By PETER GREEN
The Prison Officers’ Association believes that improving the conditions at the nation’s prisons in which inmates are housed, would also improve the conditions in which prison officers are required to work.
This is the view of public relations officer of the association, Kris Guerero, in response to the court judgment in which the State has been ordered to pay out $1.9 million in compensation to five former inmates because of the terrible conditions under which they were housed at the Golden Grove Remand Prison.
In a statement, Guerero stated the following:
“It is no secret that, in recent times, the State has been required to pay compensation to inmates following legal challenges brought by their attorneys concerning, among other matters, the conditions in which inmates were housed.
There were other factors involved in some of these matters, but the condition of prison facilities and the living environment have, at times, featured prominently.
That raises an important question:
What happens after the court process?
When a court challenge identifies unacceptable conditions and the State is required to compensate affected persons, what is the next step?
Does the process end with compensation?
Or does it trigger a comprehensive assessment, investment, repair, renovation and modernisation programme aimed at ensuring that the same conditions do not continue to exist?
The Prison Officers Association is asking this question because improving the conditions in which inmates are housed also improves the conditions in which prison officers are required to work.
These are not two separate issues.
A deteriorating prison facility does not discriminate between the person being housed there and the officer reporting for duty there.
If an inmate is subjected to poor ventilation, inadequate sanitation, deteriorating infrastructure, overcrowding or other unacceptable conditions, the officer working an eight-, twelve- or twenty-four-hour shift within that same environment is exposed to the same physical environment.
So, following the various legal challenges and the concerns raised through the courts, what is the State’s plan moving forward?
We have the Port of Spain Prison — the Royal Jail — heading towards decommissioning.
But what about the facilities that will remain operational?
What is the plan for their rehabilitation and modernisation?
What is the timeline?
What resources have been allocated?
What improvements are being prioritised?
And perhaps most importantly:
Are we going to wait for another inmate to take the State to court before action is taken, or will the lessons from these cases now inform a proactive programme to improve Trinidad and Tobago’s prison infrastructure?
The Prison Officers Association believes that prison reform cannot simply be about responding after litigation.
It must also be about prevention.
Better facilities mean better conditions for inmates, safer and more dignified working environments for officers, and ultimately a more functional and modern Prison Service.
The Association must also consider whether legal action is necessary to address the conditions faced by its members.
Should the Prison Officers Association bring a class action suit against the State for similar conditions?
That question deserves serious consideration, particularly if prison officers continue to work in facilities affected by the same inadequate ventilation, sanitation problems, deteriorating infrastructure, overcrowding and other unacceptable conditions.
The question remains: after the court cases, what is the next step?
The Prison Officers Association is asking for answers — not only for inmates, but for the officers who work in these facilities EVERY SINGLE DAY.”
