Conditions in places of detention
Prisons and inmate dormitories
The Bulgarian prison system is comprised of 12 prisons, of which one for women, and one correctional facility for juveniles. All prisons have dormitories of open type and several have also dormitories of closed type. By 31 December 2009, the inmate population was 9006. Figure 1 below shows the number of inmates in prisons and prison dormitories in 2000–2009.
Figure 1
Source: DG Enforcement of Sentences
The trend towards a reduction of the total number of inmates was sustained in 2009, too. During previous years, such a reduction was seen also with regard to the number of the accused and the defendants in the prisons. However, in the last year there was a significant increase in the number of accused individuals:
Figure 2
Source: DG Enforcement of Sentences
A trend towards reduction was also typical for the number of convicted inmates in prisons over the past three years:
Figure 3
Source: DG Enforcement of Sentences
The legislative changes introduced after 2002 resulted in a process of moving convicts with good behaviour out of prison facilities and into prison dormitories. This resulted in a gradual increase of the number of inmates in the open and transitory dormitories. At the end of 2008, the total number of inmates in dormitories was 2,253. With the entry into force of the new Enforcement of Sentences and Guarded Detention Act on 1 June 2009, the transitory dormitories were eliminated and replaced by the open dormitories. By 31 December 2009, the number of inmates in such dormitories was 1,853, i.e. 400 less than in the preceding year; the number of inmates in closed dormitories was 905.
Existing prison buildings are old and obsolete, which makes it extremely difficult to bring them in line with the international standards on the treatment of inmates. No new prisons have been built during the years of transition. The prison buildings in Lovech, Pazardzhik, Vratsa, Stara Zagora, Varna and Burgas were built in the 1920s and the 1930s. Built more than 100 years ago, the Sofia prison is the oldest. The reduction of the total number of inmates and the practice of extended use of prison dormitories resulted in a reduction of the overpopulation in the main buildings of most prisons. Nevertheless, in 2009 the living space in the cells of the Varna, Sofia and Pleven prisons was insufficient, which required the use of double and even triple bunks. The cells in several prisons have no lavatories and the inmates have to use buckets during the night. In December 2008, the Council of Ministers adopted a Strategy for the Development of the Correctional Facilities (2009-2015) and an Investment Programme for Construction, Reconstruction and Modernization of Prison Facilities.
The explanatory notes to the strategy point out that the living space in the cells is approximately 2 m2 per person while the recommended standard is 6 m2; most cells do not have drinking water, their windows are small and do not provide sufficient fresh air and sunlight. The main purpose of the strategy was to modernize and reform the penitentiary system in compliance with the European standards and to make prison conditions more humane. The repairs and the reconstruction of some prisons continued in 2009. All cells in the Vratsa prison were equipped with lavatories. New prison construction was obviously not a priority at the end of the mandate of the old and the beginning of the mandate of the new government.
Prison medical care is isolated from the national healthcare system in terms of facility standards, administration, number of medical check-ups, reporting, statistics, prophylactics and prevention. The main problems in this field arise from staff and equipment deficiencies and from the impossibility to provide the necessary volume of specialized assistance. The prison medical centres fail to meet the requirements of the Medical Institutions Act. Apart from these problems, there is a lack of independent control on the medical activities and on the sanitary and hygienic conditions which affect directly inmates’ health status. Ensuring healthy and safe labour conditions for working inmates is difficult, especially considering the lack of an effective mechanism for independent control. Work quotas and remuneration should not be defined subjectively by prison officials. Inmate labour is exempt from social security payments and from compensation for workplace accidents.
Despite the explicit legal provisions, some inmates still complain of unjustified use of physical force and means of restraint. This is why the disciplinary actions taken by prison guards must be documented strictly and effective investigations by an independent body should be carried out with regard to all such complaints.
A new Enforcement of Sentences and Detention Under Remand Act (‘Enforcement of Sentences Act’ hereafter) came in force on 1 June 2009. It includes explicit regulation of the living space and the living conditions for every inmate, although the application of these requirements is delayed over time. For the first time in the history of the penitentiary the law requires the adoption of an ordinance defining annual budget standards per inmate. The ordinance, which stipulates that the state budget should include the funds needed for inmate subsistence, was adopted in the last days of 2009. However, the standards, which are listed in 14 paragraphs, repeat the provisions of the Enforcement of Sentences Act and contain no specific parameters. Also for the first time, the new act introduces an explicit ban on any kind of torture, cruel or inhuman treatment. At the same time, the types of penitentiary regimes are reduced and prison dormitories can now be only of open and closed type. In line with the international standards, the act strengthens the role of public oversight, i.e. the Ombudsman, and that of the municipal monitoring commissions. Under the new provisions, the mandate of the commissions is expanded to include public control on the activities of the penitentiary facilities. The ban to receive food, clothes, shoes, books, etc. sent as mail packages may be regarded as a serious restriction of inmate rights. Such a ban cannot be justified by the claim that the restriction of the right to mail packages will prevent banned items from entering the prison. The regulation of health controls and hygiene in prisons in the new act may be regarded as a deficiency. These are to be inspected by specialists from prison medical centres, which makes the independence and the objectivity of the controls questionable.
Investigation detention centres
By 31 December 2009 there were 43 investigation detention centres with 1,087 detainees arrested under the Code of Criminal Procedure (see Figure 4).
Figure 4
Source: DG Enforcement of Sentences
In comparison to previous years, the number of detainees at the detention centres is significantly larger. The detention centres are used not only for ‘detention under remand,’ but also for other purposes, such as 72-hour detention, detention of persons for whom APBs have been issued and persons transferred “by delegation.” In 2009, the overpopulation of detention facilities, especially of those in the regional centres, was extremely high. The general conditions in the detention centres are significantly worse than those in the prisons. For the first time after the beginning of the democratic changes in Bulgaria, the investigation detention centres and the prisons were given long-term attention in the governmental Strategy for the Development of the Correctional Facilities (2009-2015), and the conditions in them became a priority. The end of mandate report of the Ministry of Justice indicates that designs for the construction of new detention centres in Petrich, Gabrovo, Lovech, Plovdiv and Shumen and for the improvement of the existing ones in Vidin, Ruse, Haskovo and Razgrad were developed by mid-2009; on 10 June 2009, the minister of justice opened the new investigation detention centre in Plovidv, which was built in compliance with the international standards on penitentiary facilities and human treatment of detainees.
The investigation detention centre system in Bulgaria is comprised of detention and administrative facilities at the 28 regional centres, as well as in smaller communities where a need for such facilities has been established. The facilities in some of the larger regional cities (Plovdiv, Varna, Ruse, Pleven, Veliko Tarnovo) have no territorial detention centres, which determines the greater population in them. Permanent overpopulation exists also at the border detention centres in Svilengrad, Petrich and Slivnitsa. The general conditions at the detention centres remain inhuman and degrading. The cells in most detention centres have no windows, i.e. the light is artificial and ventilation is hindered. To compensate for this, additional grated openings have been made in the doors or the doors themselves are grated, thus allowing to improve lighting and ventilation. However, sometimes this violates the right to personal life as the inmates are visible at all times. The cells in some detention centres (Vratsa, Sliven, etc.) are extremely small. In contradiction to international standards, the open space for each inmate in these detention centres does not exceed 1 m2. In addition, most of them lack open-air walking facilities. Such facilities exist at only 16 detention centres. Another ten detention centres have indoor premises for physical exercise, while in another 18 there is no possibility to provide such premises and the inmates get a walk only when allowed to visit the toilet. The great number of convicting decisions of both domestic courts and judgments against Bulgaria at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg are a confirmation of the deplorable conditions at the detention centres.
Correctional and educational facilities for minors and juveniles (CBS and SBS)
The system of the social educational boarding schools (SBS) and the correctional boarding schools (CBS) changed significantly in the past years. The number of boarding schools was reduced from 33 in 2000 to nine in 2009, a direct result from the 2004 legislative changes that restricted the arbitrariness in placing children at such institutions. In 2004, court proceedings were introduced in the placement procedure; however, it is formalistic and not in compliance with international fair trial standards and guarantees for the rights of children deprived of their liberty. The grounds for placement in a boarding school provide opportunities for significant arbitrariness, as they include no clear definitions of the “anti-social acts”, like the ones incorporated in the Penal Code.
At these institutions children who have been placed there on purely social grounds are still mixed with children who have committed anti-social acts. The remoteness of the boarding schools from large cities is a barrier to the opportunities for social adaptation of the children and hinders quality medical services, fundraising, transport, the hiring of skilled teaching staff, etc. It is impossible for the teaching process at the boarding institutions to be at the same level as in the mainstream schools. It is, therefore, necessary to review the existence of SBS and CBS in their current form and to seek alternatives for correctional influence on the children who are in conflict with the law. This is the spirit of the recommendations to Bulgaria of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child of 23 June 2008, according to which it is necessary:[1]
- to establish a special system of courts for children in conflict with law;
- to eliminate the term “anti-social act”;
- to abstain from punishing deviant behaviour of children under penal age and defining “social and protective measures” instead;
- to establish a system of social and educational measures as an alternative to the deprivation of liberty, and to ensure their effective application;
- to use deprivation of liberty, including at involuntary education institutions, only as a last resort;
- to provide the children in conflict with law opportunities for contacts with their families and with civil society organizations.
Institutions for temporary placement of minors and juveniles and crisis centres
The institutions for temporary placement of minors and juveniles in Sofia, Plovdiv, Varna, Burgas and Gorna Oryahovitsa accommodate children who have committed anti-social acts, children without a domicile, vagrant or beggar children, as well as children who have left without permission compulsory education or involuntary treatment facilities. These institutions report directly to the Ministry of Interior. In essence the stay at these homes is a short-term deprivation of liberty. The stay cannot exceed 15 days and the placement is ordered by a prosecutor. In exceptional cases the stay may be prolonged to two months. The legislative framework concerning the placement of children in these institutions contradicts the international standards, which require that any deprivation of liberty be imposed by the courts. The placement of children in such institutions, which is a deprivation of liberty, cannot be appealed. There is a contradiction with international standards also with regard to the right of the children to a lawyer from the time of detention, during the stay or after the measure has been imposed.
The placements at the crisis centres, which exist in Bulgaria since the autumn of 2006 and are used to accommodate children victims of trafficking for a period of up to six months, also contradict the standards on the rights of the child. Such placements are effected only by an instruction or by an order of the directors of social assistance directorates. In contradiction to Article 26 of the Obligations and Contracts Act, there is no court ruling on the placement orders, despite the fact that crisis centres are in essence specialised institutions. As in the case with the institutions for temporary placement of the Ministry of Interior, the procedure for the placement of children at crisis centres does not afford for participation of a lawyer. The arbitrariness of the placement creates serious problems for the children at the crisis centres. Apart from children victims of trafficking, children who have committed anti-social acts are also placed there. In some cases, upon the expiry of the six-month period, placement is extended for another six months by another order. In essence, the placement at crisis centres constitutes deprivation of liberty and therefore the government needs to urgently take measures to prevent such severe violations of the rights of the child from happening.
[1] See Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under Article 44 of the Convention, Concluding observations: Bulgaria, CRC/C/BGR/CO/2, 23 June 2008.
