Inmate Rights in Americas System

Inmate Rights in Americas System Introduction Like other criminal justice systems around the world, America’s system has undergone significant changes to become what it is today. During the 19th century, the â€Å"hands-off doctrine† described the relationship between American courts and the correctional system of the country (Schmalleger Smykla, 2012).Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Inmate Rights in America’s System specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Prisoners were largely viewed by the law as slaves of the nation, without human rights which take place today. Judges in the criminal justice department argued that prisoners lacked rights because of their criminal charges. As a result, courts took no responsibility in interfering with the management of prisons in order to avoid conflict of power between two state departments. Nonetheless, the â€Å"hands-off doctrine† did not last forever; it was changed in the sec ond half of the 20th century after American courts were convinced that they had a responsibility in resolving several legal claims, which were being raised by inmates. Proponents also sought to challenge the constitution in ensuring that the voice of the inmates was heard, concerning their prison life. Through several amendments, the American courts today recognize the rights of prisoners even though they are limited as compared to those enjoyed by free citizens (Schmalleger Smykla, 2012). This paper discuses the rights of inmates in America as compared to those enjoyed by prisoners in other countries like the United Kingdom, and Canada. Inmate Rights in the United States Right to Free Speech American inmates have freedom of speech conceived in 1970. It requires justification as to why an inmate should be denied this right at any given moment. In regards to this, prisoners challenged the states’ censorship on mails in 1974 arguing that it was a move aimed at undermining thei r right to freedom of speech.Advertising Looking for research paper on criminal law? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Even though this move was considered to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, it was ruled that inmates’ freedom could only be limited if it was a security threat to the state (Schmalleger Smykla, 2012). Additionally, the limitation can be justified only within the boundaries of protecting the interests of the federal government. Besides this, prisoners’ degree of association is limited by the activities of their labor union. This implies that inmates can only interact as directed by the union, which designs and executes prison activities. Access to Courts It has been argued that the right for an inmate to access courts during their prison life is very important and can be seen as the most essential right among others. This is supported by the Civil Rights Act of 1871, which has cont inuously served as the backbone of promoting inmates’ rights. Victory emanating from such lawsuits has also played a major role in ensuring that inmates are provided with a jailhouse lawyer, who offers any required legal advice (Schmalleger Smykla, 2012). In essence, a jailhouse lawyer is an inmate who advises other prisoners on various legal matters. Moreover, inmates have the right to access law libraries, which play a fundamental role in helping them to understand their rights as defined by the state. Knowledge obtained from these libraries is equally important in helping them to understand their criminal offenses, punishment, and court processes. Disciplinary Proceedings According to the 5th and 14th Amendments, all American citizens are guaranteed the due process. In this context, courts have the responsibility of putting in place relevant procedures to curb cases of inmates being deprived off their right of freedom. Similarly, inmates are supposed to have knowledge of the charges, before they appear in court for hearings. It is responsibility of the court to ensure that inmates are served with required notices early enough (Dervan, 2011).Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Inmate Rights in America’s System specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Besides being notified, inmates have the right to invite witnesses during the hearings to witness in their favor as a way of convincing the court. Apart from this, American inmates have the right to be helped during the presentation of a defense in court proceedings. However, this does not compel the court to provide an attorney for the accused. They also have the right to support their evidence with written statements, which offer an explanation of the evidence. Equal Protection As stated under the Fourteenth Amendment, all citizens have equal protection of the laws of the state. Though this is the case, lawsuits against racial seg regation are common in the United States (Dervan, 2011). On the other hand, gender-based biasness occurs mainly in workplaces and educational centers, and most of the cases involve women, who are considered to be more prone than men. Throughout the implementation of the law that guarantees this right, courts have upheld that female and male inmates deserve equal privileges at any given moment. Right to Privacy Unlike other citizens, American inmates lack the Fourth Amendment right, which protects people against unfair search and seizure by security agents. As a result, correctional centers are allowed to monitor the movement of prisoners in cells and carry out searches that are not warranted. During Hudson v. Palmer (1984), the court upheld that prisoners did not have privacy coverage under the Fourth Amendment of the American law (Dervan, 2011).Advertising Looking for research paper on criminal law? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More While this was the case, it had been argued that prisoners lacked entitlement to privacy because of security reasons, which demanded that inspections and searches were carried out randomly. Rights in Conflict Under this category of rights, there are cases of conflicting rights and interests. For instance, there have been lawsuits filed against correctional officers of the opposite sex observing inmates during a prison search. The conflict arises from the fact that inmates and correctional administrators have their legal rights (Dervan, 2011). For example, inmates are usually concerned about their privacy, while the officers have equal job opportunities in spite of their gender, while prison officials have been mandated to ensure that the correctional centers are safe. In some states, like Alabama, the court does not allow women to work in maximum-security centers to eliminate the risk posed by male inmates on female officers. Rights upon Release Though inmates may be set free accord ing to court procedures, they find it hard to fit back in the society because of legal obstacles. For instance, ex-convicts of murder are deprived of the right to vote or take specific job positions in certain fields. Moreover, civil death terminates all the civil rights, although there is no state in America, which uses the law. It has been argued that voter disenfranchisement is one of the worst penalties against former inmates (Schmalleger Smykla, 2012). As a result, there are millions of black ex-convicts who are not allowed to participate in any voting exercise. Inmate Rights in the United Kingdom Like the United States, England recognizes some rights for those people who are held in prisons because of different reasons. Some of these rights give details on how inmates can make complaints through the ombudsman and their accessibility to lawyers for the sake of making legal proceedings at any given moment. Reception Upon reception, the UK law allows prison officers to search al l inmates and take their photographs if it is necessary. Among other reasons, the search ensures that prisoners do not possess items, which are not permitted by the law. In order to enforce this, prisoners are usually given a list of items to go through upon arrival at any correctional center before signing it (Owers, 2010). Additionally, prisoners are not allowed to be in a possession of cash but rather pay it using account under the management of the governor. An information book is also given to all prisoners as a way of helping them to adapt to the new environment outside of the society. On the other hand, prison rules are only given to those who request them from prison officers. Access to Lawyers According to prison laws in the United Kingdom, inmates are allowed to be visited by their solicitors and even communicate with them. Importantly, a prisoner is free to contact the solicitor without necessarily contacting the prison authorities. Furthermore, complaints about prison li fe can only be revealed in public after the solicitor has legally advised the prisoner (Owers, 2010). The law was first applied by the European Court of Human Rights and the court took stern measures to avoid any interference. The right also guarantees inmates the confidentiality on any material, which prisoners are permitted to posses. Letters Prisoners are allowed to send a statutory letter in a week, whose payment is made and another privilege letter whose postage fee is paid with money, which is not directly drawn from the private cash allowance. It is worth noting that no correctional center is allowed to interfere with the statutory letter as a way of disciplining an inmate (Murray, 2011). In cases where inmates are granted special letters, it is essential to note that such letters are independent from existing privileges. Prisoners are also issued with a special letter, which allows them to settle their businesses in cases where they have been transferred to other centers or released. While these restrictions exist in correctional centers, all inmates in open prisons are free to send any number of letters without legal restriction. Moreover, un-convicted prisoners are allowed to pay for as many letters as they can even though they are also entitled to two weekly letters, which are paid by the prison (Murray, 2011). Censorship According to the law, mails are only opened in correctional centers holding high-risk inmates while other prisoners receive their mails without being opened by the facility authority. While this is the case, officials may check letters, which are sent by criminals convicted of sexual-related crimes. In terms of content, the governor may resend the letters to the initial correspondent if they are too long and beyond recommended length. The letters may also be resend if they are rejected by the prisoner, regarded as the addressee (Easton, 2008). Special requests and complaints are usually made by filling a general application form, a nd prisoners are allowed to contact their lawyers where it is necessary. Inmates who break prison rules go through disciplinary proceedings to determine their punishment. Either an independent adjudicator or a governor can hear and determine the case. Inmate Rights in Canada Like in the United States, early years saw Canadian prisoners suffer in the hands of courts due to the lack of recognition of their rights. In most cases, inmates had to clear their jail terms or willfully choose to die, without being granted a fair trial in court. In other words, inmates lost all their civil rights and survived at the mercies of the correctional center (Grossman Roberts, 2011). It was horrible for a person to be imprisoned since prison life was more horrifying than dwelling of beggars in the streets. As a result, prisoners were the most inferior members of the society. It is believed that this trend was adopted after a public outcry arguing that prisoners enjoyed life more than free and innoce nt citizens. It was therefore necessary for them to be deprived of their civil rights. However, the manner in which inmates are treated in Canada today has significantly changed, and people are guaranteed several civil rights, which are contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Grossman Roberts, 2011). These rights are important in ensuring that procedural rights for inmates are upheld by the court and correctional centers. Among others, the charter guarantees inmates the freedom of religion, association, security, life, equality, liberty, and protection from detention. Timely and Fair Trial Like other citizens, inmates have the right for unbiased trial in a court of law within a reasonable time frame. This implies that impartial trial is not enough when the court takes unreasonable trial time that is almost equivalent to the jail term. However, it is worth noting that most judicial systems around the world experience slow processing of trials, thus detaining inmate s who end up winning their cases. Some legal experts have argued that there is a gap in the Canadian justice system, especially when referring to reasonable time of trial (Grossman Roberts, 2011). While this is the case, the system gives direction regarding the time within which certain actions are carried out. Most offences take a maximum of thirty days before being concluded while those that involve serious crimes may take between twenty three and forty one days. On the other hand, minor cases in which the accused is innocent may take a minimum of fourteen days before determination (Grossman Roberts, 2011). Like in America and the United Kingdom, Canadian law allows inmates to receive legal assistance and representation during court proceedings. The right to a defense ensures that the accused can defend himself through the assistance of the counsel. Nevertheless, prisoners do not have an automatic assurance of the counsel. Conclusion From the above discussion, it is evident that most countries transformed their criminal justice systems in order to protect the rights of inmates, which had not existed during the middle of the 20th century. America, the UK, and Canada have laws, which ensure that inmates are not deprived of certain rights in spite of their criminal records and current state. Common rights include right to life, protection, access to courts and protection against discrimination among others. However, the United Kingdom has more protection of inmates compared to America. As a result, British inmates enjoy more rights than their counterparts in the USA and Canada. Above all, rights of inmates cannot be equal to the rights of free citizens. References Dervan, E. (2011). American prison culture in an international context: an examination of prisons in America, the Netherlands, and Israel. Stanford Law Policy Review, 22(2), 413-428. Easton, S. (2008). Constructing Citizenship: Making Room for Prisoners Rights. Journal Of Social Welfare Family Law , 30 (2), 127-146. Grossman, M., Roberts, J. (2011). Criminal Justice in Canada: A Reader. Connecticut: Cengage Learning. Murray, C. (2011). Playing for Time: Prisoner Disenfranchisement under the ECHR after Hirst v United Kingdom. Kings Law Journal, 22(3), 309-334. Owers, A. (2010). Prison Inspection and the Protection of Prisoners Rights. Pace Law Review, 30 (5), 1535-1547. Schmalleger, F., Smykla, J. (2012). Corrections in the 21st Century. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.