1. Monitoring places of detention in New Zealand
Dr Jackie Blue
Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner

2. Overview The New Zealand context OPCAT in New Zealand
Observations about the New Zealand framework

3. New Zealand context Population 4.5m
Legislation and policy generally reflects human rights standards; issues in practice
Range of complaints and monitoring mechanisms
We have well developed law and policies which are compliant with international treaties
Biggest issue is in the practice and how the laws are applied
For instance everyone who is detained has the right to a lawyer but in prisons they screen all phone numbers to check legitimate – can take up to 2 to 3 weeks
Why we went to the muti NPM model – we already had many organisations monitoring and investigating complaints – wanted to use the existing expertise

4. New Zealand Human Rights Commission
Independent Crown entity
New Zealand’s NHRI (‘A’ Status Accreditation)
Three full time Commissioners and three part time Commissioners.
48 staff - three offices

5. Major functions Advocate and promote respect for human rights
Encourage harmonious relations between individuals and among the diverse groups in New Zealand
Advise and monitor equal employment opportunities
Provide an enquiries and complaints service
Advocate and promote respect for, & an understanding & appreciation of, human rights in New Zealand society
Encourage harmonious relations between individuals and among the diverse groups in New Zealand
Advise and monitor equal employment opportunities
provide an enquiries and complaints service
Report directly to the Prime Minister
Inquire generally into any matters that might involve an infringement of human rights
Offer dispute resolution services (mediation) to resolve individual discrimination complaint
Develop a National Plan of Action for human rights
The Commission cannot investigate or make decisions/findings on the merits of an individual discrimination complaint.
The Commission does not investigate individual allegations of torture or ill-treatment.

6. Towards preventive monitoring in New Zealand
2003
OPCAT Signed
2006 Amendments to Crimes of Torture Act 1989
2007 Designation of NPMs / OPCAT ratified
2003: OPCAT signed
Assessment of options, existing bodies, legislation & changes required
2006: Amendments to Crimes of Torture Act 1989
2007: OPCAT ratified
2007: Designation of National Preventive Mechanisms & Central NPM
OPCAT sets up a system of independent monitoring of places of detention at national and international level
The aim is to prevent torture and ill-treatment in detention.
Progressive development through constructive dialogue
the UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT) and
a National Preventive Mechanism (NPM)
An NPM can
act as an early intervention mechanism
help increase transparency and accountability
help develop standards and improve overall service delivery and efficiency, e.g. through constructive dialogue
Crimes of Torture Amendment Act – provided necessary powers to the UN Subcommittee to fulfil its functions in New Zealand
- authorised Minister of Justice to designate NPMs
- provided all necessary powers to NPMs
- required NPMs to report annually
- established a Central National Preventive Mechanism
New Zealand ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture (OPCAT) in March In accordance with New Zealand’s policy that a treaty should not be ratified until any legislation required to implement it has been passed, the Ministry of Justice investigated what legislative changes would be required to give effect to the obligations in the OPCAT, and the Crimes of Torture Amendment Bill was drafted to implement these. In the course of this exercise, officials examined a number of existing organisations with responsibilities in relation to the welfare and treatment of detained persons. However, it was also recognised that a number of changes would be required to ensure that any organisations that were designated as National Preventive Mechanisms (NPMs) met the requirements of OPCAT.
In particular, the need for NPMs to
be functionally independent
be comprised of experts with the required capabilities and professional knowledge and strive for gender balance and adequate representation of minority and ethnic groups
be authorised to regularly examine the treatment of persons in places of detention
have access to all relevant information and to all places of detention, including the opportunity for private interviews with those detained and others who may have relevant information
have the authority to make recommendations to the relevant authorities
publish and disseminate annual reports
be adequately resourced
have the right to make contact with the Subcommittee.
Officials were also mindful of concerns that if a number of organisations were designated as NPMs, the designation of a central coordinating body may be advisable. It was proposed that the New Zealand Human Rights Commission undertake this role.
Crimes of Torture Amendment Act
The enabling legislation was passed by Parliament in November 2006, amending the Crimes of Torture Act 1989 to include new provisions relating to visits by the UN Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture, the establishment of NPMs, Central National Preventive Mechanism and other miscellaneous provisions.
Features of the legislation are that it:
enables the Subcommittee to exercise in New Zealand the functions and powers provided for in the OPCAT, including the right to enter and inspect places of detention, and examine such information as is necessary for the proper performance of its functions (ss 17-25)
authorises the Minister of Justice to designate various institutions as NPMs to monitor the prevention of torture in relation to specified places of detention (s26)
sets out the powers of NPMs to ensure that all designated organisations are empowered to conduct preventive visits, and access necessary information, places of detention and interview relevant people (ss 27-30)
requires the institutions designated as NPMs to produce and disseminate a publicly accessible annual report on the exercise of their functions under the OPCAT (ss 27(c), 36)
provides that a central national preventive mechanism be appointed to co-ordinate the activities of the NPMs and maintain liaison with the Convention Subcommittee (ss 31-32).

7. Designation of NPMs
Use & build on existing mechanisms – expertise, relationships, profile
Avoid duplication
Recognise different circumstances & requirements of various detention contexts
Designations of NPMs means the direction that the Minister has determined . The Minister can also direct which organisations can be NPM – doesn’t need to change the law
Use & build on existing mechanisms – expertise, relationships, profile
Avoid duplication
Recognise different circumstances & requirements of various detention contexts
Coordination – maintain cohesion & consistency
Coordination – maintain cohesion & consistency

8. Places of detention
Crimes of Torture Act includes a list of places of detention
This is not an exhaustive list/ There is scope to include dementia units and aged care facilities – and if so the HDC may be an obvious choice to be a NPM or give the Commission more funding and they can do this
17 prisons
437 police custodial facilities
5 youth justice residences
4 care and protection units for children
70 health and disability places of detention
1 immigration detention facility
1 defence force facility

9. The OPCAT National Preventive Mechanism function is carried out by five separate agencies with different areas of responsibility.
The Office of the Ombudsman
The Office of the Children's Commissioner
The Independent Police Conduct Authority
The Inspector of Penal Service Establishments
Human Rights Commission – Central NPM
NPMs designated to monitor particular places of detention

10. CNPM
The Human Rights Commission is designated as the Central National Preventive Mechanism (CNPM).
The functions of the CNPM are to coordinate the activities of the NPMs and to maintain effective liaison with the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture.
The Human Rights Commission is designated as the Central National Preventive Mechanism (CNPM).
The functions of the CNPM are to coordinate the activities of the NPMs and to maintain effective liaison with the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture.
The CNPM does provide a secretariat role for the NPMs and coordinates joint meetings and activities.
There is an agreed job description setting out the CNPM role and responsibilities.
The Commission, as CNPM, does not directly undertake monitoring activities.
WE write an annual report

11. NPM Activities
Each NPM carries out their monitoring activities very differently – even though their statutory functions are the same.
Resources range from teams of dedicated investigators to one person who spends several hours per month undertaking monitoring activities.
Approaches include:
comprehensive auditing through interviews and surveys of detainees to
monitoring regimes that include the use of “self audit” tools that are completed by detaining agencies then randomly reviewed and checked by the NPM
NOTE CYPF says that the CYF monitoring is the same as OPCAT monitoring but it isn’t and they say it is not a core function

12. Recent NPM/CNPM activities
Prepared joint NPM submissions for NZ UN CAT and UPR reviews
Facilitated meetings between NPMs and the UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and the UN Arbitrary Detention Working Group
UN Arbitary Detention Working Group and SPT very similar work and is duplicaiton in some areas. Not a huge difference
Followed up with Government agencies re: monitoring of SPT / ADWG/ CAT recommendations
Facilitated a meeting between NPMs, civil society organisations and advocacy groups
Prepared a joint briefing to the incoming Minister of Justice following the 2014 general election
Prepared joint submissions to Parliament on proposed legislative changes
Developed an agreed NPM Identity Statement, Publication Policy and Information Policy

13. Values and Impacts Strengthened mechanisms Building relationships
Improved awareness & understanding of human rights & OPCAT
Strengthened mechanisms
Building relationships
Value recognised
Practical improvements
Individual situations
Improvements within institution
Nationwide initiatives
BENEFITS OF MULTI NPM
Improved awareness & understanding of human rights & OPCAT
Strengthened mechanisms
Building relationships
Value recognised
Practical improvements
Individual situations
Improvements within institution
Nationwide initiatives
ALSO BY BRINGING THESE GROUPS TOGTHER IT IS A MORE POWERFUL VOICE

14. Challenges for NPMs/CNPM
Difficulty identifying issues of significant mutual benefit for all NPMs due to the different detention contexts
Lack of clarity around the scope of the OPCAT mandate (gaps: aged care residences and overlap: youth justice residences)
Overlap between NPM agency core business and OPCAT activities
Challenges for NPMs/CNPM
Note TPA project re point 2.- MW IS OUT TORTURE PREVENTION AMBASSADOR – RESEARCH AND ADVOCACY FUNCTION ADVISORY – ON OTHER AREAS THAT NEED TO BE MONITORED
Difficulty identifying issues of significant mutual benefit for all NPMs due to the different detention contexts
Lack of clarity around the scope of the OPCAT mandate (gaps: aged care residences and overlap: youth justice residences)
Overlap between NPM agency core business and OPCAT activities
Resource and funding constraints – CNPM and NPMs
Timely access to specialist expertise for on site visits
Complexity of the multi NPM mechanism makes it hard to explain to the general public
Getting input from individuals who are / have been detained can be difficult

15. Challenges cont… Resource and funding constraints – CNPM and NPMs
Timely access to specialist expertise for on site visits
Complexity of the multi NPM mechanism makes it hard to explain to the general public
Getting input from individuals who are / have been detained can be difficult
Can bring specialist in. For instance the Ombudsman gets the catch all groups to monitor and he is not an expert in mental health

16. Multi NPM Observations
Lots of scope for learning from the experiences of the other NPMs
Important to recognise and accept NPM differences
Identify the areas where the CNPM can really “add value”
Get the core activities right – do not get too ambitious and choose key priorities carefully
Relationships between NPM chairs/ leaders are crucial
Multi NPM Observations
Lots of scope for learning from the experiences of the other NPMs
Important to recognise and accept NPM differences
Identify the areas where the CNPM can really “add value”
Get the core activities right – do not get too ambitious and choose key priorities carefully
Relationships between NPM chairs/ leaders are crucial THIS IS CRITICAL NEED BUY IN FROM LEADERS SO OPCAT CAN BE PRIORITISED IN THEIR OWN WORK PROGRAMMES
IN NZ ALL CHAIRS ARE ON BOARD

17. More Information NZ Human Rights Commission Website: www.hrc.co.nz
OPCAT: