Purpose of ICRC visits

In any crisis situation, be it a full scale war or a case of internal political unrest, people deprived of their freedom can be subjected to various forms of abuse. Prisoners are part of the general population that finds itself at risk because of the conflict (in a broad sense). The reason why the ICRC is concerned by these victims of violence who happen to be behind bars is that this particular category of people is normally not accessible to other organizations.

The main purpose of ICRC visits is to ask the authorities to take any steps deemed necessary to improve the detainees' treatment. In case of emergency, the ICRC provides the inmates with medicines, clothing, toilet articles and food.

Among the problems encountered by the ICRC in the course of its visits are the particularly harsh conditions of detention often endured by detainees, ill-treatment, torture and even executions. Sometimes there is simply the fact that detainees are cut off from their families. In some cases, failure to observe judicial guarantees can amount to ill-treatment, since this has a serious impact on the physical and mental state of the individuals concerned. The ICRC's work in places of detention constitutes a form of active prevention of such practices.

It should be underlined, however, that it is up to the detaining authorities to ensure the protection of the people they take into custody, and that they can be held accountable if they fail to do so.

The ICRC's activities on behalf of prisoners have four main objectives:

• to prevent or put a stop to disappearances and extra-judicial killings;
• to prevent or put an end to torture and ill-treatment;
• to improve conditions of detention where necessary;
• to restore contact between detainees and their families.

Experience has shown that prison visits and the physical presence in a place of detention of people from outside can be an effective way of preventing the occurrence of abuses.

An ICRC visit: facts are established, then authorities are approached

ICRC teams to visit people deprived of their freedom consist of at least one delegate and one doctor or sometimes a nurse. The size of the team and the length of visits depend on the scale of the problems anticipated and the size of the premises to be visited: two people are enough to visit a police station in Sri Lanka, but one or more teams working together over several weeks will be required for the same task in large and heavily subdivided prisons holding 5,000 prisoners, such as that of Pul-i-Charki in Afghanistan.

All ICRC visits follow a standard procedure and take place only if certain conditions are fulfilled

ICRC visits to places of detention start with a preliminary exchange of views with the people in charge there to explain how the visits themselves are organized and carried out. Together with those same authorities, the delegates then inspect the entire premises (cells, dormitories, latrines, showers, exercise yards, visiting rooms, kitchens, workshops, sports areas, places of worship, infirmary, punishment and solitary confinement cells, etc.). The most important part of the visit is the private conversations the delegates have with each prisoner who so requests, as well as with those to whom the delegates themselves wish to speak in private, at which neither the authorities nor the guards are present. In this way the ICRC team tries to find out what the prisoners regard as their main problems.

After analysing the information gathered and their own observations, the delegates submit their findings, conclusions and recommendations, together with a plan of action, to the people in charge of the place of detention and take note of their comments. In many cases, problems can be solved by establishing an ongoing working relationship with the local prison authorities.

The next step is to approach the higher authorities. Problems such as overcrowding, medical transfers and water or food supplies very often depend not only on the prison director but also on other authorities such as the Prisons Department or the Ministry of Health. Such approaches may take the form of interviews at various levels or of correspondence or written reports, depending on how great and how urgent the problem is.

The ICRC regularly provides the national authorities with a summary report on its findings over a given period or in a specific category of places of detention, which covers not only the problems identified but also any improvements observed or steps taken.

Prior conditions

Drawing on the experience acquired over the years, the ICRC has established guidelines enabling it to evaluate a prison system with maximum objectivity and submit concrete and realistic proposals which take local customs and standards into account.

Whatever the circumstances, the ICRC visits people deprived of their freedom only if the authorities allow it:

• to see all prisoners who come within its mandate and to have access to all places at which they are held;
• to speak with prisoners in private, without any third parties being present;
• to draw up a list of prisoners during its visit whom it considers to come within its mandate, or to receive such a list from the authorities and to check and supplement it if necessary;
• to repeat its visits to all prisoners of its choice if it considers that the situation so warrants, and to do so as often as it wishes.

ConfidentiaI reports

Until the late 1940s, the ICRC used to publish its reports on visits to prisoners. However, because its reports were sometimes used polemically for political purposes, thereby jeopardizing further dialogue with the authorities, the ICRC had to stop publishing them. Since then, ICRC reports have been submitted solely to the authorities concerned.

The ICRC reserves the right to publish its entire report if a detaining authority issues an abridged and consequently incomplete version of it. Whenever the ICRC visits prisoners of war captured during an international armed conflict, it also sends a copy of its report to their power of origin.

Place of detention: one reality, three perceptions

Steps taken by ICRC delegates on behalf of people deprived of their freedom are based on an analysis and consolidation of information obtained chiefly from three sources:

• the authorities, who explain their view of the prison system and conditions of detention and tell of any problems encountered;
• prisoners, who describe their own experiences and difficulties;
• the delegates, who gather full information from those two sources and then form their own conclusions.

Private interviews with prisoners: the cornerstone of ICRC action

Conversations in strict privacy between delegates and individual prisoners, without any authorities present, are the cornerstone of ICRC action on behalf of people deprived of their freedom. Such interviews without witnesses, as they are sometimes called, serve a dual purpose: they give the prisoners a break from prison routine, one in which they can speak freely about what matters most to them and be sure of being heard; and they enable the ICRC to find out all about the conditions of detention and the treatment of prisoners. The interviewing delegate also enquires how the arrest and the subsequent questioning took place, and about the conditions of detention at the various places where the prisoner was temporarily held before arriving at the place visited. In addition, the delegate maybe given information about fellow prisoners whose arrest has not yet been notified to the ICRC or whom it has not been able to contact. He or she will ensure that the interview takes place without interference from other prisoners, who might seek to exert pressure.

The task of conducting such interviews is all the more delicate in that giving such an account often revives painful memories of traumatic experiences - and there is no question of subjecting the prisoners to a fresh interrogation. There are no precise rules for interviewing them: it is up to the delegate to assess the situation on a case-by-case basis and adjust to it to create an atmosphere of trust. Sometimes the chance to speak to somebody from outside is enough for the individual prisoners to confide in the delegate, while at others it may take several visits before they will tell their story. Then again, they may open up only to the ICRC doctor. On the strength of the information thus gathered and after cross-checking, the ICRC decides what action should be taken.

Whenever necessary, interpreters are used to communicate with the prisoners, They are recruited by the ICRC itself and, to avoid any pressure, they are never nationals of the country in which the visits take place. If it has no suitable interpreters available, the ICRC may ask the prisoners to appoint one or more from among themselves; this practice is seldom adopted, however, since the prisoner interpreting a fellow inmate's remarks may be endangered by doing so or may distort what he or she says.

A professional code of conduct drawn up with the prisoner interests in mind

To the ICRC, the interests of the individual prisoners visited prevail over all other considerations. Their situation may lead to diplomatic approaches or some other intervention, but must always be handled with the utmost caution: a risk of reprisals against prisoners if allegations of ill-treatment are reported to the prison authorities may cause the ICRC to postpone its call for an investigation. Delegates will nevertheless contact other officials - often at a higher level - to prevent such situations from recurring. On no account will the ICRC quote a prisoner's statements without his or her express permission. It takes care to see that its interventions do not have any negative impact on the day-to-day life of inmates, and adapts them accordingly. Where there is overcrowding, for example, the most logical solution would presumably be to transfer some prisoners to other places of detention. But in many cases they might thus be taken far away from their families and deprived of their material support, which is sometimes vital. So delegates make sure that any transfers make due allowance for that consideration.

The ICRC is also careful not to disrupt the prisoners' own internal organization. To withstand the pressures of prison life to the best of its ability, every group of prisoners sets up its own structures which sometimes reflect the social hierarchy and political movements of the outside world. To request the transfer of prisoners from one block to another may upset that internal structure and have serious repercussions such as fights, rivalries between groups or the deprival of certain advantages linked to residence in a given block. On the other hand, the ICRC may ask for prisoners to be transferred because they are being taunted or ill-treated by cellmates for political or other reasons.

Long-term dialogue and presence: a strategic choice

The ICRC has chosen to work on the basis of dialogue with parties to conflict and with the authorities, seeking to influence their behaviour and persuade them to comply with humanitarian law and principles. But to do so a climate of confidence, which can only be created in the long term and through sustained work in the field, has to be established with all concerned. That is one reason for the ICRC's discretion. In exchange, it expects its contacts to show that they are willing to take the political steps required to improve the situation.

The limits of discretion

Dialogue with the authorities, and not the systematic denunciation of violations of international law and the humanitarian principles, is the course of action adopted by the ICRC. It does not allow itself to be swayed by the modern media or any other form of political pressure. But if serious and repeated violations occur and its own confidential approaches are in vain, or it finds that the authorities clearly have no intention of respecting international humanitarian law, it may decide to speak out. In such cases it calls upon the States party to the Geneva Conventions, and the international community as a whole, to ensure respect for that law. It did so, for instance, in the late 1980s in an attempt to obtain the release, at the end of active hostilities, of prisoners of war captured during the conflict between Iran and Iraq.