Abstract
Body searches are inherently risky practices because they imply either physical contact between persons deprived of liberty and the prison staff, or nudity, or even both in the case of intrusive body cavity searches. The risk is high for these practices to be used or applied in such a way as to constitute degrading or inhuman treatment or even torture. Safeguards and legal frameworks have been developed to reduce these risks. The adoption of the 2015 Nelson Mandela Rules (Rules 50–52), the 2010 Bangkok Rules on Women Offenders (Rules 52, 53, 60), and the 2020 European Prison Rules (Rule 54) represents important and welcome protection against abuses. However, legal norms and standards are far from enough to ensure sufficient protection. Independent oversight is essential to monitor the gap between law and practice. Monitoring bodies, such as National Preventive Mechanisms (NPMs) designated under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against torture play a key role. They have access to places of detention at any time and they can also check information, registers, and files. More importantly, NPMs can conduct interviews in private with detainees of their choice. Cross-checking these different sources with information from authorities, NPMs will better understand the reality. They can analyse how the standards are applied in practice, monitoring where searches are conducted, who conducts them and how it is done. NPMs can also question practices, in particular blanket policies where body searches are conducted on a systematic basis. In addition, they can also pay particular attention to persons in situation of heightened vulnerability such as women, girls, or LGBTIQ+ persons detained. Last but not least, the role of monitoring bodies is to make concrete recommendations to assist States in reducing the risk of ill-treatment. NPMs can promote good practices found in different places or regions and propose revisions of regulations or procedures if necessary. Through dialogue with authorities, monitoring bodies can contribute to better-protecting persons deprived of liberty against the risks of abuses inherent in body searches; in reality and not just in law.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
These are prohibited by the ‘Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas’ (Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Resolution 1/08), principle XXI: ‘Intrusive vaginal or anal searches shall be forbidden by law’.
- 2.
Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted 18 December 2002 by the fifty-seventh session of the General Assembly of the United Nations by resolution A/RES/57/199.
- 3.
Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 1 of the UN Convention Against Torture, Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
- 4.
Article 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
- 5.
70th session of the UN General Assembly in Resolution A/RES/70/175, adopted on 17 December 2015.
- 6.
65th session of the UN General Assembly in Resolution A/RES/65/229, adopted on 16 March 2011.
- 7.
- 8.
Recommendation Rec(2006)2-rev of the Committee of Ministers to member States on the European Prison Rules (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 11 January 2006, at the 952nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies and revised and amended by the Committee of Ministers on 1 July 2020 at the 1380th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies).
- 9.
See also Principle XXI of the Principles and best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas.
- 10.
See APT OPCAT Database www.apt.ch.
- 11.
The Garante is quoting M. Palma L’idea della pena nel mondo globalizzato, in Rassegna penitenziaria e criminologica 2015, no. 2, pp. 215 and ff.
- 12.
On this, see the chapter by Falxa, this volume.
- 13.
‘The distinction between minimum and elementary is not secondary. A minimum standard is limited to indicating the threshold below which a particular aspect of detention is unacceptable and risks becoming an “inhuman or degrading treatment” – and a possible breach of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Thus, a downward target. An elementary standard indicates a reachable and accessible target and at the same time, indicates that change is possible, toward progressive improvement’ (Garante 2018: 6).
- 14.
Roth v. Germany, App. No. 6780/18 and 30776/18, 22 October 2020, para 72.
- 15.
Roth v. Germany, App. No. 6780/18 and 30776/18, 22 October 2020, para 72.
- 16.
Milka v. Poland, App. No. 14322/12, 15 September 2015.
References
APT. 2007. Letting in the light: 30 years of Torture Prevention. Geneva: APT. https://www.apt.ch/sites/default/files/publications/apt30years.pdf.
APT. 2018. Towards the effective protection of LGBTI persons deprived of liberty: A monitoring guide. Geneva: APT. https://www.apt.ch/en/resources/publications/towards-effective-protection-lgbti-persons-deprived-liberty-monitoring-guide.
APT. 2022. Women in detention: Body searches. Improving protection in situations of vulnerability. Geneva: APT. https://www.apt.ch/en/resources/publications/women-detention-body-searches
APT and PRI. 2015. Body searches: Addressing risk factors to prevent torture and ill-treatment, 2nd ed. London: PRI. https://cdn.penalreform.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/factsheet-4-searches-2nd-v5.pdf
CGLPL. 2016. Lettre à la Commission mixte paritaire, Assemblée nationale, 3 mai 2016. http://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Lettre-fouilles_CMP.pdf.
CGLPL. 2019. Contrôleur Général des Lieux de Privation de Liberté’s Minimum Recommendations to Respect the Dignity and Fundamental Rights of People Deprived of Liberty. Paris: CGLPL. https://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/CGLPL-Minimum-Recommendations_EN.pdf.
CGLPL. 2020a. Rapport de visite: 3 au 11 décembre 2020 – 2ème visite Centre pénitentiaire de Beauvais (Oise). Paris: CGLPL. https://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Rapport-de-la-deuxi%C3%A8me-visite-du-centre-p%C3%A9nitentiaire-de-Beauvais-Oise.pdf.
CGLPL. 2020b. Rapport de visite: 30 novembre au 7 décembre 2020 – 3ème visite Centre pénitentiaire de Villefranche-sur-Saône (Rhône). Paris: CGLPL. https://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Rapport-de-la-troisi%C3%A8me-visite-du-centre-p%C3%A9nitentiaire-de-Villefranche-sur-Sa%C3%B4ne-Rh%C3%B4ne.pdf.
CGLPL. 2020c. Rapport de visite: 2 au 13 mars 2020 – 2e visite Centre pénitentiaire des Baumettes à Marseille (Bouches-du-Rhône). Paris: CGLPL. https://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Rapport-de-la-deuxi%C3%A8me-visite-du-centre-p%C3%A9nitentiaire-des-Baumettes-%C3%A0-Marseille-Bouches-du-Rh%C3%B4ne.pdf.
CGLPL. 2021a. Rapport de visite: 11 au 15 janvier 2021 – 2ème visite Centre pénitentiaire d’Aiton (Savoie). Paris: CGLPL. https://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Rapport-de-la-deuxi%C3%A8me-visite-du-centre-p%C3%A9nitentiaire-dAiton-Savoie.pdf.
CGLPL. 2021b. Rapport de visite: 1er au 5 et 8 au 10 février 2021 – 2ème visite Centre Pénitentiaire de Lille-Loos-Sequedin (Nord). Paris: CGLPL. https://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021b/12/Rapport-de-la-deuxi%C3%A8me-visite-du-centre-p%C3%A9nitentiaire-de-Lille-Loos-S%C3%A9quedin-Nord.pdf.
CPT. 2018a. Factsheet: Women in prisons, CPT/Inf (2018) 5. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/168077ff14.
CPT. 2018b. Report to the Norwegian Government on the visit to Norway carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 28 May to 5 June 2018. CPT/Inf (2019) 1. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680909713.
CPT. 2019a. Report to the Slovak Government on the visit to the Slovak Republic carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 19 to 28 March 2018. CPT/Inf (2019) 20. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/168094fd71.
CPT. 2019b. Report to the Danish Government on the visit to Denmark carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 3 to 12 April 2019. CPT/Inf (2019) 35. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680996859.
CPT. 2019c. Report to the Estonian Government on the visit to Estonia carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 27 September to 5 October 2017. CPT/Inf (2019) 31. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/168098db93.
CPT. 2020. Report to the Portuguese Government on the visit to Portugal carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 3 to 12 December 2019. CPT/Inf (2020) 33. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680a05953.
CPT. 2021a. Rapport au Gouvernement de la Principauté de Monaco relatif à la visite effectuée à Monaco par le Comité européen pour la prévention de la torture et des peines ou traitements inhumains ou dégradants (CPT) du 15 au 18 septembre 2020. CPT/Inf (2021) 12. Strasbourg : Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680a2851d.
CPT. 2021b. Rapport au Gouvernement de la République française relatif à la visite effectuée en France par le Comité européen pour la prévention de la torture et des peines ou traitements inhumains ou dégradants (CPT) du 4 au 18 décembre 2019. CPT/Inf (2021) 14. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680a2f0a0.
CPT. 2021c. Report to the Spanish Government on the visit to Spain carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 14 to 28 September 2020. CPT/Inf (2021) 27. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680a47a76.
Garante. 2018. Norms and normativity, standards for the enforcement of adult sentencing; Collection of recommendations, 2016–2017. Rome. Garante. https://www.garantenazionaleprivatiliberta.it/gnpl/resources/cms/documents/d7716fed68164b657b6bb0a41db176ea.pdf.
Garante. 2020. Report to Parliament 2020. Rome. Garante https://www.garantenazionaleprivatiliberta.it/gnpl/resources/cms/documents/1a914f80cdad973aeaee49fbe15b2acd.pdf.
HMIP. 2017. Expectations: Criteria for assessing the treatment of and conditions for men in prisons. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2021/07/Expectations-FINAL-2021.pdf.
HMIP. 2021. Expectations: Criteria for assessing the treatment of and conditions for women in prison. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2021/08/Womens-Expectations-FINAL-July-2021-1.pdf.
HMIP. 2022a. Report on an unannounced inspection of HMP Durham by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 15 and 22–26 November 2021. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022a/03/Durham-web-2021.pdf.
HMIP. 2022b. Prisoner survey methodology, results and analyses HMP Durham November 2021. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022b/03/Durham-combined-survey-methodology-and-results.pdf.
HMIP. 2022c. Report on an unannounced inspection of HMP Altcourse by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 1–2 and 8–12 November 2021. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022c/02/Altcourse-web-2021.pdf.
HMIP. 2022d. Prisoner survey methodology, results and analyses HMP Altcourse November 2021. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022d/02/Altcourse-combined-survey-methodology-and-results.pdf.
HMIP. 2022e. Report on an unannounced inspection of HMP Swaleside by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 18–19 and 25–29 October 2021. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022e/02/Swaleside-web-2021-1.pdf.
HMIP. 2022f. Prisoner survey methodology, results and analyses HMP Swaleside October 2021. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2022f/02/Swaleside-combined-survey-methodology-and-results.pdf.
Sivilombudsmannen. 2017. Visit report: Ila Detention and Security Prison, 6–9 March 2017. https://www.sivilombudet.no/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Visit-report-2017-Ila-Detention-and-Security-Prison.pdf.
Sivilombudsmannen. 2018. Visit report: Bergen prison, 2–4 May 2018. https://www.sivilombudsmannen.no/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Bergen-Prison.pdf.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bernath, B. (2023). Strip Searches: A Risky Practice That Needs to Be Monitored. In: Daems, T. (eds) Body Searches and Imprisonment. Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20451-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20451-7_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-20450-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-20451-7
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)