Report on the
SIXTH WORKING SESSION OFFERED TO THE ALBANIAN PRISON ADMINISTRATION
IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE ALBANIAN PRISON SERVICE
AND COUNCELLING SESSION PROVIDED TO THE GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF
PRISONS
Organized by Albanian Helsinki Committee
On 4-8 June 2005
In the framework of its mission of human rights protection,
sensitization and education of the public in general with human
rights, as well as aiming at supporting the Albanian authorities in
their efforts to further reform the penitentiary institutions and
introduce priority issues such as employment of prisoners in these
institutions, during 4-8 June 2005, AHC organized another counseling
session with the General Director of Prisons, two-days working
session with the administration of Rrogozhina and Peqin prisons and
one-day working session with the governors of Tirana penitentiary
institutions and heads of different departments at the GDP which
work on policies regarding employment of prisoners and prisoners’
treatment.
These activities were attended and supported by the Director General
of Prisons Mr. Engjëll Hysi, high officials of the General
Directorate of Prisons, prison governors of Rrogozhina, Peqin and
Kosova, senior staff of both the pilot prisons of Rrogozhina and
Peqin where as the last working session was attended by high
representatives of the education, logistics and treatment
departments at the General Directorate of Prisons, and governors of
Tirana pre-detention facilities and prisons. Experts who offered
their expertise in this session were Mr. Jan van den Brand, Director
Portfolio and Coordinator of the External Relations in the Dutch
National Agency of Correctional Institutions in the Netherlands, at
the same time, expert of the European Council in Eastern and Central
Europe and Mr. Theo Westerhout, Regional Director in the
Netherlands, both individuals with a long
experience in management of the penitentiary institutions. Mrs.
Edlira Papavangjeli, Programs’ Coordinator was representing Albanian
Helsinki Committee in these activities.
During the counseling meeting with the Director General of Prisons
Mr. Hysi the issue which was dealt was that of elections and how can
the possibility for the prisoners to vote be organized. Mr. van den
Brand, explained how this is done do in the Netherlands. All the
prisoners who are allowed to vote are sent a card and with this card
they can mandate a close family member or a relative to vote for
them. In all cases this can not be a member of the prison staff. If
a politician asks permission to talk to the prisoners within
penitentiary institutions – which never has happened so far in the
Netherlands – prison administration look for possibilities to be
created. The expert noticed that in the Albanian situation the
governors create a real possibility to vote.
The second issue which was treated with the Director General was the
train the trainers’ program. After some discussion we reached
consensus about the format: 5 days in Tirana, implemented by two
trainers: one didactical specialist and one expert with the penal
knowledge.
During the working session which took place in Peqin Prison the main
issue treated at length was the employment for prisoners. During the
first lecture, Mr. Jan van den Brand provided the participants with
a general introduction to this significant issue, the legal
framework and the philosophy about labor for prisoners.
More concretely, in the following paragraphs you find some important
points of this lecture:
Introduction to the issues of labor in penitentiary institutions
When you make analyses about prisoners one understands a big
diversity; diversity in crimes (robbery, sexual crimes, murder
cases, drugs, fraud and so on), diversity in ethnic background and
religion; diversity in age. On the other hand, one finds only a few
diversities in the structure of life. Most of the prisoners have a
dramatic history: addiction, low education; bad structured daily
routine; lack of norms and values; only a few communication skills.
Of course there are exceptions such as cases of the offenders of
incest or other sexual crimes like pedophiles.
In case you try to compensate all these problems in the prisons than
you need to offer a broad scale of activities. At the same time you
have to realize that a prison is not a treatment institution that is
not a hospital but an institution serving public interests. There
are a few important things that we try to reach with each prisoner:
discipline, daily routine, reducing drug use, healthy food.
Why for example is it so important to teach prisoners how to fill in
his daily activities in an effective way? The answer is simple:
Many prisoners live a wild uncontrolled life. For many of them the
night is the day and the opposite; they eat bad food.
Labor is one of the most important activities that we can offer the
prisoner. Look at ourselves: Is it not so that we work sometimes 40
years of our life? When prisoners come in our prisons they often
have none or only little experience in the labor market and in most
cases hardly any education.
Legal framework on labor in prisons and other reference to
international literature
If we refer to the publication already in Albanian language please
consult Making Standards Work: page 131.with reference to European
Rules starting with article 71. When we refer to the Dutch Prison
Rules you will find only one article: art. 47 regarding labor in
penitentiary institutions. This does not mean that we think that
employment for prisoners is not important: the opposite is the
reality. As it is state above, article 47 only the principle rule is
mentioned. The details about employment are regulated in ministerial
protocols. This is based on the pragmatic reason that it is much
easier to change these protocols than laws. Of course it is evident
that the wages and conditions are regulated at a national level.
Labor acquisition and further organizational aspects are the
responsibility of the local management teams. In this context the
expert also will refer to the situation of the Czech Republic[1].
The handbook of Andrew Coyle “A Human Rights Approach to Prison
Management” treats as well issues such as wages, models of labor
acquisition from a managerial perspective etc on pages 85/89. The
expert pointed out the fact that the Albanian legal framework on the
issue of prisoners’ employment is undergoing amendments with the
view to improve the provisions and with this thought in the
background the participants of these working sessions and the
experts have offered their experience and recommendations for the
Albanian case.
The organization of labor has also a lot of implications:
-
For the daily programs, this all in relation to the rest of the
activities; how to organize labor in the most effective way;
-
Forced labor: in principle is prohibited; but of course you can
work with incentives; or work with a restrictive regime when
people are not willing to work; a good disciplinary protocol has
to be made in this case;
-
Health: responsibility for the medical service is very important:
is someone able or not able to work?
-
Safety: what type of work do you choose? What are the security
measures? Control after work in a metal workshop for ex. will be
needed.
-
Skills: very important aspect, one should look for possibilities
to combine work with vocational training possibilities in order to
make possible to many prisoners to work.
-
Supervision: should this be carried out by professionals? Or
Prison Officers?
-
Wage/remuneration: what should be the salary comparing to the
situation outside prisons? Symbolic payment like in the
Netherlands? And in case you provide prisoners with normal
salaries: do the prisoners have to pay back for their costs? Etc.
-
Working conditions: prison administration should guarantee good
working conditions as well as insurance.
The functions of labor:
-
Provides prisoners with a daily routine: structure in life;
daytime is the daytime and not the opposite; Prison administration
should organize the labor in that way that there are no
disturbances, for example: system of half day work; other part of
the day is reserved for other activities like fresh air, visits,
sports and so on;
-
Responsibility for the prisoners: it makes them responsible for
the production; gives them the feeling that they are also
responsible.
-
Useful existence: it reduces their feeling of being losers who are
not able to do something useful;
-
Self respect: boosts their self respect, make compliments to them;
let them have the feeling that they do and can do more than they
ever expected of themselves.
-
Labor is good to fill in your time; no boredom; no other worries,
avoids irritating behavior to others and so on;
-
It is good for the institution: it provides better control, safe
feelings and atmosphere; more creativity; more challenges.
-
Labor has social functions as well: prisoners have to work with
others, have to accept others in all its aspects, have to
appreciate and respect each other, learn to deal with conflicts in
stead of using violence; In this context the role of the staff is
very important;
-
It reduces drug use: it stimulates prisoners also to do other
activities like sports, reading books; builds further their self
confidence.
-
Combine labor with vocational trainings which offers theme more
possibilities after their release.
-
It is a good preparation for reintegration into the society after
their release.
After this lecture the participants worked in two groups on the
following issues:
Workshop 1
1. Are prisoners in your prisons interested in work and if yes what
kind of work do they prefer most?
2. Do you think that in your local situation is it possible (or even
necessary) to combine labor with vocational trainings?
3. Do you see possibilities to organize labor in your institutions?
4. Do you think that for the organization of labor specialized staff
should be involved or just the regular prison staff?
The feedback from the working groups was very positive. There was
broad consensus about the necessity and usefulness of labor.
Regarding the issue of the organization of work for participants it
was more challenging to answer. Professional staff was important to
be involved in the organization of work for prisoners and also the
combination with vocational training should be part of the
consideration.
During the second day of this working session Mr. Theo Westerhout,
gave his lecture on an overview of the employment in the
Netherlands, the policies on labor for prisoners, the daily program
for prisoners in a particular local institution[2]
and the part labor takes in this daily program, the latest changes
in the labor programs, changes in the organizational aspects and
structures etc. The participants were introduced with concrete
examples of best practices in the Netherlands regarding the
employment situation of prisoners.
After this introductory and concrete speech, the participants worked
in two different workshops on 4 different questions/statements for
each working group. The following are the questions they handled as
well as the answers provided by the members of the groups.
Workshop 2:
1. Which system in the daily program of the prisoners do you
prefer for the labor activity and why?
The background regarding this issue: according to national and
international rules the prison systems have to offer a lot of
obligated activities to the prisoners (fresh air, sports, visits,
hygiene, and library). This (can) cause a lot of organizational
activities. Taking this complexity of factors and responsibilities
the prison administration can make a choice between: a) whole day
labor with a lot of disturbances; b) half day labor; c) labor only
for motivated prisoners;
The feedback from the participants of the working groups was as
follows: the majority of the participants preferred to work with the
Dutch system, that is organizing half day work for prisoners and
offering work to all the prisoners; at least as a start. This was
motivated because of organizational reasons and more effective.
2. Labor activities need rules and regulations: what do you
think would be more effective to regulate labor at a national or
local level or a combination of both?
The background regarding this issue: circumstances in the prisons
can differ; this can be the reason to have more elaborated local
rules, but on the other hand, one can say: why set differences
between prisons and why not work with a national protocol/ law on
labor in prisons.
The feedback from the participants of the working groups was as
follows: it should be a combination of both national and local rules
on labor. Therefore, more concretely, regulations regarding
wages/remuneration and maximum numbers of working hours and safety
rules should be regulated at a national level; alongside with the
national legislation there should be local protocols on labor for
prisoners for each prison taking into consideration the
specificities of each penitentiary institution.
-
What is
your opinion about the wages/remuneration? What should be the way
to be adopted for the Albanian context?
The background regarding this issue: when you look at the diverse
situations in many countries (look at the book of Andrew Coyle page
85/89 as well as the article about the Czech situation) you will see
that there are several possibilities of what system to adopt when it
comes to the remuneration of the work carried out by prisoners.
There are models of paying the prisoners: a) a full salary like “the
outside world” with the condition that prisoners should take care of
their families; b) a full salary with the requirement that prisoners
have to pay 65% of their salary to the prison for the costs of their
treatment in the prisons; c) a symbolic salary/payment like in the
Netherlands where it is more a pocket money that is given to the
prisoners than payment in forms of salaries.
The feedback from the participants of the working groups was as
follows: an ”Albanian” model is preferred, that is, full salary
should be paid to the prisoners with the condition that part of it
should go as their contribution/responsibility to their
relatives/families, part of it to the prison and the rest for the
prisoners as their pocket money.
-
What
should be the policy adopted for the work acquisition? Who should
have the responsibility for this: the department/headquarters or
the local institutions or a combination of both structures?
The background regarding this issue: it is very important to work
with private factories/companies. On the other hand, the concrete
environment/context of the prisons differs from one to another. It
is also possible to organize factories for yourselves, that is
workshops of different kinds in the system and last but not least it
is possible to organize a lot of activities in the prisons itself
like cleaning, clothing, cooking, maintenance of the buildings etc.
A part of such initiatives area already taken by the Albanian prison
administration in some particular prisons, but now time has come to
think in terms of a whole system regulating the initiatives for the
employment of prisoners.
The feedback from the participants of the working groups was as
follows: there was a widely shared big preference for the
combination of shared responsibilities of the central department of
the GDP and local institutions because of the fact that indeed the
situation and possibilities for the prisons are different. Some
prisons have more possibilities for agricultural work and some for
more industrial work whereas the rest more self-provision of work
opportunities.
-
What
should be done in cases when there is no work available inside a
penal institution and no money to pay the prisoners?
This was a complicated question. Depending on the principle choice
you make, a regulation is necessary especially when the outside
world/relatives are involved and depended (in financial terms) on
their relatives in the prison.
The feedback from the participants on this issue was that it is the
responsibility of the government to take care of this situation and
provide legal guarantees at least for the relatives/family members
of the prisoners while the main bread provider is suffering his
sentence in the prison.
-
Can
prisoners sell self-made products like wooden or concrete objects,
furniture and paintings to the general public? If so are they
allowed to keep the money?
Several countries and prisons present a different situation
regarding this issue. For example: prisoners can make these articles
in “their own time” or during “labor” time.
The feedback we got from the participants of the working groups was
that when you organize these activities, that can be very positive
for the prisoners in the labor time and that should be considered as
the prisoners’ own income regulated with the same rules of course
which counts for the other prisoners.
-
What
should be done when a prisoner who has followed a specialized
educational course at one prison is transferred to another prison?
This issue is for the future situation when the system of employment
will be spread in many different prisoners in Albania. Participants
shared the opinion that the prisoner should not be transferred;
first he/she should finish the program. They also agreed with the
suggestion from the experts in this context.
-
Should
prisoners who are participating in education or in vocational
training be able to earn the same amount of money as those who
work in workshops and perform a more specialized work?
In the beginning this was a complicated question for the
participants and the first reaction was negative. But after our
further explanation and the additional remarks regarding the
specificities and costs of the workshops, then all agreed with the
opinion that the same amount of payment should be adopted and the
same rules.
Apart from the working groups and the points highlighted above there
was an additional and principle concern regarding the classification
of the prisoners in different regimes after the court determines
their measure of imprisonment sentence. According to the Albanian
legislation the court has also the competence to classify the
prisoner to the appropriate regime of the penitentiary institution
to serve their sentence. The experts brought different models from
the Western and Eastern Europe where it is the competence of the
central office of the prison administration to accommodate prisoners
according not only to their type of crime but at the same time of
their personality characteristics and risk profiles. In the Albanian
situation the judges have a lot of power/competence in the process
of the enforcement of the imprisonment sentences. The experts
suggested that there is a need for a professional discussion in a
broad forum among professionals such as prosecutors, judges, prison
service etc and politicians and parliamentarians to reconsider these
legal provisions and leave more competence to the prison service
regarding the enforcement of the imprisonment sentences.
During the last working day with representatives of headquarters and
governors of pre-detention facilities and prisons of Tirana, Mr. Jan
van den Brand informed the participants about all the outcomes, the
suggestions and comments of the staff of the three local
institutions with regard to the issue of labor in prisons. The
concrete recommendations brought from the staff of the local
institutions were very relevant and useful for the policymakers
working for the headquarters.
On the other hand, AHC and its experts shared the opinion that
working this way, that is bringing the comments and suggestions of
the staff from the base/local institutions to the responsible staff
at the central office of the GDP for the policy development and
policymaking on labor issues is an adequate approach which
highlights the commitment of the staff working at the local level.
In addition this participatory method strengthens the respect for
your employees at the base level in considering important issues
such as this one. Participants from the GDP shared the same opinion
and appreciated the comments of their colleagues, in fact the GDP
had already made use of this method in their preliminary survey on
the work acquisition where they had involved the local institutions
in order to set up general policies regarding creating of employment
possibilities for prisoners.
All the participants, experts, and the organizers of these three
successive events shared the opinion that this mission fulfilled the
objectives set forth.
|
