CAT/C/NOR/CO/8
Isolation in pretrial detention
15.
The Committee is concerned about the high incidence of systematic isolation, often
not required for reasons relating to the investigation, during pretrial detention in police cells,
based on a high degree of discretionary assessment, which often cannot be legally
challenged. This may amount to de facto solitary confinement and is the result of
insufficient space in prison buildings and insufficient staff in regular detention facilities.
The Committee is also concerned about the rate of suicides in pretrial detention and about
mental and other health problems that may arise from the imposition of isolation and for
which treatment may not always be provided (arts. 2, 11 and 16).
16.
The State party should adhere strictly to the 48-hour custody rule and ensure
that pretrial detainees are moved as soon as possible to prison facilities in order to
avoid unnecessary isolation during their detention in police cells, which may amount
to de facto solitary confinement and give rise to mental health problems. It should
apply rigorous criteria for isolation and provide inmates with legal and procedural
safeguards to address their situation in order to prevent discretionary assessments, as
well as with adequate mental and other health care, in particular when subjected to
isolation. The State party should ensure sufficient prison facilities and staff, as well as
adequate material conditions, to address the needs of and accommodate all pretrial
detainees.
Solitary confinement
17.
The Committee is concerned:
(a)
About the continued high rates of prolonged isolation and an increase in the
number of registered cases of exclusion, isolation, “shielding” and similar restrictive
regimes regarding remand and sentenced prisoners, which amounts to solitary confinement,
and is due to a large extent to building conditions and staff shortages, including the report
in the Bergens Tidende on 24 March 2018 that a detainee in Bergen city prison had been
subject to isolation in a security cell for almost 1,700 hours over the previous two years
(979 hours in 2016 and 700 hours in 2017);
(b)
That conditions of de facto isolation that are similar to solitary confinement
are not based on an individual administrative decision with a legal basis for exclusion and
therefore cannot be challenged or appealed;
(c)
About the absence of a set maximum number of days a prisoner can be kept
in full exclusion, and that the amendments to the Execution of Sentences Act, whereby
isolation can no longer be used as a disciplinary measure against minors and, as a
preventive measure, must be limited to a maximum of seven days, have not yet entered into
force;
(d)
That the legal basis for the use and length of solitary confinement continues
to be insufficiently precise and may result from discretionary decisions not respecting the
principles of proportionality, which prevent the possibility of administrative or judicial
supervision and can amount to violations of the Convention (arts. 2, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16).
18.
The Committee reiterates its recommendation (see CAT/C/NOR/CO/6-7,
para. 11) that the State party ensure full conformity with the Convention and the
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson
Mandela Rules) adopted in 2015, and should:
(a)
Implement effectively the revised guidelines enacted by the Government
in March 2017 that lay down detailed criteria on the use of solitary confinement and
ensure that issues relating to infrastructure and staffing are not used as grounds for
exclusion;
(b)
Reduce the use of solitary confinement to situations that are strictly
necessary and amend the legislative framework in order to limit the use of such
confinement to exceptional circumstances;
(c)
Ensure that persons subjected to solitary confinement are attended to by
medical staff on a daily basis, that their isolation is discontinued if it is found to
4