There are various circumstances in which a person might be searched whilst in prison and different types of search that may be justified by different circumstances. Common times to be searched are on initial reception to prison, after transfer from another prison, returning to prison after ROTL or escort, following visits and when conducting a cell-search. The type of search you might get depends on things like whether you are in the high security estate, or whether you are in prison for men, women or young people. PSI 07/2016 Searching of the Person contains details of this, and we thought it would be useful to summarise some of the key points below.

There are two main types of search – rub down searches and full searches.

Rub down searches can be carried out by a single officer and must be done using open hands with fingers spread out. There are two levels of rub down search – level A and level B. Level A rub down searches include extra checks such as asking you to remove shoes, checking in your hair and looking inside your ears nose and mouth, whereas level B rub down searches do not.

Rub down searches are not intrusive searches and should not normally require you to raise or remove outer clothing. However, if the prison staff think that something may be hidden you may be asked to raise or remove outer clothing. This must always be done in private and out of sight of persons of the opposite sex.

Full searches are more in depth searches which require you to remove your clothing. They must be carried out by two officers of the same sex as the person being searched and should be out of sight of anyone else including other staff and prisoners. You should never be completely naked during a full search – staff should let you replace clothing on the top half of your body before removing items on the lower half.

Full searches of women differ from that of male prisoners and consist of Level 1 and Level 2 searches. Level 1 searches involve the removal of clothing except from underwear. Level 2 searches involve removal of all clothing including underwear. Level 2 searches should only take place if there is intelligence or suspicion that an item has been hidden.

Hand-held metal detectors may be used during a full search for men and must be used as part of a full search for women.

Prison officers are not allowed to conduct intimate searches. Searching staff may look into your mouth during a rub down or full search. If there are grounds to suspect that a male prisoner has an item hidden in an intimate area then a closer visual inspection can be undertaken as part of a full search. Male prisoners may be asked to squat during a full search, and records must be kept of when this request is made. Women must not be asked to squat under any circumstances and should not be subject to visual inspections of intimate areas.

There are a number of annexes within the PSI which cover considerations for specific groups of people.

Annex D gives guidance on searching arrangements for religious or cultural reasons. Male prisoners who have a religious or cultural reason for not being searched by a female member of staff can request that this is carried out by male staff only. It also sets out the procedure for searching of religious or cultural headwear and provisions for Muslim prisoners if they are to be searched by dogs.

Annex E says that search procedures will need to be varied according to injuries or disabilities a person has and with advice from healthcare if needed.

Annex H includes searching arrangements for transgender people in prison and states that a voluntary agreement should be put in place as to how this should be done. If you have applied for or have obtained legal recognition of the gender with which you identify you must be searched in accordance with this unless alternative arrangements are agreed. It is important to note that searches must not be conducted to determine gender.

If you would like a copy of the full Prison Service Instruction on this subject, please contact us on the details below.

You can contact the Prison Reform Trust’s advice team at FREEPOST ND6125 London EC1B 1PN. Our free information line is open 3.30pm-5.30pm on Monday and Thursday, and 10.30am-12.30pm on Wednesday. The number is 0808 802 0060 and does not need to be put on your pin.

Please note, the above article focusses on prisons in England and Wales and may not apply elsewhere.

In 2014, a small number of serious and high profile offences committed by people on temporary release led to the introduction of additional restrictions on the use of ROTL, cemented soon after in PSI 13/2015 Release on Temporary Licence. Unfortunately, these restrictions created unnecessary barriers and delays for the vast majority who made good use of ROTL to maintain family ties, take part in work and improve their resettlement – all of which contribute to reducing reoffending. At the time of these tragic incidents the overall success rate of ROTL was 99.93%. In the four years that followed the new restrictions, use of this important rehabilitative provision dropped by a third.

Advocating for better use of ROTL and a reversal of these restrictions has been one of Prison Reform Trust’s main priorities in recent years. We made recommendations through our ‘Inside Out’ briefings—the first published in 2015, the second published with Clinks in 2016, and a third in 2018. Many of the issues we raised came directly from the contact we have with people in prison through our advice and information service, as well as from the voluntary sector’s experience of offering ROTL placements.

In 2018, we welcomed the announcement by Justice Secretary David Gauke to review ROTL provision as part of employment and education strategy. Alongside governors, employers and other stakeholders, the following consultation gave us an opportunity to reiterate our recommendations. We also consulted members of our Prisoner Policy Network (PPN) who fed their views on the proposals and draft document directly to members of the policy team at HMPPS.

The new policy, Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) Policy Framework, was published and came into force in May this year. It contains a number of very welcome changes which have the potential to really improve the use of ROTL.

Here we summarise some of the main changes;

ELIGIBILITY

• There is no longer a restriction on ROTL during the first 3 months following a transfer to open conditions – often referred to as a ‘lay down’ period. This means you will be eligible for ROTL after transfer once all necessary sentence planning and risk assessments have been completed.

• Eligibility for Resettlement Day Release (RDR) therefore starts from the point of transfer to open conditions, subject to sentence plan and risk assessment. For women, you will be eligible at the point of recategorisation as ‘suitable for open conditions’.

• You are also eligible to apply for Resettlement Overnight Release (ROR) from the point of transfer to open conditions (or the point of recategorisation for open conditions for women). However you will be expected to have completed a period of successful RDRs before RORs can take place.

• Eligibility for Resettlement Day Release from closed conditions remains the same – 24 months before your effective release date OR once you have served half your custodial period, whichever gives the later date. This applies to those eligible for Standard ROTL only, as those under Restricted ROTL still need to be in open conditions for RDR (or assessed as suitable for open conditions, for women).

• Eligibility for Resettlement Overnight Release from closed conditions also remains the same – 6 months before your effective release date OR once you have served half your custodial period, whichever gives the later date. But you may now apply for one ROR per month rather than being limited to two during the last six months.

WORK PLACEMENTS

• There is no longer a requirement to do unpaid work before you can apply for paid work. You are allowed to take paid work as soon as you are eligible for RDRs. However, unpaid voluntary work will still be available for those who will benefit from it. All placements, whether paid or unpaid, must still be approved by the governor.

• Previous guidance which limited the use of work opportunities, such as those in hospitality, due to proximity to the drinking of alcohol or gambling have been removed. However, these factors are still likely to be taken into account when assessing suitability of work placements for any individual.

• It is no longer a requirement that you have to spend at least 24 hours per week in prison.

CHILDCARE RESETTLEMENT LICENCE (CRL)

• Primary carers are now allowed to apply for Childcare Resettlement Licence (CRL) as well as sole carers.

• Eligibility for CRL has also been extended to include if you have children under 18—rather than under 16 as it was previously. The policy goes further by saying that although CRL is primarily for benefit of children under 18, in some cases it may continue after the child has reached 18.

• CRL is also available more frequently for those who are eligible—a maximum of one day release per week including one period of overnight release per 28 days can be taken. The overnight release can be up to four nights.

RESTRICTED ROTL

The threshold for those subject to Restricted ROTL has been slightly reduced. It still applies to all Indeterminate Sentenced Prisoners (ISPs) and anyone currently assessed as high or very high risk of serious harm on OASys– but the ‘MAPPA Nominal’ category has been replaced by more specific categories. The list of people who are now subject to Restricted ROTL is therefore:

• Indeterminate sentence prisoners (ISPs);

• Prisoners serving Extended Determinate Sentences, or other legacy extended sentences;

• Prisoners serving sentences imposed under section 236A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (offenders of particular concern); and

• Any other offender who is currently assessed as high or very high risk of serious harm on OASys.

If you think your ROTL status may be affected by these changes you should speak to your offender supervisor at the prison to find out more.

UNACCOMPANIED ROTL

Under the new policy all prisoners, including those on Restricted ROTL, can be considered for unaccompanied ROTL without having to complete accompanied ROTL first. However, the prison may still decide accompanied ROTL is necessary in individual circumstances as a way of managing risk.

HISTORY OF ESCAPE, ABSCOND OR SERIOUS ROTL FAILURE

Under the new policy, those with a history of escape, abscond, or serious ROTL failure can now be considered for open conditions and ROTL, provided that the it occurred more than two years ago and has only occured once on your current sentence.

OTHER NOTABLE CHANGES

• The policy is now clear that you can be granted Special Purpose Licence both to visit a dying relative and to later attend their funeral. Although this was not prevented by the previous policy, we had become aware of cases in which people had unreasonably been asked to choose one or the other.

• The policy suggests that ROTL could be used to help people who are due to be released on a Friday to access the many services which they may need before they close at the weekend. This is a sensible and welcome use of ROTL—if you are eligible for RDRs and think you would benefit from this we advise putting in an application to ask about this.

The policy also aims to streamline the process by reducing the need for repeated consultation with agencies and unnecessary ROTL boards. The aim will be to agree a likely programme of ROTL at the beginning of the process, consulting with offender managers and other relevant agencies about suitability and things like key dates or locations to be avoided. Once the prison has all relevant information for the programme of ROTL being considered they only need to consult again if there are significant changes in circumstances. These improvements to the way ROTL is processed could really reduce delays and improve people’s access to ROTL.

Of course, it’s not just about policy and we are yet to see how effectively the new guidelines are put into practice. The removal of a number of unnecessary requirements leaves Governors with some discretion as to how to apply the policy locally—we hope that this will result in some sensible decisions which increase opportunities for effective ROTL. You should be provided with information about how the policy will be delivered at the prison you are in. We are already aware that at least one open prison has been proactive by providing a copy of the Policy Framework and a summary of changes to every prisoner. We hope this good practice is reflected elsewhere as well but if this is not the case and you would like a copy of the Policy Framework please contact our advice and information service using the information below. We have also updated our information sheet which contains general information about ROTL as well.

Though the changes in the new policy are a welcome and significant step in the right direction, there are still ways in which ROTL could be improved further, and we will continue to advocate for this. PRT would like to see further reversal of restrictions brought in in 2014 by abolishing Restricted ROTL, so that all decisions are made on the basis of an individual’s risk, rather than their sentence. We would also like to see much better use of ROTL from Category C prisons so that the many people held in closed conditions can benefit from the rehabilitative value of this provision.

You can contact the Prison Reform Trust’s advice team at FREEPOST ND6125 London EC1B 1PN. Our free information line is open 3.30pm–5.30pm on Monday and Thursday, and 10.30am–12.30pm on Wednesday. The number is 0808 802 0060 and does not need to be put on your pin.

In December 2018 HMPPS published a Policy Framework about Access to Digital Evidence – also referred to as ‘A2DE’ for short. It covers the provision of what was previously known as ‘Access to Justice’ equipment, such as laptops, which are available in some circumstances to help with legal proceedings.

The purpose of A2DE equipment is very specific, so it is worth making sure you understand what it is for before making a request. It is to provide prisoners with access to digital equipment required ‘to view electronic disclosure by the Crown as evidence for the prosecution in any legal case’. It is not for reading correspondence from legal advisers as this would be subject to Rule 39 – this will be provided in paper format as usual. It is not for legal research or preparing submissions to court – though there are some considerations for people may have difficulty with writing by hand, which we mention below.

If you think you need A2DE equipment you can make a request by completing the application form found at Annex G of the Policy Framework – you can ask staff for a copy of this or contact our service using the details at the bottom of this article. The application form asks you to give details about why you need the equipment, why the evidence cannot be viewed during a legal visit and if you have any medical conditions which should be taken into account.

When considering a request, the Policy Framework says that Governors must consider whether you will be genuinely disadvantaged without access to the appropriate equipment. The decision to give access to A2DE equipment must be balanced against security and safety concerns. If your legal work can be adequately conducted with paper and pen then it’s likely you will be expected to do so.

Annex A of the document gives more information about when A2DE equipment may be considered. The following are examples of things that an application may be approved for; to view evidence submitted by The Crown which is too large to be viewed in paper form or during a legal visit; if you have a disability which makes viewing the evidence in paper format difficult; if the defence is complex or requires investigation of data which could not easily be done without A2DE equipment; if the information is sensitive and in a format which could only be viewed using A2DE equipment; or if you are appealing against conviction, you have a live appeal with a valid appeals court number, and new additional disclosure is available.

The following are examples of reasons why an application may not be approved; if it is for typing letters to your legal team; if it is to view video evidence which could be viewed on a DVD player or during legal visits; if it is only to listen to audio evidence which could be listened to on a CD player; if you are not able to use the equipment; if you are an appellant appealing against sentence not conviction, where no additional disclosure is submitted; if it is to prepare an application for appeal.

Usually the equipment provided will not have write-access enabled, which means it cannot be used to type things like submissions for your case. The Policy Framework references the case of Ponting v Whitemoor, which states that there is no requirement laid down by the Court that written submissions had to be in typed format or to reach a certain level of English. It also references R v Kenyon, in which the Court of Appeal concluded that conditions imposed by the prison authorities on the use of a computer by a prisoner in connection with litigation did not breach his human rights.

There is an exception if refusing to provide equipment would raise a real risk of prejudicing legal proceeds – for example, if someone has a disability which makes writing by hand difficult. In these cases, an electronic typewriter might be provided instead of a laptop for this purpose.

If your application is approved you will be asked to sign a compact which includes the conditions of using the equipment. We recommend reading this carefully and asking staff if you are not clear about anything. If you would like a copy of the Policy Framework, please contact our service on the details below and we will be happy to send it to you.

You can contact the Prison Reform Trust’s advice team at FREEPOST ND6125 London EC1B 1PN. Our free information line is open Monday, Tuesday and Thursday 3.30-5.30. The number is 0808 802 0060 and does not need to be put on your pin.

From the start of February 2019, an updated instruction comes into effect which covers adjudications – PSI 05/2018 Prisoner Discipline Procedures (Adjudications). This replaces PSI 47/2011 which previously dealt with the subject. It also has also been combined with policy on recovering money for damages to prisons and prison property, previously in PSI 31/2013 which is also cancelled as a result.

The summary explains that the new document is the first stage in a process of reviewing adjudications in prison which will eventually result in a Policy Framework on the subject – the new form of guidance documents which we have mentioned in recent articles. Prison Reform Trust expect to be consulted on the development of adjudications policy in the meantime so, as always, would welcome any views or experiences you are willing to share on the subject.

This stage of the review has not radically changed overall discipline procedures, so it should remain familiar to anyone who previously understood it. Some of the changes reflect bulletins to governors since the last update and so should have already been put into practice. Helpfully, there is a table of amendments included in Annex G of the PSI which mean that you can check where the changes have been made. The following are some of the most significant amendments:

• The PSI includes detail about the use of CCTV or Body Worn Video Camera (BWVC) footage as evidence for adjudications. The prison should allow evidence of this type to be viewed by yourself and any legal adviser at the prison, with failure to allow this likely to lead to any guilty finding being quashed. If there is a reason for not allowing you to view the footage, perhaps for security or data protection reasons, then the footage cannot be used as evidence to support any adjudication.

• In relation to Incentives and Earned Privileges, it says that ‘adjudicators should consider requesting a review of any IEP action where a prisoner is found not guilty at an adjudication in relation to the same incident’.

• There are some added equality considerations, such as accounting for mobility difficulties or other disabilities in relation to hearing room layout, and considering literacy and language difficulties to make sure someone understands what is happening.

Annex A still contains details of adjudication procedures. Some notable changes include:

• There is additional emphasis on the point that ‘threat of punishment must not form part of the prison strategy for dealing with self-harm or attempted self-harm’.
  There are added prompts for adjudicators to check fitness for hearing as a standard part of adjudication procedures.

• When considering punishment, it clarifies adjudicators responsibility to consider risk factors in open ACCTs or ACCTs closed within the last 3 months.

• It clarifies that discipline procedures should continue when someone transfers prison before a hearing, and that adjudication paperwork should be sent to the receiving prison for this to happen.

• There are clear references to staff responsibilities to hand particular forms to prisoners, such as the DIS 7 which gives details of punishments given.

• It includes further detail about the principles of natural justice in relation to length of time for adjournments, but no longer includes the 6 week guideline.

Annex B now contains guidance about different charges, including the wording which should be used to lay the charge and proof to be considered. The following guidance has been added:

• Guidance that foreign national prisoners and detainees can have charges laid against them for not complying with Home Office Requirements – for example, refusing to attend a pre-arranged interview with the Home Office.

• Advice to staff about charging people who have assisted in drone related activity or been non-compliant with smoke-free policy.

• Advice to staff that prisoners who permit photographs to be taken of them in prison and/or allow a photograph to be uploaded onto social networking sites can be charged with failing to comply with rules, but only if a local document exists making it clear that this is a rule.

• Charges have been updated to reflect an amendment to Prison and YOI Rules which means someone can be charged if a substance is found in their urine that demonstrates that a controlled drug or specified drug has been administered. A list of substances relating to ‘specified drugs’ can be found in the Prison and YOI Rules.

If you would like a copy of the new PSI please feel free to contact us and we would be happy to send it to you. If you are not familiar with adjudications process we can also provide you with general information to help you gain a better understanding about what should happen.

You can contact the Prison Reform Trust’s advice team at FREEPOST ND6125 London EC1B 1PN. Our free information line is open 3.30pm-5.30pm on Monday and Thursday, and 10.30am-12.30pm on Wednesday. The number is 0808 802 0060 and does not need to be put on your pin.

In June 2018, the Ministry of Justice published their Female Offender Strategy which embraces the case for a specific approach to women, whose offending is more likely to be affected by domestic abuse, coercive relationships and unmet health and social care needs, and who are more likely than men to be primary carers of children. The strategy acknowledges that for these reasons outcomes for women in custody can be even worse than for men. The government has promised to reduce the use of short prison sentences (nearly half of all women given a prison sentence are sentenced to less than 6 months) and increase the use of community sentences that would come with support.

As part of the implementation of the Strategy, the policy document covering women in prison – Prison Service Order (PSO) 4800 Women Prisoners – has been reviewed and replaced by the Women’s Policy Framework. This Policy Framework includes requirements and guidance about how women should be treated and supported not only in prisons but also in the community by probation services and courts as well.

The Policy Framework includes outcomes that Governors of women’s prisons should be aiming to achieve. Women should be held in “trauma-informed” conditions where they feel safe and which meet their specific resettlement needs. Staff working with women should be given training to give them a better understanding of women’s needs and circumstances. Women in prison should be able to access education, learning and skills provision, including in relation to parenting. They should also be able to access physical and mental health services that meet their needs. Prisons should also be working to identify and provide appropriate support to women who are at risk of or who have experienced domestic abuse, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, sex work, human trafficking and other forms of abuse.

There are a number of measures included to help women meet challenges in relation to family relationships and childcare. While in prison, women should be given help and support to maintain family ties, and wherever possible be held in a prison which best enables them to do this. Prisons should have a ‘Family and Significant Other Strategy’ in place which explains how they aim to help women maintain these relationships. This should be made available to prisoners, staff and all visitors. There is more information about this in a recently published Strengthening Prisoners Family Ties Policy Framework, which also applies to men’s prisons and which we will write about in more detail in the coming months.

Support should be available for women who are separated from their children, including those experiencing loss or bereavement. Pregnant women and women with children under 18 months should be made aware of the benefits of Mother and Baby Units (MBU’s) and offered help to make an application if they want to. There is further information about this in PSI 49/2014 Mother and Baby Units. There is also a DVD that women could request to view in prison about what mothers should know if they are subject to imprisonment. As in the previous PSO, pregnant women should not be transported in cellular vehicle other than in the exceptional case that a healthcare professional has assessed it as acceptable.

Although much of prison policy and procedures detailed in current PSOs and PSIs apply to both men and women, there are some clear distinctions in practice, which the Policy Framework references. For example, searching procedures for women differ from those in the male estate, particularly in relation to a full search. PSI 07/2016 Searching of the Person sets out the differences, which we have also summarised in our information sheet on the subject. Similarly, women are subject to different Categorisation system than men, with only open and closed prisons within the estate. This continues to be covered by PSI 39/2011 Categorisation and recategorisation of Women prisoners.

There are some matters that were covered in the previous PSO but are no longer in the Policy Framework. Some of these are reasonably represented elsewhere because they apply to policy covering both the women’s and men’s estate. Others are more concerning in their absence. For example, the previous policy stated that women do not need to wear prison issue clothing, recognising that ‘part of the rehabilitation for many women prisoners involves the ability to maintain and raise self-esteem’. This is not included in the Policy Framework, due to change to policy was introduced in 15 November 2018 which means that all convicted prisoners, including prisoners in the women’s estate, must wear prison-issue clothing unless Governors decide some or all of their that the convicted prisoners in their prison can wear their own clothes as part of the IEP scheme. We are not yet aware of any change in practice as a result, but PRT will continue to advocate for the importance of women being allowed to wear their own clothing, and for any policy shift to extend this to the male estate as well – rather than the other way around.

If you would like a copy of the Women’s Policy Framework or any other documents mentioned in this article, or if you have any questions, please feel free to contact us using the details below.

You can contact the Prison Reform Trust’s advice team at FREEPOST ND6125 London EC1B 1PN. Our free information line is open 3.30pm-5.30pm on Monday and Thursday, and 10.30am-12.30pm on Wednesday. The number is 0808 802 0060 and does not need to be put on your pin.

Please note, the above article focusses on prisons in England and Wales and may not apply elsewhere.

In November 2016 the Justice Secretary, then Liz Truss, announced 2500 additional prison officers as part of the Prison Safety and Reform white paper. This included ‘new dedicated officers, each responsible for supervising and supporting around six offenders’. Two justice secretaries later, and this approach has become part of what is now known as ‘Offender Management in Custody’ – or ‘OMiC’ for short.

In their annual report this year, HMPPS described OMiC as a key part of the response to self-inflicted deaths, self-harm and violence in prison. It is intended to improve safety by engaging with people, building better relationships between staff and prisoners and helping people settle in to life in prison. We understand that the keyworker model has currently been rolled out in about 15 prisons, with the aim for it to be rolled out across the male closed estate by next summer.

HMPPS has published a supporting document ‘Manage the Custodial Sentence Policy Framework’. It gives more details about how the keyworker system should work. Its states: