Much has been said and written about Bill 49 that seeks to increase pre-trial arrest from 48 to a total of 96 hours with possibly another 24 hours added  for offences carrying 12 or more years of imprisonment. The stance has been a human rights perspective, but I’d like to write about how this will impact police logistics.

Not an easy Easter Sunday topic.

The European Court of Human Rights has long established that detention renders a person situationally vulnerable and the possibilities for ill-treatment as well as for degrading treatment are more likely to be triggered in such a setting. And the longer the period of detention, the higher the risk for the police to slip up, escalating the potential of detainee ill-treatment and indignity to occur.  The police unions seem to be silent on the matter.

There are three main areas of contention discussed in academia: health and mental health safeguards; the physical cell conditions; and perceived coercion of police tactics.

Health issues recorded in the literature range from lack of access to prescribed medicine to stress-related pain, withdrawals from substance abuse, increased asthma attacks and death during custody. Mental issues have been recorded as the more likely of all health categories to increase during detention and suspects might develop co-morbidity, such as depression and / or self-harm together with an existing health condition.

Studies on female and gender diverse detainees are too infrequent in contrast to studies involving male detainees and the comparative results are truly patchy. The same can be said for vulnerable detainees, whether it relates to disability, old age or physical frailty. And this does not relate solely to health issues but to other daily and practical aspects such as body and cell searches.

Studies show that the onset or incidence of health issues while held in custody tends to increase with age and with a lack of a fixed residence or address. Constabularies in the UK tend to have a healthcare model in place, with the possibility of a rapid intervention of multi-professional medical teams, a short response time, and established SOPs that clearly outline roles and obligations. This goes hand-in-hand with an established procedure in the UK that obliges custody sergeants to first complete a pre-established healthcare risk assessment drawn up by forensic medical examiners.

So the police would need a mental health protocol in place. They also need monitoring of detainees when substance withdrawal symptoms worsen. They need to have and be trained on handy equipment such as defibrillators. There’s a court case involving a death in custody, so let’s not repeat history.

As for the second question, the physical conditions of cells, the restricted space is already hard to sustain for 48 hours so imagine double that time. The number of cells has to increase to cater for both kind of arrests – the standard 48 and the longer detention. Should one plan for a separate branch of cells? It makes sense to separate the two types of detention, as the impact of seeing others leave before one’s time is up can have negative mental health effects and a downwards behavioural spiral.

Should these cells have different facilities and furnishing? What kind of privacy is going to be afforded? Who is cleaning the cells and when, given that the detainees have to stay there even while eating?

There isn’t a standard minimum area for a cell although the literature tends to gravitate towards at least 2 by 3 metres, or 6 m², with a window that allows natural light and ventilation  through, with a comfortable temperature that can be controlled.  And what constitutes an adequate floor to ceiling height? Sitting in a restricted space has its toll, with the typical short-sightedness known to affect prisoners because of close quarters. So should these cells have a larger footprint?

Would a visit from the task force related to the Convention against Torture pass is part of the test? And how about clothing, food and the need for exercise?

The third aspect of perceived coercion of police tactics requires training the custody officers on multiple levels, whether it’s body and cell searches, communicating with detainees, giving the right caution, receiving and processing detainee complaints. For starters, at which point should the detainee’s next of kin be informed?

The eight-hour sleep period during which no questioning can take place is already established within the 48 hour arrest, so how many of these 8 hours fit into the 96+ hours?

And what would the financial costs of this prolonged detention be?

A slip-up in any of these three areas would amount to ill-treatment of detainees. It would also affect the police and judicial cooperation of Member States with Malta should it fail miserably in this area. Is Malta prepared for this?