|
Innovations
and Practices
Key to closed doors…
Introduction
For
most people in the Commonwealth, the police are quite simply
the gatekeepers of the justice enforcement system. Detention
centers, which even though form an integral part of this system
is also the most shielded from public eye. The impermeability
of places where prisoners are kept either in police custody
or in detention centres brings in an element of unaccountability
to the whole justice system.
To
counter this negative perception, laws in many Commonwealth
countries provide members of the community with an opportunity
to look into the closed doors through the system of visitors.
" The system seeks to create a stronger partnership between
the police and the community by placing a semblance of accountability
and transparency in the detention and custody system, which
has been a subject of secrecy and concern for the public at
large," said John Woodcock, Police Powers and Procedures,
Home Office, UK.
This
article will delineate salient features of the Independent
Custody Visiting System prevalent in the United Kingdom.
The
Start
The
idea of 'custody visitors' to police stations was first put
forward by Lord Scarman in his report on the Brixton disorders
in 1981. Lord Scarman recommended that provision be made for
'random checks' by people other than police officers on the
interrogation and detention of suspects in police stations.
In
1983, following consultation between the Home Office, police
authorities and chief constables, the Home Office issued a
document called: 'Custody Visitors to Police Stations: Guidelines
(Provincial Forces)'. The document was intended to 'provide
a basis for establishing pilot custody visiting schemes in
different police areas.' Initially six pilot schemes were
set up, which was then replicated all over the country following
its success. The system came to be formally known as lay visiting.
It
was in effect from 1April 2003 that lay visiting was given
a statutory footing and was termed as the Independent Custody
Visiting System.
In
Practice
This
system provides for trained volunteers of the community to
attend police stations to check on the treatment of detainees
and the conditions in which they are held and to verify that
their rights and entitlements are being correctly observed.
It strives to offer protection to both detainees and the police
and more importantly reassurance to the community at large
that the police are upholding human rights of the detainees.
The
Independent Custody Visitors Association, the apex body sets
out specific guidelines under which a visitor is appointed.
The visitors at the time of appointment should be at least
18 years of age. There is no prescribed upper age limit. The
appointments are initially made for three years and reviewed
every six months. Visitors, unannounced, can at any time,
visit police stations in pairs. They carry out their inspection
of custody conditions and talk privately with those detainees
who agree to be seen by them.
The
responsibility for organising and overseeing the delivery
of the system lies with police authorities, in consultation
with chief constables. The procedures in place for ensuring
effective management of custody visiting include:
- Developing
policy to maintain and enhance the effectiveness of schemes,
- Ensuring
the maintenance of appropriate organisational arrangements
and visiting patterns,
- Overseeing
the recruitment, approval and training of independent custody
visitors,
- Establishing
and maintaining effective systems for feedback to the police
authority on a regular basis the output from visits, and
putting in place the necessary action to respond to issues
as they arise,
- Facilitating
meetings of their independent custody visitors to discuss
their work and issues arising from it.
Making
a difference
A
very important aspect of this system is the reporting of the
visits which is made available to the police authorities at
the station visited and subsequently by the Authority for
their perusal and follow up. Comments made by the visitors
are disseminated to all the other custody visitors with key
issues being discussed at the annual meeting.
The
system goes a long way in protecting human rights by providing
independent scrutiny of the detainees' treatment. By giving
approved members of the local community an opportunity to
observe, comment and report on these matters, it also seeks
to improve citizens' understanding of procedures at police
stations. On the other hand, police management of their performance
improves thereby resulting in revised functioning and training
procedures for the personnel.
However,
the system is not without its share of chinks. Research conducted
by independent analysts in 2002, revealed that inconsistencies
in areas such as administration, recruitment, frequency of
visits and training have failed to galvanise the process into
a trusted system.
It
also remains relatively little known to the public at large
and distressingly is not considered to be high priority even
within the justice system. A more concerted effort in terms
of raising the awareness level is required on part of every
stakeholder to make the Independent Visiting System a success,
a system which has come about to be recognised as one of the
important tools of cultivating a trusted partnership between
the police and the public.
Following
are the statistics that were collected based on the information
recorded by the visitors from 1993-2003. (Source: ICVA)






|
Remembering
a visionary
Lord
Scarman, the pioneer responsible for initiating the
development of the Independent Custody Visiting System
as we know it today, passed away on 9 December 2004,
aged 93.
When
the government appointed Lord Scarman to head an inquiry
into the causes of the 1981 Brixton disorders, his findings
called for a number of improvements including greater
emphasis on community policing and the recruitment of
more people from ethnic minorities into the police service.
Most importantly his report stated:
"
I recommend for the strengthening of local accountability
and consultation, the provision for random checks by
persons other than police officers on the interrogation
and detention of suspects in the police station. I do
so recommend."
|
|