Human Rights Achievements of AMC: Need for Audit of
Women’s Conditions of Detention? - ANU Prisoners Advocacy
Public Forum ACT Legislative Assembly Reception Room, 6
March 2013 6-7.15pm
by Dr Helen Watchirs OAM, ACT Human Rights &
Discrimination Commissioner
Thank you for inviting me to speak today about human rights compliance at the Alexander
Maconochie Centre. I would like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the
land on which we meet today, the Ngunnawal people. I respect their ancestors, continuing
culture (the oldest in the world at 40-60,000 years) and the contribution they make to the life
of this city and this region.
The AMC was designed and constructed to reflect a commitment to human rights enshrined
in the ACT Human Rights Act 2004 and to invest in an environment to promote effective
rehabilitation under the Corrections Management Act 2007, rather than simple punishment.
The AMC received detainees 4 years ago in 30 March 2009, and can accommodate up to 300
people who are either remanded in custody or serving a custodial sentence. It includes
education/program rooms, a library, the Hume Health Centre, Transitional Release Centre,
Crisis Support Unit, Management Unit and a series of accommodation units – about half are
in cottages and for males there are sentenced and remand cellblocks. Currently there are 14
female & about 230 male detainees.
The Commission has not had the resources (declined with cuts, but more recently staff losses)
to audit the AMC’s compliance with the Human Rights Act, as we did with the smaller BRC
in 2007. It is therefore difficult for us to provide detailed and conclusive comments on the
AMC’s human rights compliance at this point in time. Although a huge improvement on the
old Belconnen Remand Centre facility (in terms of natural light, open air, and campus style),
the AMC has encountered a number of challenges, which is not surprising for a new facility.
Several recommendations are still outstanding from the 2007 BRC Human Rights Audit, such
as piloting a Needle and Syringe Program to prevent disease transmission, including
HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis C (12 cases now of detainees acquiring infection in AMC).
1
National studies estimate that one third of male detainees have been exposed to Hepatitis C
and two thirds of female detainees. Detainees should have health care that is at least
equivalent to the community, and NSPs have been operating successfully in the community
for some decades. The Commission also called for a secure forensic Mental Health Unit to be
progressed as a priority, and described ‘D-yard’ at BRC as a non-therapeutic environment –
in my view the Crisis Support Unit has similar difficulties. The Act Government announced
on 30 July 2012 that a 15-bed secure unit with funding of about $25 million would be
established by 2016.
There have been a number of incidents which had attracted media attention such as detainee
assaults on each other and staff, and detainees climbing onto the roof of the Centre following
lockdowns, a botched escape attempt from TRC, attempted suicide; and I referred a serious
matter of alleged use of force by a former staff member to the AFP and Ombudsman. Our
Annual Reports note concerns about whether pregnant female detainees are able to keep
infants, and whether there is systemic sex discrimination due to lack of enough education,
programs, and work.
Women’s HR Audit and Systemic Discrimination Review
I believe a comprehensive human rights audit of the AMC is needed, but it is currently only
feasible within a small area, which we have chosen as the Women’s area. The HRC has
commenced conducting interviews with current and former detainees (assisted by Women &
Prisons group auspiced by the Womens’ Centre for Health Matters), families, management,
staff, unions and stakeholders. This week we received large volume of records such as use of
force, searches (including strip) and reports. Today we invited written submissions up until
12 June 2013 through a media release, and we will hold some specific stakeholder forums,
such as oversight agencies and service providers. The AMC has not repeated the problems
identified in the 2007 Audit, and reported to CEDAW, of women being bussed between BRC
& STRC to address overcrowded of PDC (designed for 30 detainees, but held 50 on
weekends), causing increased strip searches during transit, less visits, employment and
difficulties with health appointments.
As with the, BRC Audit of 2007 (and Quamby in 2005 and Bimberi in 2011) we expect that
during the course of the Audit/Review and immediately afterwards, projects may be
2
expanded or established to anticipate or implement recommendations, which we welcome.
We expect to present a Report to the Attorney-General (Simon Corbell) and Minister for
Corrections (Shane Rattenbury) at the end of 2013 with recommendations on how to improve
the human rights conditions of women (including women with disabilities and various races)
in detention using a best practice framework in areas ranging from:

Education, programs & work (eg barista & hairdressing courses);

Visits (eg conjugal); family relationships, especially children (babies/infants);

classifications & accommodation eg not solitary confinement;

discipline, use of force/restraints, searches contraband (eg strip), segregate, seclude;

privacy, freedom of communication/information/media;

opportunities for sport, recreation, practice religion;

lockdowns and staffing levels (including need for escorts, eg hospital emergencies)

health (including mental health), gender specific services such as pap smears and
breast cancer screening, random drug testing (urine/blood), meals & hygiene; and

throughcare such as transitional housing – eg Coming Home program.
General Human Rights issues
The Commission has had a good working relationship with corrections officials, including
being consulted in the design of the prison, and we attended regular oversight agency
meetings at the AMC. Commission staff have trained new officers on human rights and
discrimination law, often in partnership with ACTCS policy people, and the general
impression we have is that ACTCS take their human rights obligations seriously. Recently we
were informed that women are now receiving trauma counselling. Staff and all 3
Commissioners visit the prison and have found Corrections staff, from officers through to
senior management, to be polite and accommodating of any requests the Commission makes,
eg often we are able to see detainees at short notice in a private room for complaints.
Detainees at the AMC may make free calls to the HRC to discuss issues of concern.
However, the Commission only has jurisdiction to take complaints regarding discrimination
and services eg health. Otherwise, we can only note systemic HR matters - over time there
has been a decrease in the number of calls we receive, because we cannot offer individual
3
remedies and we refer callers to the Official Visitors & Ombudsman (the latter has also
experienced a drop in complaints). In 2009-10 we had 117 inquiries, in 2010/11 there were
92 inquiries and 4 discrimination complaints, in 2011/12 there were 46 inquiries and 11
discrimination complaints. These discrimination complaints may also be by staff, on
specified grounds including race, sex, and disability
While the 2011 Hamburger Review was impressive, its focus was mainly operational - the
Commission succeeded in amending its Terms of Reference to include human rights
considerations, and some issues we raised with them (and in our Annual Reports) included:

Lack of adequate heating in cells - now detainees have doonas (but still issue of open
windows due to indoor smoking);

Extended periods of lockdown due to staff shortages in past – less problems recently;

Management Unit and mixing of Protection Prisoners and Segregated Prisoners, as well
as sentenced and remand - however the use of segregation powers with differing Regimes
has ceased;

Corrections Management Act not being followed in reviews of disciplinary matters legislation and policies/procedures have been simplified and are more fair;

Slow introduction of programmes - although this has improved, it is still an issue for
female detainees, and those in specific areas such as the CSU and MU.

Women’s and Children’s Policy: whether it will be practically possible for a woman to
have a baby with her at AMC - or option to transfer with detainee’s consent to NSW (but
problem if away from rest of family) eg Jacaranda Cottages at Emu Plains Prison Farm.
The Commission has also previously raised some issues of concern regarding the Crisis
Support Unit, which contains males and females, but generally mixing is avoided in
detainees’ time out of cells - however need for different times out of cells means that it is
more limited.
Conclusion
Human rights compliance by detention facilities are not solely fixed by new buildings,
although they are critical to avoid issues like overcrowding and inappropriate mixing of
different detainees. Human Rights Audits require Governments to ensure dynamic and
ongoing implementation and monitoring through laws, policies, programs, practices, cultures
and resources. The Commission strives to review constructively and carefully looks for
evidence-bases. Detention facilities are the tip of the iceberg in criminal justices systems systemic reform especially in the area of prevention and diversion, throughcare and
transitioning can have the biggest impact. The Optional Protocol in the Convention Against
4
Torture was signed by Australia, but not yet ratified – a central feature is the need for
independent monitoring of places of detention. The anticipated ACT Bill preparing for
OPCAT will be of high interest.
Focusing on rehabilitation is extremely important immediately, but may take some time to
impact on recidivism rates, and break inter-generational cycles. Justice Reinvestment through
intensive community support programs is an important approach that complements human
rights, and hopefully will help address huge issues such as the over-representation of
Aboriginal people in detention and the criminal justice system. In my view the attempt to
build a human rights compliant prison in the ACT is an ongoing process of continuous
improvement, and the result appears to be better than other Australian jurisdictions,
particularly in relation to staff culture. There are also higher costs due to the ACT’s small
size rather than human rights compliance alone, but this is very difficult to avoid in many
service areas, not just the AMC prison.
5