Review of the Handbook on the Use of Technology in Prison Settings
The Handbook on the Use of Technology in Prison Settings, co-authored by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), was launched at a plenary session on the first day of the inaugural Prison Design and Technology Conference (PDTC) in April 2026. This conference was organised by a world-leading prison organisation, the International Corrections and Prisons Association (ICPA), held in Rabat, Morocco, which brought together global stakeholders.
The Handbook is a detailed document of 130 pages reviewing the use of technology in prisons, structured in three parts – Introduction and Background to Technology in Prison; Development, Implementation, and Use of Technology in Prison; and Thematic Application of Technology in Prison – each with numerous chapters focusing on various issues. It is followed by conclusions and 36 recommendations.
This review, by the Australian NGO Community Justice Coalition (CJC), is the first published review of this handbook. It is a review on behalf of people living within prisons who have been entrapped in a cycle of recidivism and lack of rehabilitative opportunities and resources.
The CJC is an Australian-based NGO that includes former prisoners and advocates for specific reforms in the Australian justice systems. The CJC has identified telecommunications as an essential way to break down the unnecessary dangerous isolation of detention and has worked with this focus since the year 2000, having achieved two acknowledged world firsts. CJC’s Work on Computers In Cells
Although there are many positive statements in the Handbook in support of the potential benefits of technology to prisoners, they are embedded within a very lengthy document, often relegated to the later sections. Further, the attitude adopted is defensive, often focusing on an administrative perspective and the potential dangers technology may involve, rather than having the health and wellbeing of the prisoner remain the objective. Accordingly, this only serves to exacerbate the lack of opportunities for prisoners to be re-integrated back into society and are left with no option but to transition back into a life of crime. This again reinforces the underlying need that prison systems must be human focused, particularly focusing on the prisoner rather than the administration; of which the Handbook should reflect this.
It is disappointing that it does not do so, as both the UNODC and ICRC share a long and deep involvement in human rights issues. There are missed opportunities for this document to champion real change based on the needs and rights of prisoners. Using technology and bringing telecommunication services to prisoners would discourage isolationary behaviours and bridge the digital divide, improve wellbeing and health; support connection with family and community; educate and improve skills; and facilitate reintegration and community. The skills and autonomy the inmates developed from using digital resources are vital during their post-release, where a study from the UK unveiled that the implementation of kiosks increased education and offending behaviour program completion, better-equipping ex-inmates re-integration, especially in the areas of social interactions and seeking employment. In summary, it should serve to support and enhance their basic fundamental rights as human beings.
The Nairobi Declaration for Detainee Telecommunication Rights states that electronic communication, digital literacy, and access to digital resources are a basic human right. It is therefore surprising that there is no mention of this important declaration in the Handbook. We feel that, due to this omission, the Handbook can be seen as incomplete, at best; and, at worst, neglectful of prisoners’ human right to telecommunications. We are also disappointed by the absence of any exploration of the Import Model of detainee access to telecommunications; a point we will return to later in this review.
On the other hand, the UNODC and ICRC are to be applauded for the detail and breadth of the Handbook. There are for example, positive statements on the health benefits of technology to help deliver healthcare. The Handbook makes mention of the potential for using externally sourced health care to bridge the institutional gap in accessing advanced health services in addition to mitigating the impact of limited internal services (pp. 67 – 68, 90 – 94). It also acknowledges that technology can extend the reach of services, including preventative health and disease monitoring (pp. 71-72). Additionally, the Handbook mentions that technology should be complementary and additive to, rather than a replacement for, in-person healthcare (pp. 74); and the clarity on the need for digital healthcare technologies to abide by the Mandela Rule regarding clear separation between healthcare and custodial functions (pp. 70-71).
The Handbook’s positive statements on the benefits of external education are also welcome (pp. 51, 88 – 89), as is the recognition that technology can meaningfully expand prisoner rehabilitation through e-learning, vocational training, cognitive behavioural therapy, digital skills development, and more frequent family contact via video and phone calls (pp. 87 – 100).
However, the Handbook misses an opportunity by focusing on the challenges of integrating technology into the closed traditional models of service delivery (pp. 25 – 42), rather than exploring the possibilities of utilising the vast and rich resources of external services via the Import Model as developed by the CJC. Prisoners’ educational, rehabilitative, physical, and mental health needs, and their ability to overcome the disadvantages of isolation and the digital divide by keeping them connected to loved ones, support networks, and the community, can be supported by drawing on the Import Model’s Four Es:
- Effective in providing trusted external services without conflict of interest with security roles.
- Efficient, as they are already paid for by governments.
- Existing through the sentence and available after release.
- Emotionally Important, enabling detainees to feel connected to the outside community.
The Handbook would benefit from a greater emphasis on the benefits of external counselling delivered through the Import Model.
In summary, while the work required to produce this Handbook is appreciated, and many aspects are encouraging, a shift in focus is needed from “What change do we want to see?” within prisons, to “How can we ensure services improve the lives of prisoners inside cells?” and “How can these changes be installed safely?” (pp. 10 – 14). Consequently, improving the lives and wellbeing of prisoners and respecting their human rights should be the guiding principle of the entire document which would work towards helping Australia’s concerning recidivism rate of 54.9%.
The Import Model is essential, and it is unfortunate that the Handbook consistently overlooks it. At the core of this model is a principle that must be stated plainly: for the benefit of the whole community, any unnecessary isolation due to detention should cease, as telecommunications now allow the delivery of essential services to those who need them. Effective counselling is impossible without trust, and that trust requires counsellors who are external to detaining authorities.
The CJC’s vision for the future of imprisonment differs from those of the prison authorities. If there has been a 25% increase in imprisonment over the past 5 years, as was said at the launch of the Handbook, the answer lies in the potential benefits of telecommunications. This is not to normalise imprisonment but to break down the isolation and the stereotype of prisoners as “others”, as well as to allow reconciliation and restorative justice. To this end, we look forward to the incorporation of the principles of the Import Model and the Nairobi Declaration into future editions of this prospectively valuable Handbook.
——————————————————————————————————————-
SUMMARY OF THE CONTENTS
Part 1: Introduction and Background to Technology in Prison (pp. 1 – 8)
Technology has been used in prisons for over 75 years, beginning with radios within the 1950s and evolving through CCTV, electronic locking, cloud-based networks, and digital calls for family contact. This pace of technological adoption has accelerated sharply since the COVID-19 pandemic, from 2019 to 2022. (pp. 5 – 6)
Today, many prisons use a wide array of technology, including: digital prisoner file management, admin platforms, healthcare technology, security tools, e-learning platforms, in-cell devices, and communication technology. However, this adoption of technology remains highly disproportionate throughout the globe, with some high-income countries exploring AI and robotics in prisons, whereas others are only beginning to digitise paper records. (pp. 6 – 8)
Part 2: Development, Implementation, and Use of Technology in Prison (pp. 9 – 42)
Approaches and Considerations (Chapter 3, pp. 10 – 18)
The Handbook stresses that prison administrations should start from the question “What change do we want to see?” rather than “What technology can we buy?” to avoid buying technology for its own sake. Any solution implemented must follow the Nelson Mandela Rules and other UN prison standards. Prison administrators should apply a test of legality, necessity, and proportionality before adopting any technology. (pp. 10 -14)
Key risks highlighted in the Handbook include (pp. 12 – 13):
- Over-reliance on automated systems that reduce staff situational awareness.
- Bias that may amplify racial, gender or socioeconomic discrimination.
- Privacy violations.
- Risk of diverting resources away from basic services like healthcare and rehabilitation.
Principles for the Use of Technology in Prison (Chapter 4, pp. 19 – 24)
The Handbook sets out five guiding principles for the use of technology in prisons, informed by the Nelson Mandela Rules:
- Human Dignity (p. 20): Technology must not dehumanise prisoners or be used in ways that amount to inhumane treatment.
- Non-Discrimination (p. 21): Technology must not reinforce existing inequalities. AI and digital systems must be assessed and monitored for bias.
- Normalisation and Rehabilitation (p. 22): Technology must not aggravate the inherent suffering of imprisonment. Rather, it should support reintegration into society outside of prison.
- Legality, Necessity, and Proportionality (p. 23): Each use of technology must require a legal basis, must address a genuine need, and must not impose excessive surveillance or control.
- Accountability and Transparency (p. 24): Prisoners must be informed about what data is collected and how it is used. Independent oversight bodies must be empowered to scrutinise technology use.
Guidelines on Developing and Implementing Prison Technology Solutions & Management of Prison Technology (Chapters 5 – 6, pp. 25 – 42)
Prison administrations are advised to develop structured technology roadmaps that are aligned to institutional strategies. Before procurement, they should map existing infrastructure, engage a broad range of stakeholders (including prison staff and prisoners themselves), conduct tests, and plan for the full lifecycle cost, which includes the initial purchase but also the maintenance, training, and eventual decommissioning. (p. 25 – 35)
The Handbook strongly warns against vendor lock-in, and instead recommends having open standards and interoperable systems. Vendor lock-in refers to a situation where critical systems become dependent on proprietary software, closed data formats, or exclusive maintenance contracts from a single supplier. Procurement processes should be transparent and competitive, and contracts should include data protection obligations and audit rights. Prison administrations should be wary of profit-driven vendors who may not understand prisoner vulnerabilities. (pp. 31 – 32)
On ongoing management the Handbook covers (pp. 36 – 42):
- Technology lifecycle management.
- Data quality.
- Cyber security.
- Contingency planning (including manual fallback procedures for power failures and cyberattacks.)
- Responsible use of AI and algorithmic risk tools, which should assist rather than replace human decision-making.
Part 3: Thematic Applications (pp. 43 – 111)
Digital Prisoner File Management (Chapter 7, pp. 44 – 58)
Digital Prisoner File Management Systems (DPFMS), also known as Offender Management Systems or Custodial Management Systems, are one of the most impactful forms of prison technology. They can track every stage of a prisoner’s journey through the prison system from admission to release. It covers identities, sentencing, classification, case management, healthcare (separately and confidentially), security incidents, rehabilitation programming, visits, finances, and release planning. (pp. 44 – 54)
Benefits of DPFMS include an improved efficiency, greater transparency, reduced corruption, and better data-driven policy. However, the Handbook acknowledges risks include data quality failures (e.g. Thailand’s experience shows that KPI-driven data entry produced large volumes of low-quality records), unauthorised access, and over-dependence on digital systems without adequate backup. The Handbook’s key recommendations include adopting role-based access rights, maintaining full audit trails, and ensuring interoperability with courts, police, and probation services. (pp. 54 – 58)
Prison Infrastructure Management (Chapter 8, pp. 59 – 64)
Smart building technologies, such as automated doors, environmental sensors, CCTV etc., can improve safety, efficiency, and living conditions. The Handbook also highlights the potential for “green prisons” that use smart systems to reduce energy consumption and carbon footprint. (pp. 60 – 62)
However, the Handbook is emphatic that resilience must be built in from the start. Prisons must maintain manual fallback systems (backup power, paper-based processes, physical keys) for all critical functions so that a cyberattack or power failure does not compromise safety or prisoners’ rights. Older buildings often have structural limitations that make digital retrofitting particularly challenging. (pp. 62 – 64)
Healthcare (Chapter 9, pp. 65 – 74)
Digital health tools, such as Electronic Health Records (EHRs), telemedicine, AI diagnostic support, mental health apps, and wearable monitoring devices can improve access to care, particularly in remote or under-resourced facilities. (pp. 66 – 72)
Critical safeguards include (pp. 73 – 74):
- A strict firewall between health records and general prisoner data.
- Informed consent for telemedicine and data sharing.
- The primacy of in-person care (especially for torture allegations and disciplinary incidents).
- Ensuring that technology does not compensate for chronic underfunding.
- Digital health tools must only be introduced after basic care standards are already met.
Prison Security, Operations and Safety (Chapter 10, pp. 75 – 86)
This chapter covers CCTV and video analysis, perimeter security, full-body scanners, RFID tracking, drone detection and countermeasures, mobile phone detection and managed access systems, body-worn cameras for staff, and the growing use of AI for incident prediction. (pp. 75 – 86)
The Handbook is clear that surveillance must have defined limits, such as:
- Toilets and showers must not be monitored.
- Privileged conversations with lawyers and healthcare professionals must not be recorded.
- AI-generated alerts must always need human review.
Surveillance should not substitute for dynamic security, which depends on trained staff building genuine relationships with prisoners. (pp. 75 – 76)
On AI in security, the Handbook warns against ‘black box’ systems from commercial vendors (wherein AI algorithms are treated as trade secrets, meaning only the vendors understand how it works), over-reliance leading to staff complacency, and the risk of predictive systems that encode historical biases. Singapore’s 2025 AI Governance Framework is offered as a very promising example of structured risk assessment across the AI project lifecycle. (pp. 85 – 86)
Rehabilitation and Contact with the Outside World (Chapter 11, pp. 87 – 100)
Technology and digital tools can significantly expand prisoner rehabilitation by enabling such services as e-learning, vocational training, cognitive behavioural therapy programs, digital skills development, and video/phone contact with families. Digital literacy and competence with digital devices are positioned not as supplementary concerns but as fundamental prerequisites for successful reintegration. Given the extent to which contemporary daily life depends on digital participation, prisoners who lack these skills face significant and compounding disadvantages upon release. (pp. 87–100)
The Handbook notes that female prisoners tend to benefit more from digital rehabilitation tools, especially for maintaining family connections and parenting roles for their children. It further emphasises that video calls must supplement and not replace in-person visits. Communication costs should be regulated to prevent exploitation of prisoners’ families. Finland’s Smart Prison Project and Australia’s in-cell tablet rollout are cited as illustrative case studies of good implementation of technology into prisoners’ lives. (pp. 88, 95)
The Handbook recommends that managing risks, including preventing contact with criminal associates, protecting victims, and preventing misuse of internet access, should be addressed through transparent and proportionate controls, rather than mere blanket restrictions. Privileged communications with lawyers, medical professionals, and oversight bodies must continuously remain confidential. (pp. 98 – 99)
Human Resources and Administration (Chapter 12, pp. 101 – 105)
Technology is able to support fairer recruitment (including online platforms, standardised testing, training), more efficient HR management (including scheduling, payroll, performance tracking, etc.), and broader staff development through e-learning modules for the betterment of prisoners. The Handbook further notes that Singapore’s mandatory ICT literacy program covers cybersecurity, data protection, and AI literacy for all public officers. (pp. 101 – 104)
In the Handbook staff digital literacy training is presented as non-negotiable, every new technology rollout must be accompanied by appropriate training, including on the legal and ethical elements of the digital systems. Staff codes of conduct may need updating, and trade unions should be involved in explaining the rationale for new technology. (pp. 103 – 105)
Recommendations (Chapter 13, pp. 106 – 111)
The 36 recommendations that have been stated prior, primarily coalesce around several themes, which are summarised below:
- Digital prisoner file management systems should: record all key information; incorporate appropriate data quality and validation controls; apply strict role-based access rights; ensure actions are traceable; and promote interoperable data standards.
- Technology must always complement, never replace meaningful human interactions and professional judgement.
- All technology must comply with the Nelson Mandela Rules, the Bangkok Rules, and applicable human rights law.
- Robust data protection, cybersecurity, and independent oversight must be embedded from the technology’s implementation.
- AI tools must be transparent, auditable, free of bias, and subject to human override.
- Digital transformation must be equitable, policies should address the entire prison estate, not just showcase facilities.
- Prisoners must be prepared for digital re-entry and digital literacy programs are essential for successful prisoner reintegration into society.
Despite the strength of these recommendations, the CJC has identified they fail in recognition of two key issues:
- The unequivocal recognition of the issues as a matter of human rights.
- The endorsement of the Nairobi Declaration on Detainee Telecommunication Rights.