4.3 All prisoners are allocated a PIN number in order that they may use the
Pin phone facility to maintain contact with friends or family whilst they are in
custody. They must be informed verbally and in writing that their communications
are subject to interception and they must complete a contacts list which separately
identifies any numbers which should be placed on the confidential side of their
Pin-phone account. The telephone numbers of legal advisers will then be entered
into the Pin-phone system in such a way that any calls to these numbers will
automatically not be recorded. This should act as a safeguard and prevent any
legally privileged conversations being monitored unintentionally but it is not totally
failsafe. Following a case which received national coverage in the media last year a
review was conducted and the Prison Service has introduced new measures which
are designed to prevent breaches of Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention
on Human Rights. My Chief Inspector contributed to the review and the findings
and good practice points which have been gathered from our inspections were
taken into account.
4.4 In reality the system still relies heavily upon manual intervention and
therefore no guarantee can be given that a breach will never occur in the future.
Providing the prisoners and their lawyers always adhere to the rules and the prison
staff apply the process diligently the risk of legally privileged communications
being intercepted will be minimised. The Inspectors will of course be looking
specifically at these areas when future inspections are conducted.
Work of the Inspectorate during the period covered by
this Report
4.5 There are 137 prisons in England & Wales and since the Inspectorate
was formed virtually all of them have been inspected at least twice. Prisons in
the high security estate are generally subject to an annual inspection but the
frequency of inspections of other establishments depends on their previous level
of compliance.
4.6 During the period covered by this report my Inspectors visited 89 prisons
which roughly equates to two thirds of the whole estate. The inspection usually
takes one working day, although in order to achieve this in the larger prisons the
Inspectors work in pairs. Following the conclusion of the inspection a detailed
report is prepared for me and this is sent to the Governor and relevant staff,
together with a schedule of recommendations or an action plan if necessary.
4.7 Lawful monitoring carried out in accordance with published criteria can help
to safeguard the public, the prison, its staff and other prisoners. It requires good
practice by well trained, well led and dedicated staff. This must be supported by a
sound infrastructure incorporating good quality documentation capable of being
completed to the highest standard in order to provide clear and unambiguous audit
trails.
4.8 Sixty of the prisons emerged well from the inspections and the overall level
of compliance with the rules was satisfactory or better. Indeed the Inspectors found
examples of good practice which are now firmly embedded in the systems and
processes and managers and staff clearly demonstrated a commitment to achieve
the best possible standards.
4.9 Regrettably serious weaknesses and failings were found in the systems and
processes of the other 29 prisons which were inspected during 2008. I do not imply
that prison managers and their staff are deliberately setting out to circumvent the
rules because often these failings result from a lack of equipment and resources to
conduct the interception efficiently and effectively, especially when large numbers
of prisoners need to be monitored because they are considered a risk to children
or are subject to harassment restrictions. The monitoring of prisoners for public
protection purposes must be geared to risk and to the resources that are available
to conduct the monitoring in each prison. In my judgment each establishment must
20