~By Jugaad Singh
Part I of the Blog dealt with the historical context and the legal background pertaining to prison food in India. Part II of the blog will be tackling the introduction of the Modern Prison Manual of 2016 as well as providing a global perspective of the problem along with possible solutions.
THE MODEL PRISON MANUAL, 2016
The Model Prison Manual, 2016, a comprehensive guiding manual to overhaul prison administration, created by the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD) was very elaborate; imbibing all the international standards of food security in prisons given in the UN Bangkok Rules as well the Nelson Mandela Rules. This document aimed to remedy the shortcomings in the existing provisions for prison food and laid down proper guidelines for the food to be served to the incarcerated, even to pregnant and nursing women. Under Chapter VI of the Manual, sufficient emphasis has been laid down for the maintenance of prisoners by providing for specific calorie and dietary requirements as well as several suggestions for the improvement of rations. The Manual also has sufficient provisions to safeguard the quality and quantity of the same.
Despite such positive changes, the manual fails to provide a budget for the procurement of such foodstuffs. It suffers from the same shortcoming that the previous prison manuals did as under Chapter VI of the Manual, it leaves the quality and taste of the food prepared up to the discretion of the officers in charge. In addition to that, any complaints regarding food by prisoners are to be dealt with by the Superintendent of the prison who exercises discretionary power and most of the issues are swept under the rug.
In the Supreme Court case of Rama Murthy v. State of Karnataka, a complaint was raised about the insubstantial quality of food served in Central Jail, Bangalore. The food was declared ‘satisfactory’ by the concerned officials upon raising a complaint. A District Judge had made an enquiry in the jail and the food was once again deemed to be ‘satisfactory’ rather than an independent body inspecting the food on scientific parameters. Finally, the judgement concluded that there is a need for a complaint box in all prisons. This showcases how there is an alarming need to move from this model of internal inspection to one of transparency. It is even more alarming that refusal to eat the food still remains an act constituting a prison offence. Nevertheless, it is a step in the right direction in providing food security behind bars.
However, because prisons are a state subject, it is the states’ discretion on whether or not they implement the changes suggested in this manual. Only 11 states and UTs have adopted the recent manual and there is no indication of a rapid change in the prison manuals of the remaining states. It is estimated that it takes up to 15 years for the changes in the manual to reflect in the state manuals and that too a complete replica would be impossible. Furthermore, for poor and illiterate prisoners, it is extremely difficult to access updated prison manuals and it is very easy for a prison officer to deny them their rights, especially concerning food. Despite, being a well-drafted manual, a lack of effective implementation compromises the standards for the treatment of prisoners.
GLOBAL SITUATION REGARDING PRISON FOOD
The use of food as a punishment extends beyond India and examples of gross violations of the right to food can be found in prison systems across the world. Prison systems across the world are meting out punishment in the form of unpalatable food which allegedly meets the nutritional guidelines. A famous example is that of the “Nutraloaf” served in American prisons. The brick-shaped Nutraloaf is a foul-tasting lump of food ground into a dense mass that is said to contain ‘all’ the necessary vitamins, nutrients and minerals that a human being needs. Eating this loaf has induced vomiting, stomach-aches, and even anal fissures in several inmates. Predictably, there have been several lawsuits across the US challenging the poor quality of the food. However, none of these has brought about a nationwide abolition of the Nutraloaf nor have they been successful in ending the punishment of inadequate and inedible food in US prisons. Despite the shift towards rehabilitation as the objective of imprisonment, the use of food as a punishment brings us further away from such a goal.
CROOKS TO COOKS: SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORM
In contrast, the prison food systems in Denmark serve as a guiding model for other nations. Their prison systems, based on the theory of normalization and responsibility aim to convert inmates from ‘crooks to cooks’. Their prison system requires incarcerated people to buy and prepare their meals. The objective in Danish prisons is to reduce the number of meals served through an institutional cafeteria and focus on a communal self-catering system. Given the limitations of Indian prisons, establishing such a prison food system would come with its fair share of problems such as a lack of infrastructure in our overcrowded and underfunded prisons and a genuine safety issue if the inmates engage in violence. Although idealistic for the present, it would be a step in the right direction.
The adoption of a laissez-faire approach has left the control over the service of food and its inspection in the hands of the prison administration which is often not held accountable under the current prison manuals and can only face accountability in front of the courts. At a stage when India needs to make a shift towards a rehabilitating approach to imprisonment, food is the focal point of bringing about such a change, as it is through food that an inmate may develop trust instead of resentment towards the institution. Proper food will help change their perspective of imprisonment from punishment to an opportunity for self-reform.
Concrete steps need to be taken to ensure the right to food behind bars. First and foremost we need to get rid of any discrimination between prisoners based on caste or social status and ensure that adequate nutrition is provided to all inmates regardless of their reason for imprisonment. Second, laws ensuring stringent inspection of management, preparation and distribution of food in prisons are necessary to combat corruption and adulteration of prison food. An independent food inspection body is required which ensures quality control in all prisons, instead of leaving the quality of the food up to the ‘satisfaction’ of prison officials. Third, India can emulate Denmark’s exemplary rehabilitative prison food model while encouraging self-catering tiffin services for prisoners, which will allow them to earn an income while preparing nutritious meals for themselves.
Last, there is an immediate need for state prison manuals to adopt the nutrition guidelines specified by the Manual of 2016 and also ensure that funds are properly allocated to ensure quality food. A positive step has been taken in this direction in the form of the recent announcement of the Model Prisons Act, 2023 by the Home Ministry marking a shift of the focus from just detention to that of rehabilitation as well. Although it focuses on regulating prohibited items in prisons, transparency and equipping prison administration with advanced technological equipment, one can hope to see strengthened safeguards for food security behind bars. However, this act suffers from the problem of just being guiding legislation for State governments. The states have not shown a lot of initiative in bringing about prison reform, hence, it is proposed that to do so, prisons can be added to the Concurrent List and an amended uniform central law ought to be passed to secure this fundamental right for all inmates. Nevertheless, the inclusion of such provisions itself would be a leap forward in securing the right to food in Indian prisons.
The author is a third-year B.A. LLB student at Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law.