The non-governmental organization Juventas announced today that it expresses deep concern regarding information indicating that there was no adequate institutional response at the Administration for the Execution of Criminal Sanctions (UIKS) in Bijelo Polje after an arrested person reported being subjected to abuse and sexual violence by another prisoner.
"Vijesti" reported yesterday that a convict who spent just under two months in prison in Bijelo Polje on charges of assault was subjected to brutal abuse and multiple rape by his cellmate, which led to the confirmation of an indictment for five serious crimes against VA.
UIKS announced yesterday that they had taken all measures to protect the detainees.
DON'T MISS IT
Juventas said today that it is particularly problematic that, after the injured party reported the violence to the guard, he remained in the same cell with the person he identified as the perpetrator, and that the authorities did not take protective measures, verify the allegations, or provide an urgent medical examination, as required by international standards for the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty.
Juventas added that international law clearly stipulates that any report of violence in prison triggers the obligation to act ex officio, regardless of the later withdrawal of the statement.
"The European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention against Torture and the European Prison Rules oblige the competent authorities to investigate allegations, protect the victim and provide medical and psychological assistance as soon as they become aware of possible abuse. The withdrawal of a statement in a prison environment cannot be interpreted as an exculpatory basis for inaction, but rather as an indicator of fear and risk of further violence," Juventas said.
The NGO stated that the lack of reaction in such situations represents not only an institutional failure, but also a serious violation of the prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment, as well as a violation of the state's enhanced obligation to protect the safety and dignity of persons deprived of their liberty.
"In addition to the responsibility of prison guards, commanders and others, it is necessary to open the issue of the prison doctor's responsibility in this case. According to the available information, the doctor examined the injured party, gave him therapy and asked why he 'suffered', but it remains unclear whether he acted in accordance with the obligations prescribed by the European Prison Rules. Rule 42.3(c) explicitly obliges medical staff to record and report to the competent authorities any sign or indication that prisoners are being treated violently, while Rule 43.3 requires the doctor to inform the prison governor whenever he considers that the physical or mental health of a prisoner is at serious risk due to the conditions of his sentence. In this context, it is legitimate and necessary to ask whether the prison doctor, in addition to providing therapy, recorded the suspicion of violence, documented the medical findings and informed the administration and other competent authorities, as international standards explicitly require. If so, to determine the omissions of those who did not react to the doctor's report," Juventas said.
Juventas demands that the responsibility of all officers who were aware of reports of abuse be determined, but did not act in accordance with the prescribed procedures, as well as that clear, safe and effective protection mechanisms be provided for persons reporting violence in the prison system.
"Human dignity and fundamental rights do not end with the deprivation of liberty. Any different approach undermines trust in institutions and renders the rule of law meaningless," Juventas said in a statement.
Bonus video:
