This article attempts to address the perennial problem of overcrowded holding cells at police stations. 

Detention cells at police stations are originally designed to keep arrested persons in custody, pending a first appearance before a magistrate or judicial officer. Consequently, the holding capacity of police cells is relatively small, ranging between 20 and 211 cells. Currently, most police cells have a capacity of less than 50. 

Traditionally, police cells were not designed for extended imprisonment, but for overnight or over weekend detention of arrested persons. If pre-charge suspects and trial-awaiting prisoners are incarcerated together, the result is overcrowding of police cells. Hence, police cells should be reserved for pre-charge suspects while trial-awaiting prisoners should be detained in holding cells. 

There are miscellaneous reasons that can lead to alleged offenders being remanded. These include the seriousness of the offence; being a flight risk; collusion; risk of influencing witnesses; pre-trial risk of continuing with criminal activities; alleged offenders being risks to themselves, and/or protecting the victim(s). 

Reducing overcrowding in police cells requires an understanding of the magnitude and extent of the problem, and the reasons for which it has come about. A census of the remand population can identify who is in custody and why, and point to priorities for relieving congestion. Timely and accurate information can also enable a more rational debate about the most effective use of police custody, and assist advocacy on behalf of policies which meet international standards. 

Detention comes at the end of a long chain of decisions involving legislators, policymakers, the police, prosecutors and courts. The extent to which police custody is used reflects a range of factors, including levels of inequality and investment in social policy, as well as levels of crime. Therefore, reducing the number of inmates in police cells is not simply a question of establishing measures that can act as direct alternatives to pre-trial detention or sentences, although these are important. 

It involves the development and use of a wide range of methods to prevent crime through social and situational measures, and of ways to resolve harm and disputes without recourse to criminal law, for example, by using informal and restorative justice approaches.

International Demands 

International standards and norms recommend that resorting to prosecution and incarceration be employed only where this is proportionate to the offence committed and there are no other appropriate options. To ensure that the police custody play their proper role, it is important that minor offenses, such as minor assault, trespass, etc, be processed in different ways. Many countries have systems of diversion, like police warnings, or cautions, restorative justice or mediation options, referral to mental health or drug treatment or prosecutorial fines. Others have centuries-old informal processes of traditional justice which can provide accessible and informal justice designed to divert minor cases out of the criminal justice system. 

As long as basic human rights are observed, such processes can have an important role to play. 

Countries with the highest levels of overcrowding also have prison populations with the highest proportions of pre-trial detainees held in prison or police cells. Therefore, efforts to address the problem of lengthy pre-trial detention can be improved by access to justice, including increasing legal aid and assistance, and supplementing this by making use of paralegals to provide advice to defendants; enforcing time limits in criminal proceedings; offering bail and other alternatives to pre-trial detention; and reforming criminal procedures so that cases are reviewed regularly and brought to a conclusion more speedily. 

Non-custodial measures

Too many criminal justice systems, whether non-custodial responses exist in law or not, still use imprisonment as their default sanction. This can be because of mistaken beliefs that society’s and the victim’s interests are best-served by a custodial sentence; excessive influence of the police and prosecutors over the criminal justice system; and judges’ fear of being considered corrupt or “soft” on crime. Sometimes, there is either no organisation available to supervise community sentences or a shortage of resources for the implementation of responses to crime which permit the offender to remain in and provide compensation to the community. 

To develop and implement constructive and non-custodial measures and sentences, a range of community-based sentences should be available to courts including discharges, fines and community service and measures should be taken to assist offenders to comply with these.

These sentences can be particularly effective for women offenders who are usually apprehended for non-violent crimes and whose crimes are often closely related to their economic and social disadvantage in society.  In addition, alternative arrangements should be considered for parents with dependent children, particularly mothers with babies. It is increasingly understood that the best interests of the child should be taken into consideration in deciding whether or not to detain a parent. Sentencing courts should have enough information to enable them to balance society’s and child’s interests, and for them to consider community-based options. 

The recently adopted Bangkok Rules or formally, the United Nations Rules, is a set of 70 rules focused on the treatment of women prisoners and non-custodial measures for women offenders. 

It emphasises that, when sentencing or deciding on pre-trial measures for a pregnant woman or child’s sole or primary caretaker, non-custodial measures should be preferred where possible and appropriate, with custodial sentences being considered when the offence is serious or violent.

Also, children differ from adults in their physical and psychological development and their emotional and educational needs. These differences constitute the basis for the lesser culpability of children in conflict with the law and require different responses to be available. The experience of imprisonment can often strengthen rather than weaken a child’s delinquency. In summary, to effectively address the issue of overcrowding in police cells, the government must construct more holding cells and invest in non-custodial alternatives to detention both pre-trial and post sentencing. 

Judicial authorities should consider diverting minor cases out of the criminal justice system altogether. There are a variety of diversion programmes that cater for multiple needs, such as teen and youth courts, restorative justice, mental health courts, mentoring programmes and truancy prevention and intervention programmes. The police should invest in long-term national strategies for crime prevention and reduction, and for courts to reduce high rates of pre-trial detention by improving speedy access to justice. 

*Maj. Gen. (Rtd) J. B Tjivikua is a crime intelligence analyst, and a retired major general of the Namibian Police.