International Incapacitation: the Good and the Bad

While being incarcerated in a prison is not something man people would find enjoyable

there are certainly better prisons to be placed in than others. There are also some countries who

treat their prisoners far better than others, with smaller prisons, more personalized incapacitation,

and better living conditions. Living in the United State I became accustomed to seeing prisons as

they are portrayed on television in shows such as Law and Order and Prison Break, but this is

not always the case.

Prisons in the United States, Iceland, Sweden, and Russia differ extraordinarily.

American prisons can be either severe or relaxed, Icelandic prisons are known for being more

relaxed and accommodating for their prisoners, the Swedish system has a reputation for being

among the most soft on its inmates, and Russian prisoners have acquired a reputation for being

among the most brutal in the world. This paper seeks to delve into some of the reasoning behind

these reputations and to explore just what makes up each of these prison systems.

Brief Overview

Design, conditions, and treatment inside each prison system in the world varies from

nation to nation. There are the basic statistics that say something by themselves, of course: the

United States has more prisoners than any other country in the word. The U.S. is followed

closely by China, although Russia comes in as having the second highest prison population in the

world per person (International Centre for Prison Studies, 2014). Compared to the astounding

numbers of prisoners in these giant countries (ranging from hundreds of thousands to over two

million in the U.S.) the Icelandic prison population of less than 200 prisoners seems measly and

insignificant by contrast (International Centre for Prison Studies, 2014). Nowhere near as many

prisoners reside in the Swedish system as can be found in the American or Russian systems but

compared to the 200 inmates in Iceland the population seems substantial, as the number has

dwindled from slightly over 6,000 inmates in 2010 to a mere 4,500 in 2012 (International Centre

for Prison Studies, 2014). But yet each of these prison populations, however big or small, has

substantial implications for how the prison systems in the different countries are run and how

prisoners are treated while incarcerated.

Inside American Prisons

The American prison system falls under the realm of the Federal Bureau of Justice and is

known as the Federal Bureau of Prisons. In 2010 the country had 4,575 different facilities to

accommodate its massive prison population, filling the prisons and jails to 99 percent of their

capacity. The prison population in the United States had been steadily rising over time, causing

overcrowding in the system and a need for more personnel and space to house the inmates as the

years went go on (International Centre for Prison Studies, 2014).

American prisons are not removed from the infamy that comes with prison brutality.

Although a country that praises itself on human rights and democracy it too has its share of

extreme prisons placed sporadically around the country. Among these are Rikers Island in New

York and ADX Florence Supermax in Colorado, far closer in design to the Russian prisons than

anything resembling a prison found in the tiny nation of Iceland.

The Florence Supermax prison has come under international scrutiny before, but never to

quite the extent of Russian prisons (both have had documentaries devoted to exploring what life

is like within their walls, however) (Clare & Nasaw, 2012, 1). This particular prison is among the

most secure facilities found inside the United States and as such has earned the nickname

“Alcatraz of the Rockies” throughout the years, emphasizing the unlikelihood of escape from the

prison and the strict rules enforced inside its walls (Clare & Nasaw, 2012, 1). The facility

currently holds approximately 360 male prisoners, thought to be the worst criminals or terrorists

found inside of the country. Because these prisoners are commonly thought to be among the

worst people found in the country the prison has received attention in countries around the world

for the long periods of solitary confinement its inmates are frequently held in (Clare & Nasaw,

2012, 1). This prison is the worst of what can be found inside the American borders and not

representative of the typical American prison, but it does serve to show just how extreme

conditions can be in the United States (although not the norm).

Solitary confinement is often used to make prisoners more controllable for the prison

authorities and as such it is frequently known to take its toll on the prisoners. This is in no way

unique to American prisons or to the prison at Florence in particular but has come up as an issue

against this particular prison in the past (Clare & Nasaw, 2012, 1). The prison recently came

under the inspection of the European Court of Human Rights who found that the means used to

restrain and house these extreme prisoners were indeed justified given the circumstances and that

the prison’s actions against the prisoners were not a violation of human rights (Clare & Nasaw,

2012, 1).

In addition to ADX Florence solitary confinement has recently drawn attention at a

prison in California, proving that extreme conditions are not only a problem to the American

system in a Supermax setting. While solitary confinement has presented problems for human

development over the years in prisons all around the country there is one prison in particular that

stands out for its solitary confinement units and the treatment of its inmates. This prison is

included in the Center for Constitutional Right’s petitions as one of their most recent fights to

end solitary confinement. The petition seeks to address security housing units (SHU) at the

Pelican Bay facility in California. Prisoners in the SHU at Pelican Bay State Prison became

famous for the conditions they were suppressed in, shedding light on solitary confinement and

prison conditions to the rest of the country and the world (Sullivan, 2012).

The SHU at Pelican Bay serves as a deterrent to improve prisoners’ behavior in the

prison according to Associate Warden Larry Williams, who adds “We don’t want them to like

being in prison,” (Sullivan, 2006). And it appears as though there is no real threat of the

prisoners liking their living conditions in this prison: the cells in Pelican Bay have been designed

so that prisoners cannot see anyone else or any of the other cells from inside, reinforcing the

feeling of being alone and separated from the rest of prison society (Sullivan, 2006). Pelican Bay

has one of the oldest (and largest) isolation units in the United States, has served as a model for

the SHUs in many newer prisons (Sullivan, 2006), and was home to 1,200 inmates in 2006 alone.

Isolation does more than mentally stunt the prisoners who are kept alone in their cells.

Physical contact with other humans is also all but nonexistent in many SHUs throughout the

country, Pelican Bay included. In addition to a lack of mental stimulation physical contact

between inmates in solitary confinement is also restricted as much as possible (Sullivan, 2006).

The “pinky shake” is the only contact inmates in Pelican Bay experience during their

time in isolation, which often lasts for years. Tiny holes punched throughout the metal cell doors

are just big enough to slip a pinky finger through, the only personal contact with anyone else

these inmates are allowed (Sullivan, 2006). With only books and the occasional prison noise to

keep these prisoners company it is easy to see how mental problems can come about and

consume the lives of people locked away by themselves.

Human rights groups such as the CCR and the ACLU are not the only people who have

tried to create change and reform in the American prison system in the days since it originated

and opened its doors to the more harmful members of American society. Even though some

authorities and government officials choose to overlook the harsh and detrimental conditions

inside of prison walls and solitary cells, many advocates of change do not. The California

Department of Corrections (DOC) ended its attempt to rehabilitate prisoners in the state prisons

in 1977, refocusing its efforts instead on incapacitation (Gilmore, 2007). Although not a new

idea to the country as a whole it goes to show the transformation of this specific state’s prison

system that included extreme facilities such Pelican Bay.

California state prisoners had also gotten involved in the reform movement, demanding

better treatment from the prison system in 1867. The prisoners had been successful in achieving

the passage of the Habeas Corpus Act to relieve overcrowding in prisons and have their

constitutional rights respected, even in prison (Gilmore, 2007). These conditions have often been

violated over the years which has been seen most notably in the treatment of prisoners housed in

solitary confinement and the overcrowded prisons found in all states throughout the country.

Infamous Russian Prisons

Similarly to American prisons the prison population in the Russian Federation has also

been on the rise in recent years. The prison systems falls under the command of the Ministry of

Justice and is currently made up of close to 700,000 prisoners (International Centre for Prison

Studies, 2014). Russian prisons are presently filled to 83.6 percent of their capacity, although

overcrowding is still a major problem within the system. Female prisoners in Russia make up

roughly eight percent of the overall prison population and juvenile offenders make up less than

one percent of the prisoners (International Centre for Prison Studies, 2014).

Famous prisons in American culture consist of facilities such as Alcatraz and Riker’s

Island. Both reached their notoriety through strict policies and serious consequences for the

failure to abide by the rules. Russian prisons are not unlike this in that this country’s famous

prisons also reached their fame through similar techniques, with one added method: excessive

brutality against the prisoners.

Among these are Vladimir Central Prison and Russia’s own Alcatraz. Vladimir Central

has been utilized by the judicial system for more than 200 years, dating back for much of

Russian history (Feifer, 2008, 1). While current prisoners are in no position to speak out about

the atrocities that go on within the prison walls former inmates have less of a problem doing so.

A former inmate at both Vladimir Central and Kopeisk Prison in the Ural Mountains of Russia

spoke out against what he had seen and experienced first-hand (Feifer, 2008, 2). It was not

uncommon for prisoners to be handcuffed to a shower and beaten by guards, dragged back to

their cells by other inmates, forced into a beating by another prisoner, psychologically broken, or

dragged outside where they were stripped and beaten (Feifer, 2008, 2). Frequently inmates would

harm themselves to avoid being beaten by the guards and some of the prisoners were even driven

to commit suicide to escape the horrific conditions and treatment of many Russian prisons.

Russian authorities deny that any such torture prisons exist in the country. Prisoners who

attempt to speak with authorities about the treatment they are receiving from guards are

frequently singled out for worse abuse in the future, so it is rarely worth it to come forward and

speak with those who are in charge (Feifer, 2008, 2). These prisons are designed to spread fear

through the country and that is exactly what they do.

The Russian system is set apart from others similar to it also in that the prisoners

themselves are commonly used to enforce order throughout the prisons. Authorities within this

system have a two-tiered system for maintaining order inside their walls: the guards are in place

and implement the more serious security measures and also hand-pick prisoners to make up the

lower level of security in the facility (Hounshell, 2010). These prisoners receive special privilege

for their role as “enforcers” in the community and are an easy way for prison officials to ensure

the prisons are obeying the rules. If one of the enforcers is killed the officials have an almost

unlimited supply of inmates willing to take their place and because of this the two-tiered system

was formally established by the country’s Ministry of Justice in 2005 (Hounshell, 2010).

A comparison: American and Russian Prisons

American prisons have not gained a worldwide reputation of being a place of brutality

and torture but there are certainly some comparisons that can be made between the American and

Russian prisons in recent times. Both of these countries incapacitate more prisoners than

anywhere else in the world, leading to packed prisons and overcrowding running rampant

throughout the prison systems (Greifinger, 2005, 61). According to a study in 2003 the only

other country with a prisoner population resembling these two countries was South Africa. The

majority of the crimes putting such monumental amounts of people in prison are drug offenses

and property crimes, not the violent crimes that lead people to believe society is dangerous

(Greifinger, 2005, 61).

But the similarities between Russian and American prisons are not merely their prisoner

populations; similarities can also be seen in the prisons’ health and wellness and in their

overcrowding (Greifinger, 2005, 63). Data has been found to show that such severe

overcrowding in a prison population can result in last psychological trauma in prisoners. Beyond

just the health and sanitation effects of overcrowding and filling cells to capacity comes the

mental toll that this process has on the people involved. Overcrowding prisoners in cells has been

linked to increased rates on psychiatric care, death, and suicide (Greifinger, 2005, 63).

The Icelandic System

In Iceland the department regulating prisons also falls under the Ministry of Justice,

called the National Prison and Probation Administration. In early 2013 the prison population of

Iceland was a mere 152 prisoners, three percent of which were female and less than one percent

of which were juveniles (International Centre for Prison Studies, 2014). As a tiny country with a

similarly small prison population to match these 152 prisoners filled the prisons throughout the

country to 93.3 percent capacity, reflecting just how small the prison system in Iceland really is

(International Centre for Prison Studies, 2014).

The Icelandic prison system differs from the Russian one in a variety of ways, not the

least of which is a more modern approach to prisons and justice overall. Where many of the

Russian prisons have been around for much of the country’s history and have not adapted very

much the changing times many prisons in Iceland are more up to speed with modern times. The

prisons in this country contract out many of their services – aspects of the prisons ranging from

health care to halfway houses (Baldursson, 2000, 9).

Icelandic prisons are not known for their archaic conditions and treatment of the

prisoners but rather for their relatively comfortable and good treatment of the people incarcerated

within their walls. As a country with a small overall population the prison population matches

this, resulting in small prisons with a fraction of the people found in American or Russian

prisons (Baldursson, 2000, 9). Both work and school are offered to these prisoners, with the

salary for each ranging higher than in the other Nordic countries, and certainly higher than in

more overcrowded prisons. Here the average hourly salary for the prisoners comes to about

$3.50-4.00 in United States dollars (Baldursson, 2000, 9). This high salary means that prisoners

are not only more willing to go to work but also that it is common for them to have saved a

substantial amount of money by the time they are released back into society.

School for the prisoners is available in four out of the five Icelandic prisons, but a full

sized school exists in only one of them – Litla Hraun. As in other sectors of the prison system the

people that help to make up these schools are contracted from the outside world and come in to

the prisons to help supplement the corrections system (Baldursson, 2000, 9). Regardless of where

the teachers and supplies come from prisoners in Iceland are given access to an education the

majority of the time.

The Prison and Probation Administration (PPA) is the agency in charge of probation

arrangements and enforcement in Iceland. The main duties of this administration are to

implement the sentences given by the courts and to ensure that specialized services are available

to the people who need them in the system (Newton). The PPA oversees the people sentenced to

prison as well as those given probation, parole, and other types of interventions.

According to the United States State Department Icelandic prisons meet international

standards and do not violate human rights in their treatment of prisoners (State Dept., 2009, 2).

The country’s prison population consists of so few juvenile and female offenders that they do not

have their own prisons. While there is a female prison it also houses male prisoners because it is

not typically filled to capacity, and juvenile offenders are housed and handled by the country’s

Government Agency for Child Protection (State Dept., 2009, 2).

Conditions in Icelandic Prisons

With access to outside treatment, lush living conditions compared to Russian and

American prisons, small prison populations, and the right to visitors and communication with the

outside world life in an Icelandic prison is immeasurably more ideal than life in a prison in one

of the stricter and more severe countries. Icelandic society is not known for its brutality and its

prison system reflects that. As in other prison systems Iceland has also encountered its own

overcrowding problem and has been forced to handle having too many prisoners and not enough

cells to place them in (State Dept., 2009. 2). The situation is nowhere near as extreme as in other

parts of the world, having only 276 prisoners without a typical-sized cell in 2009, unlike the

copious amounts packed in major prisons elsewhere (these offenders did not serve their

sentences, as there was not enough room) (State Dept., 2009, 2).

Sentencing in Iceland

Sentencing guidelines for the crimes committed by the offenders in Iceland differ greatly

than sentences that would be received for similar crimes elsewhere in the world. While the

United States has the death penalty and Russia (unofficially) punishes its prisoners through

torture Iceland has very relaxed punishments for its criminals. The maximum sentence for s

criminal offender in Iceland is life in prison, followed by 16 years in prison for manslaughter

(Newton). The system also punishes drug offenders in society, with drug trafficking carrying the

penalty of 12 years of incarceration. In general the punishments for crime in Iceland tend to be

less harsh and extensive than those found elsewhere in the world (Newton).

The Prison System in Sweden

As a country Sweden and the United States share many things – the English language,

democracy, a healthy population, and many common western views about the world. Even with

all these similarities the prison systems in these two western democracies differ immensely in

their population statistics, treatment of their inmates, and the way prisons are run throughout the

nations. Naturally it follows that the Swedish system is also substantially different from either of

the other two systems previous discussed.

The Swedish Prison and Probation Administration falls under the country’s Ministry of

Justice and is responsible for running the prison system throughout the nation (International

Centre for Prison Studies 2014). In 2005 a request was put in by Saddam Hussein was put in to

the prison system to inquire if he could await trial in a Swedish prison because of the system’s

liberal reputation around the world (a request that was denied by the system and resulted in

Hussein being detained elsewhere in the world) (James, 2013).

Sweden has a more advanced juvenile prison population than Iceland given that it has

more residents and crimes committed overall. In this country criminal responsibility begins at 15

years of age, slightly lower than other countries around the world (Lindstrom & Leijonram,

2007, 561). The Swedish Welfare Service is the agency that handles juvenile justice throughout

the nation, overseeing that the system treats juveniles easier than it would if they exceeded the

age of 21. In addition to this no juvenile offenders under 21 years can receive a sentence of life

in prison (Lindstrom & Leijonram, 2007, 561).

As with the American prison classification system of minimum and maximum security

prisons throughout the country (and others around the world) the Swedish prisons are also

classified in regards to their security levels. The classifications range from Class A to Class F

prisons, A being the most secure and F being the least sure and most open (Lindstrom &

Leijonram, 2007, 563). Class A prisons hold the most violent offenders and are designed to

prevent inmate escapes. Class F prisons hold people who pose much less of a threat to society,

including offenders convicted of drunk driving offenses and people who are nearing the end of

their sentences elsewhere (Lindstrom & Leijonram, 2007, 563).

In recent years the Swedish system has seen a steady decline in its prison population

which has impacted the system in significant ways across the board. The country has seen

roughly a one percent decrease in the size of the population every year since 2004 and decreased

six percent between 2011 and 2012 alone (Orange, 2013). While prison rates have dropped crime

rates have not, leading officials to believe that the drop in incarceration rates reflects the success

of rehabilitation programs across the country. The prison populations are expected to continue to

drop in future years throughout Sweden, and have recently led to the closing of four prisons

throughout the system because there is simply no need for them anymore (James, 2013).

Punishments in Sweden

Numerous punishments are implemented onto Sweden’s criminals for the crimes they

commit in society. The Swedish Prison and Probation Service penalizes the offenders through

the country by either prison time, intensive supervision, a conditional sentence with community

service hours, probation (with or without community service hours), or a special treatment plan,

depending on the offender and the severity of the crime committed (Swedish Prison & Probation

Service, 2007, 6). Out of the prisoners sentenced to serve time in prisons in 2006 slightly over 15

percent of the offenses committed were theft, 22 percent of the offenses were drug related, and

17 percent of all offenses were violent crimes, with drug offenses and theft being the most

common occurrence for both male and female prisoners (Swedish Prison & Probation Service,

2007, 22).

Preparing for Release

The primary goal of incapacitation within the Swedish system is to rehabilitate the

prisoners so that they are ready to become members of good standing in society upon their

release. The result of this is that the system utilizes various methods to prepare its prisoners for

re-entry into the outside world to maximize the chance they have at not re-offending and coming

back into the prison system (Swedish Prison & Probation Service, 2007, 23). Conditional release

allows the prisoner to spend time outside of the prison during the day, acclimating them with the

world beyond the prison walls and giving them time to work, participate in education, or take

part in vocational programs that will be useful on the outside (Swedish Prison & Probation

Service, 2007, 23).

Health Care across the Systems

As in most other aspects of the systems health care and medical treatment also differs

greatly from the American to the Russian to the Icelandic and Swedish systems. In keeping with

the aforementioned facts the American and Russian systems have some important similarities

and the other two systems are set apart from the others. The massive populations of the larger

prisons in the two bigger countries takes its toll on the health of inmates in the facilities, with

diseases and chronic illness spreading wildly through prison hallways (Greifinger, 2005, 61). In

the earlier years of these prisons tuberculosis was the common problem and has since been

replaced with health concerns including mental illness and sexually transmitted diseases

(Greifinger, 2005, 61).

Icelandic correctional facilities outsource prisoners’ medical treatments they commonly

do elsewhere in the process of caring for the inmates. Physicians and other necessary health care

professionals come from outside of the prison system and are brought in as necessary to handle

health problems that arise within the prisons (Baldursson, 2000, 9). Icelandic prisons also do not

have health wards in which to care for their sick; when prisoners fall ill they are simply

transferred to a normal Icelandic hospital and are treated there.

Alcohol and drug problems are also not handled within the Icelandic prisons. If an inmate

has a drug problem and needs to receive treatment they too are sent out of the prison and to a

treatment program elsewhere (Baldursson, 2000, 9). In these programs the inmates are treated

like all the other people recovering from their drug problems and the programs are traditionally

funded by the state or welfare programs (Baldursson, 2000, 10).

Although medical and drug treatment is outsourced to other professionals outside of the

correctional system the prisons do handle one type of treatment on the inside – psychological.

The prison system in Iceland employs two full time psychologists who see prisoners on an

individual basis when they need help from a medical professional (Baldursson, 2000, 10).

As with Icelandic prisons outsourcing to outside hospitals is common within the Swedish

system. Once inmates have been admitted to their correctional facility they are examined by a

nurse within the first 24 hours of their arrival. Beyond this outside care for specific medical care

is sent out to medical services outside of the prison, including hospitalization of the inmates

when necessary (Lindstrom &Leijonram, 2007, 568). Treatment programs have been developed

to help prisoners with drug problems, who are urine tested and have their cells searched by both

guards and dogs for drug contraband (Lindstrom &Leijonram, 2007, 568).

Individual Testimonies: What Reports Won’t Show

Official reports are not known for their telling stories of torture and brutal daily

conditions but rather the facts and data involved with facilities and judicial systems. But that is

not always the entire story. When the European Union Russian Centre recently reviewed the

Russian Federal Penitentiary Service and the Judicial Service many of the supposed harsh acts

committed inside the system came to light.

The harsh allegations about conditions throughout the Russian penitentiary system are by

no means limited to the male facilities, either. Two members of a popular punk rock band were

imprisoned in Russia for lip-synching and playing air guitar during a peaceful protest, and after

serving the majority of her time in a Russian prison one of the members has come forward to a

New York Times journalist detailing the horrific conditions she had experienced in her prison

(Gessen, 2013). Sewage pipes in the washrooms frequently got blocked and had to be fixed by

the prisoners or they would burst; inmates rarely got to wash up and when they did it was in the

same washroom as the other inmates; the food fed to prisoners is always stale or rotten,

encouraging malnourishment in the facility; beatings and violent treats from prison authorities

are not commonly found inside the prison hallways (Gessen, 2013).

Grievances against the prison system are not unique to the facilities found in Russia,

however. ADX Florence has had its share of opposition in the years since opening its doors.

Human rights activists and inmates themselves have spoken out about what goes on within its

walls, opposing the strict regime and the treatment of the people who are forced to remain inside.

11 prisoners from Florence have filed a federal class action lawsuit against the United States

Bureau of Prisons alleging that they were mistreated and their mental illnesses (or the ones they

have developed while in incarceration) (Walshe, 2012).

The prisoners from the Colorado Supermax show the extent of just how bad the worst of

the American prison system is. Twice a week the inmates are kept in their cells for 24 hours a

day; the other five days they are allowed outside of their cells for one short hour (if not in the

ultra-secure unit of the prison, which very few are) (Walshe, 2012). As part of the Bureau of

Prisons’ policy mentally ill offenders are not allowed into the ADX, but that does not stop the

offenders who do get placed there from developing a mental illness during their sentence.

The BOP directed indirectly addressed this through a statement stating that “Incarceration

is difficult for many people. Many individuals experience a wide range of emotions – sadness,

anxiety, fear, loneliness, anger or shame… Look for meaning and purpose in education and

treatment programs, faith, work, family, and friends,” (Walshe, 2012). But what use is this

blanket statement when access to treatment, work, family, and friends are almost nonexistent in

the country’s infamous Supermax facility.

Prison rights in Sweden and Iceland are a far cry from what can be found in many

Russian and American correctional institutions. Visits in the Swedish prison system may take

place without the supervision of a prison officer. These visits include conjugal visits, visits from

friends or families, attorneys, or from members of organizations (including but not limited to

Amnesty International, human rights organizations, or religious organizations) (Lindstrom

&Leijonram, 2007, 565). Mail is also allowed within the Swedish prison system but may be

subjected to searches by prison officials for contraband or information about illegal activities

(Lindstrom &Leijonram, 2007, 565).

More unique to this liberal prison system is the granting of furloughs to prisons within

the system, a freedom that would be unheard of in the stricter prison systems of the world. This

is among the rights granted to inmates in the country that contributes to its reputation from other

countries around the world as one of the more lenient systems, willing to go easy on the

prisoners (which has resulted in numerous escapes and tightened security measures during the

last few years) (Lindstrom &Leijonram, 2007, 565). The system sees reuniting the prisoner with

the world outside of prison as crucial to that inmates’ rehabilitation and treatment.

Among the prisoners to escape over the last decade and lead to the hardening of the

Swedish prison system was Tony Olsson, who escaped from a high security prison. Olson had

been convicted of killed two police officers. Although studies have pointed to convicts becoming

smarter and savvier in the ways of manipulation and escape Olsson’s cell door have been

accidentally left open by a member of the prison staff (Alvarez, 2005, 1). Olsson walked out of

his prison with a gun, a cell phone, and three other prisoners whom he let out of their cells after

taking keys from a prison guard. Another guard had smuggled in the phone and gun that Olsson

had used in his escape and after the men were captured a total of five guards were implicated in

helping the prisoners to escape the prison, which shocked both the system and the country and

started calls for a stricter prison system (Alvarez, 2005, 2).

The Swedish prison system is not always the picture of ease and leniency that it appears

to be, however. It advocates the use of solitary confinement (isolation) only in extreme

circumstances and when there is a distinct need for it. And yet the system was still condemned

by the European Union’s Anti-Torture Office for its occasional use of isolation for an extended

period of time (up to a year and a half) (Ghosh, 2013). The system claims to rarely use this

punishment on its prisoners and yet it has been known to happen for lengths of time found

incomprehensible to members of the international community.

A Deeper Look: When Cameras Get Inside

The graphic footage showing these prisons from the inside is there. Be it National

Geographic, 60 Minutes, or international journalists there is no denying the conditions that so

many of the world’s worst prisoners live in every day of their sentences. In 2009 National

Geographic aired one of the first in-depth looks at three famous prisons to show what life was

like on the inside.

Black Dolphin Prison (referred to as such because of the black dolphin statue standing

outside its front doors) shows how extreme life can be inside a Russian prison. The prison holds

approximately 700 of the worst criminals in Russian society. Murderers, cannibals, pedophiles,

and terrorists are among those making up its sizable population (National Geographic, 2009).

The harsh conditions, brutal crimes committed, and strict atmosphere of the prison reinforce the

lack of sympathy the guards are known to have for the convicts.

Breakfast is followed immediately by early morning exercise, both of which take place

indoors. The exercise time takes place indoors so prisoners are never allowed outside, but simply

pace back and forth in a large caged cell (National Geographic, 2009). When prisoners are

walked around the prison they are handcuffed, accompanied by numerous guards and trained

dogs, and walked through the halls in stress positions to eliminate their view of the prison and

lessen the chance of escape (National Geographic, 2009).

60 Minutes aired a documentary filmed by CBS Broadcasting that went inside ADX

Florence to get a first-hand look at the country’s Supermax prison used for the world of

American criminals. The prison houses some of the worst criminals the country has ever seen –

terrorists, gang members, murders. This particular prison emphasizes isolation within its walls,

removing its inmates from the outside society and from the reach of their friends of family (CBS,

2009). Prisoners are allowed one 15 minute phone call every month, constantly surveyed, and

force fed their meals if they attempt anything resembling a hunger strike. Claims of understaffing

have made their way to authorities and to the general public, creating fear for the guards who do

work at ADX Florence (CBS, 2007).

As seen in many strict Russian prisons isolation is a key component of controlling the

inmates, depriving them of any familiarity or comfort. Described as a “clean version of hell” by a

former warden the prison has also been referred to as the strictest prison in the world (CBS,

2007).

Things Are Not Always What They Seem

Even though main Russian authorities deny the harsh treatment of inmates in their

traditional facilities and prisons camps the extreme conditions have been studied and reported on

over the years. Russian authorities have acknowledged the horrific conditions which used to be

so completely widespread under Soviet rule, even going so far as to admonish the prior human

rights violations. But these violations are not necessarily over, despite what the authorities may

lead the public and the world to believe. A 2002 speech by then Deputy Minister of Justice Yuri

Ivanovich Kalinin reiterating to the people just how important it was to uphold peoples’ basic

human rights, even in a Russian prison “One of the most important focuses of reform in the legal

sphere is judicial and legal reform aimed at establishing the priority of human rights, the

implementation of constitutional principles and bringing of Russian law into line with generally

accepted norms of international law,” (Kalinin, 2002, 9). Whether or not the federation has

addressed the allegations of abuse is an entirely different story.

Conclusions

Although the basic premise for prisons around the world is the same the methods to

implement justice differ tremendously from country to country. Some nations pack their

prisoners in as tightly as possible and beat them to instill fear, others allow prisoners to live in

comfortable conditions with access to a well-paying job and an education. Prisons are meant to

rehabilitate the worst members of our society, regardless of where they are located in the world.

When this is not a realistic possibility they merely serve as a means to incapacitate these

members of society for as long as possible. Some countries believe in using top security

techniques to watch over their prisoners while others are more relaxed in their security, and when

it comes to being locked up around the world there are absolutely some places that are better to

be placed in than others.

Bibliography

Alvarez, L. (2005). Escapes Lead Sweden to Rethink Liberal Prison System. The New York Times, pp. 1-2.

Baldursson, E. Prisoners, Prison, and Punishment in Small Societies. (2000). Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology & Crime Prevention, 1(1), 6-15.

Basic facts: the Swedish Prison and Probation Service. (2007). Norrköping: The Swedish Prison and Probation Service.

Clare, S. & Nasaw, D. (2012, 04 12). Just how bad are American 'Supermax' prisons?. British Broadcasting Channel.

CBS News. A clean version of hell. (2007). Directed by Scott Pelley. New York, N.Y.: CBS Broadcasting, Inc.

Feifer, G. (2008, January 1). Former Inmates Allege Russian 'Torture Prisons'. Retrieved April 30, 2014.

Gessen, M. (2013). Life in a Russian Prison. The New York Times.

Ghosh, P. (2013). Sweden’s Happy and Perplexing 'Problem': Four Prisons Closed Due To Falling Inmate Population. International Business Times.

Greifinger, R. Health status in US and Russian prisons: more in common, less in contrast. Journal of Public Health Policy, 26, 60-68.

Holmberg, S., & Öberg, J. (2012). Effects of Drug Treatment Units in Swedish Prisons. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology & Crime Prevention, 13(1), 44-63.

Hounshell, B. (2010). What are Russian prisons like?. Foreign Policy.

International Centre for Prison Studies. Europe: World Prison Brief. (n.d.). Retrieved April 30, 2014.

James, E. (2013). Why is Sweden closing its prisons?. The Guardian.

Kalinin, Y. (2002). The Russian penal system: past, present and future. London: International Centre for Prison Studies.

Lindstrom, P., & Leijonram, E. (2007). The Swedish Prison System. Ministry of Justice. 559-570.

Orange, R. (2013). Sweden closes four prisons as number of inmates plummets. The Guardian.

The Washington Times. “Petak, Russia’s Alcatraz, softens hardened inmates.” August 14, 2004.

National Geographic. Russia's Toughest Prisons. (2011).

Sullivan, Laura. “At Pelican Bay Prison, a Life in Solitary.” National Public Radio 2006, n. page. Web. 18 Dec.2013.

US Department of State. Executive Summary. (2011). Iceland. United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC.1-18.

Walshe, S. (2012). US 'supermax' prison is condemned internationally for its abusive regime. The Guardian.

Wilson Gilmore, Ruth. (2007). The prison fix. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, Web.