Complaining about a decision during detention

First describe what was actually decided

Start with the date, content and consequences of the decision. Who communicated something on behalf of which official, on what grounds and for what period? The Penitentiary Principles Act has its own system of legal protection. A general frustration about the atmosphere in a department is not necessarily the same complaint as refusing a specific visit. By describing the event precisely, a lawyer or the competent authority can assess whether there is a decision against which a complaint can be made.

If necessary, ask for the written notice and keep it, but do not wait indefinitely for paper if you already know the decision. Also record a verbal communication with date and content. A written version may contain more or different motivation than the initial explanation. That difference can be relevant, without every deviation automatically leading to destruction. Do not already assume an administrative objection period of six weeks. Detention law has its own short terms that require a completely different preparation.

The correct route depends on who makes the decision

According to DJI, an individual can complain to the complaints committee about a decision by or on behalf of the director. Other decisions may have a different route, for example around selection, transfer or certain leave decisions. Therefore, make a distinction between what the institution itself decides and what is determined by an official outside the institution. An employee who communicates a decision does not necessarily have to be the one who legally made it. Ask for the document and remedy information rather than just the name of the messenger. (DJI can complain to the complaints committee about a decision by or on behalf of the director)

Medical practices also have their own complaints system. The RSJ explains medical complaint and appeal law, distinguishing the actions of healthcare providers from responsibilities of the director. A problem with access to care can therefore contain different aspects. Have it assessed exactly what the complaint is about before you put everything in one general complaint form. This guide does not provide a one-size-fits-all path for every medical or placement decision. It is precisely this demarcation that prevents a substantively important objection from ending up with the wrong authority. (RSJ explains the medical complaint and appeal law)

Simple complaint and formal mediation have different clocks

Article 61, fifth paragraph, of the Penitentiary Principles Act sets the starting point for submission no later than the seventh day after notification of the decision. However, in the case of a request for formal mediation as referred to in Article 59a, paragraph 6 applies: the complaint period then runs until the seventh day after receipt of the written findings of the supervisory committee. If the complaint concerns a decision that is worthy of complaint, the request for mediation itself must be submitted no later than the seventh day after notification. That is a specific arrangement, not a general suspension due to every conversation.

Therefore, record notification, submission of the mediation request and receipt of the written findings separately. Have it checked which route has actually started and which date applies. Keep copies and shipping information. A late complaint may still be admissible under certain circumstances, but you should not anticipate this. Those who depend on the institution for submission can record requests and delivery times. Putting a date down on paper afterwards does not replace reliable information about the real process sequence. Ask for help immediately if you have a specific obstacle.

A conversation is not automatically the formal mediation route

A monthly commissioner can help with mediation or a practical problem. DJI describes, among other things, a statement for this purpose. Ask explicitly whether your request will be treated as mediation under Article 59a, what the subject is and how the findings will be communicated in writing. An ordinary conversation with staff or an unclear request for attention is not automatically the same. For the applicability of the deviating complaint period, the actual content, timeliness and handling of the request must be assessed; just the word mediation in a conversation does not provide certainty.

In addition, make your goal clear: explanation, practical solution or formal assessment. These goals can coexist. In a complaint, state the reasons if no request for mediation has been made, as prescribed in Article 61, third paragraph. Tell the lawyer what contacts have already taken place and enclose the real request. Do not automatically withdraw a complaint because someone verbally promises improvement. Check whether the solution has actually been confirmed and what consequences still persist. Good coordination prevents formal legal protection from being confused with an informal commitment.

Explain why the decision is incorrect or unreasonable

A complaint becomes easier to assess when you link facts and arguments to the specific decision. Which information is incorrect, which rule do you think has been incorrectly applied and why are the consequences in this situation disproportionate or insufficiently justified? A broad accusation that the staff always acts unfairly does not clarify those questions. Let a lawyer help with the legal basis, but don't wait to gather the factual core. An accurate event description can enable legal substantiation later.

Also state what the facility wanted to protect according to the communication, for example order or safety, and what facts are mentioned about this. You don't have to agree with that to respond specifically to it. A useful argument may be that an assumed contact did not take place or that a less drastic option was not visibly considered. Which test exactly applies depends on the authority. Therefore, avoid a general template in which the same rights and conclusions are stated for each problem without any connection with the decision.

Make the difference between observation and assumption visible

Collect the communication, relevant applications, responses and available supporting documents. For each event, note who was there and what that person may have observed independently. Do not ask fellow inmates to make a joint version. A department roster or visit registration can sometimes support a specific question, but you do not need to have documents that you do not have access to. Identify what is missing and why it is relevant. The competent procedure must then make clear which documents become available and how to respond to them.

A factual summary must also include the unfavorable passage on which the decision is based. If there is an incident report, have the lawyer read it instead of just reporting your own response. A dispute becomes more credible and precise when it makes clear which part is incorrect. When it comes to medical or family data, pay attention to necessity and safe provision. Not every detail from a private message needs to be included in a complaint about visitors. Ask what information actually substantiates the stated necessity.

Fictional example: a visit is denied

In a fictional example, Amir is told that a planned visit is canceled. He asks for a meeting with a letter and expects that a formal complaint has also been filed. After a few days it turns out that the note was only registered as a request for informal explanation; whether it also contains a timely formal mediation request has not been investigated. In the meantime, the visit date has passed. The situation now requires two separate assessments: was a complaint made in time or should it be settled immediately, and what interest is there in the consequences and motivation of the refusal? The practical problem and the procedure do not coincide.

Amir notes when he heard the decision, saves the message and describes exactly what was on his slip. The lawyer examines the authority and the relevant period and determines whether urgency still makes sense. The example does not say that an expired visit date makes every complaint useless or that a meeting note can never contain anything formal. Above all, it shows that an intention such as I have complained must be linked to the real document, the receiving agency and the requested treatment.

A decision and complaints calendar prevents procedural confusion

Use its own rule for each problem. A new decision may have a different period, motive or legal remedy and should not disappear unnoticed in an old complaint. Also note who helps outside the institution and how they receive the documents. A family member can organize and make calls, but is not automatically authorized to conduct every procedure on behalf of the detainee. Ask how representation or legal assistance works in the specific route and what permission is required.

• Decision: date, sender, content, basis and validity period.
• Notification: when and how you heard about the decision.
• Deadline: applicable route, controlled completion date and person responsible for submission.
• Substantiation: main factual error, legal question and supporting document.
• Informal: conversation or mediation, date, commitment and what has been confirmed.
• Urgency: which consequences still persist and which individual request needs to be assessed.
• Continued: receipt, case number, director's response and date of ruling or appeal.

Do not use rounded designations such as next week when a specific date can be noted. Make uncertainties visible in the calendar and ask for clarification. The same applies to telephone messages to family: a loved one may think that a lawyer has already filed while they are still waiting for the decision. One agreed division of tasks prevents duplication of work and gaps. Check the confirmation received together, without deducing from it that the complaint is admissible or substantively well-founded.

A complaint does not automatically stop the implementation

A decision can have an impact in the meantime, for example in the case of a restriction of several days. In the event of a complaint under the Pbw, the chairman of the appeal committee of the RSJ can, upon request, suspend implementation in whole or in part, as provided for in Article 66. Discuss whether such a request is possible and useful and follow the correct submission route. Just the word urgent above a complaint does not stop the decision. The regular assessment and a temporary measure answer different questions. Also let us know when the decision ends, so that the request is in line with the current situation.

In the event of an acute health or safety problem, appropriate assistance must be sought immediately. A formal complaint is not a substitute for necessary medical care or reporting of imminent danger. For an urgent request, describe specifically what is happening now and what consequences cannot wait. A general reference to stress may provide less information than the precise missed treatment or ongoing disability. The legal assessment remains dependent on jurisdiction and facts; a short duration does not automatically make a measure lawful or unlawful.

Read result, recovery and appeal as separate points

A ruling can declare the complaint well-founded, unfounded or inadmissible and have various consequences. Ask exactly which decision is being annulled, whether a new decision is necessary and whether compensation is possible. That is not automatically full compensation for everything you have experienced. Also check whether the director or you can file an appeal and what short term applies. The receipt of a ruling is therefore a new moment for the calendar, no reason to close the folder immediately.

Our analysis is that effective legal protection in detention starts with a small amount of precise information: decision, knowledge, jurisdiction and desired solution. This structure makes room for substantive criticism without losing sight of the procedure. Continue to follow practical agreements where possible and ensure that the dispute proceeds via the correct route. Moreover, a complaint about detention conditions does not independently change the criminal title of the stay. For questions about the original criminal case, the procedural guide is another starting point. (procedure guide)