More than 1,000 Irish prisoners have to slop out their cells every morning, writes Carol Coulter, Legal Affairs Editor
THE HIGH Court judgment finding that slopping out in Portlaoise Prison did not violate a prisoner’s constitutional rights does not give the Government the green light to continue the practice. It indicated that in another case, with other facts, the outcome might be different.
More than 1,000 Irish prisoners have to slop out their cells every morning, a practice that has been condemned by successive inspectors of prisons, the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and a host of other bodies. Following the discontinuation of the practice in Scotland in 2004, Ireland now has the dubious honour of being the only country in western Europe where it continues.
The Government has acknowledged that it is unacceptable, but has no concrete plans for discontinuing it, other than a reference to the pending construction of a new prison in Thornton Hall, itself disappearing further and further into the future.
The judgment gives a graphic and disturbing description of the system of slopping out, whereby the prisoners have to urinate and defecate into a small pot, sleep with the contents overnight, have no access to running water to wash their hands and then must walk publicly with the contents to a sluice area the next day.
“I must conclude that the ventilation, sanitation and hygiene regime fell significantly below the standard one would expect at the time,” Mr Justice MacMenamin said. The excuses for not tackling the problem in 2000 begged the question “as to whether this frequently criticised aspect of incarceration in E block would have ever reached the top of the priority list”.
Despite this, he found that, on the specific facts of this case, Sean Mulligan’s constitutional rights and rights under the European Convention on Human Rights had not been violated, and he was not entitled to damages.
Mr Mulligan was a republican prisoner serving a five-year sentence in Portlaoise high security prison. He was also a spokesman for the Real IRA prisoners there. Because of the specific conditions in Portlaoise Prison he had a cell to himself, situated on a landing that was not overcrowded. He had privacy for his human functions and slopping out did not take place in crowded conditions. He was able to be out of his cell for more than 12 hours a day. While he suffered from a colorectal complaint, which the court found was exacerbated by the slopping out conditions, he did not bring this complaint to the attention of the governor or the medical authorities in Portlaoise. Had he done so, he might have sought an individual remedy, and, if it was refused, could have had a basis for legal action.
In contrast, prisoners in Mountjoy and Cork prisons, where slopping out also takes place, live in multiple occupancy cells on severely overcrowded landings, often in circumstances where prisoners spend up to 23 hours in their cells each day.
When rejecting Mr Mulligan’s claims, the judge analysed a number of cases involving sanitation conditions in prisons in Europe and the UK. Where a violation was found conditions were worse than in this case and combined with overcrowding and lack of privacy. In the Scottish case, for example, this was the case and the petitioner also spent up to 23 hours a day in his cell. The case resulted in the Scottish executive having to pay out £80 million in damages to other prisoners similarly affected.
Other Irish prisons may have more in common with the conditions in these cases than those in Portlaoise.