Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

27. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality her views on the report of the Inspector of Prisons on the prisoner complaints system Review, Evaluation and Analysis of the Operation of the present Irish Prison Service Complaints Procedure, which identified a number of significant concerns regarding the implementation of the complaints procedure in prisons; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [17141/16]

Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Insert questionThe current statutory complaints procedure for prisoners was introduced in 2013 following on from recommendations made by the Inspector in 2012. It was an improvement over the pre-existing procedures and provided for an independent element in the investigation of serious complaints. Details of that system are further outlined in my response to Dáil Question 113 on 4 May 2016.

The report of the Inspector of Prisons on the prisoner complaints system “Review, Evaluation and Analysis of the Operation of the present Irish Prison Service Complaints Procedure” was published on 8 June 2016 and is available on my Department's website - www.justice.ie. This identified a number of concerns in the implementation of the current complaints procedure. Arising from this I met with the Inspector of Prisons to discuss his findings. The Inspector made it clear to me that he considered the Irish Prison Service has to retain a central role in the complaints process but with independent oversight and that he was satisfied that a fair and effective complaints procedure could be achieved with the implementation of his recommendations. I also had a separate meeting with Director General of the Irish Prison Service to see what action needed to be taken following on from the report.

In the light of this report it is clear that more needs to be done before we have a system that will gain the full confidence of staff, prisoners and the general public. One of the key recommendations in the Inspector's report is that prisoners’ complaints would be subject to review by the Ombudsman who would also be able to deal with complaints directly in the case of undue delay. I accept this recommendation and my officials have already had an initial exploratory meeting with the Ombudsman's office and will be raising this issue with Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.

Another recommendation is that complaints would also be categorised as either serious Category A or minor Category B and that a robust investigative mechanism must be put in place, in prisons, to ensure the proper investigation of Category A complaints. While I fully accept this recommendation I am concerned that replacing external investigators with an internal IPS team of investigators might give rise to a perception of bias. I have directed that more training be provided for external investigators and that this independent investigative element be maintained for a 12 month period and then reviewed.

I have also accepted further recommendations in the report. These include resolving minor complaints at the lowest level; allowing prisoners make complaints to relevant professional bodies; prisoners being entitled to an explanation for decisions made affecting them; frivolous and vexatious complaints being addressed and fair procedures applying. Similarly the recommendations on adequate training, adhering to protocols and statutory obligations, holding staff to account, not hindering the complaints procedure and having an effective communication system are accepted.

In my meeting with the Inspector about his report, I specifically asked him to keep the complaints procedure under review and to give her regular reports. I emphasised that the rights of all prisoners, including vulnerable prisoners, have to be promoted and an effective complaints system is just one aspect of achieving this goal.

While some amendment to secondary legislation may be required to effect these recommendations, it is not envisaged that primary legislation would be required.