But the article makes no mention of its opinion on the imprisonment of convicted criminals, the next point of contention is article 5, "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" and even by the governments own prisons watchdog the current conditions in some if not most of Britain's detention facilities contradict with what the United Nations declares as an acceptable state for a human being to be kept in.
But as with every point of contention there is always a counter argument, the point of prison is to pass punishment upon someone who has decided to break a law passed by their piers, which is enforced by the HM government and police force. The concept of punishment is that someone has committed an offence an is given a penalty in order for them to pay for what they have done and it is the hope that this will act as a deterrent to stop the person committing future crimes at a later date.
So why should the prisoners have rights, when they have decided to infringe on the Human rights of other members of society, article 3- everyone has a right to security of person. Right wing criminologists might conclude that below standard containment conditions for prisoners is a just punishment, and that if someone decides to break the social code then they should receive a punishment fitting their crime. The concept of prison being morally objectionable as with most issues concerning the law, down to everyone's particular views on the issue, but the argument that prison is an indefensible act has no sound basis.
What would the justice system do with convicted criminals, the purpose for prisons are to keep the people to legal system deem to dangerous to person or society away from the public domain. Where should these people go if the prisons were actually abolished? , there are many different methods of rehabilitation as a punishment now available to the criminal justice system but these methods cannot be applied to all crime and criminals.
It appears Morris's 1976 statement that imprisonment is morally objectionable is a two sided story but the indefensible claim cannot be founded with any sound information or alternatives proposed. Every society has their own form of social punishment, and the maximum penalty that can be handed down in the united kingdom is a lengthy prison term, and as in every society there are extreme deviants that pose a serious threat to the safety of the public at large, and if they commit such offences they should lose their right to liberty and freedom and be removed from society, and the only method available is for incarceration.
Cambridge dictionaries Online
Retrieved December 12, 2004 from
Scott, D, G. (n.d.). Abolitionism and Prisoner's Rights in Britain. Retrieved December, 12, 2004 from
Maguire, M and Morgan ,R and Reiner, R (3rdED),2003, The Oxford handbook of criminology, Oxford, Oxford University Press , 250-260, 1119-1125, 1169-1181