Solitary confinement has been a controversial topic in prison management for a long time, primarily because of human rights concerns related to its use and execution. Numerous empirical studies have demonstrated that solitary confinement negatively impacts the inmates' well-being, affecting their physical, psychological, and social health. [1]Additionally, it has also been linked to higher recidivism rates.[2]
For most inmates, being placed in solitary confinement is an extremely stressful experience with potentially harmful physical and psychological effects. In solitary confinement, prisoners are isolated from others, with only minimal interaction with correctional officers. They rely entirely on these officers for their basic needs and are confined to a small cell with limited movement. Research indicates that solitary confinement can exacerbate, rather than resolve, prison management issues by causing mental health problems, adding further challenges for the administration. Statistics show that inmates in solitary confinement often experience anxiety, nervousness, and chronic depression, sometimes feeling on the brink of an emotional breakdown.
The long-term psychological impact of solitary confinement varies depending on the inmate's personality, the conditions of their confinement, and the duration of their isolation. Additional studies report that after release from solitary confinement, prisoners frequently suffer from sleep disturbances, emotional dependency, and heightened sensitivity to noise.
Originally, the main aim of solitary confinement was to rehabilitate offenders. However, in modern times, it is rarely used for this purpose. Instead, it serves primarily to curb criminal behaviour within prison walls or as a method of discipline and retribution. Conversely, implementing solitary confinement requires careful consideration, as it can result in human rights violations if used for extended periods, if inmates are deprived of all social interaction, or if it involves inhumane or degrading conditions.
Solitary confinement in Malta is regulated by article 9(1) of chapter 9 of the laws of Malta[3] which provides as follows: “The punishment of solitary confinement is carried into effect by keeping the person sentenced to imprisonment, during one or more terms in the course of any such punishment, continuously shut up in the appointed place within the prison, without permitting any other person, not employed on duty nor specially authorized by the Minister responsible for the prisons, to have access to him.”
This may only be applied to specific crimes, such as forgery, counterfeiting, encouraging minors to engage in prostitution or participate in pornographic material, producing and distributing indecent material involving minors, and cases involving multiple concurrent offenses.
Article 9(2) of chapter 9 of the laws of Malta however provides that no term of solitary confinement shall exceed 10 continuous days, more terms of solitary confinement can only be applied with an interval of two months between one another. Furthermore, it shall not be lawful to inflict more than 12 terms of solitary confinement.
In Malta, the legislator takes additional steps to protect the well-being of convicts sentenced to solitary confinement. The judiciary is permitted to verify, including through medical evidence, that the inmate is physically and mentally fit to endure solitary confinement. Additionally, according to the Prisons Regulations[4] if a medical officer at the correctional facility certifies that an inmate currently in solitary confinement is no longer fit to continue, the confinement will be suspended and only resumed once the inmate is deemed fit again.
Under usual conditions, all convicted inmates serving their sentences at Corradino are entitled to one visit per week and to send and receive a letter on his admission to prison and thereafter once a week.[5] However, this right can be suspended during periods of solitary confinement, despite the European Prison Rules stating that disciplinary measures should not restrict family visits unless it is necessary for maintaining safety and security.
In addition to instances where solitary confinement is mandated by the judiciary, the Director of Prisons has the authority to temporarily confine a violent inmate in exceptional circumstances. If the confinement exceeds 48 hours, the Director must consult the Medical Officer. According to Prison Regulations, the Director can also impose solitary confinement for up to 30 days if an inmate is found guilty of a disciplinary offence. Any decision by the Director that results in solitary confinement for more than six consecutive days must be reviewed by an Appeals Tribunal. If the Tribunal determines that the punishment is unjustified, it can order compensation in the form of remission or special privileges.
Briefly, many assert that incarceration is a punitive measure. However, those in favour of the restorative justice approach are heavily against the imposition of solitary confinement on inmates.
The correctional services Agency’s motto is ‘Suavis Ex Aspero’ meaning firm but gentle, with the agency’s principal goals being to:
In light of the aforementioned information, do you believe that solitary confinement should be part of a restorative justice system, when numerous literatures dictate otherwise? Should we be looking into a legislative reform to exclude completely the concept of solitary confinement? And most important question out of all;
Does solitary confinement align with the rehabilitation goals of modern correctional practices?
For more information or assistance related to Criminal Law please contact Dr Robert Tufigno and Dr Delilah Vella.
Further insights you may wish to read:
The Powers of the Executive Police
[1] (Shalev, 2008; Brunner et al., 2017).
[2] (Gordon, 2014).
[3] Criminal Code.
[4] SL. 260.3 of the Laws of Malta, article 82(3)
[5] S.L 260.3 of the Laws of Malta, article 52(2).