Cultural organizations and reformers in the UK are up in arms against government contractor Serco for removing artworks from court facilities in England and Wales.
A February 10 report from Lay Observers, an independent monitor, found that Prisoner Escort and Custody Service, a government agency, provided artworks to all courts. Lay Observers found that only courts operated by prisoner transport company GEOAmey put the work on display. Some facilities operated by government contractor Serco, says the report, “initially put up the artwork but quickly removed it following instructions from Serco management. No satisfactory explanation has been given as to why one supplier permits this while another does not.”
The works were created by inmates at Doncaster prison, says the report. Their charge was to brighten the environment and reflect on their own experiences in court. The pieces were commissioned by the government’s Prisoner Escort and Custody Services to adorn court custody suites, which are secure facilities connected to courthouses where people await their appearances before a judge or magistrate, many of which are underground and have limited natural light, the report notes.
“Although a small change,” says the report, “Lay Observers report that the art improves the feel of custody areas that display it.” Not only does it help people in custody, who may be under great distress due to their situation, says the report; it also can have a good impact on staff, improving their decision-making and thereby leading to better outcomes for detained people.
Examples provided in the report include brightly hued scenes showing people in landscapes, accompanied by inspirational quotes from popular figures from Madonna (“No matter who you are, no matter what you did, no matter where you come from, you can always change, become a better version of yourself”) to Winston Churchill (“Success is not final; failure is not fatal: It is the courage to continue that counts,” which the International Churchill Society has classified as falsely attributed to the onetime Prime Minister).
Artworks such as these were provided for court facilities in the UK but were reportedly removed by government contractor Serco.
Lay Observers
It is a “sad day,” said Robert Morrall, director of Pictora, which has put art in prisons since 2019, speaking to the Art Newspaper. “Within the criminal justice system’s secure estate the value of art cannot be underestimated. For those creating art, it builds self esteem, confidence and soft skills that link to employability. It can be a key to positive resettlement and the reduction of reoffending, which currently costs the country in terms of economic and social cost around £18.1 billion.”
Andrew Neilson, the director of campaigns at the Howard League for Penal Reform, was even more outspoken, telling the Guardian that “In this time of court delays, overuse of remand and miserable prison conditions, it seems petty and vindictive to order the removal of artwork that might offer a source of hope in court custody suites.”
The report found “deep and persistent systemic problems” in the systems by which people are detained and transported, including excessive periods spent in facilities not intended for long detention; delays that disrupt court proceedings; and overly inflexible practices. Short staffing means poor service to detainees, who include people with mental health needs, language barriers and disabilities.
Public statements from government officials and Serco failed to address the issue at hand.
“It is vital we provide safe environments for those in court custody, and we work closely with suppliers to strengthen safeguards for people in our care,” a Ministry of Justice spokesperson told the Guardian.
“Serco is committed to providing a safe and welcoming environment for detainees in our care,” a Serco spokesperson said in a statement to ARTnews. “We are working with [His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service] to enhance the look and feel of Court Custody Suites.” Asked for clarification on whether artworks were removed and why, the representative did not immediately reply.
