"Other countries' experience suggests that bringing prisoners from abroad to Estonia could raise various ethical dilemmas and practical issues that are vital to address in the interests of protecting people's rights," wrote report authors Indrek-Ivar Määrits and Ksenia Žurakovskaja-Aru, director and senior adviser, respectively, of the Inspections Department at the Office of the Chancellor of Justice.

The analysis examines in more detail the problems that arose when Norway housed prisoners in the Netherlands' Norgerhaven Prison.

First, the office's staff highlighted that although the conditions at Norgerhaven were appealing to the prisoners brought from Norway – spacious outdoor area with trees, the opportunity to spend a lot of time outside one's cell at will, good sporting facilities, good pay for prison work and low prices at the prison commissary as well as the opportunity to communicate with loved ones via Skype – Dutch prison officials felt that the forced transfer to Norgerhaven Prison acted as an additional punishment, as they were far away from their loved ones and could not access necessary services.

Owing to the language barrier, officials only communicated with the prisoners to the extent necessary to maintain order; this, however, objectified these individuals and encouraged the formation of groups and hierarchical relationships among prisoners based on language, religion and other characteristics, as well as the ill-treatment of weaker prisoners.

For the same reason, these prisoners were not being resocialized, and likewise missed out on much of the information they needed as well as struggled with both health concerns and filing complaints or requests due to the language barrier.
 
Another issue to become a problem in itself was the fact that Dutch prison officials were not sufficiently familiar with Norwegian law, and could not adequately advise individuals in their case management or on other legal matters. The isolation of the Norgerhaven prisoners was further exacerbated by the fact that they could not meet with their families and children, as very few prisoners were visited by their families due to the distance and lack of money to do so.

The Norwegian Ombudsman also expressed concern that Dutch authorities could, in certain situations, use restraint measures and special equipment on Norwegian prisoners. Such a solution could subject people to the arbitrary decisions of another country's authorities and jeopardize the protection of the prisoners' rights, the ombudsman found.

Human rights must be guaranteed in any event

In evaluating the acceptance in Estonia of foreign prisoners, presumably from the United Kingdom, the staff at the Chancellor of Justice's Office emphasize that Estonia cannot compromise on the need to respect human rights and the rules agreed upon in Europe regarding the treatment of prisoners.

First, the authors of the report recall that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has stressed that the central goal of European countries' penal policy must be the individual's social rehabilitation, and that the right and opportunity for an individual to participate in rehabilitation activities is seen as an integral part of a dignified punishment.

Likewise, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has in its recommendations on foreign prisoners stated that prison conditions must prepare foreign prisoners for release and social integration.

It has also been found that a person sentenced to prison in one country should not be forced to serve their sentence in a foreign country against their will.

Estonian prisons cannot currently cope with foreigners

The Office of the Chancellor of Justice staff members note that during their inspections, they have seen how even just a few foreigners ending up in Estonia's prisons has posed a significant challenge for the prison system.

"It has proven difficult to communicate with the individual on a daily basis, provide them with information in a language they understand, offer meaningful activities, provide quality healthcare services (hindered by the language barrier), ensure contact with their loved ones, etc.," the authors described, adding that there are currently only a few such prisoners present in Estonia, but even now already there is a shortage of prison staff to deal with them.

"The detention center of the Law Enforcement Bureau of the Police and Border Guard Board's (PPA) Northern Prefecture is a good example of the fact that it isn't easy to find officials competent in dealing with foreigners and providing foreigners with the necessary services," they added.

They likewise expressed doubts about whether it would be easy to find the 400 prison officials anticipated to be hired to manage the arrival of British prisoners.

"Information gathered during the chancellor's inspections shows that prison teams have been understaffed for a long time, and that finding new employees has not been an easy task for prison management," the analysis noted.

"It can be assumed that just as Norgerhaven Prison worked hard, Estonia would apparently likewise want the international project to be a success," the authors continued. "That could mean that the best officials would start dealing with prisoners brought from abroad, and local prisoners may not receive the necessary attention as a result. This could lead to their rehabilitation stalling, which could in turn potentially endanger both prison and public safety as well as raise imprisonment costs."

Legal proceedings also an issue

In addition, the authors of the analysis raise the question of how meetings between foreign prisoners and their loved ones are to be organized.

"It will be necessary to agree on opportunities to facilitate such contact, who will bear the costs, and also which country (for example, Estonia) will pay if a prisoner demands compensation for damages caused by limited opportunities to communicate with family," they highlighted.

Another complex issue is how the handling and resolution of various incidents will be regulated if a foreign prisoner escapes, commits a crime either in or outside of prison, falls ill and requires treatment outside prison, and so on. It must be clear who can use force, special equipment and weapons against a foreign prisoner and how, as well as who will bear the costs if something goes wrong, the authors continued.

A further area of concern is how the rights of foreign prisoners will be protected in legal proceedings.

"Will justice be administered according to Estonian law or the sending country's law?" the office staff asked. "In an Estonian or the other country's court? How will this impact the Estonian judicial system, which may need to allocate significantly more resources than before in some cases?"

The authors of the report pointed out that 24 percent of complaints received by Estonia's administrative courts are from the country's own prisoners.

"Handling complaints from incoming foreign prisoners could mean dozens if not hundreds of new court cases, if they are to be handled by Estonian courts," they note. "What language will administration and court proceedings be conducted in, and who will cover the translation costs if a lengthy and complex legal case involves a foreign prisoner who needs a significant share of proceedings translated into a language they understand?"

The analysis drawn up by staff members at the Office of the Chancellor of Justice also mentions the matter of Estonia's reputation in connection with renting out prison space.

"The main goal should be to ensure that Estonia's reputation does not suffer as a country respectful of human rights," they underscored. "Estonia cannot become a place where wealthier countries ship off their prisoners like cargo to a low-cost prison, at the cost of worse treatment than in their home country."

The authors noted hardly any rules exist in international law for the resolution of such situations.

"Whether the renting of prison space could become an Estonian success story in every respect depends to a considerable extent on how good and thorough the agreement between countries ends up being," the analysis concludes. "In addition to the attractive amount of money, many crucial factors are involved regarding which contracting parties must achieve a clear common understanding, to ensure that the cost of resolving problems to arise later do not reduce the benefit to zero."

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!