The inmate lay belted in his own urine

The inmate lay belted in his own urine

The inmate in the institution was strapped to a belt bed for 15 hours and was forced to lie in his own urine. The Swedish Prison and Probation Service is now receiving sharp criticism from the Ombudsman (JO). – If you are to wear a seat belt in the Swedish Prison and Probation Service at all, much better regulation is needed, says Chief JO Elisabeth Rynning.

TT An inmate at the Swedish Prison and Probation Service's Salberga was placed in a booster bed for 15 hours. Stock Photography.Picture: Bertil Ericson/TT At the Swedish Prison and Probation Service's Salberga, an inmate was strapped to a belt bed in February 2019 and then allowed to lie there for 15 hours. When he needed to fulfill his needs after just over three hours, he was offered nothing for security reasons. other alternative than being strapped in to do so in an adult diaper, according to the Ombudsman's investigation. However, the strapped man refused this because he thought it felt “terribly offensive”. The inmate eventually fulfilled his needs and then remained in his own urine. Chief Justice Ombudsman Elisabeth Rynning writes in the decision that she did not have the opportunity to make a full assessment of whether the inmate's belting at the time was necessary and if a toilet visit was not possible. According to the Council of Europe Special Committee against Torture (CPT), belting should only be used as a last resort to prevent the risk of injury to oneself or others. The duration should be as short as possible, usually minutes rather than hours. JO writes that, although a full assessment of the necessity of the measure could not be carried out, there are “serious concerns regarding the Swedish Prison and Probation Service's proportionality assessments in this case”. to the fact that the documentation in the inmate's journal regarding the belting is very deficient, which has made it difficult to evaluate the incident afterwards. – It is 15 hours and it is a very long time. Very special circumstances must be required. But it is not possible to read from the documentation and then it is very difficult to assess in retrospect whether it was proportionate, says Elisabeth Rynning to TT. to the government after her visit to Sweden in 2015. Elisabeth Rynning tells TT that there are strong reasons to review the Prisons Act and the Detention Act's provisions on imprisonment and belting. The regulations that currently exist in the Swedish Prison and Probation Service are only general provisions on proportionality and that one must use of the principle of least intervention. That is, if you can solve the problem in a less intrusive way, you should do it. And that is not enough, the chief JO thinks. But one can of course consider whether this measure should be used at all, says Elisabeth Rynning. The Ombudsman therefore makes a request to the government for a review of the legislation. There are much clearer rules when taking corresponding measures in forensic psychiatry or compulsory psychiatry. There are time limits and other control measures.Facts

Request to the Government from the Ombudsman

The Ombudsman makes a request to the Government for a review of the legislation regarding imprisonment and belting in the Swedish Prison and Probation Service. does not meet the requirements that should be set for a legally secure handling, the Ombudsman has the opportunity to point it out and request that the government review the legislation.

Source: The Ombudsman