familiarity with prison oversight bodies · wider project exploring prisoners' perspectives of...
TRANSCRIPT
Familiarity with Prison Oversight Bodies
Sophie van der Valk, Eva Aizpurua & Mary RoganPRILA
Prison Oversight Bodies
Prison inspection and monitoring bodies are important safeguards against breaches of human rights
Familiarity Trust Engagement
Methods
• Semi-structured interviews (44)
• Surveys (N = 509)
• Random selection
• 3 medium male security prisons
Objectives of Study
Wider project exploring prisoners' perspectives of oversight bodies
Current Objectives
1. To examine awareness and familiarity amongst prisoners of oversight bodies
2. To identify characteristics associated with degree of familarity
The Survey
Awareness
Inspector of Prisons
Visiting Committees
CPT
Personal Approach
Inspector of Prisons
Visiting Committees
CPT
Contact
Inspector of Prisons
Visiting Committees
CPT
The Survey
508 prisoners randomly selected from three Irish prisons (RR = 83.9%)Participants
Self-administered paper questionnairesInstrument
November 2018 - February 2019Fieldwork
Familiarity
69.1
21.328.0
49.0
6.711.4
25.0
2.2 2.0
Awareness Personal approach Contact
Visiting Committees Inspector of Prisons CPT
Typologies• Latent Class Analysis
Low Familiarity
§ 43.9% of prisoners
§ Low levels of awareness, personal approach and contact
Awareness only
§ 26.4% of prisoners
§ High awareness with low engagement
Familiarity with the VC
• 14.5% of prisoners
• High familiarity with the VC only
High Familiarity
§ 15.4% of prisoners
§ High levels of awareness, personal approach and contact
Class Membership
13.0
6.74.1
2.6
0.0
25.0
% of foreign prisoners by classLow Familiarity Awareness only VC only High familiarity
𝑋! = 11.75, 𝑝 < .01, 𝜑 = 0.15
Class Membership
8.4
26.0
18.8
37.3
0.0
50.0
% of prisoners serving sentences of 10 years + by class
Low Familiarity Awareness only VC only High familiarity
𝑋! = 38.00, 𝑝 < .001, 𝜑 = 0.16
Class Membership
27.5
10.2
43.8
22.0
34.326.7
48.0 49.2
0.0
75.0
Protection status Complaint usage
% of prisoners by class
Low Familiarity Awareness only VC only High familiarity
𝑋! = 14.25, 𝑝 < .01, 𝜑 = 0.17 𝑋! = 41.32, 𝑝 < .001, 𝜑 = 0.32
Conclusions
1. Diversity of experiences that prisoners have with oversight bodiesFour subgroups of prisoners characterized by distinct patterns of awareness and contact with prison oversight bodies
2. Profiles of prisoners differ in their background characteristics and experiences in prison
§ Low familiarity (43.9%) - nationality§ Awareness only§ Familiarity with Visiting Committees only§ High familiarity (15.4%) – longer sentences, protection, complaint experience
Implications: Typologies
Build Trust and Credibility of
Oversight Bodies
Develop awareness-raising initiatives
Advance our understanding of
prisoners´experiences with oversight bodies
Effective Oversight Protection
Engagement
Awareness
Trust
Access
Human RHuman Rights Protection
