4.2 The interception of prisoners’ telephone calls and correspondence is
permitted, and in many cases is mandatory, under the Prison Act 1952 and the
National Security Framework (NSF). The NSF stipulates that any telephone call
may be listened to or letter read if intelligence suggests that this is necessary and
proportionate under Prison Rule 35A or Young Offenders Institution Rule (YOIR)
11(4). Interception is mandatory, primarily in the case of Category A prisoners
and prisoners who have been convicted of sexual or harassment offences and who
continue to pose a risk to children or the public. However, communications which
are subject to legal privilege are protected and there are also special arrangements
in place for dealing with confidential matters, such as contact with the Samaritans
and a prisoner’s constituency MP.
Work of the Inspectorate during the period covered by
this Report
4.3 There are 137 prisons in England & Wales, including Kennet which was
opened in 2007. All of the prisons have been inspected on at least one occasion
during the last 3 years and quite a number have now been inspected for a second
or third time. During the period covered by this report my Inspectors visited 85
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.
4.4 There is a legal obligation upon the Prison Service to inform the prisoners,
verbally and in writing, that their communications are subject to interception.
Interception is illegal and a breach of the Human Rights Act unless it is carried
out in accordance with the Act and NSF. The primary objective of the inspection
is to ensure that each prison is complying with the rules.
4.5 Regrettably, I cannot give an assurance that there is total compliance with
the rules and in some prisons breaches still occur on a fairly regular basis. My
inspectors have needed to re-inspect a number of prisons within a relatively short
time in order to raise the level of compliance. In saying so, however, I do not imply
that prison managers and their staff are deliberately setting out to circumvent the
rules. Generally failure to achieve a good level of compliance results from a lack
of resources and the pressure which the staff are often under to deal with other
matters involving the good order and security of the prison.
4.6 Towards the end of last year my Chief Inspector and I met with the Director
General of the Prison Service to review the outcomes from the various inspections
and this was very useful. A new strategy for conducting the interception of
communications within prisons has now been developed by the National
Intelligence Unit and this is based upon the findings from the inspections. The
intention is that the new scheme will be tried in a number of prisons which have
been selected by the Prison Service and then the results and findings will be
presented to the Secretary of State for consideration.
4.7 Gradually, the level of compliance is improving and indeed some prisons
have exceeded all expectations. A new document, which contains all of the salient
features of the interception of communications, has been developed and this is
being adopted universally. Signed acknowledgements are to be obtained from
each prisoner and retained in the core records as this will clearly demonstrate that
the prison has fully discharged its legal obligations.
4.8 I am reasonably confident that in time our inspections will show that there
is general compliance with the Act and the Rules which are laid down under it.
Without fail the Governors are responding very positively to our recommendations
and in my view the new strategy will ensure that in the longer term there will be
improved efficiency and effectiveness.
13