PRIVATE DETENTION ROOMS:

A NEW URBAN REALITY

Dr. Jonathan Hadley

University of Helsinki (Dept. Social Research)

Helsinki 2010 International Seminar on Urban Safety

21 October

ANY PLACEUnder jurisdiction or control

of an OPCAT state

WHERE PERSONSARE or MAY be

DEPRIVED OF THEIR

LIBERTY

Either by virtue of an ORDER given by a

PUBLIC AUTHORITY

or at its INSTIGATION, or with its CONSENT or ACQUIESENCE

LIBERTY (deprivation of):

Any form of

detention or imprisonment

or the placement of a person

in a public or private

custodial setting

from which that person is not

permitted to leave at will

by order of any judicial,

administrative or other authority

‘Place of Detention’UN’s Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) Article 4*:

*(Adopted 18 Dec 2002. In force 22 Jun 2006. Signed by Finland 23 Sep 2003. Not ratified as of 5 Oct 2010)

The Private Security Guard: A Sociological Study

Academy of Finland Postdoctoral Research Project Award 2008-2010

Ethnography of guards in multi-nodal mass semi-public spaces in Helsinki

Inspired by controversial incident in Kontula, October 2006 on YouTube

Asks what new power reality the uniformed security guard represents

Police College of Finland (2008) and University of Helsinki (2009-2010)

Helsinginsanomat 15/11/2006: YouTube, AllSeeingEyeZ

Growth figures...

For Finland’s steady population of 5 million

In1980s In 2010

Police Officers: 9,000 7,000

Private Security: 2,500 12,000

Follows shopping mall growth since 2000

(Main sources: Annual Police Reports & Police Department communications)

Commodification of Policing

≠

2007: Parity and beyond...2009: Helsinki Police commanders openly describing

private secuirty as ’our right hand’ and admit coverage of everyday street-level police duties would be ’difficult without them’ (Q & A session, Helsinki Urban Safety conference, March 2009).

2010: National Police Commissioner aknowledges in national media there are now more private security guards in Finland than police officers and, as such, an inability of police to cover for the security duties of striking retail guards in April 2010 (YLE news 10/4/10).

Key legislation1999 Security Stewards ActGoverns ’traditional’ stewards of 1970s on.

Independant hire, mainly outdoor public events.

Järjestyksenvalvoja = security steward (order)

2002 Private Security Services ActRegulates private security companies as

providers of security services to private clients

Vartija = security guard (property)

2003 Public Order ActCommercialises ’traditional’ security steward

for provision by private security companies in

shopping malls & public transports systems.

By client demand - prevalent 2008 onwards.

(company employed guards become stewards)Photo: © Bettina Airaksinen (www.Flickr.com) ‘Security Rap’, Helsinki Main Station, 22 Aug 2007 (Accessed 7 Apr 2008).

Legal powers... apprehensionGuards

(Sec 28 & 29 2002 Act)

Stewards

(Sec 6, 7 & 8 1999 Act)

Remove – Without business on premises

Apprehend – Petty offenders (theft/assault)Escaped or wanted on warrant

Frisk – Detained for police arrival

Prevent entry & re-entry and

remove (or apprehend if needed):

Drunk, disorderly or dangerous

persons in their area of operation.

Frisk and seize from, or

remove persons in possession of:

Items prohibited either by law, or

as a condition of entry to area (?)Trained and equipped with spray, baton and handcuffs.

Can use such forcible means as is necessary to exercise powers

Sec 7(3) Security Stewards Act 1999(Ammendment 622/2003)

”If an apprehended person cannot be handed over to the

police without delay, security stewards have the right,

provided they obtain the consent of the police and comply

with instructions issued by the Ministry of Interior,

to keep the person in custody for up to four hours after the

apprehension, but in any case only up to the time the event

has ended and the public has dispersed or the reason for the

apprehension has otherwise ceased to be valid.”

Contested interpretation of for retail security detention rooms and use by stewards appointed under 2003 Public Order Act?

The(multi-nodal)

Grid

© J A Hadley, Oct 2010

Observed Detention RoomsUnable to include slides of detention rooms

unexpectedly found and discussed

with guards during field work due to

researcher’s confidentiality agreements.

Ranged from improvised outdoor spaces

to adapted indoor spaces, to DIY style

converted rooms, to purpose built rooms

built with the mall itself. Eight cases.

Development of Detention RoomFrom an improvised doorway in public view...

...to a client provided, fully equipped & purpose built suite inside a mall’s

state of the art security centre

Private detention rooms as standard by 2005

since governing private security legislation in 2002.

Continued retail sector development in 2010.

Recognisable as ’Places of Detention’ under OPCAT

Regulation of Detention Rooms?

Currently no state regulation of min’ standards Companies and clients consult together on design

Guards develop their own common practices But practices focus on guard’s security interest

Who safeguards the detainee’s rights & welfare? Who supervises the guard’s detention practices?

If yet to ratify OPCAT (as of Oct 2010)…

How is potential ill treatment to be prevented?

and I was left in that room for almost two hours where I was subjected to more verbal abuse

Then I was taken to this seedy little room at the bottom of some stepsthat are covered in urine

including this same guard coming up to me with his fists saying

”you’re in fucking Finland now, mother-fucker! It’s our fucking rules!”

British citizen, resident in Helsinki, speaking on popular Finnish radio, Radio Rock, (14/8/2008) regarding alleged abusive detention by guards over a tram ticket dispute. So traumatised immediately left for UK with school age family after 16 happy years here.

Ill Treatment in Places of Detention?

Suggested State Guidance:Given that private detention rooms and their routine use pending police arrival will continue to develop:

CCTV for all detention rooms/holding areas Wearing of four-digit identity numbers for all guards Clear display of complaints procedure in the room Detainee’s right not to be held incommunicado* Time limits from police notification to arrival*

*Exceptions only authorised by police and in accordance with regular police procedures

As ’Places of Detention’: Minimum (EU?) standards? OPCAT supervision (NPM) implications? How many in your local shopping mall? Are they properly regulated/supervised?

Yet to have first death in custody:

Who’s liable – Police? Police Authorities? Guards? Company? Client?

How safe is this new urban reality?

Thank youjonathan.hadley@helsinki.fi