Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services

Inspector's Directed Review (Directed Review of the Management of Offenders in Custody by the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services (Report No. 30, November 2005))

The Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services was created in 1999 as an independent statutory body. The role of the Office is to bring independent external scrutiny to the standards and operational practices relating to custodial services within the state. The Office, which falls within the general portfolio responsibility of the Minister for Corrective Services, is answerable directly to the Parliament. (1)

The Directed Review of the Management of Offenders in Custody by the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services (Report No. 30, November 2005) (Inspectors Directed Review) was held simultaneously with the Mahoney Inquiry, and, in fact, the terms of reference of the latter directed the Inquirer to ‘have particular regard to the opinions and findings of the Inspector of Custodial Services'.  The Inspector was directed to inquire into, and advise upon, a range of matters, including whether innovative approaches to custodial management can be developed, and whether existing prison facilities and their regimes and programs are appropriately calibrated to achieve the objectives of imprisonment.  Some contextual background into Aboriginal over-representation is provided in the document.  Issues addressed include risk management and prison regimes (including classification of Aboriginal prisoners, Aboriginal prison regimes) and custodial management in the Kimberley and Eastern Goldfields.

Classification system
Whilst the Prisons Division Strategic Plan for Aboriginal Services advocates recognising the unique position and history of Aboriginal people, including in relation to the justice system, the classification system applies uniformly to all prisoners, with no specific reference to racial background.  In fact, there is potential for bias within the system as factors such as program performance, stability factors, work/education report are utilised in making an assessment, and these factors have been found to be poor predictors of Aboriginal behaviour. The classification system does not allow the Department to deliver on its Strategic Plan for Aboriginal Services.  Prisoners are not accommodated in their homelands; contact with family is not maximized; Aboriginal prisoners are not being housed in institutions which provide programs that respond to their specific needs; and they are not developing culturally appropriate assessments in prisons and the community to support and sustain reintegration (as set out in recommendations in the Strategic Plan for Aboriginal Services).  (Recommendation 2.129)

Regimes
There is a chronic shortage of programs and program staff in the northern and eastern prisons.  For instance, at the Eastern Goldfields Regional Prison, Aboriginal prisoners make up 80% of the male prisoner population, and they are prone to heavy alcohol and substance abuse.  However, only 23 of the prisoners attended the Indigenous Men Managing Anger and Substance Abuse program in 2003-2004 (with 649 prisoners received at the prison during this period).  There were no other programs run during the year.  Aboriginal prison regimes are a matter of deep concern to the Inspectorate.  Aboriginal prisons have been neglected, and their conditions are inferior to those within non-Aboriginal prisons. This is structural racism, and regional stakeholder reference groups ought to be established in each region to be able to speak for the (particularly Aboriginal) prison population.  These groups would maintain effective links between the community, communities, Aboriginal leaders and the prisons, and would engage in consultation in terms of policy and planning.  More needs to be done to improve the funeral attendance policy.  (Recommendation 2.129)

Kimberley Regional Custodial Management
In 2004, the Kimberley Aboriginal Reference Group (KARG) (see below) was set up to report to the Minister for Justice about infrastructure and facility needs, and programs and regimes, in terms of a custodial plan for the area.  This is a move in the right direction - towards consultation.  Whilst Aboriginal participation and partial ownership of justice processes, through, for instance, Aboriginal reference groups, will contribute to reducing over- representation, a whole-of-government approach - involving the various agencies and Departments responsible for policing, community development, Indigenous affairs, health, crime prevention, drug and alcohol strategies, mental health, education and training, courts and others - is required. That holistic approach should adopt alternative ways of dealing with offenders through restorative justice and victim mediation models, for example. There also needs to be an integration of the range of custodial and correctional services in a particular area.  Gaps in community justice services actually contribute to imprisonment patterns (for instance, where there is no work identified and negotiated which could be carried out under community service orders, fines or imprisonment are imposed).  The lack of community justice personnel and services in some predominantly Aboriginal areas (such as Wyndham) exacerbates the situation
for Aboriginal people, in terms of overrepresentation in custodial settings.  A secure prison should be seen as a hub of regional correctional services. This approach should be piloted at East Kimberley, with the KARG (or a derivative thereof) potentially having responsibility for maintaining effective linkages with Aboriginal communities; advising on policy; and monitoring the actual impact of current policies and practices upon their people, both prisoners and families. (Recommendations 3.150)

Eastern Goldfields Custodial Management
Most prisoners from this region are placed ‘out of country' due to a lack of facilities (mainly in metropolitan prisons) - an issue of particular concern in relation to
juveniles.  There are limited opportunities in terms of programs in this region.  During community consultations, there was endorsement for community-run juvenile bail
hostels, with adequate support from the Department and adequate community capacity. In 2004, a community bail facility was set up in the Kalgoorlie region, and
there has been a commitment to build a juvenile remand centre in Kalgoorlie-Boulder.  Aboriginal people want to care for Aboriginal people with appropriate support from
government and non-government agencies, and with Aboriginal viewpoints being taken into account. This is consistent with the principles of the AJA.  There is also support for a pre-release centre in the Kalgoorlie area, where Departmental staff or staff from other contracted organisations might provide social support to tenants.  Released offenders on parole; offenders on a pre-release scheme, on bail; or offenders who have a community order requiring them to undertake a program which is not available on their remote community could reside here.  Residents could get support in a number of areas, such as employment and successful reintegration, and people on bail would be supported to meet bail conditions. 

Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, Digest of Aboriginality in Western Australian Prisons as Reported in Published Inspection Reports 2000-2005
(June 2006)

This Digest of Aboriginality Report is a summary by the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services of findings located in Inspection Reports for the period 2000-2005 which relate to Aboriginal persons.  It is noted in the report, at the outset, that in 2001, Aboriginal prisoners represented one third of Western Australia's prison population. In 2006, this figure increased to 40%, with 45% of this group accommodated in one of the state's four regional ‘Aboriginal Prisons' (at Broome, Eastern Goldfields, Roebourne and Greenough Regional Prisons). (2)  According to the Report, each of these prisons has a population that is 75 % or more Aboriginal, ‘yet, urban, white Australian values dominate the management of these prisons.  It is in these four prisons that structural racism is most stark', according to the report.  Regional ‘Aboriginal prisons' in Western Australia are underfunded and neglected, leading to appalling conditions (in all aspects) to be endured by Aboriginal prisoners. (3)

The report goes on to consider conditions in a range of areas, and indicates where Western Australian prisons fall short in terms of meeting Standard Guidelines for Corrections in Australia, finding as follows.

• More culturally and linguistically appropriate orientation procedures are required.
• Foreign nationals on remand in regional prisons were more likely than Aboriginal remandees to be classified as low security, enabling them to enjoy better conditions (such as not being transferred out of the region whilst on remand).
• The current classification system disadvantages Aboriginal prisoners (such as privileging stable work history and residential address), and a more effective and realistic assessment process is required.
• Despite espousing a commitment to keep Aboriginal prisoners in their homelands, this is not occurring.  For instance, in 2004, 40% of prisoners from the Kimberley were accommodated outside that region.
• The Aboriginal Visitors Scheme needs to work more effectively with Aboriginal women in regional areas.
• There were some difficulties with the Peer Support Group; namely, lack of awareness of the Group in regional prisons, and management attempting to ensure Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal members of the Group (in one instance).
• The employment of a full time Indigenous Liaison Officer at Acacia Prison was a practice that ought to be followed in other prisons, as this initiative worked very effectively.
• Officers at one regional prison in particular allegedly treated Aboriginal prisoners ‘like animals', and the report indicates that there is ‘increasingly embedded racism' present which cannot be eradicated solely by cultural awareness training.  Racism existed in metropolitan prisons, although perhaps not at such a serious level as occurs at a regional level.
• The use of restraints in regional Aboriginal prisons (particularly to move prisoners within prison facilities, perhaps due to lack of secure perimeters) is ‘disturbing', and would not be tolerated in mainstream custodial facilities. 
• Accommodation in regional prisons is below acceptable national standards.
• In some instances, cultural meeting places in prisons were tokenistic only, and access to them by prisoners was restricted.
• Aboriginal prisoners had been denied leave to attend funerals on the basis that the relationship with the deceased did not constitute a sufficiently ‘significant relationship' (although significant within Aboriginal culture). 
• There was insufficient provision of traditional foods in many instances.
• More and better use might be made of Aboriginal Medical Services in providing health care to Aboriginal prisoners.
• Aboriginal prisons suffered a program deficit when compared to non-Aboriginal and metropolitan prisons
• There were inadequate systems in place to enable Aboriginal prisoners to maintain contact with kin and community.  Distance was prohibitive in those instances where Aboriginal people were transferred ‘down south' and away from community, and transfers of prisoners to community for visits were not occurring in numbers of any significance.
• Aboriginal prisoners in regional prisons were not given the same opportunities to participate in work opportunities and rarely were found in top-level industry employment, in part due to stereotypes of Aboriginal people as unskilled, as lacking a work ethic and as being suited to a limited range of manual jobs.
• Aboriginal participation in community work was positive, but it was noted that there was unequal access to (s 94) projects.  For instance, over half of the prisoners undertaking community work in the course of a year are non-Aboriginal at Broome Prison, despite the fact that the latter constitute only 25% of the prison population.  At Eastern Goldfields, Aboriginal community work was more menial in nature than that undertaken by non-Aboriginal inmates.

Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, Inspection Standards for Aboriginal Prisoners (2008)

The Inspector of Custodial Services developed these Standards to represent the codification of findings and recommendations for improving the outcomes for Aboriginal prisoners (constituting 40% of the WA prison population), developed over the eight years that inspections have taken place.  Standards cover a wide range of issue, and some examples follow:

• Aboriginal prisoners should be able to serve out their sentence within their own country
• Prison buildings and layouts should be culturally appropriate
• The transport of Aboriginal prisoners out of their country should only be undertaken where absolutely necessary and after making
  provision for the high level of stress that that such journeys generally cause.
• Care should be taken to ensure that significant Aboriginal cultural values are   not unknowingly or unnecessarily transgressed or that European cultural    assumptions are placed on Aboriginal behaviour.
• Culturally appropriate criteria for leave to attend family funerals should be established and implemented for Aboriginal prisoners, and in those instances In those situations where all the Aboriginal prisoners who wish to attend a funeral are not granted leave to do so, each prison should make provision for appropriate internal meetings or ceremonies to take place.  Aboriginal spirituality should be encouraged and strengthened through the systematic observance of customs relating to language, food, death, healing, storytelling, rites of passage or tribal traditions.
• Prisons where the population is predominantly Aboriginal should have an active peer support group of prisoners which broadly reflects the various gender and skin groups that comprise the prison population.
• The management of Aboriginal women should reflect an understanding of a women-centred approach to all aspects of imprisonment.
• Prisons with a predominantly Aboriginal population must have comprehensive health services that reflect and cater for the epidemiological profile and needs of its Aboriginal population.
• At prisons with a predominant Aboriginal population, the health service should employ an Aboriginal health worker.
• Food and dietary arrangements should take account of the particular health needs and preferences of the prisoner population and appropriate provision should be made for the availability of traditional food and bush tucker.
• Aboriginal prisoners from remote communities should be able to access appropriate compensatory arrangements to mitigate the many additional disadvantages that they experience in prison.
• Visiting arrangements at Prisons with a predominantly Aboriginal population should be highly flexible, particularly for visitors that have come from remote communities. Many such visitors are only able to visit infrequently and where practicable, such visitors should be allowed extended and all day visits.
• Each prison with Aboriginal prisoners should make available culturally appropriate offender programs, with the whole suite of programs calibrated to the offending profile and criminogenic needs of the prisoners.
• Vocational skills programs that are relevant to post-release employability of Aboriginal prisoners in either local industries or on their own communities should be established and maintained.
• Prisons with a predominantly Aboriginal prisoner population must ensure that there are appropriate pre-release opportunities for women prisoners.
• Educational opportunities should be culturally appropriate to the needs and beliefs of the prison population.
• Release arrangements for Aboriginal prisoners, particularly for those from remote communities must include robust processes to ensure that prisoners can safely and promptly return to their homes, regardless of where they were initially arrested and/or tried.