Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 13 May 1997

Vol. 479 No. 2

Written Answers. - Treatment of Prisoners.

Trevor Sargent

Question:

253 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Justice the reason a prisoner of 82 years who is feeble was bound by wrist breaker handcuffs for a three and a half hour journey from Cork Prison to Arbour Hill Prison, Dublin 7, in view of the fact that he is non-violent, has never attempted to escape and cannot even climb stairs. [12934/97]

If the account presented by the Deputy was accurate there would be reason to question the procedure followed in this case.

My information, however, is that the picture presented is not, in fact, correct. By way of background I should say that last year following a number of serious incidents involving prisoners escaping from prison escorts, I ordered a major review of the arrangements in place for prison escorts. Arising from this review a new type of restraint was introduced into service. These restraints are more secure than older types while at the same time allowing prisoners ample freedom of movement. It is incorrect to imply that these restraints are excessively restrictive and certainly quite wrong to describe them as "wrist breaker handcuffs". They are a necessary protection for the public and for the officers who have to escort prisoners, no more or no less.

While the Deputy may, of course, query the use of any form of restraint in the case of an elderly prisoner, he will appreciate that these are operational decisions made by prison staff involved whose job is to weigh up all the relevant considerations in arriving at their decisions. If the form of restraint being employed involved serious discomfort, then there would be reason to question its use in the case of an elderly offender. However, as that is not the case and the offence was quite serious, I believe it is reasonable that the operational decision required should be left to those whose job it was to make it.
Top
Share