Allocation to cells is dictated in the prison rules by the complete separation of the sexes, prisoners’ physical and mental states, age, previous criminal records, and the prison regime. Prisoners are allocated a cell after a psychological evaluation, which is taken into account by the wardens responsible for each unit. Above all, cell allocation is dependent on the availability of places.

Spain does not recognise the existence of prisoners of conscience. Multiple NGOs have denounced this lack of recognition. The existence of prisoners of conscience or political prisoners is a deeply controversial subject, particularly since the referendum on Catalonian independence held at the end of 2017. Some independence leaders were imprisoned for their role in the rebellion, following the declaration of independence of “the Republic of Catalonia¹“.

Around one hundred professors of law mobilised against this act. They contest the accusation of “rebellion”, underlining the lack of “violent uprising”. Amnesty International has spoken out multiple times on the issue to reiterate the importance of the right to freedom of expression and to peaceful assembly. According to Amnesty, the imprisonment of Catalan leaders for serious crimes is an excessive and unjustified measure.

There have been no reported delays in informing the family of a deceased prisoner of their death. However, there have been complaints of a lack of consideration shown on these occasions. Relatives have sometimes questioned the authorities’ version of events, particularly when other prisoners have reported incidents involving guards prior to the death.

Inquiries linked to allegations of torture or illl-treatment are partial and limited, verging on non-existent. The administration is not in a position to establish a judgement on the reality of ill-treatment. Prison officers are rarely subject to judicial condemnation. The most common sanction is a suspension of their employment. The Coordinator for the Prevention and Denunciation of Torture (CPDT) has reported a general climate of fear and intimidation. These circumstances prevent prisoners from complaining of poor treatment. Prisoners in León prison have complained to a delegation from the CPT of physical ill-treatment. They did not lodge a complaint due to intimidation from staff.
During the CPT visit to Catalonia, the delegation noted numerous cases of ill-treatment by prison officers. Prisoners who are agitated or those who show signs of violence are often slapped, punched or clubbed in their cells or in a separate room. The CPT is very concerned about such violence.¹

The torture prevention policy includes training staff on human rights issues, and regular visits by the Ombudsman and CPT. This policy also allows, on the recommendation of the SGIP, the installation of surveillance cameras in cells equipped with restraints. The SGIP has, however, refused to regulate the recording, acquisition, conservation and transmission of the images from the CCTV system in prison facilities. The Ombudsman has criticised the variation in video surveillance systems, and the lack of transparency resulting from this heterogeneity. They underline the absence of supervision for staff or of guarantees of prisoners’ rights¹.

The Ombudsman has proposed, in a study published in May 2014, to adapt the Istanbul Protocol to suit conditions in Spain. The state has not followed this recommendation to date. Heath professionals are under the authority of the Minster of the Interior. The CPT delegation has criticised the indifferent attitude of care staff. One of them, in the prison of Madrid V, claims to hardly see the value of reporting injuries, arguing that wounded prisoners would be examined in hospital prior to being admitted to the facility. Potential injuries on arrivals are often described in a superficial manner. No reference is made to the circumstances in which an injury may have happened.

The trade union, ACAIP, attributes the rise in violence to a shortage of staff, the ageing workforce and a lack of training. The number of prisoners suffering from psychiatric issues is rising, which requires increased vigilance by wardens.

All prisoners can submit petitions or complaints regarding their treatment and prison conditions. Complaints and appeals can be submitted verbally or in writing to prison authorities (the staff, manager, or facility director), judiciary authorities, the Ombudsman, or the public prosecutor.

All prison establishments have a computerised central registry to log petitions and complaints. Appeals relating to disciplinary sanctions, initial classifications, an increase or decrease in grade, and decisions affecting fundamental rights are all presented to the facility director, who transmits them to the judicial authority. A certificate of receipt in a sealed envelope is delivered to the prisoner.

All citizens, whether Spanish or foreign, can complain directly to the Ombudsman or NPM on their website, by letter, by fax, or in person. The NPM may also refer matters to themself. Confidentiality is not guaranteed in communications between prisoners and the NPM.

The Ombudsman outlines in their annual reports the application of their recommendations. They develop a framework of the principle elements evaluated during each prison visit. The framework follows the criteria evaluated the previous year and indicates their progress. There are four grades available: sufficiently successful, partially successful, not adequately achieved, and not evaluated.

The CPT notes that sentence enforcement judges’ main function is to validate the decisions of the prison administration. It laments that these judges do not fulfil their role in ensuring proportionality and the appropriateness of authorities’ decisions in a satisfactory fashion. Prisoners have expressed to a CPT delegation their lack of confidence in the institution¹.

Spanish members of Parliament are authorised to conduct visits to prisons.

The judge responsible for the enforcement of sentences oversees sentence adjustments (article 90 of the Penal Code).

The King may issue a pardon, at the suggestion of the Ministry of Justice (the Law of Pardon). This pardon can be granted for all types of crime but does not remove the infraction from a person’s criminal record. Reoffenders are not eligible. The Law of Pardon is intended to promote reintegration. A pardoned individual must demonstrate proof of their self-improvement. The amnesty law was repealed in 1978. The final amnesty was granted in 1977 to political prisoners during the democratic transition.