House of Commons - Northern Ireland Affairs

Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs First Report

7 Accountability

154. Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJINI) is an independent statutory inspectorate, established under the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002, constituted as a non-departmental public body in the person of the Chief Inspector. It is funded by and reports to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, who has powers to direct the Chief Inspector to undertake specific pieces of work. Normally, however, the Chief Inspector proposes a programme of work, which is subject to the approval of the Secretary of State. CJINI has a duty under the 2002 Act to inspect the Northern Ireland Prison Service and has the power to delegate that responsibility to HM Inspector of Prisons (HMIP). Mr Kit Chivers, Chief Inspector CJINI, told us that in most cases he preferred to work in partnership with other inspectorates, and that in the case of prison inspections HMIP usually provided the lead inspector who would form a team with members from both CJINI and HMIP.[202] The members of the team shared their findings and published the reports jointly. Starting with the inspection of HMP Magilligan in September 2004, inspections of Northern Ireland Prison Servicec establishments have been led by HMIP with the participation of inspectors from CJINI, and the resulting reports have been jointly signed by both Chief Inspectors.[203] The programme of inspections has been similar to that for prisons in England in Wales, comprising a mix of scheduled and unannounced inspections with each prison having at least one full inspection and one follow-up inspection every five years.

155. The inspection reports that have been issued to date under those arrangements are HMP Magilligan (March 2005 and December 2006), Hydebank Wood - Women Prisoners (May 2005), Hydebank Wood YOC (October 2005) and HMP Maghaberry (May 2006). The inspections have been based on a methodology similar to that used for prisons in England and Wales, but the remit of CJINI is wider than that of HMIP (for example CJINI has a broader interest in the management of the Prison Service and the pay, conditions and training of its staff) so it is not always possible to make direct comparisons between the two prison services. CJINI also monitors how the Prison Service relates to other parts of Northern Ireland's criminal justice system and has covered aspects of the Prison Service's work in its broader reports on the Management of Sex Offenders (March 2005 and December 2006), Target Setting and Performance Management (January 2006) and the Northern Ireland Resettlement Strategy (June 2007).

156. The inspection of secure psychiatric accommodation is the responsibility of the health board and does not fall within the remit of CJINI/HMIP.

157. Other, non-criminal justice inspectorates have a role in the work that takes place in prisons. CJINI has negotiated joint working arrangements with these inspectorates in order to minimise the inspection burden on the Northern Ireland Prison Service and so that the inspection report provides a comprehensive review of the operation of the whole prison. CJINI has worked jointly with the Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI), and is planning a similar relationship with the Northern Ireland Education and Training Inspectorate now that it has taken on ALI's inspection functions. HMIP and CJINI are developing a Memorandum of Understanding with the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority, which inspects health and social services in Northern Ireland, so that HMIP will continue to inspect the delivery of healthcare in prisons, while the Regulation and Quality Improvement Agency inspects commissioning.[204]

158. Ms Anne Owers, HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, told us that she believed the existing inspection arrangements to be satisfactory and that she did not believe that the Northern Ireland Prison Service was 'over-inspected':

I truly do not think that (over inspection) needs to be a concern. I cannot speak for the NIHRC because that is something that is specific to Northern Ireland, it is new and obviously (CJINI) will be working out what the relationship is with that. But the whole reason that we do inspections jointly with the education inspectorate and the healthcare inspector … is so that prisons do not get three or four separate people turning up on three or four separate occasions … we and (CJINI) together organise the programme for inspection and bring in these other organisations to provide their specialist assistance. … So we can do two things. First of all we can reduce the burden on the prison and prison service and secondly an inspection can provide a holistic picture of the whole establishment[205]

159. In Northern Ireland, aspects of the prison regime have also been subject to scrutiny from the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) The NIHRC is a statutory body created by the Northern Ireland Act 1998, with a range of duties relating to human rights issues. It is able to conduct investigations, and has the power to assist individuals when they are bringing court proceedings, to intervene in proceedings and to bring court proceedings itself. The NIHRC has conducted valuable research into women's imprisonment and into children in custody, and regularly submits responses to prison service consultations on draft policies.[206]

160. We conclude that the inspection arrangements of Northern Ireland prisons are operating satisfactorily and are pleased to note that Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland has established effective working relationships with the Northern Ireland Prison Service and with other inspection agencies.

Prisoner complaints

THE PRISONER OMBUDSMAN

161. In February 2005, the then Secretary of State, Rt Hon Paul Murphy MP, appointed Mr Brian Coulter as the first Prisoner Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. His remit is to investigate complaints by prisoners who have failed to obtain satisfaction from the Northern Ireland Prison Service complaints system. If the Ombudsman upholds the complaint, he will make recommendations to the Prison Service. The Ombudsman told us that he also (at the request of the Minister) conducts investigations into deaths of prisoners in prison custody, monitors the use of force at the disposal of the prison service and conducts thematic reviews (normally at the instigation of the Director of the Northern Ireland Prison Service).[207] The Ombudsman is independent of the Prison Service and reports to the Secretary of State. Mr Coulter suggested to us that his role should be placed on a statutory footing in order to secure the independent powers of his Office.[208] He pointed out that the management of complaints is described in the Review of the Criminal Justice System in Northern Ireland 2000 as an essential part of effective accountability mechanisms. Mr Coulter told us that:

One important issue in relation to statutory footing is that I should be accountable to Parliament for my aspect of prison service oversight and eventually, with devolution, to the Northern Ireland Assembly. This above all would underscore the independence of my Office. I am told that the failure to deliver proper statutory footing for my Office in accordance with the wishes of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the Prisons Minister is due to lack of resources with particular regard to non availability of persons with legislative drafting skills. I hold the view that the Northern Ireland Office has a duty to provide for the development of my office and that the prevailing situation reflects an unacceptable policy vacuum.[209]

162. Mr Coulter also said that he believed it would be logical to include the Probation Service within his remit (as is the case for his equivalent in England and Wales).[210] The PBNI, subject to the resolution of some specific issues, was supportive of the Prisoner Ombudsman dealing with complaints against probation officers. Mr McCaughey, Chief Probation Officer, informed us that the PBNI had proposed a pilot whereby the Ombudsman would begin to deal with complaints for a year or so, with the PBNI paying the costs for that period.[211] The Minister told us that he had decided not to extend the Ombudsman's role to include probation, but that the Ombudsman had agreed to deal with complaints from prisoners about the probation service on a voluntary trial basis.

163. Mr Coulter informed us that he believed he should retain responsibility for investigating complaints about healthcare after the transfer of responsibility for healthcare provision had moved from the prison service to the DHSSPS.[212] Oversight of clinical governance was also raised as a matter of concern by the IMBs:

There is a number of issues which concern us (about the transfer of responsibility for health to the DHSSPS). First of all clinical governance. What is going to happen, and if the prisoners have complaints regarding health who will they go to? … That is still being discussed.[213]

Dr Philip McClements told us that his view was that:

If you are asking me for a personal view of how that will all shake out, my firm belief is that if the transfer takes place, then the health-related issues in prisons must be investigated by the Health Service Ombudsman and not the Prisoner Ombudsman but, likewise, the prison components of complaints would still rest with Mr Coulter. The difficulty is in looking at deaths in custody where you always have both areas, there are always health issues and prison discipline and it is how you properly take advice on both those sides of that particular equation.[214]

164. We are pleased to note that the Prisoner Ombudsman's Office has become well established in Northern Ireland and that it has developed good working relationships with the prison service and with each prison establishment. We believe that, at a suitable opportunity, the role of the Office should be placed on a statutory footing. We are glad that arrangements are now underway to do so via amendments to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill. We support the proposal from PBNI that there should be a pilot period of a year or so during which the Ombudsman deals with probation complaints, and recommend that this pilot should lead to the development of longer term arrangements for handling of probation complaints. We call on the Northern Ireland Prison Service and DHSSPS to ensure that future arrangements for handling prisoner complaints about healthcare are carefully defined and clearly communicated to prisoners.

INDEPENDENT MONITORING BOARDS

165. An independent monitoring board (IMB) is appointed for each prison in Northern Ireland by the Secretary of State under the Prison Act (Northern Ireland) 1953. The IMBs deal with a variety of issues relating to the treatment, healthcare and welfare of prisoners, and they consider requests and complaints made by prisoners. In order to fulfil their role, each member of a Board has the right of access to all parts of the prison and to each prisoner at any time. The IMBs have an oversight of prison staffing and administrative issues only in so far as these impact on the welfare of prisoners. IMB representatives are present as observers of all major incidents. Mr McAllister (IMB Chairman, HMP Maghaberry) told us that the Prison Service took the role of the IMBs seriously, and that there were good communications between the IMBs and different parts of the Prison Service.[215]

166. The IMB 2005/06 reports note that the IMB secretarial function was transferred from the prison service to the Prisoner Ombudsman's Office and that the IMBs started to work alongside the Ombudsman in dealing with prisoners' complaints during that period. Mr McAllister explained that there was no statutory or formal relationship setting out the structure or framework for a relationship between the IMBs and the Prisoner Ombudsman, but that the two offices shared much in common in terms of prisoners' rights and in their roles in responding to prisoners' complaints. He explained that work was in progress to set up a protocol on working arrangements between both parties.[216] However, Mr McAllister also explained that since the IMBs secretariat had moved from the Prison Service to the Prisoner Ombudsman's Office (to underline the IMBs' independence from the Prison Service), difficulties had arisen in relation to service provision and the independence of the IMBs from the Ombudsman:

There is a perception among prisoners and prison staff alike that the IMB is a branch of the Ombudsman's office. Although there are some similarities in the work of both offices and there is a necessity to work together in areas of mutual concern, it is crucial to the IMBs that we are not only independent but that we are seem to be independent.[217]

167. The Committee on Administration of Justice (CAJ)[218] suggested that since the IMBs were a relatively new institution, it might be useful if Criminal Justice Inspection were to undertake in due course a thematic inspection of the operation of the IMBs to see how well they were working.[219]

168. We commend the work of the Independent Monitoring Boards and acknowledge gratefully the contribution made by those who offer their time on a voluntary basis. We support the IMBs' request to promote their role and underline their independence from the Prisoner Ombudsman's Office. We recommend that the development of a protocol on working arrangements between the two bodies is treated as a priority.

202 Q 1 Back

203 Ev 165 Back

204 Ev 166 Back

205 Q 50 Back

206 Ev 173 Back

207 Q 140 Back

208 Ev 181 Back

209 Ev 181 Back

210 Qq 153, 178 Back

211 Q 289 Back

212 Qq 153, 178 Back

213 Q 449 Back