Young women offenders are increasingly being dealt with more harshly than their male counterparts � women are twice as likely to receive a custodial sentence for first non-violence offence than men (Home Office 1999). There has been a considerable increase in the number of young women receiving custodial sentences in the last ten years. We do not believe that prison is a solution for offending, particularly for young women who are not a risk to the public.

Most young women in prison have severe social, emotional and health problems, often resulting from childhood traumas. Imprisoned far from home and away from their children, the experience of prison has a devastating effect on them resulting to over 40 per cent self harming or attempting suicide (Home Office 1997). Recent research by Nacro has demonstrated that prison does more harm than good, as nearly half reoffend and are reconvicted within two years (Nacro, 2001).

Home Detention and electronic monitoring

We are in favour of any measure that enables women to serve their sentences out of prison. However, care must be taken when considering tagging/home detention curfew. It must be first and foremost ascertained that a women�s home is a safe place for her to be. This is not always the case, particularly for women aged16-24 who experience disproportionately more violence than women as a whole (Home Office 1999). Furthermore, over half of young women in prison aged 21 and under have been sexually abused as children, probably in the home (Home Office 1997).

We believe that the way to reduce crime and reoffending by young women is to address the underlying causes of their behaviour. These are often linked to painful experiences in childhood (sexual abuse, growing up in care, family breakdown and domestic violence) which may result in low self esteem, poor school achievement, mental and emotional health problems, poverty and drug and alcohol dependency.

Because there are no Young Offenders Institutions for young women and few local authority secure units, girls as young as 15 are being imprisoned in adult women�s prisons, often very far from their homes. This practice must stop. Alternative provision must be found that can provide the sort of therapeutic services described above and that is close to the young women�s home and support network.

Clare Dodwell, Policy Officer, Young Womens Christian Association YWCA

===================================================

Prisoners' property search policy is unlawful�

Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

A policy requiring that prisoners must always be absent when privileged legal correspondence held by them in their cells was examined by prison officers was unlawful.

The House of Lords so held in allowing an appeal by George Anthony Daly from the dismissal by the Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Kennedy, Lord Justice Otton and Lord Justice Waller) on May 25, 1999 of his application for judicial review of the decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, acting by the Director-General of the Prison Service, to apply a policy of cell searches in all closed prisons in England and Wales which involved prison staff searching prisoner's legally privileged correspondence in their absence from the cell.

==========================================================

Dear MOJUK,

I am a Rastafarian from the Church of the twelve tribes of Israel.The prison service are denying me the right of freedom of religion, the right to manifest my religion, to worship, to practice, to teach and observance of the Rastafarian faith.

My religion forbids I to give or take bodily fluid from my body for medical purposes. I have made my religion known to the administration and and they know herbs are part of my religion.

They keep asking me for you urine samples to be tested for drugs. I refuse on religious grounds, for this reason alone I've been kept on closed visits for almost 10 months. I've been deprived of my private cash to purchase toiletries, tobacco, phonecards and all necessities from the canteen, for almost the same period of time. Also all my wages I work for they take away. The Prison Service argument for this blatant harassment is that they do not recognise the Rastafarian religion.

I am kept on the lowest IEPS level and have had no association for 10 months. I am kept behind the door, unless I am working on art or education. Plus have been kept in solitary confinement for an impossible amount of days in the segregation unit. I was even planted with drugs in this establishment. And even though to this day I haven't seen what they said, they even took away my radio.

My best regards to all the hostages.

Carl Kanute Gowe, HMP Gartree

============================================================

Satpal Ram: Double blow
�
Home Secretary refuses to uphold Parole Board decision to release Satpal Ram.
�
Background
In 1986 Satpal Ram was racially attacked in an Indian Restaurant. In the course of Satpal defending himself his attacker died. In 1987 Satpal was convicted of murder without being given the opportunity to defend himself in court. During these fifteen years of his incarceration he has been moved continuously, seventy times, to various high security prisons. At present he is back in HMP Blakenhurst.
�
Parole:
In December 1999 Satpal began another lengthy parole process.

On the 27th October 2000 the Parole Board gave an unprecedented recommendation supporting the immediate release of Satpal Ram.
They also said that in recommending his release that he did not need testing� in open conditions but should be immediately released. They took into account the exceptional nature and quality of the support network available to him, who have an intimate knowledge of his circumstances and the pressures that he will face on release and who have expressed commitment towards him.
�
However:
This recommendation arrived at the Home Office in October 2000. The then Home Secretary Jack Straw, sat on it till January 16th 2001, and then sent it back to the Parole Board seeking clarification� on such a positive decision. The Parole Board wrote back stating very, very clearly that they stood by their decision and in the absence of new information had no power to review their decision.
�
In an unprecedented move Jack Straw, rejected this recommendation. But Satpal and his legal team were only informed of this decision on May 10th 2001 - seven months later. Instead, Paul Boateng the then Prison Minister made the absurd decision that Satpal Ram should undergo an accelerated decatogorisation timetable, that can only be rationalized by political purposes rather than any justifiable social objectives.
�
Gareth Pierce, Satpal's Solicitor, lodged a challenge at the High Court on August 10th 2001 against the Home Office decision to refuse Satpal's immediate release.
�
A week ago after he was finally decategorised and moved to open prison, a curious, alleged 'incident' took place on the day when he was trying to telephone to the hospital where his mother was dying, with the result that Satpal was immediately transported to a high security prison - without adjudication on this allegation. Despite strong medical evidence from his mother's doctors that she was close to death, the Prison Governor refused to allow Satpal to visit her without handcuffs despite the fact that he has had eight home visits without handcuffs in the last two months. Sadly, Satpal's mother died on the 7th September without him at her side.
�
Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) Decision
After the CCRC had delayed almost a year giving their decision, they finally gave a provisional decision. The CCRC have provisionally rejected Satpal's legal team's submission. Satpal, his family and campaign supporters are joined by a massive, informed opinion that the original trial was totally flawed and riddled with every form of institutional racism. Satpal suffered an unprovoked racist attack. Self-defence is no offence. The view of the CCRC is provisional only and everyone concerned is confident that the final decision must be in accordance with justice and truth, leading to a referral of the case to the Court of Appeal.
�
The Struggle Continues
Despite the continuing inhumane treatment at the hands of the government and judiciary, Satpal remains strong. The struggle to prove his innocence will continue as the campaign's pressure increases, both nationally and internationally.
�
Self Defence Is No Offence! Free Satpal Ram!
=====================================================
White Crown Prosecution Service is racist, says report by lawyer
�
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was branded �institutionally racist� at every level yesterday after the attitudes of white lawyers were found to have led to a disproportionately high number of black people being sent for trial.

An independent report by Sylvia Denman, a barrister, found that the CPS was failing to filter out police prejudices at the time of arrest. This resulted in weak cases involving people from ethnic minorities still being sent for trial.
Ms Denman said she had serious concerns about both black and Asian defendants and victims receiving unfair treatment, especially in a public organisation designed to uphold the law.

�This would provide a good illustration of how lack of vigilance, rather than conscious discrimination, may give rise to institutional racism within the CPS,� she said.
The CPS has been given 12 months to begin eliminating fundamentally racist attitudes within the service. It will be overseen by a steering group. A similar committee was set up after the Stephen Lawrence inquiry (which criticised the Metropolitan Police�s handling of the murder investigation) to oversee the police force.

The report, entitled Race Discrimination in the Crown Prosecution Service, found that ethnic minority staff were seriously under represented in the higher administrative grades. Black and Asian lawyers also �remained trapped� in positions much lower than their abilities deserved. There was such a poor system to respond to accusations of discrimination from ethnic minority staff that they were often persuaded to drop their complaints.

Twenty years after the first policies on race became legislation, the CPS had failed to take steps to improve attitudes with the service at all. They finally were forced to take notice in the early 1990s after they lost a series of high-profile tribunals which black and Asian staff brought against them.
David Calvert-Smith, who as Director of Public Prosecutions has been head of the CPS since 1998, acknowledged the service�s failings and admitted the charges of institutionalised racism yesterday. He said the CPS, which was set up in 1986 partly to maintain fairness in the justice system, had a �far higher duty than most organisations� to set public standards.

The investigation by Ms Denman, who was until recently the chairman of Camden and Islington health authority, had been a �very uncomfortable period� for most of its employees, �particularly those who are white�, he said. Mr Calvert-Smith said: �The first time we are confronted, as a trained lawyer, with the fact that we are behaving in a way that discriminates, your instinct says, �What, me?� All of us white managers and white lawyers must believe that, albeit without intending to, we have discriminated. There is no doubt that the CPS has been within the Lawrence definition �institutionally racist�.�

Mr Calvert-Smith said the service would abide by the recommendations of the report. Staff who continued with racist attitudes would face dismissal, while promotion to key positions would no longer discriminate against minorities. The CPS will be subject to the guidance of a steering group, set up by the Attorney-General and on which Ms Denman, an Afro-Caribbean, will sit. It will monitor progress over the next 12 months.

Failure to show any dramatic improvement will mean the Commission for Racial Equality will be invited back. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .by Helen Studd