Human Rights Day - Dignity and justice for all of us

Today is the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The theme for the past year in the lead up to the 60th anniversary has been "Dignity and justice for all of us". The UNDR has been translated into 360 languages allowing various UN and NGO organisations to spread the word about this important document which informs us of our rights. The Declaration has been translated into Gaeilge: Dearbhú Uile-Choiteann Cearta an Duine.

The commemoration was established in 1950, when the General Assembly invited all states and interested organizations to celebrate the day as they saw fit. It is also the day that the five-yearly United Nations Prize in the Field of Human Rights and Nobel Peace Prize are awarded. The United Nations Prize in the Field of Human Rights are due to be presented today to Ms. Louise Arbour (former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights), Mr. Ramsey Clark (former United States Attorney General and lawyer), Dr. Carolyn Gomes (Jamacan Human Rights Defender), Dr. Denis Mukwege (founder, director and chief surgeon of Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo) and Human Rights Watch. Mrs. Benazir Bhutto (Pakistani politician) and Sr. Dorothy Stang (US/Brazilian Human Rights Defender) are to be awarded the prize posthumously.

In his remarks on Human Rights Day the UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon hopes "that we will all act on our collective responsibility to uphold the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration." He went on say that we could only "honour" that "inspiring document when its principles are fully applied everywhere, for everyone."

Full Video

The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navanethem Pillay wants the "full implementation of human rights on the ground" in a way that is "regardless of their race, sex, religion, nationality, property or birth, to realization of each and every right set forth in the Universal Declaration."

Full Video

There are a number of events being organised around the worldmy favourite being this campaign in Austrailia being organised by the UNYA called write4rights asking young people to text what they think about Human Rights. An excellent idea.

If you have any links or stories on Human Rights Day, please post them in the comment thread!

Universal Periodic Review - UN Human Rights Council

Via UN News Centre.

Under General Assembly Resolution 60/251 (Which also established the Human Rights Counicl), the General Assembly mandated the Council to

undertake a universal periodic review, based on objective and reliable information, of the fulfillment by each State of its human rights obligations and commitments in a manner which ensures universality of coverage and equal treatment with respect to all States; the review shall be a cooperative mechanism, based on an interactive dialogue, with the full involvement of the country concerned and with consideration given to its capacity-building needs; such a mechanism shall complement and not duplicate the work of treaty bodies.

This Universal Periodic Review got underway yesterday in Geneva with Bahrain and Ecuador. The other states in this 1st Session Review are

* Tunisia
* Morocco
* Indonesia
* Finland
* United Kingdom
* India
* Brazil
* Philippines
* Algeria
* Poland
* Netherlands
* South Africa
* Czech Republic
* Argentina

These will all be examined during the First Session which lasts till the 18th of April.

The Second Session will consider

1. Gabon
2. Ghana
3. Peru
4. Guatemala
5. Benin
6. Republic of Korea
7. Switzerland
8. Pakistan
9. Zambia
10. Japan
11. Ukraine
12. Sri Lanka
13. France
14. Tonga
15. Romania
16. Mali

This session will take place between 5-16 May.

The third and Final Session this year will see the following states examined,

1. Botswana
2. Bahamas
3. Burundi
4. Luxembourg
5. Barbados
6. Montenegro
7. United Arab Emirates
8. Israel
9. Liechtenstein
10. Serbia
11. Turkmenistan
12. Burkina Faso
13. Cape verde
14. Colombia
15. Uzbekistan
16. Tuvalu

That session will take place between the 1-12 December.

What do these reviews entail?

The reviews entail each country giving its own information, limited to a 20 page report, but also shadow reports can be submitted by Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), limited to 10 pages. NGOs, NHRIs (National Human Rights Institution's), Human rights defenders, Academic institutions and Research institutes, Regional organizations, as well as civil society representatives may also submit observations as stakedholders but there submissions summarized by the OHCHR in a 10 page report.

Example: Bahrain

Bahrain's Report(PDF) contains information on reforms it pledged to make on election to the Human Rights Council. It details constitutional protections, legal protections, treaties signed and/or ratified, as well as the State's view of whats happening on the ground. State's may also give additional Documentation, Bahrain has taken the opportunity and submitted 6. They havent been translated from Arabic so I cant read them.

The OHCHR Report (PDF) is a summary of the Treaties signed and ratified by Bahrain. It gives a summary of the views of the bodies set up by the treaties on work done and any issues.

12 stakeholders (PDF) made submissions to the OHCHR giving there view on whats happening on the ground.

Hopefully these UPR's will make a difference around the world and put more pressure on states to respect Human Rights and their treaty obligations.

Ireland will be reviewed in 2011 in the 12th (and last) Session of the UPR.

---
Sources:
UN human rights body begins first-ever examination of all countries’ records - UN News Centre
Universal Periodic Review - OHCHR
General Assembly Resolution 60/251 (PDF) - UN
Universal Periodic Review: Bahrain - OHCHR
Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review Calender (PDF) - OHCHR

UN Convention on the rights of Persons with Disabilities

I should have picked up on this alot earlier. But anyway 20 coutries have ratified the Convention meaning it can enter into force so who are these twenty enlightened countries?

Bangladesh - 30 November 2007
Croatia - 15 August 2007
Cuba - 6 September 2007
Ecuador - 3 April 2008
El Salvador - 14 December 2007
Gabon - 1 October 2007
Guinea - 8 February 2008
Hungary - 20 July 2007
India - 1 October 2007
Jamaica - 30 March 2007
Jordan - 31 March 2008
Mexico - 17 December 2007
Namibia - 4 December 2007
Nicaragua - 7 December 2007
Panama - 7 August 2007
Peru - 30 January 2008
San Marino - 22 February 2008
South Africa - 30 November 2007
Spain - 3 December 2007
Tunisia - 2 April 2008

Now I must say some of these countries to not instantly spring to mind when thinking of countries that might sign up for it! Only one of the twenty seven EU Member States has ratified the Convention which was opened for signature over a year ago (30 March 2007).

Ireland signed the convention on the 30th of March last year, but there is still no sign of legislation forthcoming to allow us to ratify the treaty.

Here some information on the Convention. Links at the end of the post (As usual!)

There are eight guiding principles that underlie the Convention and each one of its specific articles:

* Respect for inherent dignity, individual autonomy including the freedom to make one's own choices, and independence of persons
* Non-discrimination
*Full and effective participation and inclusion in society
* Respect for difference and acceptance of persons with disabilities as part of human diversity and humanity
* Equality of opportunity
* Accessibility
* Equality between men and women
* espect for the evolving capacities of children with disabilities and respect for the right of children with disabilities to preserve their identities

The convention will become legally binding on 3 May.

----
Links:
Secretary-General Ban hails entry into force of treaty on disability rights - UN News Centre
CONVENTION on the RIGHTS of PERSONS with DISABILITIES
List of Signatories and Ratifications - UNEnable

Gay Pride: Triumphalist or rembering a historical battle for human rights?

The other day I was bored and was watching BBC Parliament. It was a recording of the previous days debates in the House of Lords, which is very interesting. Though one member of the House gave me something to mull over and hence this post.

Another thing that we see regularly—I do not know whether it is an annual event—is the gay pride parade, which I and many others consider to be triumphalist and could be used to incite hatred against other sexualities. People may think that that is far-fetched, but these days nothing is far-fetched.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon, Independent Labour

Source: Hansard

This was during a debate on amendment No. 137 (Lord Waddington) to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.

For those interested the amendment was as follows:

Schedule 26, page 269, line 19, at end insert—

“13A After section 29J (protection of freedom of expression), insert—

“29JA Protection of freedom of expression (sexual orientation)

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion of, criticism of or expressions of antipathy towards, conduct relating to a particular sexual orientation, or urging persons of a particular sexual orientation to refrain from or modify conduct related to that orientation.””

Source: Hansard

But the amendment aside, Lord Stoddart does raise an interesting point, Is Gay Pride Triumphalist? Or are we celebrating or Liberation that started in New York in 1960's?

For me Gay Pride is a double edged sword. Its celebrates the fact that I am who I am, but at the same time I think Gay Pride can sometimes creat more differences then their are. I also feel gay pride has lost its political roots as demonstration for human rights, not just for homosexuals but for all citizens.

People views of Gay Pride today vary from fun, carnival like atmosphere (eg Cork, which welcomes everyone to join in the parade) to brash, sexual all night parties (eg Amsterdam). These are views I have come across in the two and half years I am out.

So where does the future lie for Gay Pride? Please leave comments and I will post on this one further.

Treaty of Lisbon Episode IV: The Charter of Fundamental Rights

OK, so I finally stopped procrastenating and wrote this post. Its a short one but there isnt much to say on it without quoting the entire document! The next post on Lisbon will be a surpirse one (in other words, I dont know what it will be about!!!)

The Treaty of Lisbon does two things that will strengthen Human Rights with the EU.

1. It will allow the EU to accede to European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
and
2. Will make the Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding.

The convention is already a long held standard in European Human Rights. Ireland was one of the original signatories of the Convention and it entered force in Ireland on 3/9/1953. The EU accession will make the EU institutions abide by the convention and will allow citizens to take the institutions to the European Court of Human Rights.

On the Charter, this currently is only a proclamation, and has no legal backing. The Lisbon Treaty on the other hand will ensure that it is legally binding.

The EU therefore acquires for itself a catalogue of civil, political, economic and social rights, which will be legally binding not only on the Union and its institutions, but also on the Member States as regards the implementation of Union law. The Charter lists all the fundamental rights under six major headings: Dignity, Freedom, Equality, Solidarity, Citizenship and Justice. It also proclaims additional rights not contained in the European Human Rights Convention, such as data protection, bioethics and the right to good administration. It reaffirms important steps to outlaw discrimination on the grounds of gender, race, sexual orientation and colour. It also mentions social rights applied within companies, e.g. workers’ rights to be informed, to negotiate and take collective action – in other words, the right to strike

Full text of the Charter (PDF) Its only 16 pages long and is quite an informative read

Nigeria - Update

After my last post on Nigeria, I've found two interesting blog posts over on FACT OR FICTION on the issue. One is a post on Nigeria's human right obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The second is an open letter to the President of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo.

USI LGBT have a page on their website about Nigeria, and what they are advocating to do, including contact details for the Nigerian Embassy in Dublin.

Organisations supporting the abandonment of this Bil:

Africa Action, United States

African Human Rights Organization, Cameroon

Alliance Rights, Nigeria

Center for Democracy and Development, Nigeria

Centre d'Etudes et de Recherche en Droits de l'Homme - Démocratie et Justice Transitionnelle, Democratic Republic of Congo

Civil Liberties Organization, Nigeria

Global Rights, United States

Human Rights Watch, United States

International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, United States

International Commission of Jurists, Switzerland

International Service for Human Rights, Switzerland

Legal Defense and Assistance Project, Nigeria

National Black Justice Coalition, United States

Support Project in Nigeria, Nigeria

University of Pretoria - Centre for Human Rights, South Africa

*UPDATE* the proposed bill is a on the USI LGBT website (PDF)

GAY WITCH-HUNT IN NIGERIA

Via USI LGBT (email so no link)

"Nigeria seems certain to legislate one of the world's most sweeping and repressive anti-gay laws, unless international pressure is bought to bear on the Nigerian government in the next few weeks," Peter Tatchell has stated.

The leader or OUTRage! went on to say, "We appeal to gay and human rights groups worldwide to take urgent action to press the Nigerian government to uphold international human rights law and to drop this draconian legislation.

"A new bill, currently being debated in the Nigerian parliament, is the most comprehensively homophobic legislation ever proposed in any country in the world. Its extremism is rivalled only by the death penalty that exists for homosexuality in several Islamic fundamentalist states," added Mr Tatchell.

"The bill is primarily concerned with banning same-sex marriage, but its sub-clauses go much further. They will strip lesbian and gay Nigerians of their already limited civil rights. The bill outlaws almost every expression, affirmation and celebration of gay identity and sexuality, and prohibits the provision of sympathetic advice and welfare support to lesbians and gay men.

"Violations will be punished with an automatic five year jail sentence.

"The draconian measure will outlaw membership of a gay group, attending a gay meeting or protest, advocating gay equality, donating money to a gay organisation, hosting or visiting a gay website, the publication or possession of gay safer sex advice, renting or selling a property to a gay couple, expressions of same-sex love in letters or emails, attending a same-sex marriage or blessing ceremony, screening or watching a gay movie, taking or possessing photos of a gay couple, and publishing, selling or loaning a gay book or video.

"Even mere socialising by two or more gay people is likely to be interpreted as illegal.

"It widens Nigeria's already harsh anti-gay laws, to criminalise any expression, public or private, of homosexuality. Attending a private gathering of gay people, or imparting HIV prevention information to a gay person, will become a crime.

"Even before this new legislation, homosexuality was punished with a 14-year jail term under civil law, and by the death penalty in the northern regions of the country that are governed by Sharia law.

"The new legislation is backed by the Anglican Church in Nigeria and by its notoriously homophobic Archbishop, Peter Akinola. They are encouraging and endorsing the bill's victimisation of their gay countrymen and women, including the victimisation of their fellow Christians who are gay.

"The new law will criminalise gay Christian gatherings, blessings and celebrations. It is a direct attack on both the Christian and gay communities of Nigeria," said Mr Tatchell.

The bill is entitled, "The Prohibition of Relationships Between Persons of the Same Sex, Celebration of Marriage by Them, and for Other Matters Connected Therewith."

It has been approved by the Federal Executive Council and is now before the National Assembly. It is expected to be passed and become law shortly.

Under the bill, a penalty of five years imprisonment will be imposed on any person who "goes through the ceremony of marriage with a person of the same sex," or who "performs, witnesses, aids or abets the ceremony of same sex marriage," or who "is involved in the registration of gay clubs, societies and organisations, sustenance, procession or meetings, publicity and public show of same sex amorous relationship directly or indirectly in public and in private."

Obviously, it is astounding that any country should be allowed to even contemplate such laws. Substitute 'homosexuality' for 'people of colour' or 'jews' and an international protest would ensue. As a community, we need to stop Nigeria from continuing this shameless gay pogrom.

State to let transsexuals alter gender in passports

Via The Irish Times and USI LGBT

Transsexuals will be able to have their gender changed in new Irish passports in what will be the first statutory recognition of transgender rights in Irish legislation.

However, the change comes as the State contests a landmark case in which a transsexual is trying to have her birth certificate changed from male to female.

Dr Lydia Foy, a dentist from Kildare in her 50s, was born a male, married and fathered two children before undergoing gender realignment surgery almost 15 years ago. Dr Foy, whose marriage ended in the 1990s, changed her name by deed poll in 1993.

The case will raise significant issues about the legal recognition and rights of Irish transsexuals. It is due to be heard in the High Court in April next year.

Dr Foy is expected to argue that refusal of the State to change her birth certificate is in breach of her rights as recognised under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The High Court ruled against her in 2002. However, just two days after the judgment, the European Court of Human Rights found in favour of British transsexual Christine Goodwin who claimed the UK's refusal to allow her to amend her birth certificate violated rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights.

Dr Foy's renewed legal attempt to overturn the State's refusal to change her birth certificate follows Ireland's ratification of the convention and other significant legal developments in this area.

Solicitor Michael Farrell of the Free Legal Advice Centres - which supports Dr Foy's High Court application - yesterday said he welcomed the State's decision to provide greater recognition of transsexuals in the form of new passports. However, he said much more needed to be done to provide proper recognition of transgender citizens.

"We are very out of line with the rest of Europe on this issue," he said.

The State's watchdog on human rights, the Irish Human Rights Commission, has also welcomed plans to provide for transgender passports.

The Passports Bill allows an applicant who has undergone or who is undergoing treatment to change their sexual characteristics, to change the name and gender entered in their passport.

In a statement, the human rights commission said: "This section of the Bill addresses important questions relating to the right to respect for private and family life, issues which have recently been considered in detail by the European Court of Human Rights."

Excellent news for Transexuals in Ireland, but still a long way to go. best of luck to Lydia Foy in Europe!

Towns and regions take a stand against trafficking

The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities is apprealing to all European cities and regions to sign up online to a Declaration on the fight against trafficking in human beings. The Declaration, which was presented and opened for signature on 31 May 2006 , during the Congress session, has been signed by the local elected representatives of 17 local authorities, who have thereby committed themselves to take a series of measures in their own communities. All elected representatives of local and regional authorities which have a decision-making chamber are invited to sign this text.

The Declaration is the Congress' contribution to the Council of Europe's campaign against trafficking, led under the slogan “Human being – not for sale!”.

We, the mayors, leaders and representatives of local authorities of the 46 member states of the Council of Europe,

Are committed to the principle of respect for human rights as expressed in the Council of Europe’s Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and especially Article 3 recognising the right of all people not to be subjected “to inhuman or degrading treatment” and Article 4 prohibiting slavery.

Are gravely concerned by the increase in the scale of human trafficking, a phenomenon that constitutes a terrible violation of human rights and undermines the fundamental principles of democracy and the rule of law.

Recall that it is at local level that the final stage of trafficking is played out and that local authorities have a fundamental role to play as guarantors of social cohesion and their citizen’s well-being and security.

Are determined to eradicate this heinous modern-day form of slavery.

Welcome therefore the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS No. 197) which was opened for signature on 16 May 2005.

Pledge our full support to the Council of Europe Campaign to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings and its twin objectives which are to raise awareness of this issue throughout Europe and to secure the earliest possible ratification and signature, by all Council of Europe member states, of the Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.

Commit ourselves to mobilising all forces at local level in order to ensure that the campaign message is heard at both ends of the scale of governance both at the level of citizens and at the highest levels of state government.

Undertake to make the fight against the trafficking of human beings a top priority for our administrations and to implement as many of the proposals outlined in Congress Resolution 196 (2005) on the fight against trafficking in human beings and their sexual exploitation as possible, and in particular those aiming at:

- the protection of victims, their rehabilitation and reintegration (such as the creation of resource centres/ support units at local level specialised in assistance to trafficked human beings and working in close co-operation with relevant non-governmental associations);
- provision of specialised training for all actors in this field with regard not only to identification and prevention of trafficking but also victim care;
- increased professional opportunities for women thus rendering them less vulnerable to trafficking.

Call on heads of state and government to:

- sign and ratify the Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings as soon as possible if they have not already done so;
- launch and support national anti-trafficking campaigns in close co-operation with local and regional authorities to highlight awareness of this issue among those most at risk;
- fully involve local and regional authorities in the drawing up and implementation of action plans decided at national level as they are directly affected by this phenomenon;
- allocate the requisite competences and financial resources necessary for local and regional authorities to implement action and programmes at their level to combat trafficking and to provide assistance to its victims.

Show our commitment to this fight by signing the present declaration.

A list of Signatories can be seen here

So far Cavan County Council is the only Irish Local Authority to sign up to it!

Come on Local Authrorities Sign Up!!!

Click Here to Sign

ICCL

Found the Irish Council of Civil Liberties Website today. Tis mostly undercontsruction but theres loads of info on it. Check it out by clicking the image above

B'Tselem update - 09 Oct 2006

1.4 million Gazans still without electricity twelve hours a day

Israel must finance the rehabilitation of the power plant it bombed in the Gaza Strip. This is one of the conclusions of B'Tselem's new report, Act of Vengeance, which describes and analyzes the harsh effects of the Israeli Air Force's destruction of the power plant in June. B'Tselem states that the bombing was illegal, and calls on the government to finance upgrading the infrastructure for transferring electricity from Israel to the Gaza Strip; to reinstate legislation permitting individuals and entities harmed by the bombing to sue Israel for compensation; to open criminal investigations against the persons who planned and carried out the attack, with the intention of prosecuting them; and to prohibit the IDF from attacking civilians and civilian objects.

Some three months after the bombing, 1.4 million Gazans remain without a steady supply of electricity. The power stoppages significantly affect the level of health services they receive. The inability to refrigerate food has increased the risk of food poisoning. The water and sewage systems, which rely on a regular supply of electricity, have been severely impaired, with most city dwellers receiving water for two to three hours a day. B'Tselem warns that the sewage system in the northern Gaza Strip is liable to collapse and flood neighboring communities with raw sewage.
Video: Family without electricity
Video: Hospital without electricity
Summary of the report
The complete report (doc)

B'Tselem's investigation leads to indictment
On 18 September 2006, the Judge Advocate General's Office indicted two soldiers from the Haruv Battalion who maltreated Palestinians in the Nablus District in August of this year. The soldiers were charged with assault in aggravated circumstances and with conduct unbecoming. After B'Tselem requested that this incident and seven other cases of beating and abuse of Palestinian by soldiers be investigated, the Judge Advocate General's Office ordered the Military Police to investigate the cases. The indictments followed.

For years, B'Tselem has reported on security forces' violence against Palestinian civilians. Recently, there has been a significant rise in the number of such reports received by the organization. The decision to prosecute in this case is exceptional. B'Tselem hopes that the decision signals a change in policy; in the past, the military authorities paid little attention to incidents of this kind. The authorities generally do not give due importance to investigating and prosecuting cases of violence by security personnel against Palestinians. In failing to do so, they send a message to the forces in the field that the maltreatment of Palestinians is not a serious matter.
Additional information
Testimonies

Israel's policy separates tens of thousands of Palestinian families
For almost six years, Israel has prevented family unification between Palestinian residents of the Occupied Territories and their spouses from abroad, and has prohibited family members from visiting the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. In their recently issued report, B'Tselem and HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual point out that, during this period, Palestinians have submitted more than 120,000 requests for family unification, which await processing.

Israel's policy has created a harsh reality for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians: spouses are unable to live under the same roof; children are forced to grow up in single-parent families though their parents want to live together; people do not leave the Occupied Territories to go abroad for medical treatment because Israel may not issue them a new visitor's permit; women from abroad married to residents of the Occupied Territories face the constant threat of deportation. B'Tselem and HaMoked call on the government of Israel to begin immediately to process requests for family unification and visitor's permits.

Video testimony: Muhammad al-'Amleh
Video testimony: Daniella Shumar
Summary of the report
The complete report (doc)

False representation
On 22 August 2006, Naot Hapisga Modi'in Ltd. filed a prospectus in advance of making a public offering of bonds and options on the stock exchange. B'Tselem and Bimkom compared the information in the prospectus with the information they had accumulated during their investigation. They found many errors in the prospectus relating to the Naot Hapisga project that the company is building in the settlement of Modi'in Illit. The errors create a false picture in an attempt to conceal some of the substantial problems that the company faces in building the project.

Following B'Tselem and Bimkom's letter to the Securities Authority, the company postponed the offering and changed many details in the prospectus. According to a report B'Tselem and Bimkom published in December 2005, the separation barrier was set to promote the expansion of the bloc of settlements centering around Modi'in Illit, in part by taking control of privately-owned Palestinian farmland.

Additional information

Human rights of mentally ill prisoners being denied - Neville

The recent tragic death in Mountjoy prison highlights the need to deal with prisoners who suffer from mental illness, according to Fine Gael Deputy Health Spokesman and President of the Irish Association of Suicidology, Deputy Dan Neville.

“Mentally ill offenders should be afforded the option of a treatment programme instead of prison. A recent report shows that 60% of female and 35% of male prisoners have suffered from mental illness. This report again highlights the scandalous way the psychiatric services are under resourced, and how people who need medical intervention are ending up in prison. In most cases these prisoners are convicted for petty crime, and are not a danger to society. We must address this issue, for the sake of the ill prisoner, and in certain circumstances for the protection of other prisoners.

“Of the prison population, 40% of women and 25% of men in prison have attempted suicide or committed self harm. These people are not receiving the urgent treatment they need. In excess of 600 prisoners who are in danger of taking their own lives each year end up in padded cells. A witness described the scene in one of the cells as follows:

‘I saw a prisoner, a man in his 40s, lying in his underpants in a foetal position on the floor with a pot beside him. The cell in question was approximately the size of an outsized refrigerator.’

“Each year, 300 people who have six months’ prevalence of severe and enduring mental illness are committed to prison. The treatment of mentally ill prisoners is an affront to the human dignity of both prisoners and the prison staff.

“Unfortunately, this situation has been known about for many years. I am not confident that the recent report, while highlighting the disgraceful situation, will have any impact on the problem. The Government has failed disgracefully in developing the psychiatric serves, and its resources have been reduced from 11% of the health budget in 1997 to 7% in 2006. What chance is there for the prison population, the most marginalised group in society, of receiving any consideration with regard to their needs for mental illness treatment?

“The Government must introduce two distinct but co-ordinated systems, one outside the prisons in the community and one inside the prisons. We must deal appropriately with psychiatric illness before it becomes criminalised. Consideration must be given to establishing a mental health court system. These would have five broad objectives:

• to preserve public safety;
• to reduce inappropriate incarceration of mentally ill offenders and promote their well-being;
• to relieve the Department of Justice of the need to correct inmates with mental disability;
• to reduce repeat criminal activity among mentally ill offenders;
• and to reduce psychiatric hospitalisation of mentally disabled offenders.

“These courts should have the option of imposing a carefully monitored individual plan of mental health treatment for low risk mentally ill prisoners, instead of a prison sentence. However, a court system will not be sufficient unless it is part of a well-planned and co-ordinated monitoring and service provision programme which involves the mental health services. Such an approach would involve the court services, the Departments of Justice and Social & Family Affairs, the Probation and Welfare services, and the Health Service Executive, all functioning in partnership.

“The chief aim would be to expedite and maximise alternative schemes for those who are judged fit to live in the community. The programmes would address both the need for humane treatment of the mentally ill via suitable community schemes, and the largely wasteful and ineffective financial burdens placed on the Department of Justice. Mentally ill offenders should be afforded the option of a treatment programme instead of prison, and be obliged to commit to the programme for an extended period or face imprisonment.”