Condensed entry: The minimum requirements of adequate accommodation in detention include cells of reasonable size for the number of persons they are used to accommodate, large enough windows for the entrance of fresh air and natural light; sufficient artificial light; adequate sanitary installations; adequate bathingand shower installations; separate beds and separate and sufficient bedding kept in good order and cleanliness. Where sleeping accommodation is in individual cells or rooms, each prisoner shall occupy by night a cell or a room by himself. Where dormitories are used, they shall be occupied by prisoners carefully selected as being suitable to associate with one another in those conditions. Each detained person should have at least seven square metres of floor space.
Comprehensive entry: The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners provides that all accommodation provided for the use of prisoners and in particular all sleeping accommodation shall meet all requirements of health, due regard being paid to climatic conditions and particularly to cubic content of air, minimum floor space, lighting, heating, ventilation and sanitary conditions.[1] The minimum requirements include:
cells of reasonable size for the number of persons they are used to accommodate;
large enough windows for the entrance of fresh air and natural light; sufficient artificial light; adequate sanitary installations;[2]
adequate bathing and shower installations;
separate beds and separate and sufficient bedding kept in good order; and
cleanliness.[3]
Where sleeping accommodation is in individual cells or rooms, each prisoner shall occupy by night a cell or a room by himself.[4] Where dormitories are used, they shall be occupied by prisoners carefully selected as being suitable to associate with one another in those conditions.[5] The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture has set seven square metres as a guideline for the floor space needed per detained person.[6] These standards of accommodation are applicable to all states regardless of their level of development.[7] Detention facilities should make appropriate modifications to their procedures and facilities for the benefit of persons with disabilities, when such modifications do not impose a disproportionate or undue burden.[8] Failure to provide adequate accommodation in detention may constitute *inhumane conditions of detention* Accommodation conditions found to have, in themselves or cumulatively with other conditions of detention or ill-treatment, to have violated the prohibition on *inhuman or degrading treatment in detention* include overcrowding;[9] where detainees were kept in dark, wet, filthy and dirty cells,[10] infestation of rats, cockroaches and lice;[11] no beds, blankets or warm clothes;[12] artificial light left on 24 hours a day;[13] and where detainees had to use the toilet in front of others detainees.[14] In Gorji-Dinka v Cameroon, the HRC held:[15] With regard to the conditions of detention, the Committee takes note of the author's uncontested allegation that he was kept in a wet and dirty cell without a bed, table or any sanitary facilities. It reiterates that persons deprived of their liberty may not be subjected to any hardship or constraint other than that resulting from the deprivation of liberty and that they must be treated in accordance with, inter alia, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (1957). In Peers v Greece the ECtHR found that the competent authorities took no steps to improve the objectively unacceptable conditions of the applicant’s detention. … the applicant had to spend a considerable part of each 24-hour period practically confined to his bed in a cell with no ventilation and no window, which would at times become unbearably hot. He also had to use the toilet in the presence of another inmate and be present while the toilet was being used by his cell-mate. … the prison conditions complained of diminished the applicant’s human dignity and … amounted to degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention.[16] The right to adequate accommodation applies to all places where persons deprived of their liberty are held. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture noted with regard to visits to police stations in Brazil:[17] Detainees were held in subhuman conditions in very dirty and smelly cells without proper light and ventilation. It was unbearably humid in most cells. Detainees had to share thin mattresses or sleep on the bare concrete floor, and often had to sleep in shifts because of the lack of space.
[1] Rule 10.
[2] Special provision shall be made for the sanitary needs of women, see United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the Bangkok Rules) rule 5; European Prisons Rules19.4, 19.5-19.7. [3] SMR rules 11, 12, 13 and 19. See also European Prisons Rules arts 18-20; Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americasprinciple XII.[4] SMR rule 9(1).[5] SMR rule 9(2). [6] European Committee for the prevention of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment (CPT) Second General Report CPT/Inf (92) 3 [EN] (1992) para 43. [7]Mukong v Cameroon communication 458/1991 (HRC 1994) para 9.3. [8] CRPD art 14(2); Hamilton v Jamaica communication 616/1995 (HRC 1999) para 8.2; Price v United Kingdom application 33394/96 (ECtHR 2001) para 30. See also the European Prison Rules art 12 with regard to prisoners with mental disability. [9]Melnik v Ukraine application .72286/01 (ECtHR 2006) para 103; Juvenile Reeducation Centre v Paraguay (IACtHR 2004) paras 165, 171. [10]Gorji-Dinka v Cameroon communication 1134/2002 (HRC 2005) para 5.2; Caesar v Trinidad Tobago IACtHR 2005) paras 99, 100; Institute for Human Right and development in Africa v Angola communication 292/2004 paras 50, 53.[11]Griffin v Spain communication 493/1992 (HRC 1995). [12]Tekin v Turkey application 22496 (ECtHR 1998) paras 49, 53. [13]Larrosa v Uruguay communication 88/1981 (HRC 1983) para 10.3. [14]Peers v Greece application 28524/95 (ECtHR 2001) para 75. [15]Gorji-Dinka v Cameroon para 5.2. [16] Peers v Greece para 75. [17] Special Rapporteur on Torture, visit to Brazil, E/CN.4/2001/66/Add.2 (2001)para 16.
The minimum requirements of adequate accommodation in detention include cells of reasonable size for the number of persons they are used to accommodate, large enough windows for the entrance of fresh air and natural light; sufficient artificial light; adequate sanitary installations; adequate bathingand shower installations; separate beds and separate and sufficient bedding kept in good order and cleanliness.
Where sleeping accommodation is in individual cells or rooms, each prisoner shall occupy by night a cell or a room by himself. Where dormitories are used, they shall be occupied by prisoners carefully selected as being suitable to associate with one another in those conditions. Each detained person should have at least seven square metres of floor space.
Comprehensive entry:
The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners provides that all accommodation provided for the use of prisoners and in particular all sleeping accommodation shall meet all requirements of health, due regard being paid to climatic conditions and particularly to cubic content of air, minimum floor space, lighting, heating, ventilation and sanitary conditions.[1] The minimum requirements include:
- cells of reasonable size for the number of persons they are used to accommodate;
- large enough windows for the entrance of fresh air and natural light; sufficient artificial light; adequate sanitary installations;[2]
- adequate bathing and shower installations;
- separate beds and separate and sufficient bedding kept in good order; and
- cleanliness.[3]
Where sleeping accommodation is in individual cells or rooms, each prisoner shall occupy by night a cell or a room by himself.[4] Where dormitories are used, they shall be occupied by prisoners carefully selected as being suitable to associate with one another in those conditions.[5] The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture has set seven square metres as a guideline for the floor space needed per detained person.[6]These standards of accommodation are applicable to all states regardless of their level of development.[7] Detention facilities should make appropriate modifications to their procedures and facilities for the benefit of persons with disabilities, when such modifications do not impose a disproportionate or undue burden.[8] Failure to provide adequate accommodation in detention may constitute *inhumane conditions of detention*
Accommodation conditions found to have, in themselves or cumulatively with other conditions of detention or ill-treatment, to have violated the prohibition on *inhuman or degrading treatment in detention* include overcrowding;[9] where detainees were kept in dark, wet, filthy and dirty cells,[10] infestation of rats, cockroaches and lice;[11] no beds, blankets or warm clothes;[12] artificial light left on 24 hours a day;[13] and where detainees had to use the toilet in front of others detainees.[14]
In Gorji-Dinka v Cameroon, the HRC held:[15]
With regard to the conditions of detention, the Committee takes note of the author's uncontested allegation that he was kept in a wet and dirty cell without a bed, table or any sanitary facilities. It reiterates that persons deprived of their liberty may not be subjected to any hardship or constraint other than that resulting from the deprivation of liberty and that they must be treated in accordance with, inter alia, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (1957).
In Peers v Greece the ECtHR found that
the competent authorities took no steps to improve the objectively unacceptable conditions of the applicant’s detention. … the applicant had to spend a considerable part of each 24-hour period practically confined to his bed in a cell with no ventilation and no window, which would at times become unbearably hot. He also had to use the toilet in the presence of another inmate and be present while the toilet was being used by his cell-mate. … the prison conditions complained of diminished the applicant’s human dignity and … amounted to degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention.[16]
The right to adequate accommodation applies to all places where persons deprived of their liberty are held. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture noted with regard to visits to police stations in Brazil:[17]
Detainees were held in subhuman conditions in very dirty and smelly cells without proper light and ventilation. It was unbearably humid in most cells. Detainees had to share thin mattresses or sleep on the bare concrete floor, and often had to sleep in shifts because of the lack of space.
[1] Rule 10.
[2] Special provision shall be made for the sanitary needs of women, see United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the Bangkok Rules) rule 5; European Prisons Rules19.4, 19.5-19.7.
[3] SMR rules 11, 12, 13 and 19. See also European Prisons Rules arts 18-20; Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americasprinciple XII.[4] SMR rule 9(1).[5] SMR rule 9(2).
[6] European Committee for the prevention of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment (CPT) Second General Report CPT/Inf (92) 3 [EN] (1992) para 43.
[7] Mukong v Cameroon communication 458/1991 (HRC 1994) para 9.3.
[8] CRPD art 14(2); Hamilton v Jamaica communication 616/1995 (HRC 1999) para 8.2; Price v United Kingdom application 33394/96 (ECtHR 2001) para 30. See also the European Prison Rules art 12 with regard to prisoners with mental disability.
[9]Melnik v Ukraine application .72286/01 (ECtHR 2006) para 103; Juvenile Reeducation Centre v Paraguay (IACtHR 2004) paras 165, 171.
[10] Gorji-Dinka v Cameroon communication 1134/2002 (HRC 2005) para 5.2; Caesar v Trinidad Tobago IACtHR 2005) paras 99, 100; Institute for Human Right and development in Africa v Angola communication 292/2004 paras 50, 53.[11] Griffin v Spain communication 493/1992 (HRC 1995). [12] Tekin v Turkey application 22496 (ECtHR 1998) paras 49, 53.
[13]Larrosa v Uruguay communication 88/1981 (HRC 1983) para 10.3.
[14] Peers v Greece application 28524/95 (ECtHR 2001) para 75.
[15] Gorji-Dinka v Cameroon para 5.2.
[16] Peers v Greece para 75.
[17] Special Rapporteur on Torture, visit to Brazil, E/CN.4/2001/66/Add.2 (2001)para 16.