Chapter 4: Prisons

4 Prisons

 

SIERRA LEONE
A country review of crime and criminal justice, 2008

 

African Human Security Initiative

Monograph No 160, May 2009

 

Introduction

One of the critical challenges as far as the consolidation of peace, security and reconciliation in Sierra Leone is concerned, is the extent to which the dignity of the human person, which was trampled underfoot during the war, can be restored and respected. Even in pre-war Sierra Leone, many ills were blamed on the lack of justice, especially for the poor and downtrodden. The abuse was characterised by the prison system where the rights and dignity of prisoners were either ignored or flagrantly wronged, as captured in the Report of the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission(SLTRC 2004),which noted the need to restore human dignity at both the individual and the national level.

An important yardstick for measuring a nation’s obligation to uphold human dignity and the rights of its citizens is the manner in which that nation treats people who are put behind bars, either in jail or in other detention centres. Though the main focus of the post-war reconstruction drive was on security, increasing attention is now being given to the criminal justice system, perhaps as a result of an awareness that until Sierra Leone improves the delivery of justice to an appreciable degree, the country will continue to be unstable. Efforts are thus being made to upgrade critical institutions, including Sierra Leone’s Prisons Service. Importantly, the government, in collaboration with its development partners, has set out to improve conditions at the country’s prisons. With the support of the UN and the Justice Sector Development Project (JSDP), four new prisons have been built and eight have been renovated and enlarged. Under the Sierra Leone Security Sector Reform Implementation Programme (SLSSRI), the Prisons Department was in 2006 provided with funds to procure vehicles.

Sierra Leone’s Constitution provides for the protection of the fundamental rights of all citizens, including those incarcerated or imprisoned. Whilst the 1960 Prison Rules and the 1961 Prisons Ordinance do not meet the standards of some international protocols and conventions, they nonetheless require that prisoners be treated with respect and dignity. Significantly, gradual but noticeable compliance with a few of the international protocols and conventions can now be detected, especially as far as security, discipline and good order, the use of force and firearms, and the exercise of fundamental rights, such as freedom of conscience and worship, are concerned.

It became clear during the research that whereas the will exists to implement full compliance with international protocols and conventions as they relate to the rights of prisoners and people in detention, the Prisons Service completely lacks the human resources, logistics and funding to provide the flexibility needed for this.

Constitutional and legal framework of the Prisons Service

The country’s Constitution and the Prison Rules, which derive from the authority of the Prison Ordinance Act (No. 22 of 1960), provide the legal framework for the Prisons Service. The Constitution contains a series of provisions for the protection of the rights of prisoners, including the presumption of innocence until guilt is established beyond all reasonable doubt and the right to legal counsel and representation. It also proscribes arrest and detention without recourse to the due process of the law, as well as any form of torture and cruel or inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. It determines that any person who is charged with a criminal offence should be afforded a fair and speedy trial within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

The Prison Rules govern the internal administration of prisons, including prisoners’ rights and the conduct of prison officers. For example, they state that prisoners should be treated with dignity and restricts the unnecessary use of force, provide for regular physical exercise and regulate the availability of sufficient bedding, clothing and their cleanliness. They also lay down that prisoners should be given a sufficient quantity of food and must be allowed to have contact with the outside world through visits and letters. Finally, the rules recognise the reformatory role of prisons and provide for education and library facilities.

The point must be made that although prisons fall under the exclusive control of government, the manner in which prisoners are treated is a matter of international concern. The reason for this is that Sierra Leone’s government has acceded to or needs to be guided by international treaties, customary international law, international declarations, minimum rules and a body of principles. These standards are considered to be the benchmarks for the operation of prisons worldwide. Just two examples: the UN Charter and the International Bill of Rights are the basis for international law on the defence and promotion of the rights of prisoners.

Prison conditions and treatment of prisoners

Research on the Prisons Service focused on a number of issues, namely the condition of prisons, the treatment of prisoners and of children and women in particular, and the special needs of women as prisoners. The pertinent findings of this research follow below.

 

Overcrowding and poor living conditions in prisons

There are 16 prisons in the country of which 13 are functioning. It was noted that overcrowding and poor living conditions are two key problems faced by the prisons. On a national scale, at the time of this research, the prisons were 112 per cent overcrowded. The Maximum Prison at Pademba Road in Freetown and the prisons in Bo, Makeni and Kenema were more overcrowded than the others (Table 10). It is in these prisons that the living conditions were the most appalling.

 

At a number of prisons, especially at Makeni, it was discovered that prisoners either slept on mats spread on the floor, or on locally-made mattresses, which generally swarmed with bed bugs. The researcher saw a good number of the inmates who were infected with scabies and other skin diseases. The windows did not have wire mesh protection against mosquitoes. Mosquito blood stains were noticed on the walls of many cells, suggesting that the prisoners’ nights were marred by anguish and sleeplessness.

Compounding the overcrowding and poor living conditions in prisons, was a lack of adequate food and the unavailability of pure water in many prisons. It was acknowledged by prison authorities that in early 2008 the Guma Valley Water Company refused to supply water to the Maximum Prison at Pademba Road because of millions of leones in outstanding water bills, which led to an acute water scarcity in the prison yard. That resulted in the unlocking of a cross-section of prisoners to fetch water from outside. This occurrence was not only a blatant abuse of prisoners and their fundamental human rights, but the unlocking of prisoners was a serious breach of prison security procedures.

Case flow, long adjournments and stiff bails

This research established that the prosecution and trial procedures of Sierra Leone’s legal system are an important factor in inhibiting the general efficiency of the Prisons Service. It can be argued that prison reforms without a concomitant improvement in the legal system will be a waste of time and resources. About 54 per cent of detainees are remand and trial prisoners who are presumed innocent until proven guilty. However, prisoners in this category have suffered many trial delays and long adjournments. The following are just some examples:

 

• John Lahai has stood trial in the Magistrates’ Court of Freetown for unlawful carnal knowledge of a minor from 13 December 2002 to date.
  
  

• Bonny Savage Alozie was charged with fraudulent conversion. He has been awaiting trial since 2003.
  
  

• Santigie Kamara, who is incarcerated in the Kenema prison on a murder charge, has been undergoing trial since 16 November 2002.
  
  

• Hassan Sesay has been in remand from 16 August 1999 to date. He is charged with murder and has had his case adjourned sine die, which means that his trial is adjourned until the court decides otherwise.
  
  

• Abu Massaquoi, charged with conspiracy, has been a trial prisoner at the Pademba Road Prison since 6 July 2004.

Many interviewees, both prisoners and other citizens, have alluded to the difficulties involved in meeting bail requirements. An accused is rarely released upon his own recognisances and many accused thus suffer in jails even though bail would have been authorised by the courts and bail is regarded as a right for all persons standing trial. Persons accused of capital offences, such as murder and treason, cannot be granted bail, but they constituted only about 13 per cent of the prison population. Thus, if bail were not made too stiff and set beyond affordability, the prison population would be reduced significantly.

In addition, it was noted that there were often delays in serving indictments. This has contributed not only to overcrowding in the cells, but is also tantamount to obstructing the possibility of swift trials. Some people have remained imprisoned for periods of up to two years without an indictment being issued or a court appearance. The Department of Public Prosecutions cites lack of capacity for delays in issuing indictments.

Conflation of criminal and civil matters and severity of sentences

One of the reasons for overcrowding in prisons, which itself is an infringement on the rights of prisoners, is the fact that the judiciary sometimes confuses civil matters with criminal matters. Civil matters are supposed to be handled with some degree of leniency and should attract less punishment. Alternatively, some other resolution can be arranged between the conflicting parties out of court. But trivial civil matters, like debt or a misdemeanour between a husband and wife, are often adjudicated to be criminal in nature. This sometimes results in either a long remand for the accused, a prison sentence or an excessive fine. The conflating of criminal and civil matters occurs mostly in the provinces where police prosecutors prefer charges against the accused. A few of the remand and convicted prisoners in Bo and Makeni fell in this category, as follows:

• Jeneba Koroma was serving a prison term of two years for owing the sum of Le 600 000 (about US$200).
  
  

• Saffie Kamara was remanded for taking the sum of Le 1,5 million from her intended spouse, with whom she was staying. She was charged with larceny and at the time of the researcher’s contact with her on 31 May 2008 had spent five weeks on remand with only three appearances in court.

Arrests and prosecutions

It is very common for the police to carry out both arrests and prosecutions. By law, the police should arrest and lawyers from the Law Officers’ Department should prosecute. However, over the years, this requirement has been treated with increasing flexibility. The combination of the critical roles of arrest and prosecution by the Sierra Leone Police (SLP) has been viewed as a serious affront to criminal justice on the grounds that whilst it is the function of the police to arrest alleged criminals and obtain their preliminary statements, they may not always have the requisite legal knowledge to prosecute the same criminals in a court of law. There is a strong tendency by police prosecutors to charge accused with the wrong offences. This has certainly hindered justice and put accused persons at a disadvantage.

Part of the reason for the police arrogating to themselves the responsibility of prosecution is the lack of capacity by the Law Officers’ Department. At the time of research, it was noted that there were no government-supported legal-aid providers in the country. Only two non-governmental organisations (NGO) provided such assistance, namely Timap for Justice and the LAWCLA, but even they do not cover the whole country.

In an attempt to improve the quality of prosecutorial services, SLP management decided to organise training in prosecution for a number of police officers in 2008. The training team comprised prominent local and international legal practitioners and scholars. In addition, consideration is being given to permitting those officers who have undergone legal education and have attained law degrees the right to prosecute.

Use of discretion in prisons and the role of Justices of the Peace

The threshold for the use of discretionary power seems to be unclear, especially at prisons in the provinces where even a junior prison officer may have discretionary powers. This is a critical issue as dealing with matters concerning prisoners should not be left to junior officers, especially in an unsupervised environment. It was also discovered that criminal justice is being hampered to a considerable degree by persons without legal education being appointed as Justices of the Peace, constitutional lawyers and magistrates, especially in the provinces. Justices of the Peace are not supposed to sentence people to prison for more than a year, but it was established that they can be very unreasonable in their rulings and tend to sentence accused to jail terms of more than a year for very trivial offences. Here are a few examples to illustrate this point:

• Ali Papa Kamara was sentenced to prison by a Justice of the Peace for seven years on 19 March 2008 for assaulting a policeman.
  
  

• Ahmed Kendeka was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment at the end of February 2008 by the Mattru Magistrates’ Court, which is presided over by Justices of the Peace, for a debt of Le 25 000 (an amount of less than US$10).
  
  

• Amidu Kallon was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment by the Pujehun Magistrates’ Court, which is also presided over by Justices of the Peace, in February 2008 for store breaking.

Illness and poor medical facilities

In almost all the prisons visited the researcher saw a number of prisoners with swollen legs owing to lack of exercise, thin and frail-looking prisoners because of inadequate food rations, and prisoners in a poor state of health as a result of inadequate medical facilities and poor hygiene and sanitation. An interesting but sad admission came from the Makeni prison when it was noted that, without prognosis, Panadol was the common therapeutic drug handed out for every illness reported by prisoners.

In almost all prisons visited, at least one room was set aside for the reception and care of sick prisoners. Most prison health facilities are staffed by nurses who, it was claimed, visited the cells every morning to enquire after the health of prisoners, but this could not be verified. The greatest problem recorded, however, was that in many provincial prisons there were no vehicles to take prisoners whose health had deteriorated to referral hospitals.

When asked about the types of illnesses and diseases that were prevalent in the prisons visited, the response across the board was that the most common ones were malaria, fungal infection, bloody stools, pneumonia, gonorrhoea, scabies, syphilis, muscular pain, oedema, eye and ear infections and hypertension. All the prisons denied having HIV/AIDS-infected prisoners. They admitted, however, that no HIV/AIDS tests had ever been done in the prisons to ascertain the HIV status of prisoners.

The prison authorities advised that the prisons were disinfected on an arbitrary basis. It was noted that the available supplies of disinfectants were not proportionate to the sizes and population counts of the prisons. Lack of regular fumigation, inadequate water and toiletry supplies, and general unhygienic conditions make prisoners very vulnerable to infectious diseases.

Recreation and exercise

In most prisons the cells are unlocked from 07:15 to 18:00 daily and the inmates are permitted to go out into the open yard for fresh air or to do exercise, but the requirement that they be given the opportunity to exercise is heavily inhibited by lack of space and recreational facilities in most prisons, especially those in the provinces. In some prisons, the cells are unlocked from 19:00 to 21:00 in addition, but inmates are only allowed into the corridors, not the yard. The only prisoners exempted from this regimen are those who fetch water and assist in the kitchens. It is our opinion that preventing prisoners from leaving the prison corridors to get fresh air in the open or to exercise is a violation of their human rights and incongruous with minimum international standards. The main recreational facilities offered by most prisons were ludo, draughts, cards and football.

Meals

It was found that prisoners were not fed on time. In some prisons the inmates were only served two meals a day and it appears that some preference was given to sentenced and trial prisoners over remand prisoners. A disturbing observation was that in order to permit the serving of a more meaningful and heavy meal, an ad hoc arrangement had been made in some prisons to collapse lunch and dinner into one meal.

Access to legal representation

The majority of the inmates interviewed, especially in provincial prisons, said that they had no access to legal representation. Many reported that they were charged with offences that were not appropriate for their circumstances. Especially in the provinces, where most criminal charges are handled by police prosecutors, it was claimed that the charges proffered had no legal basis. The non-availability of prosecuting lawyers implies that accused remain at the mercy of Justices of the Peace, magistrates and judges. This situation contributes to process delays and compounds the prison congestion problem. In 2007, some prisoners in Bo and Moyamba did not go to court at all for lack of prosecution services.

About 92 per cent of sentenced prisoners interviewed indicated that they had had no legal representation during their trials. During a visit to the Freetown Central Prison on 20 June 2008, a total of 425 prisoners were said to be on remand of whom about 10 per cent had no legal representation. Poverty was identified as the main reason for prisoners not being able to secure legal representation, although the adjunct to this is ignorance. In contrast, juveniles, especially those housed at the Remand Home in Freetown, are provided with legal assistance by local and international NGO’s, such as LAWCLA and Defence for Children International. This is not surprising since children and juveniles belong to a vulnerable group that is targeted by many NGOs.

Contact with the outside world

International standards and conventions determine that prisoners should be allowed to communicate with their families and friends by correspondence and supervised visits at regular intervals. Prison authorities are bound by these standards to inform the spouse and/or immediate relative of an inmate about his/her admission into a facility, any serious illness or death that may befall the person, or his/her transfer from one institution to another. In Sierra Leone, these standards are generally not complied with. Whilst some of the welfare officers interviewed pointed to the lack of logistics that made it difficult to inform relatives, others claimed that some prisoners provided incorrect address and other details. Inmates argued, however, that welfare officers were always difficult to access.

It is also difficult for inmates to communicate with their relatives or friends by correspondence, either because of illiteracy or because of a lack of capacity in prisons. An administrative structure to distribute prisoners’ letters does not exist. However, in the Kailahun prison an ad hoc arrangement had been made with members of the Drivers’ Union to carry letters from prisoners to relatives at no cost. On a country-wide basis, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) collects and distributes letters from inmates on a quarterly basis. This has proved to be the most successful way of getting prisoner’s letters to family and friends. It is hoped that this critical area will be addressed as part of the ongoing reforms being introduced by the Prisons Service.

All prisons allow regular visits, although the conditions of this facility vary from prison to prison. At a few prisons visitors are allowed to bring in food for the inmates, although cooked foods are accepted only after having been tasted by the visitor in the presence of a prison officer. Visitors all also permitted to bring clothes for remand prisoners. Whereas in many prisons the demarcated place for visits is the hallway leading to the office of the Officer in Charge, some prisons have set aside designate rooms for visits.

None of the 13 functioning prisons, except the Central Prison in Freetown, had a working telephone. But even here, prisoners were not permitted access to the telephone.

Treatment of women and juveniles/children in prisons

In line with international standards, women prisoners should not be discriminated against. They should be protected from all forms of violence or exploitation and should be held separately from their male counterparts.

The research did not find any evidence to suggest that female prisoners were discriminated against, exploited or maltreated. In all the prisons visited, there were visible signs of demarcation between female and male prisoners. The two sexes were kept in separate cells, but they often tended to mix in a manner that is unacceptable. For instance, in most prisons males and female inmates shared recreational and exercise areas. In Kenema, male and female prisoners even shared bathrooms. The special needs of female prisoners, ranging from menstrual pads to toiletries, cosmetics, slippers etc. were not supplied in any prison except in the Central Prison in Freetown, where women were provided with a dress, a head-tie and an undergarment.

In a number of prisons, particularly in Freetown, Bo and Kenema, it was common to see pregnant women and suckling mothers. The explanation was that women entered prison with unnoticeable early pregnancies and that special facilities for such women did not exist. When the time was right, they would be referred to the government hospital or to non-government agencies that had the facilities to care for such women.

As for juveniles and children, there are only two Remand Homes, namely at Bo and Freetown, and one Approved School in Freetown, which for a country of about five million people, where youths and children are in the majority, is inadequate. These facilities do, however, ensure that children who have committed crimes are not treated in the same way as adults and are not put in the same prisons. In a bid to avoid overcrowding in a situation where there are few juvenile facilities, the Remand Home in Bo at times gives offending children lashes and then lets them go. Corporal punishment does, however, violate the human rights of children. Special Juvenile Courts do not exist in Sierra Leone.

There are many abandoned children in the communities, some of whom have taken to crime. MSWGCA is doing little to integrate such children into the communities, or to trace their families.

Prisons Service administration and budgets

The primary task of the Prisons Service is to receive remand and convicted prisoners from the courts. Warrants sanctioned by magistrates, judges or by appropriate persons in authority request the Prisons Service to take custody of these prisoners and house them in an habitable environment. It is also the responsibility of the Prisons Service to receive trial prisoners, political detainees and security-risk prisoners. The Prisons Service must look after the welfare of prisoners and ensure that they are reformed and rehabilitated.

The desired staff complement of the Prisons Service in March 2008 was 2 260. Tables 11 to 14 show the actual distribution of senior staff in terms of position, deployment, gender and location, as well as prison/staff ratios.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meaningful terms and conditions of employment, including attractive salaries, are a main factor in ensuring the achievement of efficiency in organisations. Interviews with prison staff indicated that the level of salaries paid in the Prisons Service are ridiculously low and that the benefits and incentives received are no better. For example, a Grade 1 recruit earned a minimum of Le 39 150 (about US$13) and a maximum of Le 47 250 (US$16) per month, whilst the highest grade in the service, i.e. the position of Director of Prisons, earned a minimum of Le 281 750 (US$92) and a maximum of Le 368 000 (US$123). It is therefore not surprising to observe a low morale and laxness among almost all the prison officers interviewed. The grim picture this portrays strongly suggests that the professional ethos of the officers could be compromised, with a concomitant effect on their standard of care for and the degree of human rights protection of prison inmates. Complaints about low salaries were also received at the remand homes and the approved school.

Even in terms of supplies, e.g. uniforms, the situation was awful. Officers received incomplete and irregular supplies of uniforms. Uniforms were last supplied in 2006, when officers were given two uniforms and a pair of shoes. The budgetary allocation to the prisons administration is not only inadequate for the efficient operation of prisons, but is the funds do not arrive on time and are not easily accessible. Unlike the case with the SLP, the Prisons Service does not have a departmental accounting system. As such, the budget allocation does not go directly into the coffers of the administration. This is a key obstacle to the effective administration of prisons. By 20 June 2008, when the researcher visited the Central Prison at Pademba Road, the Prisons Service had not received its budget allocation for the second quarter of 2008.

Compliance with international protocols and conventions

There has been some degree of compliance in Sierra Leone with international protocols and conventions on the rights of prisoners. The Constitution provides a range of fundamental rights and liberties that are germane to persons held in detention and these are compatible with international human rights standards. However, the standards for the administration of prisons and the treatment of prisoners are outlined by the Prison Rules. The following determinations from the Prison Rules and the Prison Ordinance indicate to what extent regulations in Sierra Leone deviate from internationally accepted standards:

Section 35 provides for the solitary confinement of prisoners as a form of punishment for prison offences. However, as most prisons lack electricity, confinement in generally dark cells thus also means being confined to the dark. This situation is an affront to Rule 31 of the UN Standard Minimum Rule (UNSMR), which prohibits punishment by confining prisoners to dark cells. The UN Basic Principles for the treatment of Prisoners (1990) calls on all member states to abolish solitary confinement as a form of punishment.

Section 53 provides that prisoners who are in solitary confinement should not engage in regular physical exercise. This contravenes Rule 21 of the UNSMR, which states that every prisoner, with the exception of those employed in outdoor work, shall have at least one hour of suitable exercise in the open air daily, provided the weather is conducive.

In the First Schedule there is a prescription for penal diets, i.e. a reduction in the food allocated to a prisoner as a form of punishment. This is contrary to Rule 32 of UNSMR, which stipulates that food reduction should not be used as a form of punishment unless a medical officer certifies in writing, after an examination, that the prisoner is fit to sustain it. The research uncovered that in some prisons, especially in the provinces, penal diets are generally used without any medical certification.

Both the Prison Rules (section 73) and the Prisons Ordinance (section 57) provide for corporal punishment in prisons. However, Article 20 of the Constitution proscribes any form of torture, or any punishment or other that is inhumane or denigrating. The Prisons Rules were promulgated decades before the Constitution came into force in 1991. Although corporal punishment is thus provided for in Sierra Leonean law, Rule 31 of the UNSMR, which disallows corporal punishment, is contravened. One recommendation by the SLTRC was the abolition of corporal punishment.

Section 45 of the Prison Ordinance states: ’Every sentence of imprisonment, whether the sentence was one of imprisonment with hard labour or simple imprisonment, passed upon any criminal prisoner, shall work as directed by the Officer in Charge’. From this it is obvious that work for prisoners is compulsory, though it is unclear whether prisoners are to be paid or compensated. The research found that prisoners were often deployed at government offices and private places without any regular reward. Rule 71 of the UNSMR stipulates that prison labour must not be an affliction. Rather, it should be capable of increasing the prisoner’s ability to earn an honest living after release. Rule 76 of the UNSMR calls for some form of equitable remuneration to be paid to prisoners for their service, and that such remuneration could be used by them or be sent to relatives.

A number of provisions in the Prison Rules cover medical services. However, they do not particularly apply to the mental health of the prisoners. Rule 22 of the UNSMR specifies that medical services should include psychiatric service for the diagnosis and treatment of mental abnormality.

Although the Prison Rules were written too long ago to capture international prison standards adopted in more recent times, they do contain some provisions that are consistent with international standards, but they are not being applied at the moment. These include Rules 107 to 114, which provide for justices to visit the prisons regularly, conduct inspections of cells and receive petitions from prisoners. Rule 55 provides for the transfer of prisoners from one prison to another so that they can meet their relatives.

The following international instruments are applicable to Sierra Leone’s Prisons Service, even though there are problems with ratification and application in most instances:

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948
  
  

• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1976
  
  

• International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of 1969
  
  

• Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1990
  
  

• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 1981
  
  

• Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 1987
  
  

• Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners of 1977
  
  

• UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules) of 1985
  
  

• Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials of 1990
  
  

• Basic Principles on the Treatment of Prisoners of 1990
  
  

• The African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights of 1984

Summary of findings

From the foregoing, a number of conclusions can be drawn and observations made not just about the prisons, but also about the entire criminal justice system in the country.

Generally speaking, the main objectives of the Prisons Service, namely to provide corrective measures and to reform and rehabilitate prisoners so that they once again can become useful members of society, are not being achieved because of a number of challenges, e.g. inadequate human and institutional capacities within prisons, lack of cooperation among stakeholders in the justice sector, long and windy court proceedings, poor conditions of service for prison officers, the inadequate and late allocation of budgetary funds to the Prisons Service, to cite just a few. The burden of all these failings falls on the prisoners, thereby violating their fundamental human rights as prisoners.

A significant observation that needs to be made is that the problems facing Sierra Leone’s prisons today are not new. From the inception of prisons in the country, problems abounded as regards accommodation, sanitation, human rights, welfare, male and female segregation etc.

It is observed that in spite of some reform measures being undertaken by government on an ongoing basis in partnership with development partners, many of the prisons in Sierra Leone are still miserable. This amounts to a violation of the rights and liberties of detainees. The paradox is that prisons have the aim of rehabilitating criminals, but cannot do so for a lack of means.

Recommendations

In light of the problems highlighted above and in order to strengthen the Prisons Service and raise the profile of criminal justice in Sierra Leone, the following recommendations are made:

• To enable the prisons to function in an efficient and effective manner consistent with their mandate and international requirements, a training and capacity-building programme covering the following areas should be instituted:
  
  

  • The Prison Ordinance and the Prison Rules

  • The approach to prison management as covered in international protocols on human rights

  • Prison administration for middle and senior managers
    
    

• Since prisons can hardly function effectively in the absence of adequate logistics, supplies, appropriate amenities and good working conditions, it is recommended that –
  
  

  • A full assessment is made by government on how existing resources at the disposal of prison authorities are used, and that clear rules and procedures for the use of logistics, including vehicles and equipment, are established
    
    

  • The quarterly budgetary allocation to the Prisons Service is increased and disbursed on time so that adequate food, supplies and logistics can be procured
    
    

  • The living conditions of all prisoners are improved
    
    

  • A review is made of the terms and conditions of service for prison officers in order to enhance staff morale and efficiency

• As no substantial reform can be effected in the Prisons Service without corresponding reforms of the penal system, the bail system, the trial process, judgement patterns and accessibility to legal counsel, it is recommended that –
  
  

  • The bail system be reformed and made much more liberal and affordable
    
    The judgement patterns of the courts be reviewed in line with best practice
    
    

  • The number of remand homes and approved schools be increased and that they be maintained properly
    
    

  • The prosecution be capacitated by employing additional State Counsel and providing legal training for police prosecutors
    
    

  • Court trials be expedited to reduce the excessive number of remands and adjournments
    
    

  • Some mechanism be put in place for the provision of legal aid to inmates on remand and during trials
    
    

  • Meaningful incentives be offered to magistrates and judges for handling the case loads more efficiently
    
    

• It is recommended that the Prison Ordinance, the Prison Rules and the Criminal Procedures Act be amended in line with minimum international standards and requirements. Key areas of reform should be solitary confinement and corporal punishment, and the provision of remuneration for prisoners who engage in some form of labour.
  
  

• With regard to juveniles and women, it is recommended that –
  
  

  • Female prisoners be separated from male prisoners as far as sleeping areas, toilet and recreational facilities are concerned
    
    

  • The special needs of female prisoners with regard to feminine hygiene and maternal health be considered seriously in prisons budgetary allocations
    
    

  • Remand homes be established in the provincial headquarter towns of Makeni and Kenema so that juveniles can be kept separate from adult prisoners
    
    

  • Authorities ensure that trial prisoners are kept away from convicted prisoners.