Solitary Confinement, Prisoner Litigation, and the Possibility of a Prison Abolitionist Lawyering Ethics
Solitary Confinement, Prisoner Litigation, and the Possibility of a Prison Abolitionist Lawyering Ethics
The main goals of the text
The main aim of the paper is to shed light on the hidden world of punishment in Canada and acts as an important function of prison litigation. The article aims at showing something which is generally about the system of solitary confinement. The author also aims at infusing lawyering efforts in seeking the end of solitary detention in Canada’s state prison systems. The paper contemplates that the part of litigation in eliminating the human disaster despite the limited success of prisoners’ litigation in Canada.
The author has achieved the goals by illustrating the prolonged and prevalent use of solitary detention in Canada prisons has been unrelenting human rights crisis with racialized and gendered scopes. Several reports have advocated for the abolishment of this practice in prisons (Parkes, 2017). The author highlights the roles played by prison abolitionist ethics to abolish solitary confinement on behalf of the prisoners. This is through their lawyering efforts to end inhuman conditions and compensate illegality and suffering. The author shows the role of litigation in the critical resistance movement.
The specific arguments
The paper has suggested that prisoner’s litigation is a valuable response to the plan of abolishing this form of punishment and to redress several concrete harms that are caused by its practices. The author argues that there is increased awareness in Canada and all over the world that the solitary confinement is inhuman and amounts to much torture. Relatively, the Mandela Rules have prohibited the imposition of prolonged solitary confinement for people with physical and mental disabilities, women, and children (Parkes, 2017).
The author argues that the courts have the influence to implement rights as well as offer evocative changes to the prisons. Since prisons have remained to be closed establishments, they are resilient to accountability with increased illegalities that happen with the Canadian jails and prisons. The author argues that there is a vital place for the prison abolitionist ethic and anti-carceral social movements to foster legal action on behalf of convicts to eliminate inhuman conditions and compensate illegality and suffering.
Concepts
The article has offered an understanding of various concepts such as solitary confinement, prisoner litigation, and prisoner abolitionist lawyering ethic. The first section offers an overview of the increased use of solitary confinement, while the next section considers prisoner litigation seeking, and the third section focuses on prisoner abolitionist lawyering. There is a growing awareness of the issues of solitary confinement. Based on this litigation and lawyering efforts seek to eliminate the solitary confinement in Canadian prisons.
Specific conclusion of the text
Lawyers should sacrifice to argue for improved conditions in confinements such as low-security prisons and medical treatment. The texts campaigns for new and improved prisons to eliminate solitary confinement which makes prison a form of state violence. Considerably, the notion of abolitionist ethics engaging with criminal law will open up new possibilities and conversations that will enable doing things differently (Parkes, 2017). It is important prisoners have allies who can advocate strategically, knowledgeably, and to their interests. Lawyering efforts will reduce some inhuman activities of incarceration and allow human reforms through effective legal work. These decisions stand very strong and effective in the rights of prisoners, offering a standard of treatment that will ensure that they are free from unusual and cruel treatment in prisons.
Reference
Parkes, D. (2017). Solitary Confinement, Prisoner Litigation, and the Possibility of a Prison Abolitionist Lawyering Ethic. Canadian Journal of Law & Society/La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société, 32(2), 165-185.