 |
| John L. Hill |
He claimed the most common daily punishment involved reducing food. The BBC investigation uncovered complaints of food deprivation. At Beijing No. 2, meals consisted of cabbage boiled in dirty water, which sometimes also had bits of carrot and small slivers of meat if they were lucky. They were also given mantou — a plain northern Chinese bread. Their diets were so low in nutrition that they developed flimsy upper bodies and bloated stomachs. Outdoor exercise was often limited to half an hour each week.
Pict Rider: ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
Radalj also discussed his six-month stay in solitary confinement. The 1.2-by-1.8-metre cell (four feet by six feet) was dark, silent and lonely. The sensory deprivation was only part of the problem. Food rations were cut in half.
Compare the BBC report with an article written by Kelly Struthers Montford of Toronto Metropolitan University, with the title, “The Embodiment of Contempt: Ontario Provincial Prison Food.” Her study revealed that incarcerated individuals in Ontario jails routinely report constant hunger and malnourishment despite standards laid out by the United Nations in its Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. She cites studies that conclude that “prison food assumes enormous importance, symbolically representing, in many respects, the prison experience.”
Her study also looks at food provision as a method of control. Rather than working toward the goal of rehabilitation, inmates become resistant to those they see as oppressors. Poor-quality food sometimes becomes the trigger for exercises of resistance and misconduct. Some newer prisons are built without cafeterias to restrict inmate movement and socialization.
Like in China, the complaint is that prison food is bland. Those on the outside often speak of airplane or hospital food similarly. However, for airline passengers or hospital patients, the stay is measured in hours or days, not years, as in jail.
Gone are the days when prison food was prepared daily in individual prison kitchens. Canadian prisons, federal and provincial, have shifted to a “cook-chill” method of food preparation. Food is cooked in large vats, packaged, cooled and stored, then shipped to jails, where it is reheated and served.
The Struthers Montford article quotes prisoners who ate the food processed in the cook-chill procedure. One inmate named Dave is quoted as saying, “The food sucks. … The food is brutal. It’s all steamed; all the nutrients are taken out of the food.” The study claims that it is not whether the food is healthy, it is how prisoners believe it is unhealthy. The loss of control over one’s food intake and a belief that one is not eating nutritious foods has resulted in people feeling ill, even if the sensation is only perceived as accurate.
Are Canadian jails mimicking the Beijing jail in terms of punishment? The reason that both correctional systems cut down on the quality of food for prisoners probably has more to do with cost than punishment. Feeding large groups of people puts a strain on financial resources. China’s growth in the past 20 years has been fuelled by aggressive borrowing. The weight of that debt is catching up, and spending cuts must be made. Canadian jails have limited funds, and the expenditure on other social demands often outranks the money needed to finance the care of prisoners.
In Ontario, for example, the cost of feeding approximately 8,000 prisoners daily meant that in 2016, the daily food allowance was $9.17. Ontario’s Ministry of Correctional Services has contracted the food supply to private contractors. Except for the Ontario Correctional Institute, food in Ontario jails is provided by Eurest Corrections, a division of Compass Food Services. The fixed amount supplied to the contractor covers the food, preparation, transportation and delivery. Private industry relies on profit to stay in business. Profit comes from the difference between what the government pays the contractor and what it spends on product delivery. There is no incentive to do anything other than provide the basics.
Wanting more is a human condition. To get more, inmates often depend on friends and family by asking them to donate to their inmate accounts. Food is sometimes the subject of gambling and the object of bets. Other prisoners use intimidation and violence to extract what they feel is owed to them or what can be easily taken. The result is prison violence and dangerous working conditions for staff. Rehabilitation takes a back seat.
Dehumanization results from those in authority using physical punishment, forced labour and food deprivation. When we consider the torture that results, let’s not forget that it is not confined to Chinese prisons.
John L. Hill practised and taught prison law until his retirement. He holds a J.D. from Queen’s and an LL.M. in constitutional law from Osgoode Hall. He is also the author of Pine Box Parole: Terry Fitzsimmons and the Quest to End Solitary Confinement (Durvile & UpRoute Books) and The Rest of the [True Crime] Story (AOS Publishing). The Rest of the [True Crime] Story has been shortlisted for a prestigious Brass Knuckles Award, which is the Crime Writers’ of Canada’s prize for best nonfiction crime book of the year. Contact him at johnlornehill@hotmail.com.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.