The 'Friends of Marcia Powell' are autonomous groups and individuals engaging in prisoner outreach, informal advocacy, and organized protest and direct actions in a sustained campaign to: promote prisoner rights and welfare in America; engage the Arizona public in a creative and thoughtful critique of our system of "justice;” deconstruct the prison industrial complex; and dismantle this racist, classist patriarchy...

Retiring "Free Marcia Powell"

As of December 2, 2010 (with occasional exceptions) I'm retiring this blog to direct more of my time and energy into prisoner rights and my other blogs; I just can't do anyone justice when spread so thin. I'll keep the site open so folks can search the archives and use the links, but won't be updating it with new posts. If you're looking for the latest, try Arizona Prison Watch. Most of the pieces posted here were cross-posted to one or both of those sites already.

Thanks for visiting. Peace out - Peg.

Monday, May 3, 2010

UN: Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights:
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

Text in PDF Format

Adopted by the First United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, held at Geneva in 1955, and approved by the Economic and Social Council by its resolutions 663 C (XXIV) of 31 July 1957 and 2076 (LXII) of 13 May 1977
PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS

1. The following rules are not intended to describe in detail a model system of penal institutions. They seek only, on the basis of the general consensus of contemporary thought and the essential elements of the most adequate systems of today, to set out what is generally accepted as being good principle and practice in the treatment of prisoners and the management of institutions.

2. In view of the great variety of legal, social, economic and geographical conditions of the world, it is evident that not all of the rules are capable of application in all places and at all times. They should, however, serve to stimulate a constant endeavour to overcome practical difficulties in the way of their application, in the knowledge that they represent, as a whole, the minimum conditions which are accepted as suitable by the United Nations.

3. On the other hand, the rules cover a field in which thought is constantly developing. They are not intended to preclude experiment and practices, provided these are in harmony with the principles and seek to further the purposes which derive from the text of the rules as a whole. It will always be justifiable for the central prison administration to authorize departures from the rules in this spirit.

4. (1) Part I of the rules covers the general management of institutions, and is applicable to all categories of prisoners, criminal or civil, untried or convicted, including prisoners subject to "security measures" or corrective measures ordered by the judge.

(2) Part II contains rules applicable only to the special categories dealt with in each section. Nevertheless, the rules under section A, applicable to prisoners under sentence, shall be equally applicable to categories of prisoners dealt with in sections B, C and D, provided they do not conflict with the rules governing those categories and are for their benefit.

5. (1) The rules do not seek to regulate the management of institutions set aside for young persons such as Borstal institutions or correctional schools, but in general part I would be equally applicable in such institutions.

(2) The category of young prisoners should include at least all young persons who come within the jurisdiction of juvenile courts. As a rule, such young persons should not be sentenced to imprisonment.

Part I
RULES OF GENERAL APPLICATION
Basic principle

6. (1) The following rules shall be applied impartially. There shall be no discrimination on grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

(2) On the other hand, it is necessary to respect the religious beliefs and moral precepts of the group to which a prisoner belongs.

Register

7. (1) In every place where persons are imprisoned there shall be kept a bound registration book with numbered pages in which shall be entered in respect of each prisoner received:

( a ) Information concerning his identity;

( b ) The reasons for his commitment and the authority therefor;

( c ) The day and hour of his admission and release.

(2) No person shall be received in an institution without a valid commitment order of which the details shall have been previously entered in the register.

Separation of categories

8. The different categories of prisoners shall be kept in separate institutions or parts of institutions taking account of their sex, age, criminal record, the legal reason for their detention and the necessities of their treatment. Thus,

( a ) Men and women shall so far as possible be detained in separate institutions; in an institution which receives both men and women the whole of the premises allocated to women shall be entirely separate;

( b ) Untried prisoners shall be kept separate from convicted prisoners;

( c ) Persons imprisoned for debt and other civil prisoners shall be kept separate from persons imprisoned by reason of a criminal offence;

( d ) Young prisoners shall be kept separate from adults.

Accommodation

9. (1) Where sleeping accommodation is in individual cells or rooms, each prisoner shall occupy by night a cell or room by himself. If for special reasons, such as temporary overcrowding, it becomes necessary for the central prison administration to make an exception to this rule, it is not desirable to have two prisoners in a cell or room.

(2) Where dormitories are used, they shall be occupied by prisoners carefully selected as being suitable to associate with one another in those conditions. There shall be regular supervision by night, in keeping with the nature of the institution.

10. 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 and ventilation.

11. In all places where prisoners are required to live or work,

( a ) The windows shall be large enough to enable the prisoners to read or work by natural light, and shall be so constructed that they can allow the entrance of fresh air whether or not there is artificial ventilation;

( b ) Artificial light shall be provided sufficient for the prisoners to read or work without injury to eyesight.

12. The sanitary installations shall be adequate to enable every prisoner to comply with the needs of nature when necessary and in a clean and decent manner.

13. Adequate bathing and shower installations shall be provided so that every prisoner may be enabled and required to have a bath or shower, at a temperature suitable to the climate, as frequently as necessary for general hygiene according to season and geographical region, but at least once a week in a temperate climate.

14. All parts of an institution regularly used by prisoners shall be properly maintained and kept scrupulously clean at all times.

Personal hygiene

15. Prisoners shall be required to keep their persons clean, and to this end they shall be provided with water and with such toilet articles as are necessary for health and cleanliness.

16. In order that prisoners may maintain a good appearance compatible with their self-respect, facilities shall be provided for the proper care of the hair and beard, and men shall be enabled to shave regularly.

Clothing and bedding

17. (1) Every prisoner who is not allowed to wear his own clothing shall be provided with an outfit of clothing suitable for the climate and adequate to keep him in good health. Such clothing shall in no manner be degrading or humiliating.

(2) All clothing shall be clean and kept in proper condition. Underclothing shall be changed and washed as often as necessary for the maintenance of hygiene.

(3) In exceptional circumstances, whenever a prisoner is removed outside the institution for an authorized purpose, he shall be allowed to wear his own clothing or other inconspicuous clothing.

18. If prisoners are allowed to wear their own clothing, arrangements shall be made on their admission to the institution to ensure that it shall be clean and fit for use.

19. Every prisoner shall, in accordance with local or national standards, be provided with a separate bed, and with separate and sufficient bedding which shall be clean when issued, kept in good order and changed often enough to ensure its cleanliness.

Food

20. (1) Every prisoner shall be provided by the administration at the usual hours with food of nutritional value adequate for health and strength, of wholesome quality and well prepared and served.

(2) Drinking water shall be available to every prisoner whenever he needs it.

Exercise and sport

21. (1) Every prisoner who is not employed in outdoor work shall have at least one hour of suitable exercise in the open air daily if the weather permits.

(2) Young prisoners, and others of suitable age and physique, shall receive physical and recreational training during the period of exercise. To this end space, installations and equipment should be provided.

Medical services

22. (1) At every institution there shall be available the services of at least one qualified medical officer who should have some knowledge of psychiatry. The medical services should be organized in close relationship to the general health administration of the community or nation. They shall include a psychiatric service for the diagnosis and, in proper cases, the treatment of states of mental abnormality.

(2) Sick prisoners who require specialist treatment shall be transferred to specialized institutions or to civil hospitals. Where hospital facilities are provided in an institution, their equipment, furnishings and pharmaceutical supplies shall be proper for the medical care and treatment of sick prisoners, and there shall be a staff of suitable trained officers.

(3) The services of a qualified dental officer shall be available to every prisoner.

23. (1) In women's institutions there shall be special accommodation for all necessary pre-natal and post-natal care and treatment. Arrangements shall be made wherever practicable for children to be born in a hospital outside the institution. If a child is born in prison, this fact shall not be mentioned in the birth certificate.

(2) Where nursing infants are allowed to remain in the institution with their mothers, provision shall be made for a nursery staffed by qualified persons, where the infants shall be placed when they are not in the care of their mothers.

24. The medical officer shall see and examine every prisoner as soon as possible after his admission and thereafter as necessary, with a view particularly to the discovery of physical or mental illness and the taking of all necessary measures; the segregation of prisoners suspected of infectious or contagious conditions; the noting of physical or mental defects which might hamper rehabilitation, and the determination of the physical capacity of every prisoner for work.

25. (1) The medical officer shall have the care of the physical and mental health of the prisoners and should daily see all sick prisoners, all who complain of illness, and any prisoner to whom his attention is specially directed.

(2) The medical officer shall report to the director whenever he considers that a prisoner's physical or mental health has been or will be injuriously affected by continued imprisonment or by any condition of imprisonment.

26. (1) The medical officer shall regularly inspect and advise the director upon:

( a ) The quantity, quality, preparation and service of food;

( b ) The hygiene and cleanliness of the institution and the prisoners;

( c ) The sanitation, heating, lighting and ventilation of the institution;

( d ) The suitability and cleanliness of the prisoners' clothing and bedding;

( e ) The observance of the rules concerning physical education and sports, in cases where there is no technical personnel in charge of these activities.

(2) The director shall take into consideration the reports and advice that the medical officer submits according to rules 25 (2) and 26 and, in case he concurs with the recommendations made, shall take immediate steps to give effect to those recommendations; if they are not within his competence or if he does not concur with them, he shall immediately submit his own report and the advice of the medical officer to higher authority.

Discipline and punishment

27. Discipline and order shall be maintained with firmness, but with no more restriction than is necessary for safe custody and well-ordered community life.

28. (1) No prisoner shall be employed, in the service of the institution, in any disciplinary capacity.

(2) This rule shall not, however, impede the proper functioning of systems based on self-government, under which specified social, educational or sports activities or responsibilities are entrusted, under supervision, to prisoners who are formed into groups for the purposes of treatment.

29. The following shall always be determined by the law or by the regulation of the competent administrative authority:

( a ) Conduct constituting a disciplinary offence;

( b ) The types and duration of punishment which may be inflicted;

( c ) The authority competent to impose such punishment.

30. (1) No prisoner shall be punished except in accordance with the terms of such law or regulation, and never twice for the same offence.

(2) No prisoner shall be punished unless he has been informed of the offence alleged against him and given a proper opportunity of presenting his defence. The competent authority shall conduct a thorough examination of the case.

(3) Where necessary and practicable the prisoner shall be allowed to make his defence through an interpreter.

31. Corporal punishment, punishment by placing in a dark cell, and all cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments shall be completely prohibited as punishments for disciplinary offences.

32. (1) Punishment by close confinement or reduction of diet shall never be inflicted unless the medical officer has examined the prisoner and certified in writing that he is fit to sustain it.

(2) The same shall apply to any other punishment that may be prejudicial to the physical or mental health of a prisoner. In no case may such punishment be contrary to or depart from the principle stated in rule 31.

(3) The medical officer shall visit daily prisoners undergoing such punishments and shall advise the director if he considers the termination or alteration of the punishment necessary on grounds of physical or mental health.

Instruments of restraint

33. Instruments of restraint, such as handcuffs, chains, irons and strait-jackets, shall never be applied as a punishment. Furthermore, chains or irons shall not be used as restraints. Other instruments of restraint shall not be used except in the following circumstances:

( a ) As a precaution against escape during a transfer, provided that they shall be removed when the prisoner appears before a judicial or administrative authority;

( b ) On medical grounds by direction of the medical officer;

( c ) By order of the director, if other methods of control fail, in order to prevent a prisoner from injuring himself or others or from damaging property; in such instances the director shall at once consult the medical officer and report to the higher administrative authority.

34. The patterns and manner of use of instruments of restraint shall be decided by the central prison administration. Such instruments must not be applied for any longer time than is strictly necessary.

Information to and complaints by prisoners

35. (1) Every prisoner on admission shall be provided with written information about the regulations governing the treatment of prisoners of his category, the disciplinary requirements of the institution, the authorized methods of seeking information and making complaints, and all such other matters as are necessary to enable him to understand both his rights and his obligations and to adapt himself to the life of the institution.

(2) If a prisoner is illiterate, the aforesaid information shall be conveyed to him orally.

36. (1) Every prisoner shall have the opportunity each week day of making requests or complaints to the director of the institution or the officer authorized to represent him.

(2) It shall be possible to make requests or complaints to the inspector of prisons during his inspection. The prisoner shall have the opportunity to talk to the inspector or to any other inspecting officer without the director or other members of the staff being present.

(3) Every prisoner shall be allowed to make a request or complaint, without censorship as to substance but in proper form, to the central prison administration, the judicial authority or other proper authorities through approved channels.

(4) Unless it is evidently frivolous or groundless, every request or complaint shall be promptly dealt with and replied to without undue delay.

Contact with the outside world

37. Prisoners shall be allowed under necessary supervision to communicate with their family and reputable friends at regular intervals, both by correspondence and by receiving visits.

38. (1) Prisoners who are foreign nationals shall be allowed reasonable facilities to communicate with the diplomatic and consular representatives of the State to which they belong.

(2) Prisoners who are nationals of States without diplomatic or consular representation in the country and refugees or stateless persons shall be allowed similar facilities to communicate with the diplomatic representative of the State which takes charge of their interests or any national or international authority whose task it is to protect such persons.

39. Prisoners shall be kept informed regularly of the more important items of news by the reading of newspapers, periodicals or special institutional publications, by hearing wireless transmissions, by lectures or by any similar means as authorized or controlled by the administration.

Books

40. Every institution shall have a library for the use of all categories of prisoners, adequately stocked with both recreational and instructional books, and prisoners shall be encouraged to make full use of it.

Religion

41. (1) If the institution contains a sufficient number of prisoners of the same religion, a qualified representative of that religion shall be appointed or approved. If the number of prisoners justifies it and conditions permit, the arrangement should be on a full-time basis.

(2) A qualified representative appointed or approved under paragraph (1) shall be allowed to hold regular services and to pay pastoral visits in private to prisoners of his religion at proper times.

(3) Access to a qualified representative of any religion shall not be refused to any prisoner. On the other hand, if any prisoner should object to a visit of any religious representative, his attitude shall be fully respected.

42. So far as practicable, every prisoner shall be allowed to satisfy the needs of his religious life by attending the services provided in the institution and having in his possession the books of religious observance and instruction of his denomination.

Retention of prisoners' property

43. (1) All money, valuables, clothing and other effects belonging to a prisoner which under the regulations of the institution he is not allowed to retain shall on his admission to the institution be placed in safe custody. An inventory thereof shall be signed by the prisoner. Steps shall be taken to keep them in good condition.

(2) On the release of the prisoner all such articles and money shall be returned to him except in so far as he has been authorized to spend money or send any such property out of the institution, or it has been found necessary on hygienic grounds to destroy any article of clothing. The prisoner shall sign a receipt for the articles and money returned to him.

(3) Any money or effects received for a prisoner from outside shall be treated in the same way.

(4) If a prisoner brings in any drugs or medicine, the medical officer shall decide what use shall be made of them.

Notification of death, illness, transfer, etc.

44. (1) Upon the death or serious illness of, or serious injury to a prisoner, or his removal to an institution for the treatment of mental affections, the director shall at once inform the spouse, if the prisoner is married, or the nearest relative and shall in any event inform any other person previously designated by the prisoner.

(2) A prisoner shall be informed at once of the death or serious illness of any near relative. In case of the critical illness of a near relative, the prisoner should be authorized, whenever circumstances allow, to go to his bedside either under escort or alone.

(3) Every prisoner shall have the right to inform at once his family of his imprisonment or his transfer to another institution.

Removal of prisoners

45. (1) When the prisoners are being removed to or from an institution, they shall be exposed to public view as little as possible, and proper safeguards shall be adopted to protect them from insult, curiosity and publicity in any form.

(2) The transport of prisoners in conveyances with inadequate ventilation or light, or in any way which would subject them to unnecessary physical hardship, shall be prohibited.

(3) The transport of prisoners shall be carried out at the expense of the administration and equal conditions shall obtain for all of them.

Institutional personnel

46. (1) The prison administration shall provide for the careful selection of every grade of the personnel, since it is on their integrity, humanity, professional capacity and personal suitability for the work that the proper administration of the institutions depends.

(2) The prison administration shall constantly seek to awaken and maintain in the minds both of the personnel and of the public the conviction that this work is a social service of great importance, and to this end all appropriate means of informing the public should be used.

(3) To secure the foregoing ends, personnel shall be appointed on a full-time basis as professional prison officers and have civil service status with security of tenure subject only to good conduct, efficiency and physical fitness. Salaries shall be adequate to attract and retain suitable men and women; employment benefits and conditions of service shall be favourable in view of the exacting nature of the work.

47. (1) The personnel shall possess an adequate standard of education and intelligence.

(2) Before entering on duty, the personnel shall be given a course of training in their general and specific duties and be required to pass theoretical and practical tests.

(3) After entering on duty and during their career, the personnel shall maintain and improve their knowledge and professional capacity by attending courses of in-service training to be organized at suitable intervals.

48. All members of the personnel shall at all times so conduct themselves and perform their duties as to influence the prisoners for good by their example and to command their respect.

49. (1) So far as possible, the personnel shall include a sufficient number of specialists such as psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, teachers and trade instructors.

(2) The services of social workers, teachers and trade instructors shall be secured on a permanent basis, without thereby excluding part-time or voluntary workers.

50. (1) The director of an institution should be adequately qualified for his task by character, administrative ability, suitable training and experience.

(2) He shall devote his entire time to his official duties and shall not be appointed on a part-time basis.

(3) He shall reside on the premises of the institution or in its immediate vicinity.

(4) When two or more institutions are under the authority of one director, he shall visit each of them at frequent intervals. A responsible resident official shall be in charge of each of these institutions.

51. (1) The director, his deputy, and the majority of the other personnel of the institution shall be able to speak the language of the greatest number of prisoners, or a language understood by the greatest number of them.

(2) Whenever necessary, the services of an interpreter shall be used.

52. (1) In institutions which are large enough to require the services of one or more full-time medical officers, at least one of them shall reside on the premises of the institution or in its immediate vicinity.

(2) In other institutions the medical officer shall visit daily and shall reside near enough to be able to attend without delay in cases of urgency.

53. (1) In an institution for both men and women, the part of the institution set aside for women shall be under the authority of a responsible woman officer who shall have the custody of the keys of all that part of the institution.

(2) No male member of the staff shall enter the part of the institution set aside for women unless accompanied by a woman officer.

(3) Women prisoners shall be attended and supervised only by women officers. This does not, however, preclude male members of the staff, particularly doctors and teachers, from carrying out their professional duties in institutions or parts of institutions set aside for women.

54. (1) Officers of the institutions shall not, in their relations with the prisoners, use force except in self-defence or in cases of attempted escape, or active or passive physical resistance to an order based on law or regulations. Officers who have recourse to force must use no more than is strictly necessary and must report the incident immediately to the director of the institution.

(2) Prison officers shall be given special physical training to enable them to restrain aggressive prisoners.

(3) Except in special circumstances, staff performing duties which bring them into direct contact with prisoners should not be armed. Furthermore, staff should in no circumstances be provided with arms unless they have been trained in their use.

Inspection

55. There shall be a regular inspection of penal institutions and services by qualified and experienced inspectors appointed by a competent authority. Their task shall be in particular to ensure that these institutions are administered in accordance with existing laws and regulations and with a view to bringing about the objectives of penal and correctional services.

Part II
RULES APPLICABLE TO SPECIAL CATEGORIES
A. Prisoners under sentence
Guiding principles

56. The guiding principles hereafter are intended to show the spirit in which penal institutions should be administered and the purposes at which they should aim, in accordance with the declaration made under Preliminary Observation 1 of the present text.

57. Imprisonment and other measures which result in cutting off an offender from the outside world are afflictive by the very fact of taking from the person the right of self-determination by depriving him of his liberty. Therefore the prison system shall not, except as incidental to justifiable segregation or the maintenance of discipline, aggravate the suffering inherent in such a situation.

58. The purpose and justification of a sentence of imprisonment or a similar measure deprivative of liberty is ultimately to protect society against crime. This end can only be achieved if the period of imprisonment is used to ensure, so far as possible, that upon his return to society the offender is not only willing but able to lead a law-abiding and self-supporting life.

59. To this end, the institution should utilize all the remedial, educational, moral, spiritual and other forces and forms of assistance which are appropriate and available, and should seek to apply them according to the individual treatment needs of the prisoners.

60. (1) The regime of the institution should seek to minimize any differences between prison life and life at liberty which tend to lessen the responsibility of the prisoners or the respect due to their dignity as human beings.

(2) Before the completion of the sentence, it is desirable that the necessary steps be taken to ensure for the prisoner a gradual return to life in society. This aim may be achieved, depending on the case, by a pre-release regime organized in the same institution or in another appropriate institution, or by release on trial under some kind of supervision which must not be entrusted to the police but should be combined with effective social aid.

61. The treatment of prisoners should emphasize not their exclusion from the community, but their continuing part in it. Community agencies should, therefore, be enlisted wherever possible to assist the staff of the institution in the task of social rehabilitation of the prisoners. There should be in connection with every institution social workers charged with the duty of maintaining and improving all desirable relations of a prisoner with his family and with valuable social agencies. Steps should be taken to safeguard, to the maximum extent compatible with the law and the sentence, the rights relating to civil interests, social security rights and other social benefits of prisoners.

62. The medical services of the institution shall seek to detect and shall treat any physical or mental illnesses or defects which may hamper a prisoner's rehabilitation. All necessary medical, surgical and psychiatric services shall be provided to that end.

63. (1) The fulfilment of these principles requires individualization of treatment and for this purpose a flexible system of classifying prisoners in groups; it is therefore desirable that such groups should be distributed in separate institutions suitable for the treatment of each group.

(2) These institutions need not provide the same degree of security for every group. It is desirable to provide varying degrees of security according to the needs of different groups. Open institutions, by the very fact that they provide no physical security against escape but rely on the self-discipline of the inmates, provide the conditions most favourable to rehabilitation for carefully selected prisoners.

(3) It is desirable that the number of prisoners in closed institutions should not be so large that the individualization of treatment is hindered. In some countries it is considered that the population of such institutions should not exceed five hundred. In open institutions the population should be as small as possible.

(4) On the other hand, it is undesirable to maintain prisons which are so small that proper facilities cannot be provided.

64. The duty of society does not end with a prisoner's release. There should, therefore, be governmental or private agencies capable of lending the released prisoner efficient after-care directed towards the lessening of prejudice against him and towards his social rehabilitation.

Treatment

65. The treatment of persons sentenced to imprisonment or a similar measure shall have as its purpose, so far as the length of the sentence permits, to establish in them the will to lead law-abiding and self-supporting lives after their release and to fit them to do so. The treatment shall be such as will encourage their self-respect and develop their sense of responsibility.

66. (1) To these ends, all appropriate means shall be used, including religious care in the countries where this is possible, education, vocational guidance and training, social casework, employment counselling, physical development and strengthening of moral character, in accordance with the individual needs of each prisoner, taking account of his social and criminal history, his physical and mental capacities and aptitudes, his personal temperament, the length of his sentence and his prospects after release.

(2) For every prisoner with a sentence of suitable length, the director shall receive, as soon as possible after his admission, full reports on all the matters referred to in the foregoing paragraph. Such reports shall always include a report by a medical officer, wherever possible qualified in psychiatry, on the physical and mental condition of the prisoner.

(3) The reports and other relevant documents shall be placed in an individual file. This file shall be kept up to date and classified in such a way that it can be consulted by the responsible personnel whenever the need arises.

Classification and individualization

67. The purposes of classification shall be:

( a ) To separate from others those prisoners who, by reason of their criminal records or bad characters, are likely to exercise a bad influence;

( b ) To divide the prisoners into classes in order to facilitate their treatment with a view to their social rehabilitation.

68. So far as possible separate institutions or separate sections of an institution shall be used for the treatment of the different classes of prisoners.

69. As soon as possible after admission and after a study of the personality of each prisoner with a sentence of suitable length, a programme of treatment shall be prepared for him in the light of the knowledge obtained about his individual needs, his capacities and dispositions.

Privileges

70. Systems of privileges appropriate for the different classes of prisoners and the different methods of treatment shall be established at every institution, in order to encourage good conduct, develop a sense of responsibility and secure the interest and co-operation of the prisoners in their treatment.

Work

71. (1) Prison labour must not be of an afflictive nature.

(2) All prisoners under sentence shall be required to work, subject to their physical and mental fitness as determined by the medical officer.

(3) Sufficient work of a useful nature shall be provided to keep prisoners actively employed for a normal working day.

(4) So far as possible the work provided shall be such as will maintain or increase the prisoners, ability to earn an honest living after release.

(5) Vocational training in useful trades shall be provided for prisoners able to profit thereby and especially for young prisoners.

(6) Within the limits compatible with proper vocational selection and with the requirements of institutional administration and discipline, the prisoners shall be able to choose the type of work they wish to perform.

72. (1) The organization and methods of work in the institutions shall resemble as closely as possible those of similar work outside institutions, so as to prepare prisoners for the conditions of normal occupational life.

(2) The interests of the prisoners and of their vocational training, however, must not be subordinated to the purpose of making a financial profit from an industry in the institution.

73. (1) Preferably institutional industries and farms should be operated directly by the administration and not by private contractors.

(2) Where prisoners are employed in work not controlled by the administration, they shall always be under the supervision of the institution's personnel. Unless the work is for other departments of the government the full normal wages for such work shall be paid to the administration by the persons to whom the labour is supplied, account being taken of the output of the prisoners.

74. (1) The precautions laid down to protect the safety and health of free workmen shall be equally observed in institutions.

(2) Provision shall be made to indemnify prisoners against industrial injury, including occupational disease, on terms not less favourable than those extended by law to free workmen.

75. (1) The maximum daily and weekly working hours of the prisoners shall be fixed by law or by administrative regulation, taking into account local rules or custom in regard to the employment of free workmen.

(2) The hours so fixed shall leave one rest day a week and sufficient time for education and other activities required as part of the treatment and rehabilitation of the prisoners.

76. (1) There shall be a system of equitable remuneration of the work of prisoners.

(2) Under the system prisoners shall be allowed to spend at least a part of their earnings on approved articles for their own use and to send a part of their earnings to their family.

(3) The system should also provide that a part of the earnings should be set aside by the administration so as to constitute a savings fund to be handed over to the prisoner on his release.

Education and recreation

77. (1) Provision shall be made for the further education of all prisoners capable of profiting thereby, including religious instruction in the countries where this is possible. The education of illiterates and young prisoners shall be compulsory and special attention shall be paid to it by the administration.

(2) So far as practicable, the education of prisoners shall be integrated with the educational system of the country so that after their release they may continue their education without difficulty.

78. Recreational and cultural activities shall be provided in all institutions for the benefit of the mental and physical health of prisoners.

Social relations and after-care

79. Special attention shall be paid to the maintenance and improvement of such relations between a prisoner and his family as are desirable in the best interests of both.

80. From the beginning of a prisoner's sentence consideration shall be given to his future after release and he shall be encouraged and assisted to maintain or establish such relations with persons or agencies outside the institution as may promote the best interests of his family and his own social rehabilitation.

81. (1) Services and agencies, governmental or otherwise, which assist released prisoners to re-establish themselves in society shall ensure, so far as is possible and necessary, that released prisoners be provided with appropriate documents and identification papers, have suitable s and work to go to, are suitably and adequately clothed having regard to the climate and season, and have sufficient means to reach their destination and maintain themselves in the period immediately following their release.

(2) The approved representatives of such agencies shall have all necessary access to the institution and to prisoners and shall be taken into consultation as to the future of a prisoner from the beginning of his sentence.

(3) It is desirable that the activities of such agencies shall be centralized or co-ordinated as far as possible in order to secure the best use of their efforts.

B. Insane and mentally abnormal prisoners

82. (1) Persons who are found to be insane shall not be detained in prisons and arrangements shall be made to remove them to mental institutions as soon as possible.

(2) Prisoners who suffer from other mental diseases or abnormalities shall be observed and treated in specialized institutions under medical management.

(3) During their stay in a prison, such prisoners shall be placed under the special supervision of a medical officer.

(4) The medical or psychiatric service of the penal institutions shall provide for the psychiatric treatment of all other prisoners who are in need of such treatment.

83. It is desirable that steps should be taken, by arrangement with the appropriate agencies, to ensure if necessary the continuation of psychiatric treatment after release and the provision of social-psychiatric after-care.

C. Prisoners under arrest or awaiting trial

84. (1) Persons arrested or imprisoned by reason of a criminal charge against them, who are detained either in police custody or in prison custody (jail) but have not yet been tried and sentenced, will be referred to as "untried prisoners" hereinafter in these rules.

(2) Unconvicted prisoners are presumed to be innocent and shall be treated as such.

(3) Without prejudice to legal rules for the protection of individual liberty or prescribing the procedure to be observed in respect of untried prisoners, these prisoners shall benefit by a special regime which is described in the following rules in its essential requirements only.

85. (1) Untried prisoners shall be kept separate from convicted prisoners.

(2) Young untried prisoners shall be kept separate from adults and shall in principle be detained in separate institutions.

86. Untried prisoners shall sleep singly in separate rooms, with the reservation of different local custom in respect of the climate.

87. Within the limits compatible with the good order of the institution, untried prisoners may, if they so desire, have their food procured at their own expense from the outside, either through the administration or through their family or friends. Otherwise, the administration shall provide their food.

88. (1) An untried prisoner shall be allowed to wear his own clothing if it is clean and suitable.

(2) If he wears prison dress, it shall be different from that supplied to convicted prisoners.

89. An untried prisoner shall always be offered opportunity to work, but shall not be required to work. If he chooses to work, he shall be paid for it.

90. An untried prisoner shall be allowed to procure at his own expense or at the expense of a third party such books, newspapers, writing materials and other means of occupation as are compatible with the interests of the administration of justice and the security and good order of the institution.

91. An untried prisoner shall be allowed to be visited and treated by his own doctor or dentist if there is reasonable ground for his application and he is able to pay any expenses incurred.

92. An untried prisoner shall be allowed to inform immediately his family of his detention and shall be given all reasonable facilities for communicating with his family and friends, and for receiving visits from them, subject only to restrictions and supervision as are necessary in the interests of the administration of justice and of the security and good order of the institution.

93. For the purposes of his defence, an untried prisoner shall be allowed to apply for free legal aid where such aid is available, and to receive visits from his legal adviser with a view to his defence and to prepare and hand to him confidential instructions. For these purposes, he shall if he so desires be supplied with writing material. Interviews between the prisoner and his legal adviser may be within sight but not within the hearing of a police or institution official.

D. Civil prisoners

94. In countries where the law permits imprisonment for debt, or by order of a court under any other non-criminal process, persons so imprisoned shall not be subjected to any greater restriction or severity than is necessary to ensure safe custody and good order. Their treatment shall be not less favourable than that of untried prisoners, with the reservation, however, that they may possibly be required to work.

E. Persons arrested or detained without charge

95. Without prejudice to the provisions of article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, persons arrested or imprisoned without charge shall be accorded the same protection as that accorded under part I and part II, section C. Relevant provisions of part II, section A, shall likewise be applicable where their application may be conducive to the benefit of this special group of persons in custody, provided that no measures shall be taken implying that re-education or rehabilitation is in any way appropriate to persons not convicted of any criminal offence.

RULE 11: Maricopa County, AZ Legislature, and Competency.

An informative - and troubling - reprint from the Winter 2007 journal issue of "CorrectCare," by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care. People should not be so brutalized for having a mental illness and being too poor to bond out to see a private shrink. We're far too casual about stealing chunks of people's lives like that - it's as if we assume that because they're mentally ill and/or poor their time is of no value to them, their community, or their families anyway - as if their lives have no value, essentially.

THAT's criminal.


This article came out three years ago, by the way - before the county jails lost their health care accreditation. And we know that mental health services in this state just took a huge hit. What a bunch of short-sighted, self-interested idiots we have in the legislature, "saving" our money by selling both our public property and our people's welfare to the highest bidder.

Expect the jails and prisons to swell even more folks - we're going to pay a hell of a lot more to store people there than we would have to treat them in the community or hospital and assure that they have housing (one big reason people are arrested for trespassing is lack of their own home and bathroom).

So much for our government's commitment to keeping us "safe" - it's the Arizona state government we're most endangered by now. Perhaps some of them should be detained for competency hearings...I have an idea of who to start with.

Those of you who have more recent experience with Rule 11, please contact us so we can make sure others are informed on current conditions.


----------------------------

Restoring Competency: One County’s Solution
By Lindy Funkhouser, JD

In the spring of 2003, Ruben D.* appeared in a Maricopa County Superior Court room. Ruben was chronically mentally ill. His illness got particularly bad one day, leading to an arrest for disorderly conduct and trespassing. Ruben couldn’t make the $300 bail so he had to remain in jail until the court disposed of his charges.

On this day, after Ruben had spent about 60 days in jail, he and 15 other inmates were pulled from their cells to attend 2 ½ hours of a court calendar for defendants with “legal competency” issues. Some months ago, Ruben’s attorney had asked the court to evaluate his ability to understand his charges and to assist in his defense. In Arizona this is called a Rule 11 evaluation, for the Arizona Criminal Rule of Court that governs competency determinations.

In the Maricopa County justice system, Rule 11 was so well-known that it became a colloquial expression, as in “My attorney said I should go Rule 11 to see if it can get me off [criminal charges].” Unfortunately, Rule 11 was not a promising environment for Ruben or anyone else unlucky or gullible enough to be there. Think of George Orwell’s “1984” or Lewis Carroll’s “Alice in Wonderland.”

You see, Ruben’s attorney triggered a cumbersome and lengthy evaluation process. Ruben had to wait in jail for a court-appointed expert to prescreen him and determine whether he was appropriate for an evaluation. In other words, Ruben had to wait for an evaluation of competency to determine whether he needed an evaluation for competency. Chalk up at least 7 to 10 days for the prescreen evaluation.

As in about 75 percent of all referrals, the prescreen evaluation showed that Ruben needed to be evaluated for competency. This meant that Ruben had to wait for the court to schedule a status conference and appoint a psychiatrist and psychologist to perform a full Rule 11 evaluation. At that time in Maricopa County, the evaluators were contract providers who would arrange to meet with Ruben, review his records and write a recommendation to the court. Add another 60 to 90 days for the recommendation to land on the court’s desk.

Three Possible Findings
A competency evaluation typically leads to one of the following three recommendations:

1. Competent. This finding would mean Ruben was capable of understanding his charges. The court would assign his cases back to a trial judge without any further evaluation.

2. Incompetent/restorable. This finding would mean that although Ruben was not capable of understanding his charges, his condition was treatable. In the spring of 2003, this would mean committing him for treatment at the Arizona State Hospital.

3. Incompetent/not restorable. This finding would mean that Ruben was not capable of understanding his charges and that he could not be treated or “restored” to competency.

The evaluators in Ruben’s case picked not one but two of the recommendations; one said he was incompetent/not restorable and the other said he was incompetent/restorable. This meant that Ruben had to wait for a third evaluation, a tiebreaker. This drastically delayed Ruben’s case, adding about 45 to 60 days to his stay in the jail.

By this time, Ruben had waited in line for the court to consider the prescreen report, appoint the initial evaluators and then appoint a third evaluator. In all, Ruben had to wait six months before the court could determine whether he needed competency restoration treatment. Already, Ruben’s incarceration was longer than his likely sentence for disorderly conduct and trespassing.

The tiebreaker evaluation found Ruben was incompetent but restorable. The court promptly committed Ruben to be treated at the Arizona State Hospital.

But Ruben would not be treated soon. His name was placed on a list of 50 inmates who were waiting for an open bed to commence treatment at the hospital. This meant Ruben would likely wait another 60 to 90 days.

State Hospital was no picnic for mentally ill patients like Ruben. The hospital did not classify or restrict mobility of inmates based on their dangerousness or the nature of their charges. Ruben would be placed in the same dormitory setting as dangerous inmates who had skillfully faked a mental illness to avoid trial and sentencing. These patients occasionally attacked and injured other inmates and hospital staff.

Treatment at State Hospital was expensive. The average cost to restore a Maricopa County inmate was about $30,000. Multiply that cost by 250 inmates for the fiscal year and the full cost for Maricopa County restorations was $7,500,000.

The county had been relatively indifferent to this cost because the state paid half of the bill. But the 2003 legislature decided to eliminate the subsidy to make up for shortfalls in the state budget. In the 2004 fiscal year, Maricopa County projected that 300 inmates would need restoration services. This demand, coupled with elimination of the state’s subsidy, threatened to increase Maricopa County’s costs by $5,750,000.

Exploring the Concepts
Many excellent articles and legal opinions have explored and debated the concepts involved in legal competency. The authorities generally agree that legal competency concerns certain fundamental rights in the United States judicial system. For example, a defendant accused of crime is entitled to competent counsel under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. This right to effective assistance of counsel means very little if the defendant is mentally incapable of using that counsel in the criminal case. Also, the Sixth Amendment provides that a defendant is entitled to know the nature of her charges. This right is meaningless if the defendant is mentally incapable of understanding her charges.

The Sixth Amendment also guarantees the accused the right to a speedy and public trial. This typically means that the court must meet legal deadlines to resolve the criminal trial as expeditiously as possible.

But speedy trial rules do not apply to a competency determination. So unless the courts and policy makers address competency in a timely manner, incompetent jail inmates will be effectively disenfranchised. Justice will be denied for the inmate who, like Ruben, is charged with a minor offense, needs mental health treatment and is unable to advocate for better treatment. All of this would happen for the cause of protecting Ruben’s constitutional rights. In such cases, justice resembles “Alice in Wonderland” and courts do not like it.

Award-Winning Solution
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors addressed the problem on June 15, 2003, and provided funds to restore inmates in the county jails. County staff established a forensic team within the Department of Correctional Health Services (CHS) composed of a psychiatrist, psychologist and three masters-level social workers.

The county developed working relationships with the county sheriff, superior court and public defenders. The presiding judge of the Superior Court authorized CHS to restore inmates on the State Hospital waiting list and worked with CHS to change court forms.

CHS implemented the Restoration to Competency (RTC) program on August 15, 2003, less than 60 days after funding by the Board of Supervisors. Social workers contacted each inmate, performed a psychosocial workup and administered a preliminary competency examination. A psychologist met each inmate and evaluated the inmate’s condition. The program employed standardized tests to identify the inmates’ cognitive deficits and strengths. The team used this information to develop a restoration plan tailored to each inmate’s needs.

In the early months of the program, the forensic team used jail staff psychiatrists to prescribe medications. The forensic team met weekly to review and discuss all the cases, assess each inmate’s progress and make adjustments to the restoration plan. By October, staff began attending all court competency proceedings to keep court communication at maximum levels. This process kept the staff up-to-date on all time-sensitive matters.

By late November, the program hired a psychiatrist and added a psychologist and three masters-level social workers to increase the program’s capacity.

By December, the program had diverted 63 cases from the hospital, saving the county more than $2,000,000. The waiting list shrank from 67 inmates in November 2003 to 38 in January 2004. Waiting time for treatment decreased from 90 days to less than 60 days.

By July 2004, Maricopa County assumed virtually all restoration cases and brought all restoration costs under budget, including costs of State Hospital admissions. The Maricopa County RTC program received a National Association of Counties 2004 Achievement Award “in recognition of an innovative program which contributes to and enhances county government in the United States.”

The Maricopa County RTC experience suggests that an organization can adopt innovative solutions to manage and control its costs. Providing services in the jail allowed the county to implement management strategies that improved timeliness and effectiveness of the services. It proved that customized services for the mentally ill could be cost-effective.

In the meantime, the rights of inmates, like Ruben, are better aligned with the spirit of the law.

* This person is fictional.

— About the author: Lindy Funkhouser, JD, is the director of Maricopa County Correctional Health Services, Phoenix, AZ.

[This article first appeared in the Winter 2007 issue of CorrectCare.]

Anarchists erect border in Downtown Phoenix

Remember all those protest photos I posted a few days ago? Many of the signs I shot around town were from last Sunday morning, April 25. From Anarchistnews.org, here's a good account of what happened the night before I went for that main walk. It doesn't seem like a week has already elapsed; I meant to write something sooner as I was sure the mainstream press never picked it up.



Fortunately, my friend at Chaparral Respects No Borders found and posted the following article on her own site, which I just hit. It's better than what I would have come up with, and comes straight from the source. You should really check out my friend's blog, by the way. She regularly challenges me to think beyond my own conceptual framework for how things are, and to imagine new possibilities for social organization that most would say are out of reach. If we don't stretch ourselves, then they will forever be out of reach.

Anyway, I was present and accounted for by the Phoenix Police with this crowd last Saturday night (these folks kept holding up their banner for passers by while the cops were getting all our names - I think it said NO 1070 / No Border).

I sort of tag along with the anarchists sometimes; I'm kind of old and slow to keep up with them most days, and still too ignorant and inarticulate to call myself an anarchist, though I can't think of anything but Quakerism that comes closer to what I believe, politically, than what I've learned about anarchy this year.

They aren't all pacifists by any means, but they are definitely for human rights and universal liberation, and these folks have the same depth of conviction that I've seen among Quakers. They will risk jail or worse for what they believe in - and they don't latch onto causes or movements just because they're popular: they've been resisting this shit all along in a whole bunch of creative ways - including blogging. Their characterization of SB 1070 as "violent" is right on.

The charge against our friend, by the way, was indeed ridiculous. Two cops questioned him at the same time, asking different things. He said he didn't have ID (I think we all went undocumented); he wasn't refusing to identify himself. He just got a real SOB of a cop on his case who apparently wanted to bust at least one of us for something, and had nothing but that to go on. "Obstructing justice"? What BS - especially here and now. He did more than all those cops did that night to promote justice.

Anyway, while the "border" erection inconvenienced a few people, I thought it was a brilliant piece of guerrilla theatre (for which I can take absolutely no credit). It's important for America to know that there's considerable diversity of ideologies, tactics, and people among the Resistance here...

Here is one of the fliers we passed out that night:

The websites given at the bottom of the flier are listed at the top of this site for news of the local resistance...


------------------------------

Phoenix Anarchist Actions in Response to SB1070


On Friday morning, AZ governor Jan Brewer passed the newest and perhaps most violent in a succession of racist bills, 1070.

1070 means:

It is now illegal for any person to be on public or private land (meaning in any location within the state) without carrying verification proving citizenship or legal residency.

Every person must now carry proof of legal residency at all times in Arizona,and may legally be asked by any state employed to present documentation.

It is now illegal for any person to house or transport any person who cannot provide legal documentation within the United States.

It is now illegal for any person who cannot provide legal documentation to look for employment or to be employed in the state of Arizona.

1070 makes no bones about it: the bill is one of the most honest in demonstrating the progression of Arizona into the furthest depths of a Police State, and of the racism that necessitates it.

Phoenix area anarchists were quick to respond- in a matter of 2 days, a multitude of actions were organized around bringing the conflict more visibly to the streets of Phoenix (for the mainstream unaware of how issues of state racism and indigenous colonialism affect everyone).

With black flags, signs, and banners, a march of approximately 40 anarchists proceeded South on Central Avenue towards Van Buren. Pedestrians cheered as the group approached. The street, artistically peppered with messages of resistance- stickers, paintings and the like- became a ground for insurrectionary conflict as the loud cadre erected a border wall across Central Avenue: “DO NOT CROSS: VIOLATORS MIGHT GET FREE".

The business district was an obstacle course as drivers and passersby were forced to negotiate the obstruction of their space and the impediment of their movement- a burden placed daily on the shoulders of the indigenous whose land has been militarized and the undocumented- hunted daily.

As the public on Van Buren at Central were left to respond to the ruptures that their political complicity facilitated, the group rambunctiously proceeded along Van Buren to third street. “No Borders; No Nations; No Police Stations!” Chants rung about the cold concrete high rises as police suddenly and forcefully halted the march. Throwing marchers to the ground and threatening them with tasers and mace, the pigs detained the majority of march participants. The police demanded the names and birth dates of all detained at the threat of mass arrest. After approximately forty minutes all were released without charges or citation, except for one comrade who was arrested for “obstructing justice by not giving his true name”; a fabricated accusation.

Demonstrations this past week indicate an escalation in radical protest and dissent that will not be ameliorated by any form of legislation or representative polity. The popular resistance in Arizona thus identifies with anarchist principles, and Arizona anarchists locate themselves fittingly within a timely social war for total liberation.

Arizona: attack! Let’s get free.

American, not migrant, suspected in AZ rancher killing

As usual, erroneous assumptions were made that tied Krentz' murder to immigrants or drug-smugglers, justifying to many even more militarization at the border - and perhaps the public financing of private mercenary militias. God bless the people who decided to talk to the Daily Star about what's really going on with this investigation - this man's murder in March also brought enraged and undoubtedly armed ranchers to the capitol in April to support SB 1070 in droves. Every single brown-skinned migrant was scapegoated, and Krentz' murder was exploited by people like Russ Pearce to stir up more hysteria and fear. Even McCain is playing up the "immigrants=violent criminals" angle to this day - despite the evidence that it's an outright lie - and I suspect some of those who have been telling it know full well what the truth really is.


The article below still raises questions for me about accuracy. As reported this AM on our local NPR station, KJZZ, violent crime in America actually decreased at the same time to population of undocumented immigrants here doubled. The AZ Republic this weekend reported that violent crime along the border has been flat for the past ten years.  


Other data I've seen reinforces the argument that communities with higher concentrations of immigrants do not experience higher rates of crime; in fact, some communities known to have many undocumented residents are safer than those full of good old American boys. I also strongly suspect that more citizens than non-citizens in this country - definitely in this state - carry guns and are more prone to resolve conflict with violence.


--------------------------

American is focus in Krentz killing


The killing of a Southern Arizona rancher that sparked an outcry to secure the border was not random, and investigators are focusing on an American suspect, the Arizona Daily Star has learned.

High-ranking government officials with credible information spoke to the Star, citing a desire to quell the fury over illegal immigration and drug smuggling set off by the shooting death of longtime rancher Robert Krentz on March 27.

They said Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever is investigating a person in the United States, not in Mexico, in connection with the shooting.

The Star's policy is not to use unnamed sources except in instances in which the information is of high public interest.

Reached Sunday by telephone, Dever would not comment.

Krentz was found gunned down on his ranch northeast of Douglas a day after his brother reported drug-smuggling activity to the Border Patrol that led to the seizure of 290 pounds of marijuana and the arrest of eight people on the ranch.

The night of the killing, officers followed a single set of footprints to the U.S.-Mexico border, Dever said.

That sparked widespread speculation that Krentz was killed by an illegal immigrant or a drug smuggler from Mexico. In the ensuing weeks, the killing became symbolic of Arizona's porous and violent border, setting off a flurry of demands from residents, politicians and law enforcement leaders for more troops and resources to the border.

"Rob has become a martyr for this cause, a symbol," U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Hayworth said at a community meeting held on March 31 in the unincorporated community of Apache, near where the Krentz family has worked its 35,000-acre ranch for 100 years.

Many, including Dever, believe the killing propelled into law an immigration-enforcement bill passed by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Jan Brewer that has thrust Arizona into the international spotlight.

"The fact that it got passed has a lot to do with the reflection and response to the Rob Krentz murder," Dever said from Washington, D.C., on April 20 after testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

During testimony that day, Dever said Krentz "was senselessly gunned down on his own property" and that "his murderer was tracked to the Mexican border, and has since evaded capture," according to a copy of the testimony.

"We cannot sit by while our citizens are terrorized, robbed and murdered by ruthless and desperate people who enter our country illegally," Dever said.

Forty-eight hours after the killing, Dever told reporters that investigators believed the shooting was carried out by one person, but that they didn't know if it was a man or a woman, or the person's nationality. But Dever said they had reports that Krentz made reference to an "illegal alien" over a two-way radio he used to communicate with his brother while working that day on the southern part of their ranch.

"Given the location, (I) guarantee it was not somebody on their way to Walmart to go shopping," Dever said on March 29.

The Southeastern Arizona valley where Krentz was killed is a heavily trafficked people- and drug-smuggling corridor that has seen an increase in burglaries in recent years. Sheriff's investigators and most residents believe the crimes are being committed by drug smugglers heading back to Mexico.

Ranchers and residents in the valley said the Krentz killing had cemented the transformation of illegal border activity from irritating to deadly.

Politicians from both parties across the country have weighed in on the killing and proposed plans for how to protect border residents.

Dever himself has appeared in political ads for candidates advocating for more border enforcement, including a new radio spot for Sen. John McCain.

In it, Dever says, "The drug wars in Mexico spilled over into our state - burglaries, home invasions, even murder."

On StarNet: Find extensive coverage of immigration and border issues at azstarnet.com/news/local/border

Contact reporter Brady McCombs at 573-4213 or bmccombs@azstarnet.com

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Criminalization, not racial profiling, is the problem.

----From my favorite blogger in Phoenix on issues of migration and criminalization, at "Chaparral Respects no Borders". Explore the blog and I guarantee you'll think differently about some things. She's a genuine abolitionist.-------

Racial Profiling Focus is Still a Distraction

(This is an updated version of a post I made a few months back).

I keep hearing people (such as at the last anti-SB1070 rally) repeating their concerns about racial profiling as if this is the main problem with the bill. Racial profiling is a legal term and is against the law. Unfortunately, "illegal" immigration is also against the law. So when people talk about racial profiling, it sounds like they are only concerned with "legal" people.

I have become convinced that the focus on racial profiling is a distraction to the detriment of migrants' freedom. I am not saying racial profiling is okay, but it implies that what is wrong is that people who are being stopped because of their skin color (or other physical cues) are innocent, implying that those who have broken immigration law are not those worth our concerns. Yet, I would hope that those who claim to be allies or advocates for undocumented immigrants would not allow this idea to be promoted.

We've been hearing about racial profiling for a while. Anti-Arpaio folks have been so focused on these sweeps and the racial profiling and all that, yet only 6% of the arrests of undocumented immigrants occur out in the community, whereas the other 94% of migrants are identified for deportation when they go through the jails (and the folks in the jails are those arrested by the various police departments in the valley) (Source). (This is partly why DHS is continuing the agreements of 287(g) that involve jail checks.) Other police departments are arresting more migrants than the MCSO without these hyped-up "crime supression sweeps", as i discussed further in If Phx and Mesa PD are arresting more immigrants, why is focus on Arpaio?

Anarchists erect border in Downtown Phoenix

Remember all those photos I posted a few days ago? Many of the signs I shot around town were from last Sunday morning, April 25. From Anarchistnews.org, here's a good account of what happened the night before I went for that main walk. It doesn't seem like a week has already elapsed; I meant to write something sooner as I was sure the mainstream press never picked it up.

Fortunately, my friend at Chaparral Respects No Borders found and posted the following article on her own site, which I just hit. It's better than what I would have come up with, and comes straight from the source. You should really check out my friend's blog, by the way. She regularly challenges me to think beyond my own conceptual framework for how things are, and to imagine new possibilities for social organization that most would say are out of reach. If we don't stretch ourselves, then they will forever be out of reach.

Anyway, I was present and accounted for by the Phoenix Police with this crowd last Saturday night.
I sort of tag along sometimes; I'm kind of old and slow to keep up with them most days, and still too ignorant and inarticulate to call myself an anarchist, though I can't think of anything but Quakerism that comes closer to what I believe, politically, than what I've learned about anarchy this year. They aren't all pacifists by any means, but they are all for human rights and universal liberation, and these folks have the same depth of conviction that I've seen among Quakers. They will risk jail or worse for what they believe in - and they don't latch onto causes or movements just because they're popular: they've been resisting this shit all along in a whole bunch of creative ways - including blogging. Their characterization of SB 1070 as "violent" is right on.

The charge against our friend, by the way, was indeed ridiculous. Two cops questioned him at the same time, asking different things. He said he didn't have ID (I think we all went undocumented); he wasn't refusing to identify himself. He just got a real SOB of a cop on his case who apparently wanted to bust at least one of us for something, and had nothing but that to go on. "Obstructing justice"? What BS - especially here and now. He did more than all those cops did that night to promote justice.

Anyway, while the "border" erection inconvenienced a few people, I thought it was a brilliant piece of guerrilla theatre (for which I can take absolutely no credit). It's important for America to know that there's considerable diversity of ideologies, tactics, and people among the Resistance here...

-----------------------------
Phoenix Anarchist Actions in Response to SB1070

On Friday morning, AZ governor Jan Brewer passed the newest and perhaps most violent in a succession of racist bills, 1070.

1070 means:

It is now illegal for any person to be on public or private land (meaning in any location within the state) without carrying verification proving citizenship or legal residency.

Every person must now carry proof of legal residency at all times in Arizona,and may legally be asked by any state employed to present documentation.

It is now illegal for any person to house or transport any person who cannot provide legal documentation within the United States.


It is now illegal for any person who cannot provide legal documentation to look for employment or to be employed in the state of Arizona.

1070 makes no bones about it: the bill is one of the most honest in demonstrating the progression of Arizona into the furthest depths of a Police State, and of the racism that necessitates it.

Phoenix area anarchists were quick to respond- in a matter of 2 days, a multitude of actions were organized around bringing the conflict more visibly to the streets of Phoenix (for the mainstream unaware of how issues of state racism and indigenous colonialism affect everyone).

With black flags, signs, and banners, a march of approximately 40 anarchists proceeded South on Central Avenue towards Van Buren. Pedestrians cheered as the group approached. The street, artistically peppered with messages of resistance- stickers, paintings and the like- became a ground for insurrectionary conflict as the loud cadre erected a border wall across Central Avenue: “DO NOT CROSS: VIOLATORS MIGHT GET FREE".

The business district was an obstacle course as drivers and passersby were forced to negotiate the obstruction of their space and the impediment of their movement- a burden placed daily on the shoulders of the indigenous whose land has been militarized and the undocumented- hunted daily.

As the public on Van Buren at Central were left to respond to the ruptures that their political complicity facilitated, the group rambunctiously proceeded along Van Buren to third street. “No Borders; No Nations; No Police Stations!” Chants rung about the cold concrete high rises as police suddenly and forcefully halted the march. Throwing marchers to the ground and threatening them with tasers and mace, the pigs detained the majority of march participants. The police demanded the names and birth dates of all
detained at the threat of mass arrest. After approximately forty minutes all were released without charges or citation, except for one comrade who was arrested for “obstructing justice by not giving his true name”; a fabricated accusation.

Demonstrations this past week indicate an escalation in radical protest and dissent that will not be ameliorated by any form of legislation or representative polity. The popular resistance in Arizona thus identifies with anarchist principles, and Arizona anarchists locate themselves fittingly within a timely social war for total liberation.

Arizona: attack! Let’s get free.

Deputy shot; AZ Militia plans"Cinco De Ammo."

From Stephen Lemons' blog, "The Feathered Bastard," at the Phoenix New Times. The rally last night in Phoenix to legalize medical marijuana (a ballot initiative petition drive is underway) was timely; if pot was legalized for all and we could buy it at a pharmacy or grow our own, we could do a lot to boost Arizona's economy and tax base, and cut down on all the crime that accompanies drug-smuggling.

As for this story, we'll see how it plays out, but it looks like it's going to just be uglier than it already was. How it was determined that these guys are "possibly undocumented" - except that they are "Hispanic" - is unclear, and asserting that assumption alone at this particular time disturbs me.

I've read and heard other accounts of what happened with this deputy. It's too bad this guy was following these suspects so long in the desert alone, or they might have caught them and avoided gunfire. Since they were on foot, you'd think he could have gotten back-up with helicopters and everything before they even had a chance to spot and fire on him - especially if they were lugging a bunch of marijuana with no vehicle (how did he know what they had?).

Not that I don't believe the deputy's account; it's just a considerable amount of conjecture has been embedded in the "news" reporting of it. It doesn't appear as if he was actually able to check his suspects' documents or cargo while they were shooting at him. Reportedly, they fired about 20-30 semi-automatic weapon rounds before taking off.

I'm boycotting drug cartels, by the way, because of the violence - and would like to add to that list Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and all the other pharmaceutical pushers that exploit patients, torture animals, and kill third world "subjects" for profit, while depriving others of life-saving treatment if they can't make a buck from them. If medical progress via pharmaceuticals is a gift from God, those guys have absconded with something that belongs to all of us, and they hold our sick and dying loved ones for ransom every day. I know; I pay.

More Americans died for lack of ability to pay for health care last year, by the way, than were killed by undocumented immigrants, but you don't hear Russ Pearce or the Arizona Republican Party naming our dead as they push bills to "protect" us through the legislature - or championing our right to life.

Instead, they hoard resources stolen from the public in private tax shelters, cut more children, elderly and disabled people off of health care and social services, brutalize the teachers for protesting them, and criminalize anyone who disagrees with them. In my book, that makes the Arizona GOP both fascist and anti-American - and far more of a threat to the ordinary Arizona resident's survival than the drug cartels.

Anyway, as Lemons points out, SB1070 would have done nothing to prevent the incident with this deputy, nor would it have prevented the murder of the rancher a few weeks ago. Repealing it can prevent a considerable amount of violence being done to Arizona's Latino community, where even long-standing citizens are learning that it's never safe to call the cops.

Never mind that violence rates along the border have in fact remained flat for the past ten years. Every Latino-looking male in this state, today, is a suspect in this deputy's shooting, of course, and is presumed, as usual, to be in the US illegally. The Minutemen and militia extremists, (what a bunch of nuts. Just for the record, I saw no "feral foreign invaders rioting" at the capitol this week) and nativists like Shawna Forde (who murdered a Latino family several months ago) are going to pick up on this incident with delight and use it as an excuse to perpetrate more violence against the rest of us, be it with their laws or their guns, or both.

Arizona Militia units are on "Ribbon Status" now, by the way, and they've called for citizens to go out and buy five boxes of ammunition to celebrate "Cinco de Ammo" on the 5th of May. Those guys are scarier than the cops. Some might even BE cops. What could they possibly be planning to do with their guns and ammo? Are they going to shoot us all in the streets for resisting their right-wing rule?

Fuck them. They are deeply disturbed. Those people do not stand for America; they only stand for themselves. In any event, I'm with the guy who says "I'm Mexican. Pull me over", and am still going undocumented. We have to stop these people here.


------------------------------

Pinal County Sheriff's Deputy Shot By Suspected Drug Runners/Illegal Immigrants



PCSOBanner.jpg

A Pinal County Sheriff's Deputy was shot and wounded today by suspected drug runners smuggling an unknown quantity of marijuana through the desert.

The Pinal County Sheriff's Office identified the injured Deputy as Louie Puroll, 53, a fifteen year veteran of the department. PCSO spokeswoman Lt. Tamatha Villar said that Puroll was doing well, and had been transported to Casa Grande Regional Medical Center for treatment.

She described his injury as a "grazing wound" on the left side of his body above the kidney. Puroll identified the weapon as a high-powered assault rifle, possibly an AK-47.

Puroll was on patrol in the desert when he came across "five Hispanic males, possibly undocumented" transporting a load of marijuana.

He also saw two long gun rifles on them, according to Villar. They fired on Puroll. Puroll returned fire, but is not sure if he hit the suspects.

A manhunt is underway, with Pinal County being joined by the Border Patrol, MCSO, Arizona DPS, the Casa Grande Police Department, and other agencies. Villar said there was no vehicle involved. The men were on foot.

Fortunately, Puroll was not killed or injured more seriously than he was, but you can bet that this incident will become a battle cry in the ongoing debate over SB 1070, Arizona's new immigration law.

That law would have done nothing to prevent an incident like the one today. Nor would it have saved the life of southern Arizona rancher Rob Krentz, who was murdered, many believe, by drug or human smugglers.

But that won't matter for the debate, as we soon shall see.