ZAST kritisiert

(Infori­ot) Im fol­gen­den doku­men­tieren wir Auszüge aus dem Bericht des Anti-Folter-Komi­tees (CPT) über die ZAST in Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt. Der voll­ständi­ge Bericht ist unter www.cpt.coe.int
zu find­en. Im Anschluß eine Pressemit­teilung der Roten Hil­fe Pots­dam vom 18. März zum sel­ben The­ma. Weit­ere Infos zur ZAST gibt es im Infori­ot Archiv.

Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt Deten­tion Centre

The mate­r­i­al con­di­tions of all rooms were good in terms of space, ven­ti­la­tion, light (both nat­ur­al light and arti­fi­cial light­ing), heat­ing and state of clean­li­ness. The rooms were ade­quate­ly fur­nished (table, chairs, cup­boards), had a sep­a­rate san­i­tary annexe with a lava­to­ry and a wash­basin, and were equipped with a satel­lite TV offer­ing a wide range of pro­grammes in dif­fer­ent lan­guages. How­ev­er, the CPT sug­gests that detainees be pro­vid­ed with means for lock­ing their cupboards. 

The regime was flex­i­ble: for­eign­ers were able to move freely with­in their unit dur­ing the day, had access to a sports room and were allowed one hour out­door exer­cise every day. How­ev­er, there were no oth­er forms of activ­i­ties avail­able (even read­ing mat­ter had to be pur­chased by the detainees from their pock­et mon­ey). In fact, detainees spent the bulk of the day in a gen­er­al state of idle­ness, play­ing cards or watch­ing TV. The con­trast with Büren was strik­ing; the lack of pur­pose­ful activ­i­ties con­tributed to cre­at­ing a prison-like atmos­phere. The CPT rec­om­mends that mea­sures be tak­en to offer a bet­ter range of activ­i­ties to per­sons accom­mo­dat­ed in Eisenhüttenstadt.” 

The del­e­ga­tion not­ed that, in the con­text of med­ical con­sul­ta­tions, lan­guage bar­ri­ers between doc­tors and for­eign nation­als com­pli­cat­ed the anam­ne­sis. The prob­lem main­ly occurred at Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt and, on occa­sion, in the case of cer­tain spe­cif­ic lan­guages, at Büren. Fur­ther, at Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt com­plaints were heard from some for­eign nation­als that they had not been giv­en any expla­na­tion, in a lan­guage under­stand­able to them, about the treat­ment they had received.” 

As regards Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt Deten­tion Cen­tre, the rel­e­vant legal pro­vi­sions are embod­ied in the Law on the Exe­cu­tion of Deten­tion Pend­ing Removal (Abschiebe­haftvol­lzugs­ge­setz) of Bran­den­burg and the imple­ment­ing Order (Gewahrsam­sor­d­nung), accord­ing to which spe­cial secu­ri­ty mea­sures can be imposed on a violent/agitated for­eign­er or in case of risk of escape. The mea­sures involve, inter alia, place­ment in a spe­cial secu­ri­ty room and the use of coer­cive mea­sures (unmit­tel­bar­er Zwang). With­draw­al of out­door exer­cise was also applied occa­sion­al­ly by staff as a secu­ri­ty mea­sure; the CPT rec­om­mends that an imme­di­ate end be put to this prac­tice. Recourse to secu­ri­ty mea­sures was record­ed in the per­son­al file of the detained for­eign nation­al con­cerned but, as at Büren, not in a spe­cif­ic register. 

Con­di­tions in one of the two secu­ri­ty cells at Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt (cell No. 2008) were total­ly unac­cept­able. This cell was fit­ted with four met­al rings anchored to the floor, in order to secure a per­son hand and foot while lying prone and spread-eagled. Hand­cuffs and ankle cuffs were avail­able in the room. As already indi­cat­ed in para­graph 10 above, the del­e­ga­tion invoked Arti­cle 8, para­graph 5, of the Con­ven­tion request­ing the author­i­ties to remove imme­di­ate­ly the four met­al rings and to ensure that four-point restraint using met­al cuffs to immo­bilise a detainee is nev­er used.” 

“The CPT rec­om­mends that the nec­es­sary mea­sures be tak­en to pro­vide ade­quate rooms for accom­mo­dat­ing agi­tat­ed per­sons, in the light of the pre­ced­ing remarks. It also rec­om­mends that clear instruc­tions be deliv­ered to the staff at Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt that, in the event that a detainee is or becomes high­ly agi­tat­ed, a med­ical doc­tor should be con­tact­ed imme­di­ate­ly and action tak­en in accor­dance with the doc­tors opin­ion. More­over, staff at Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt should receive spe­cif­ic train­ing in deal­ing with agi­tat­ed detainees. 

The CPT fur­ther rec­om­mends that — both at Büren and Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt — every instance of use of secu­ri­ty mea­sures, includ­ing type and dura­tion, be record­ed in a spe­cif­ic reg­is­ter estab­lished for that purpose.” 

“The sit­u­a­tion was less favourable at Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt Deten­tion Cen­tre. Con­sid­er­able lan­guage bar­ri­ers exist­ed between the staff and detained for­eign nation­als. How­ev­er, they only part­ly explained the rather low com­mit­ment of the staff and the lim­it­ed con­tacts with detainees. The del­e­ga­tion formed the impres­sion that, in con­trast to Büren, the man­age­ment did not adopt a proac­tive approach. The staff were clear­ly lack­ing guid­ance on impor­tant issues and appeared to con­fine their activ­i­ties to ware­hous­ing detained for­eign nation­als. The CPT rec­om­mends that increased atten­tion be giv­en to the selec­tion of staff employed at Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt Deten­tion Cen­tre and to enhanc­ing their pos­si­bil­i­ties for ini­tial and in-ser­vice training.” 

Europarat wirft dem BGS “exzes­sive Gewalt” vor

(Rote Hil­fe) Der Europarat hat dem Bun­des­gren­zschutz (BGS) unnötige und “exzes­sive Gewalt” bei der Abschiebung von Aus­län­dern per Flugzeug vorge­wor­fen. Abschiebe­häftlinge auf dem Flughafen Berlin-Schöne­feld hät­ten sich über Faustschläge, Fußtritte und Beschimp­fun­gen beklagt, heißt es in einem am Don­ner­stag in Straßburg veröf­fentlicht­en Bericht des Anti-Folterkomi­tees des Europarates (CPT). Eine 13-köp­fige Del­e­ga­tion von Ärzten, Juris­ten, Gefäng­nis- und Men­schen­recht­sex­perten hat­te im Dezem­ber 2000 Polizeikom­mis­sari­ate, Gefäng­nisse, Abschieberäume und psy­chi­a­trische Anstal­ten in sieben Bun­deslän­dern besucht. Der Bericht wurde erst jet­zt veröf­fentlicht, nach­dem Deutsch­land zuges­timmt hatte. 

In dem Bericht des CPT ist auch von Mis­shand­lun­gen im deutschen Polizeige­wahrsam die Rede. Häftlinge hät­ten den Europarat­sex­perten über Tritte und Schläge bei Fes­t­nah­men berichtet, selb­st wenn sie schon wehr­los waren. Die Zellen in vie­len Polizeikom­mis­sari­at­en seien äußerst karg aus­ges­tat­tet, manch­mal fehlten sog­ar Matratzen und Deck­en. In ein­er Haf­tanstalt im bran­den­bur­gis­chen Eisen­hüt­ten­stadt ent­deck­ten die Folter­ex­perten einen Ver­wahrraum mit vier Eisen­rin­gen am Boden, die dafür benutzt wur­den, Häftlinge mit gespreizten Armen und Beinen fest zu binden. 

Von ein­er beson­ders schw­er wiegen­den Mis­shand­lung erfuhren die Folter­ex­perten auf dem Flughafen Berlin-Schöne­feld. Dort wurde den Angaben zufolge eine Nige­ri­aner­in mit Hän­den und Füßen auf eine Holzbank gefes­selt und so ins Abschiebe-Flugzeug getra­gen. Der Wider­stand der Afrikaner­in sei durch einen schmerzhaften “Kopfhal­te­griff” und ein­er ins Gesicht gepressten Jacke gebrochen wor­den. Der Flugkapitän weigerte sich, die Frau in diesem Zus­tand an Bord zu nehmen. Die Beamten bracht­en die Frau daraufhin unter Schlä­gen in die Abschieberäume zurück. 

Abschiebknäste auflösen, Abschiebun­gen stop­pen, Bleiberecht für alle Opfer von Diskri­m­inierung und ras­sis­tis­ch­er Gewalt!

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert