“Deep Frustration” Started Gaol Strike

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31540, 30 November 1967, Page 26

“Deep Frustration” Started Gaol Strike

. (New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, November 29. Last year’s hunger strike at the maximum security block in Auckland’s Mount Eden Prison was sparked off by the “deep frustration” prisoners felt about their future while they were incarcerated in the block.

The Commissioner of Inquiry into the strike (Mr F. McCarthy, S.M.) reported to the Minister of Justice (Mr Hanan) today that three factors contributed towards this frustration.

They were: The prisoners’ lack of knowledge about the reasons they were put in the block. The machinery by which they were put in the block. Lack of knowledge of how long they would be detained there. Mr McCarthy said the prisoners in the maximum security block were “imbued with a sense of deep frustration” because they could not see any hope or future while they were incarcerated in the block. “I am quite satisfied that this is the basic cause of the trouble,” he said. Stating that he was satisfied that the protest was not aimed at the food in the prison, Mr McCarthy said: “One

inmate told me that their original plan was not to stage a hunger strike—but to refuse to shave. However, they realised that this would not enhance their appearance on visiting day.” The decision to stage a hunger strike was made through a chance remark. Recommending a solution to the prisoners’ three main problems, Mr McCarthy said it was essential that consideration should be given to setting up a committee to decide whether or not an inmate should be placed in the maximum security block and when he should be released.

“I would suggest that such a committee should consist of persons who have an intimate knowledge and experience, not only of the principles of penology but also a knowledge of wrong-doers. “I am confident that a great measure of the trouble which has been experienced in the block by way of minor infractions of the present rules would be obviated if inmates knew that they had some chance of presenting their case to some independent tribunal,” said Mr McCarthy. He also proposed that before an inmate was put in the block' there should be a similar inquiry at which he should be given a chance to be heard.

“He would then know why he is there and realise in which direction he must mend his ways.” Mr McCarthy, suggested also that it might be possible to introduce a scheme where when an inmate was placed in the block, he was told that his case would be reviewed by the committee after a given time. He said this move would give the prisoner some hope. Commenting on Mr McCarthy’s proposal for reviewing the procedure for placing inmates in the block, the Minister of Justice (Mr Hanan) said the Secretary for Justice had normally taken the decision to place inmates into the block and remove them from it. Four men had been removed from the block since it was occupied in March, 1966. But Mr Hanan said he would consider the establishment of a special classification committee for the block to carry out the functions Mr McCarthy had in mind.

He emphasised, however, that as the maximum security prison at Paremoremo would be completed during next year, there might not be a need for anything too formal in the meantime.

Referring to the comment that the inmates were not told why there were put in the block, the Minister said: “Several of those who have been in the block are wellknown prisoners who have convictions for escaping and others—because of the nature of their crimes—must be given no opportunity to escape.” -Mr Hanan said the facts “cried aloud” why these men were held in close security. Nevertheless, he had instructed the Justice Department that each inmate in the block, and those sent there in future, should be told clearly the reason for the move.