By The # HaltSolitary Campaign

In the U.S. criminal legal system, individuals sentenced to prison are required to relinquish their liberty as redress for the crimes for which they have been convicted. They are not supposed to also give up their humanity, their physical and mental health, or their lives. Yet in New York’s state prisons, these are the terrible prices many incarcerated people end up paying. Some of the incidents of suicide and self-harm in the state’s prisons may be beyond the control of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS). But there can be no doubt that prison conditions profoundly affect the level of suffering and despair felt by incarcerated people, and that inhumane conditions often lead to desperate responses. This report provides hard evidence, drawn from data provided by DOCCS and other state agencies, that the rate of suicides in New York’s prisons far exceeds the national prison average. It also establishes an undeniable link between the use of solitary confinement and higher rates of suicide, suicide attempts, and self-inflicted injury. Taken together, these numbers demand immediate and drastic change in DOCCS policies and practices in relation to solitary confinement. They demand that New York’s lawmakers put an end to preventable suffering, self-harm, and death in our prisons by enacting the HALT Solitary Confinement Act, A.2500/S.1623.1 Preventing self-injury and suicide by enacting HALT is even more imperative now, as COVID-19 increases the levels of anxiety, fear, and risk of self-harm for people in solitary during the pandemic.

New York: The New York Campaign for Alternatives to Isolated Confinement (CAIC) , 2020. 22p.

By Teresa García Castro

As Latin American countries continue to grapple with worsening prison conditions, overcrowding, and the potentially devastating impact of COVID-19 in such prisons, a new report found an alarming absence of standards and public policies to protect an often-overlooked population: trans women deprived of liberty. The report—the first-ever regional study of its kind—underscores the urgent need to release as many people behind bars as possible before COVID-19 enters the region’s crumbling prison infrastructure. Drawing on a participatory research process led by formerly incarcerated trans women, the study, Trans Women Deprived of Liberty: Invisible Stories Behind Bars, is the result of a collaboration between nine human rights and advocacy organizations: Almas Cautivas, Casa de las Muñecas Tiresias, Casa Hogar Paola Buenrostro, the Corpora en Libertad Network, Dejusticia, Equis: Justice for Women, the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), the Prison Ombudsman’s National Office in Argentina, and the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA). The report describes the failures of Latin American governments to implement basic measures to protect trans women deprived of liberty from violence and abuse. As a result, trans women are subjected to discrimination, stigmatization, and criminalization at every stage of interaction with the criminal justice system, the report found. As Latin American countries continue to grapple with worsening prison conditions, overcrowding, and the potentially devastating impact of COVID-19 in such prisons, a new report found an alarming absence of standards and public policies to protect an often-overlooked population: trans women deprived of liberty. The report—the first-ever regional study of its kind—underscores the urgent need to release as many people behind bars as possible before COVID-19 enters the region’s crumbling prison infrastructure.

• More.....

  Drawing on a participatory research process led by formerly incarcerated trans women, the study, Trans Women Deprived of Liberty: Invisible Stories Behind Bars, is the result of a collaboration between nine human rights and advocacy organizations: Almas Cautivas, Casa de las Muñecas Tiresias, Casa Hogar Paola Buenrostro, the Corpora en Libertad Network, Dejusticia, Equis: Justice for Women, the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), the Prison Ombudsman’s National Office in Argentina, and the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA). The report describes the failures of Latin American governments to implement basic measures to protect trans women deprived of liberty from violence and abuse. As a result, trans women are subjected to discrimination, stigmatization, and criminalization at every stage of interaction with the criminal justice system, the report found.

Washington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), 2020. 26p.

By Teresa García Castro

COVID-19 has shed light on the need for governments across the Americas to take steps to address prison overcrowding, given the high risk of deadly outbreaks in places of detention where social distancing and other sanitary measures are difficult to achieve. In this context, some governments have promoted decarceration measures and alternatives to incarceration including house arrest—that is, court-ordered detention of a person in their place of residence—as a way to reduce overcrowding. When implemented effectively, house arrest is meant to be a less restrictive form of confinement and to help those deprived of liberty reintegrate back into their communities and avoid landing back in prison. But as detailed in a new report, Imprisoned at Home: Women under House Arrest in Latin America, imposing strict house arrest without guaranteeing fundamental human rights, particularly for people in low-income situations, can make house arrest just as punitive as incarceration. House arrest should not simply replace one form of incarceration for another. Governments across the Americas should guarantee that people subjected to this measure have their rights protected. If you’re placed under house arrest but aren’t given the option to remain employed or seek emergency medical help when you need it, those are unacceptable conditions. Authorities must ensure that those under house arrest receive the support they need to provide for their families and reintegrate into their communities.

Washington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), 2020. 20p.

By Coletta A. Youngers, Teresa García Castro, and Maria (Kiki) Manzur

Women’s incarceration in Latin America has increased dramatically over the last two decades. Not only have the sheer numbers increased, but the percentage of females in the overall prison population has also risen, and the rate of the ongoing increase in the size of the female prison population is alarming. Moreover, the number of women being put behind bars is growing much faster than the number of men. These trends cannot be explained by growth of the overall female population, or simply by the increase in the total number of prisoners. Rather, the driving force behind the data is the adoption of punitive drug laws that disproportionately affect women. In the majority of Latin American countries, drug-related crimes are the main cause of female incarceration. For instance, available data shows that in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela, drug-related offenses are the most common offense for female prisoners. In sheer numbers, more men than women are incarcerated for drug-related offenses in Latin American countries. But the percentage of women imprisoned for that offense is almost always higher than the percentage of men. Data compiled by WOLA shows that in Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Panama and Peru, the proportion of women prisoners who are incarcerated for drug offenses is at least 30% higher than in the case of men imprisoned in those countries. The excessive use of pretrial detention is a primary factor contributing to the over-incarceration of women for drug offenses in Latin America. Research shows that more women than men are in pretrial detention for drug offenses in almost all of the countries studied.

• More.....

  The incarceration of these women does nothing to disrupt drug markets or thwart the drug trade, as they are primarily engaged in high-risk but low-ranking jobs and are easily replaced, while those running criminal enterprises rarely end up behind bars. Yet the consequences of incarceration for these women, their families and their communities can be devastating. The COVID-19 pandemic—and its disproportionate impact on people in prison—gives even greater urgency to implementing reforms to dramatically reduce the number of women behind bars. The report concludes with a plea to adopt recommendations for developing and implementing gender-sensitive drug and prison-related policies rooted in human rights and public health—policies that also take into account the intersectionalities and multiple vulnerabilities of women in situations of poverty or extreme poverty; those who are LGBTI+, Afro-descendent, foreign women, or indigenous; and women who are pregnant and/or have children.

Washington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), 2020. 33p.

By The U.S. Office of the Inspector General

As of September 2016, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) incarcerated 10,567 sentenced female inmates, representing 7 percent of the total BOP sentenced inmate population of 146,084. Though female inmates compose a small percentage of the nationwide incarcerated population, correctional officials have recognized that in some areas female and male inmates have different needs and BOP has adopted genderresponsive programs and policies that account for these needs. As a continuation of prior U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) reviews examining BOP’s management of certain subpopulations of inmates, including aging inmates and inmates with mental illness in restrictive housing, OIG initiated this review of BOP’s management of female inmates, specifically BOP’s efforts and capacity to ensure that BOP-wide policies, programs, and decisions adequately address the distinctive needs of women. Our decision to initiate this review was also informed by members of Congress and public interest groups recently raising concerns about what they consider to be deficiencies in BOP’s current management of female inmates.

Washington, DC: U.S. Office of the Inspector General, 2018. 60p.

By The U.S. Civil Rights Commission

This report examines the state of federal civil rights protections for incarcerated women to explore women’s experiences while incarcerated. It covers a range of issues incarcerated women face, including access to healthcare, prevention of sexual assault, discipline and segregated housing, parental rights, and availability of programming. The report provides examples of prison administrations seeking to address these issues and it evaluates the response of the federal government. The Commission’s research includes examination of high rates of a history of trauma reported by incarcerated women, as well as policies responsive to this trauma. The report also offers recommendations to Congress and the executive branch.

Washington, DC: The Commission, 2020. 292p.

By Ashley Nellis

Nationwide one of every 15 women in prison — over 6,600 women — are serving a sentence of life with parole, life without parole, or a virtual life sentence of 50 years or more. The nearly 2,000 women serving life-without-parole sentences can expect to die in prison. Death sentences are permitted by 27 states and the federal government, and currently 52 women sit on death row. This report presents new data on the prevalence of both of these extreme sentences imposed on women.

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2021. 17p.

By The Sentencing Project

Over the past quarter century, there has been a profound change in the involvement of women within the criminal justice system. This is the result of more expansive law enforcement efforts, stiffer drug sentencing laws, and post-conviction barriers to reentry that uniquely affect women. The female incarcerated population stands nearly five times higher than in 1980. Over half (58%) of imprisoned women in state prisons have a child under the age of 18.1 Between 1980 and 2020, the number of incarcerated women increased by more than 475%, rising from a total of 26,326 in 1980 to 152,854 in 2020. The total count in 2020 represents a 30% reduction from the prior year—a substantial but insufficient downsizing in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which some states began to reverse in 2021.

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2022. 6p.

By Theodore Greenfelder; Dana L. Haynie ; Derek A. Kreager; Sara Wakefield; Sam Nur; Julia Dillavou

This study extends a previous study, the Prison Inmate Networks Study (PINS), which focused on the social organization within a men’s prison unit. These two studies enable gender comparisons that reveal potential differences and similarities in prison social structure and health in men’s and women’s prisons. The current project involving women’s prisons was conducted in three phases. Phase 1 involved the design and implementation of a network and health survey administered to residents in three women’s units in a minimum-security prison and a maximum-security prison. This was done to determine the informal social structures within the prison units and prisoners’ positions within those structures. Phase 2 identified and recruited Phase 1 participants who were release-eligible within 1 year of the baseline survey. These women were administered semi-structured interviews prior to release to determine their future concerns and expectations regarding reentry, with a focus on mothers’ plans and expectations for child reunification. Phase 3 interviewed paroled prisoners and their children 1 year after release to determine the status of their family reunification and well-being. Thus far, this study’s findings reveal the complexity of women’s prison social systems, with implications for correctional policy. There was a more fluid social system in the women’s prisons than in the men’s prisons, which requires daily attention from correctional staff and prisoners. Prison pseudo-families were present to provide support and caring behaviors. Although analyses of pre-release and post-release interviews are ongoing, important lessons are reported on the data-collection process.

Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2021. 55p.

By The Committee for Economic Development of Australia

This collaborative paper has been produced with contributions from experts, stakeholders and CEDA members. CEDA’s objective in publishing this paper is to encourage constructive debate and discussion on a matter of national economic importance. Justice is a critical institution underpinning economic and social development. Providing access to world-class justice and rehabilitation can help both the victims and perpetrators of crime, while minimising its associated economic and fiscal costs. This paper provides a foundational framework outlining the clear need to reform the imprisonment of women in Australia. It seeks to highlight the key issues and emphasise the urgent need to reduce rates of female imprisonment through a nationally consistent approach. This will help to improve workforce participation and life outcomes, while also reducing wasteful government spending at a time of urgent budget repair. This report does not seek to detail all the complexities of the issue of the incarceration of women.

Melbourne VIC ; Committee for Economic Development of Australia, 2022. 52p.

By Dudley Althaus and Steven Dudley

Since 2006, violence and criminality in Mexico have reached new heights. Battles amongst criminal organizations and between them have led to an unprecedented spike in homicides and other crimes. Large criminal groups have fragmented and their remnants have diversified their criminal portfolios to include widespread and systematic extortion of the civilian population. The state has not provided a satisfactory answer to this issue. In fact, government actors and security forces have frequently sought to take part in the pillaging. Frustrated and desperate, many community leaders, farmers and business elites have armed themselves and created so-called “self-defense” groups. Self-defense groups have a long history in Mexico, but they have traditionally been used to deal with petty crime in mostly indigenous communities. These efforts are recognized by the constitution as legitimate and legal. But the new challenges to security by criminal organizations have led to the emergence of this new generation of militias. The strongest of these vigilante organizations are in Michoacán, an embattled western state where a criminal group called the Knights Templar had been victimizing locals for years and had co-opted local political power. This paper was co-produced by the Wilson Center's Mexico Institute and InSightCrime.

Washington, DC: Wilson Center's Mexico Institute and InSight Crime, 2014. 21p.

By Ian Miller

It is the first monograph-length study of the force-feeding of hunger strikers in English, Irish and Northern Irish prisons. It examines ethical debates that arose throughout the twentieth century when governments authorised the force-feeding of imprisoned suffragettes, Irish republicans and convict prisoners. It also explores the fraught role of prison doctors called upon to perform the procedure. Since the Home Office first authorised force-feeding in 1909, a number of questions have been raised about the procedure. Is force-feeding safe? Can it kill? Are doctors who feed prisoners against their will abandoning the medical ethical norms of their profession? And do state bodies use prison doctors to help tackle political dissidence at times of political crisis?

Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. 267p.

By The International Crisis Group

What’s new? A sudden uptick of violence in March, caused by the breakdown of talks between the government and criminal gangs, has sparked a ruthless six-month law enforcement campaign in El Salvador, anchored in unprecedented mass arrests and restriction of legal rights. Why does it matter? Fed up with gang violence, most Salvadorans have applauded the crackdown. But it has also drawn criticism from human rights organisations and could boomerang. Having more than doubled the prison population, the country is headed for a humanitarian crisis in its jails, while gangs, though now in disarray, could strike back. What should be done? Rather than commit to strong-arm tactics for the long term, the government should provide an off-ramp for the thousands of gang members willing to build new lives in law-abiding society. The country’s main foreign partners should support these efforts and revive their cooperation with San Salvador.

Brussels, Belgium: International Crisis Group, 2022.41p.

Edited by William Fielding, Virginia Ballance, Philip Smith, Alexandre Veyrat-Pontet, Heather Sutton.

This publication, a collaboration between the Inter-American Development Bank and the University of The Bahamas, presents the findings of a study of sentenced inmates at the prison in The Bahamas known at the Department of Correctional Services Facility, Fox Hill. The materials provide invaluable insight into public policy to further support the transformation of citizen security in The Bahamas. Robust and reliable information is needed to effectively diagnose, plan, carry out, and monitor correctional policies. The data generated by this publication and its underlying research are key inputs for the IDB’s Citizen Security and Justice Knowledge Strategy, which aims to better inform the public debate and decision makers about institutional performance of the criminal justice sectors in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Washington, DC: Inter American Development Bank, 2019. 225p.

By Rajan Basra and Peter R. Neumann

This report offers a wide‑ranging analysis of the role prisons can play in radicalising people – and in reforming them. Building on a 2010 study that used the same methodology, it examines the policies and approaches of ten European countries, identifying trade‑offs and dilemmas but also principles and best practices that can help governments and policymakers spot new ideas and avoid costly and counterproductive mistakes. • It paints a picture of countries trying to grapple with a challenging – and rapidly changing – situation. Over the past decade, many European countries have had to deal with a significant increase and diversification of their extremist offender populations, raising systemic questions about prison regimes, risk assessments, probation schemes, and opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration that had previously often been dealt with on a case‑by‑case basis.

London: ICSR, King’s College London , 2020. 60p.

By The Anti-Defamation League, Center on Extremism

While there are almost certainly more, the following is an inventory of white supremacist prison gangs that the ADL Center on Extremism has created by working with correctional institutions and law enforcement, reviewing case files and news stories and tapping its own extensive body of information of white supremacist prison gang activities.

Key Points ■ For nearly four decades, white supremacist prison gangs have constituted one of the primary segments of the white supremacist movement, though they are different in many ways from “traditional” white supremacist groups. ■ Though they typically originate and are active in jails and prisons, most of these gangs are just as active on the streets as behind bars—including involvement in violence and other criminal acts. ■ Though they are white supremacist in nature, these prison gangs are usually a form of organized crime and frequently prioritize profit over ideology. ■ Most white supremacist prison gangs allow only men as full members, but women play important roles in most such gangs, including in criminal activity. ■ There are currently more than 75 different white supremacist prison gangs in at least 38 states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons, as well as in major county jails. They range from relatively small local gangs all the way to multi-state gangs with a thousand or more members. ■ The crimes committed by white supremacist gang members include traditional criminal activities such as running major drug dealing operations as well as ideologically motivated crimes such as hate crimes. Most white supremacist gangs also have a high association with violence—which includes violence directed even at their own members and associates.

ADL Center on Extremism , 2022. 36p.

By Filip Vojta

How criminal sentences are enforced, is of fundamental concern for the legitimacy of any justice system. However, fairly little is known about the practice of enforcing the prison sentences imposed by the international criminal tribunals. This volume offers a unique interdisciplinary lens - including international criminal and human rights law, penology, (supranational) criminology, transitional justice and terrorism studies - through which the policy and practice of enforcing the sentences of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) are analyzed. It is the first scientific work to comprehensively explore the significance of penal rehabilitation for the perpetrators of international crimes and its implementation in the prison treatment of the ICTY convicts. The analysis is informed by rich and systematically collected empirical data, including indepth interviews with the ICTY/MICT officials, national prison officials, imprisoned ICTY convicts and released ex-prisoners. It shows comparatively - and in previously unseen detail - the trials and tribulations the practice of enforcing the ICTY sentences in different European prisons faces and offers necessary recommendations for the improvement of the vertical system for enforcement of international sentences.

Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2020. 391p,

By Cesare Beccaria. Translated by James Anson Farrer.

This translation contains a 100 page introduction. From the opening page of the treatise: “To the Reader …The ill-conceived criticisms that have been published against this book are founded on the confused notions, and compel me to interrupt for a moment the arguments I was addressing to my enlightened readers, in order to close once and for all every door against the misapprehensions of timid bigotry or against the calumnies of malice and envy…”

Chatto & Windus, Piccadilly. 1880. 299p.

By George Ryley Scott

From the Preface: “In any debate on the merits and demerits of corporal punishment, the real points at issue are often confused, distorted or unnoticed in the personal reaction of the debater to the offences or crimes for which fustigation is held to be a fitting punishment. Indignation or hatred, which often degenerates into fanaticism, out- weighs every other factor. The inflaming or the development of the desire to punish results in the wish to maim or to crucify the individual responsible for the particular crime which has aroused hatred….”

London. T. Werner Laurie Ltd. (1938) 1943. 305p.

By Michel Foucault. Translated by AlanSheridan.

From Chapter 1, Torture. “We have, then, a public execution and a time-table. They do not punish the same crimes or the same type of delinquent. But they each define a certain penal style. Less than a century separates them. It was a time when, in Europe and in the United States,the entire economy of punishment was redistributed. It was a time of great 'scandals'for traditional justice, a time of innumerable projects for reform. It saw a new theory of law and crime, a new rnoral or political justification of the right to punish; old laws were abolished, old customs died out. 'Modern' codes were planned or drawn up: Russia, 1769; Prussia, 1780; Pennsylvania and Tuscany, 1786; Austria, 1788; France 1791 Year IV, 1808 and 1810. It wasa new age for pena justice…..Among so many changes, I shall consider one:the disappearance of torture as a public spectacle…”

Vintage Random House. (1977). 1995.353p.