that exist between cognitions. According to this theory, a cognition is understood to be some piece of knowledge. Since everyone holds a number of cognitions at the same time, they tend to form irrelevant, opposite or “dissonant relationships with one another” (Rudolph cited in Curran & Takata, 2006, p.1). Furthermore, psychologists explain what is called “confirmation bias” (Grohol, 2008, p. 1) by applying cognitive dissonance to practical situations in life; when people don’t like to believe that they are wrong, they may limit their input of fresh information regarding those things in ways that do not exactly conform to their earlier beliefs. Like in the Abu Gharib torture episode, Hersh (2004) reports that the officers referred to the inmates as ‘animals’ and not human beings. Thus, the military personnel, who may have been normal human beings with the belief that it is wrong to kill human beings and did want to kill human beings, due to the difference in cultural beliefs and race and colour of the prisoners, satisfied themselves that the prisoners were “animals” and not human beings, and therefore they (the torturers) were not wrong in committing the heinous crimes that they did. Another important theory on social human behaviour that is relevant to prison management is Erving Goffman’s The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959) theory that uses the metaphor of stage to explain the acts of human beings. In this work, Goff man (1959) explains that life is really a social drama, a stage, wherein all human beings acting for each other; this means, that in social interactions, human beings put on an act of what they are or what role they are playing, and modify their behaviour in order to suit the society’s idea of that role-model. This process of impressing others is executed in different ways like, their dress, how they speak or converse to others, eat and walk and the like. Particularly relevant to our subject of prison management is the psychologist’s posit that the role is played by each actor or person, is according to one’s own view of what reality is (1959, p. 28), and is supported by settings like in a drama stage. Therefore, applying this to already conflict filled prison environment, some administrators may perceive the prisoners as lesser than human beings or unfit to live in a civil society, and they – the administrators in the costume of guardians of justice, may tend to hold a hostile attitude towards prisoners and oppress them. Proof in Stanford Prison Experiment With a view to studying the feelings of prisoners and their personalities, a few Stanford University social psychologist headed by Philip G. Zimbardo, conducted a research to study “the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or prison guard,” the “effects of this institution on the behaviour of all those within its walls” (http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-3.htm), in “a simulated prison” (http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-4.htm). They chose and paid young, mentally and physically healthy volunteers and at random, assigned them roles to play – as prison guards and prison inmates. The researchers copied the atmosphere of real prisons in as many ways as possible, and even confined some prisoners to solitary confinement in order to make it appear real. The prisoners were given numbers (http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-11.htm) that identified them, costumes like the prison inmates, and prison guards and dark sun glasses that hid their real feelings, and so on. So what were the findings of this research conducted by Zimbardo et al (1971)? They inferences of this research are important, because they confirm Goffman’s (1959) theories on the role of self. In the short period of the research study, the volunteers had transformed themselves from ordinary participants in the experiment to real prisoners or real prison administrators. Interestingly, they lost all consciousness of the fact that they were only volunteers and started believing that they were guards or prisoners, and exhibited/modified their behaviour accordingly. Thus, the prisoner-volunteers underwent great stress and showed distress while the guard-volunteers did not want to relent to the prison-break attempt of the prisoner-volunteers (http://www.prisonexp.org/slide-29.htm). This experiment has clearly shown how the mutual distrust and hostile attitudes of the two opposing groups in prisons led to many challenges and problems faced in many prisons round the world, today. Human Rights Approach and Education So what is the solution? How do we meet the challenges of opposing groups and personalities effectively and manage prisons with less confrontation and violence? While this is no easy task, requiring total dedication, the human rights approach proposed by Andrew Coyle (2002) offers astute and practical ways of meeting the problems effectively. Combined with the United Nations, New York and Geneva (2005) document on Human Rights and Prisons - Manual on Human Rights Training for Prison Officials, makes for comprehensive study of the human Rights approach, offering knowledge of international codes of law and also tips to follow clearer means of practicing it. So, what is A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management –Handbook for Prison Staff (Coyle 2002) all about? In a nutshell, Coyle’s work emphasizes “the importance of managing prisons within an ethical context which respects the humanity of everyone involved in a prison: prisoners, prison staff and visitors” (2002, p. 11). Starting from the selection process of prison staff every step is important according to the author. Coyle (2002) reasons that, “Prisons usually cannot select their prisoners; … They can, however, choose their staff; It is essential that the staff should be carefully selected, properly trained, supervised and supported” (p. 13). Coyle (2002) warns of the unique situation of prisons which insulates both prisoners and the guards to some extent (p.14) and states that the recruitment must be based on a clear set of well defined codes. Coyle (2002) stresses that the criteria for selection of staff should include tests in personal integrity, positive response to stress, tendency to use minimum force in difficult situations, and persons who have no personal discrimination of racial grounds (p.20). Very importantly, Coyle (2002) in dealing with the operation of safe, secure and orderly prisons, examines all possible dangers and challenges that can occur to various groups in a prison environment “The potential for a break down in good order exists even in the best managed prisons; It is always possible that an individual prisoner will attack staff or other prisoners … prisoners may decide that they are not prepared to observe the legitimate rules of the prison and will attempt a concerted revolt, either through a riot or by taking hostages” (p. 69). He further suggests practical ways of putting human rights approach to work “The first message which staff must learn is that prevention is always better than cure; It is extremely rare that a major incident will occur without any prior warning” (Coyle 2002, p. 70). Later, talking of the disciplinary procedures and punishments, he rightly observes “By their nature prisons are closed institutions in which large groups of people are held against their will in confined conditions; From time to time it is inevitable that some prisoners will break the rules and regulations of the prison in a variety of ways” (p. 75). He also suggests that clear set of codes of management, training of staff, fairness of punishment are some ways to meet the situation with human rights in mind (Coyle 2002, pp.76-8). The ways suggested by Coyle (2002) may require some education and dedication, however, have the potential to reap rich rewards for prison staff by practice of human rights approach with an understanding of the role of self in prison management. Conclusion The torture and ill-treatment of prisoners at Abu Gharib prison in Iraq have shown how people modify their cognitions to assuage their inner conflicts. Goffman’s theory on the role of self in the stage of life, has also shed important light on the role of individual personality’s perception of reality, and their responses to prison environment, as demonstrated in Stanford University Prison Experiment (1971). The human rights approach to meet the challenges of prison management (Coyle 2002) with an understanding of the role of self is well worth considering as an effective tool of practice to control and manage prisons with as minimum violence and harm as possible, even though it requires dedicated efforts. The study has proved to be enlightening in ways and means of efficient prison management techniques. References Coyle, Andrew (2003). A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management available online accessed on 19 March, 2009. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/downloads/human_rights_prison_management.pdf Curran, Jeanne & Takata, R. Susan (2006). Frederick M. Rudolph’s page on Social Psychology. Online article, updated January 2006. Accessed on 19 March, 2009. http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/thcogndiss02.htm Goff man, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday. Grohol, M. John (2008) Fighting Cognitive Dissonance & The Lies We Tell Ourselves online article accessed on 19 March, 2009. http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2008/10/19/fighting-cognitive-dissonance-the-lies-we-tell-ourselves/ Hersh, Seymour (2004). “Annals of National Security - Torture at Abu Ghraib American soldiers brutalized Iraqis. How far up does the responsibility go?” in The NewYorker dated May 10, 2004. Accessed on 19 March, 2009. http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/10/040510fa_fact Zimbardo, Philip (1971).The Stanford Prison Experiment Research. Available online. www.prionexp.org. Accessed on 19 March, 2009. The UN (2005). Human Rights and Prisons - Manual on Human Rights Training for Prison Officials. Professional Training Series No. 11. Available online, accessed on 19 March, 2009. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/training11en.pdf Read More