The word ‘detainee’ tends to evoke media pictures of inmates at Guantanamo Bay or remind us of articles about supposed secret internment camps for terrorists and suspected terrorists. In a sense this is correct and, for the purpose of this article, I will assume this as the meaning and also include prisoners held in UK prisons on ‘remand’, i.e. being held pending trial.
If you believe your rights as a detainee have been violated, you can describe your circumstances using our free Rights Situation Checker.
Do Suspected Criminals Have Rights?
Of course they do. They are members of the human race, this great big family that we call ‘people’. They are entitled to share in the same protection that the rest of enjoy. They may have to suffer curtailment of certain rights, such as personal liberty and the right to vote, but they are still afforded the protection of the Human Rights Act, the European Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights.
Describe what has happened and find out which UK human rights protections apply and what you can do.
Try our Rights Situation Checker free, here on this site →What About Terrorists?
Yes, they have rights in exactly the same way; they still have freedom of speech. The fact that we do not condone or agree with their methods does not mean that our laws do not allow them to express their opinion; as a democratic society we just don’t want them to shatter lives and cause wide-scale slaughter. Their continued detention is the cause of much wide-spread debate; is it lawful to detain someone for years at a time? The US Supreme Court and, I would suspect, the European Court would say absolutely not, however the sovereign states have the power to curtail the rights of these people for the sake of national security.
Your situation may be slightly different. ask a question below ↓ and our editorial team will reply with our advice.
Treatment in Detention
The Courts must have a solid reason for holding people in Prison without trial, there must be a clear danger that the person in question will re-offend, attempt to intimidate witnesses or abscond and try to avoid standing trial altogether. However, and for whatever the reason, the people being held must be afforded as much personal freedom as is reasonably practical and they tend not to be subject to as much restriction as convicted inmates; for instance, there is no restriction on contact with family and friends via letter or phone.
Just as with convicted prisoners, the people being held on remand or detained for other reasons, be they mental health reasons or while awaiting a decision on immigration, must be afforded the protection from harm that is their right. They cannot be discriminated against by virtue of their race, colour, religious beliefs, sexual orientation or political views. If prisoners are charged with a crime that is sexual in nature, they must also be segregated for their own protection.
The Basic Point is This...
Every human being, be they prisoner, detainee, terrorist or asylum seeker has the basic human right to be treated with dignity and respect. They have the right to food, housing, protection, education and assistance from the law. They have the right not to be exploited, tortured or intimidated. As a country we have agreed to abide by the European Convention on Human Rights, as a nation we have the Human Rights Act to protect us from those who would seek to harm us or prevent us from enjoying our civil liberties.
Dr Green refused to make corrections to my medical notes. I wrote to CAMHS explaining the inaccuracies attaching the medical records. The following day Dr Green called the social worker and asked them to check my parental capacity, stating that I bring my daughter Amelie without any apparent reason to the doctors.
The social worker closed the case. In his report he suggested that I am influencing Amelie and potentially harming her referring to GP’s concerns.
CAFCASS made another report in March 2015 and he agreed with the social worker's assumptions based on Dr Green - a professional's opinion! They present as the “EVIDENCE” our frequent visits to doctors!
1. CAFCASS mentions in his report that my daughter is frightened of her father, that his partner says that I am a liar and that she is bored at his place and doesn't like to stay there overnight. He doesn't criticise the father at all, instead he makes a huge number of assumptions about me.
2. The paediatrician explained in his letter (March 2015) to my GP that my daughter has an irritable bladder that why she experiences the urine infection symptoms but the test do not show any growth.
3. CAMHS are looking into the case but they don't want to get involved with the court proceedings and they made sure that they see Amelie AFTER the court hearing.
4. The school holds the notes of my daughter saying to the school staff about her anxieties about her visits to her dad's and the girl at school whom she has some problems with. The school is not even allowing me to see those records. I am trying to see the headmistress for nearly 2 months now. I would never believe she is ever so busy! They treat me with suspicion and told Amelie in front of me that I am a worrier. I believe the reason for it is my Ex is the school governor.
The solicitors in Exeter recommended me not to take my child to any professionals anymore.
This is just ridiculous.
The solicitors refuse to write a letter to the doctors surgery to ask them to present the credible evidence for Dr Green's concerns.
The solicitors are convinced that the case is too complicated and nobody will look into it. The surgery wouldn't go against one of its ' doctors.
My name is Ella, I am a divorced, full time working mum. I live in Exeter with my lovely daughter Amelie. I am in a very difficult situation and I am at a loss to understand the justice and the current family law in regard to parental contact.
I am the main carer for my 7 year old daughter who sees her dad regularly, every second weekend with one overnight stay. He left us 2 years ago.
Since then he is constantly pushing for the extension of contact. We started with more overnight stays 2 years ago, but it didn't go very well. My daughter's performance dropped at school together with her emotional and physical state. You don't need to be a psychologist to understand that it was too much for a 5 years old child to accept that her daddy lives with another woman and her 2 children aged 9 and 11 years old.
I stopped overnight contact in May 2014 for a while because my daughter was distressed and developed phobias and sleepless nights. She refused to go to her dad's place. I offered any day contact instead, but her father didn’t accept it.
He made an application to the court to extend the overnight stay and accused me of poisoning my child and in her abduction. He had to withdraw his allegations during the Court Hearing (01 October 2014) as there was no substance to them and I believe they were made to weaken my position.
The Court adviser (CAFCASS) made a report in which he gave a recommendation to reintroduce the overnight contact when the child is a little bit older. 2 weeks after we had a court hearing when the same CAFCASS officer strongly recommended reintroducing overnight contact immediately. I had to compromise and agreed on gradual re-introduction of the contact.
Unfortunately my daughter wasn't ready and happy about it and her phobias and anxieties returned and worsened. She was worried, she didn't sleep well at all, she started bedwetting, Amelie was experiencing urine infection symptoms and aches all over her body.
I was very worried and I had to take her to the doctors very often during that stressful time, but all the tests' results returned as normal.
Amelie really likes Dr Smith and she was sharing her fears and anxieties about the visits at her dad's with Dr Smith. Dr Smith made two referrals to social services expressing her concerns about Amelie going to her dad's overnight. The social services didn't want to get involved explaining that it the matter of family law arena and the dispute between the parents.
My ex bombarded the surgery with the statements that I want to stop him seeing his daughter, that I am emotionally unstable and that I am not keeping him updated on his daughter's health issues, which wasn't true.
Our formal GP Dr Green who saw Amelie only once, called me and mostly shouted at me accusing me in getting them involved in the conflict. In her referral to CAMHS she made a couple of inaccuracies based on what she heard from my ex rather than on the
Ask About Human Rights a question
Ask our editorial team a question and we will reply with our advice. Tell us as much about your situation as you can: the more detail you give, the more useful our answer can be.
You do not need to use your real name. Please do not include your full address, phone number, email address, or the names of other people. We may edit or remove identifying details for privacy and legal reasons.
Comments are moderated before publication.