Is court-ordered solitary confinement needed?
Solitary confinement as a sentencing option should be abolished as it conflicts with Malta’s prison system shifting towards a restorative model
As human beings, we must uphold the principle that all individuals are equal and entitled to fundamental human rights, regardless of their actions or past mistakes. As a social worker, I firmly believe in the power of rehabilitation over retribution, not only for the well-being of the individual but for the benefit of society.
Recently, I watched Times of Malta’s prison feature, where a journalist had the opportunity to tour the Corradino Correctional Facility. I was deeply impressed by the progressive leadership and vision of Prison Director Chris Siegersma, whose background in social work aligns closely with my own values. His commitment to fostering positive change within the prison system, promoting psychological support and investing in inmate welfare is a beacon of hope for restorative justice in Malta.
However, one moment in the discussion resonated with me profoundly. Siegersma stated that he fundamentally disagrees with the practice of solitary confinement but remains bound by court sentences that enforce it. This paradox raises an important question: If the prison itself is steering towards rehabilitation, why are we still clinging to a practice that inflicts psychological harm and contradicts this approach?
Solitary confinement typically involves placing an individual in a small, stark cell for 23 hours a day, with minimal human contact and limited stimulation. The remaining hour is granted for ‘exercise’ in a small, enclosed area. This level of isolation can have devastating effects on mental health, exacerbating pre-existing conditions and even inducing new psychological disorders.
Article 9 of the Maltese Criminal Code regulates the use of solitary confinement. It limits confinement to a maximum of 10 days, with a mandatory two-month interval before it can be reimposed — unless the inmate commits a further prison regulation breach, in which case the limit extends to 15 days. The article also caps the number of solitary terms at 12 unless the court explicitly rules otherwise.
While these limitations may appear to offer safeguards, they do little to mitigate the inherent harm caused by solitary confinement. Psychological damage can manifest in as little as 24 hours of isolation, and prolonged confinement – even within the legal limits – risks long-term trauma.
Research has established the detrimental effects of solitary confinement- Omar Rababah
The European Convention on Human Rights does not directly address solitary confinement. However, article 3 states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Legal challenges across Europe have argued that solitary confinement, especially when prolonged, violates this fundamental right. The United Nations echoes this stance, defining confinement lasting more than 15 days as “prolonged” and a form of torture under the ‘Nelson Mandela Rules’.
Decades of research have established the detrimental effects of solitary confinement. Psychologists have linked it to severe psychological distress, including anxiety, depression, paranoia, hallucinations, aggression and suicidal ideation.
Malta’s prison system is visibly shifting towards a restorative model. The employment of social workers, psychologists and counsellors, along with the introduction of the commissioner for inmate welfare, signals a commitment to helping inmates address the root causes of their behaviour and facilitating reintegration into society. But this progress is undermined when courts continue to impose solitary confinement – a practice that stands in direct opposition to the prison’s evolving philosophy.
In 2021, Andrew Azzopardi, Ruth Farrugia and Jamie Bonnici authored a comprehensive report advocating for the complete abolition of solitary confinement in Malta.
While full abolition is the ideal goal, an immediate and practical step would be to remove solitary confinement as a sentencing option. This would prevent the courts from mandating its use, relieving the prison authorities of the obligation to enforce a punishment they do not believe in.
The time has come to break away from archaic punitive measures. The punishment for breaking the law should be the deprivation of liberty – not the erosion of an individual’s humanity. Malta has already begun the journey towards a more compassionate justice system. Now, we must take the next step and consign solitary confinement to history, where it belongs.
Omar Rababah is a senior social worker and an educator.