Scholarlink

This chapter aims to challenge traditional sociolegal boundaries by integrating the intersection of policy and subdisciplines that cover criminal and penal justice, health care policy, psychiatric institutions, and human rights that are part of the CPT’s remit. It combines the study of these sociolegal fields and places of deprivation of liberty, prisons and psychiatric hospitals) with a view to analysing the nature of relations between human rights, the state’s power to punish and the control over the latter through its implementation in different detention settings with potentially different human rights protections and oversight. We particularly scrutinise the way the case law of the ECtHR on prison overcrowding has been relayed and enhanced by the CPT standards. Conversely, the ECtHR has also largely relied on them. The CPT back-up has increasingly constrained the CoE member states affected by massive prison overcrowding with the additional effect of giving more strength to the inverted panopticon. We also show that the impacts of the CPT on the prevention of detainee suicides may be translated more into coercive and punitive detention practice in three jurisdictions particularly affected by suicide in detention: the UK, Belgium and France than into an increase in the inverted panopticon. We also analyse the CPT positions on prison life sentences and the way they prolong and even go beyond the ECtHR case law. The CPT’s support given to the ECtHR case law both has increased the pressure level put on some member states and the inverted panopticon as well due to a cumulative effect both operated by the CPT and the ECtHR. Lastly, studying the intersection of policies applied to different places of detention—prisons, Forensic Psychiatric Centres, and psychiatric hospitals—and integrating the sociolegal subdisciplines that cover criminal justice, health care, and human rights illustrate the complex nature of relations between human rights and detention. We demonstrate in particular enhanced forms of “transinstitutionalisation” and “transpolicies” between prisons and psychiatric institutions.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Relay of the ECtHR by the CPT Policy Concerning Prison Overcrowding, Suicide Prevention, Life Prisoners and Mentally Ill Offenders

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Gaëtan Cliquennois

摘要

This chapter aims to challenge traditional sociolegal boundaries by integrating the intersection of policy and subdisciplines that cover criminal and penal justice, health care policy, psychiatric institutions, and human rights that are part of the CPT’s remit. It combines the study of these sociolegal fields and places of deprivation of liberty, prisons and psychiatric hospitals) with a view to analysing the nature of relations between human rights, the state’s power to punish and the control over the latter through its implementation in different detention settings with potentially different human rights protections and oversight. We particularly scrutinise the way the case law of the ECtHR on prison overcrowding has been relayed and enhanced by the CPT standards. Conversely, the ECtHR has also largely relied on them. The CPT back-up has increasingly constrained the CoE member states affected by massive prison overcrowding with the additional effect of giving more strength to the inverted panopticon. We also show that the impacts of the CPT on the prevention of detainee suicides may be translated more into coercive and punitive detention practice in three jurisdictions particularly affected by suicide in detention: the UK, Belgium and France than into an increase in the inverted panopticon. We also analyse the CPT positions on prison life sentences and the way they prolong and even go beyond the ECtHR case law. The CPT’s support given to the ECtHR case law both has increased the pressure level put on some member states and the inverted panopticon as well due to a cumulative effect both operated by the CPT and the ECtHR. Lastly, studying the intersection of policies applied to different places of detention—prisons, Forensic Psychiatric Centres, and psychiatric hospitals—and integrating the sociolegal subdisciplines that cover criminal justice, health care, and human rights illustrate the complex nature of relations between human rights and detention. We demonstrate in particular enhanced forms of “transinstitutionalisation” and “transpolicies” between prisons and psychiatric institutions.