Law

The document of proportionality happens to be a article that is supposed to answer the question of whether while in the process of regulating what is referred to as the fundamental rights, the administrator or the legislature has taken the least or the appropriate choice of measures. This is usually done so as to achieve the legislative object or rather the administrative order purpose as the case may be. According to this principle, the court is usually expected to see to it that the administrative authority and the legislature all the time maintain a proper balance between the administrative or the legislative order adverse effects and liberties or interests of the person while at the same time keeping in mind their intended purpose.

It is always right to protect the majority of the people in the community. Due to this reason, it may be advisable that a search may be done on the information that is getting to and from the prisoners. However, this does not mean that all the information that gets to them should be scrutinized. It should be done only to those people who are suspected of doing something wrong. However, this may be a very difficult case to balance and therefore this is the reason why things such as letters should be opened before the prisoners or before the lawyers. (Beatson, 2005)

For there to be a balance, there is a need for a random search as this would discourage those people who may be thinking of doing so. In addition, this is the best way to ensure that there is security in the cells which would maintain law and order at the same time prevent crime. However, such activities or random searches should be done when the prisoners are not there. In addition, they should not know that it has been done. However, the court advocated for the search to be done before the prisoners, but this may not be the best idea because, they will be aware of the search and therefore go ahead and hide what they do not want seen.  (Leyland, 2008)

There is a document that presents the prisoners privileged legal correspondence and there is a chance that most of the prisoners have not read it. In fact, most of the prisoners are not aware of this document and therefore they may think that it is the right of the prison to search all their commodities in their absence.

However, the human rights activist may argue that the prisoner have the right to be there while the search is being conducted. He or she has the right to allow or even to refuse the officer to search the premises. This maybe a very conflicting argument as we all understand that the people in the prison are there because they have broken the law. There is no way that they can be given all the rights as they will result to more cases of insecurity. This is what is advocated to by the judge in Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department case but the decision should be revisited for security purposes.

However, according to the principle of proportionality, they have the right to a private life even when they are in prison. They should therefore be allowed to enjoy part of their private life but serving them with journalists will be way too much. While striking a balance, it should be clear to them that they have a right to private talks and private information which should only be regarding their case. However, they should be regularly searched so as to ensure that there is security. If they are not searched, they may be hideouts for illegal drugs and other illegal goods.

The court should make it clear that the main aim of searching the prisons is to prevent any concealment of materials that may be endangering the security in the prison. It has nothing to do with depriving the prisoners their right to private life and therefore it is a necessary activity. In addition, it should be clear that these searches should be done in the absence of the prisoners. The reason is that if they are there while the search is being done, they may become familiar with the search techniques and over time they may still be able to find some goods from the officers. In addition, if they are present, they may interfere with the search activity by conditioning the officers on where and when to search which makes it very ineffective.

However, the prisoner is supposed to have the legal professional privileges. This is a balance that should be maintained by all means. This means that even though the officers must ensure that the prison is safe by randomly searching the cells, they should allow the prisoners to have materials and information concerning their case. The prisoners should not be deprived the chance to have the information on their case. It is the duty of the officers to make sure that they distinguish the material that are a security threat and those that are important to the freedom of the prisoner.

In conclusion, even though the Human Rights Act clearly postulates that every person has the right to privacy, this may not necessarily apply to the prisoners as there are some security measures that need to be applied. Proportionality may apply in this case but there has to be some exceptions of what can be searched and what cannot be searched. The prisoner has the right to have private information concerning his case or complaints but he has no right to order or stop the search in the cell. The exception of the principle is that the officers have the right to do a random search to the cells without the presence of the prisoners or their awareness.