Why the “No Air in Prison” Bill proposed by the Victorian Government violates the Victorian Human Rights Charter and Australia’s obligations under International Human Rights Law.
11 August 2026
Everyone deserves to see the sky and breathe fresh air. Access to fresh air is a human right, a lifeline for people in prison and is a protection against cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.
At Fitzroy Legal Service, we exist to fight for justice. We believe our government and institutions must uphold human rights of all people possible, through alignment with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights at a bare minimum, without exception.
The Victorian Government’s proposed “No Air in Prison” Bill shows that our human rights are optional and can be removed when they are inconvenient. We must not let the government deny something as essential as fresh air.
What is the government doing?
The Victorian Supreme Court in the case of Marrogi recently found that the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Community Safety (DJCS) had breached the human rights of people in prison by failing to observe the requirements in s 47 of the Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) to give people in prison “the right to be in open air for at least an hour each day, if the weather permits”. The Supreme Court also found that the Secretary had acted incompatibly with section 22(1) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) (the Charter).
The “No Air in Prison” Bill
In response to the decision, instead of protecting human rights and making sure the Secretary followed the law, the Victorian Government introduced the Corrections Amendment Bill 2026 (the “No Air in Prison” Bill) to change the law itself.
This Bill authorises the government’s breach of human rights by and provides prisons with discretion to restrict access to open air for people inside prison subject to “operational considerations”. Further, the Bill denies compensation for people who have already had their human rights breached.
In Parliament, the government has confirmed the restriction will not be confined to emergencies and is intended to limit the human right to open air on an ongoing basis and for extended periods of time. This bill will operate indefinitely.
At Fitzroy Legal Service, many of our clients have already been subject to ongoing, rolling lockdowns at multiple prisons due to “operational considerations”. These “operational considerations” in practice are everyday issues like rostering decisions and staffing shortages. The fundamental human right to open air must not be subject to something as vague and open-ended as the convenience of the “operational considerations” of an institution like a prison, with no accountability or oversight.
What about the Victorian Charter of Human Rights?
Section 22(1) of the Charter establishes the right to humane treatment when deprived of liberty and guarantees that everyone in prison retains their fundamental human dignity. As a closed environment where people’s liberty is restricted, prisons are places where human rights protections are especially important.
For the Government to respond to the Court’s decision by indefinitely overriding human rights obligations that should limit the extraordinary powers of the state is unacceptable.
By allowing prisons to take away fundamental human rights in the name of operational considerations, the “No Air in Prison” Bill will increase the lack of transparency in prisons and the likelihood of abuses of power.
Is the Victorian Government breaching International Human Rights Law?
Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Mandela Rules), which provides that everyone in prison must be treated with respect and human dignity and be protected from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, for which there can be no justification. Rule 23 of the Mandela Rules provides that every person in prison should have at least one hour in the open air daily if weather permits. The “No Air in Prison” Bill is inconsistent with the Mandela Rules.
The Bill is also inconsistent with Article 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 16 of the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. These are foundational human rights instruments to which Australia is a signatory.
It is unacceptable for the Victorian Government to introduce a Bill that contravenes Australia’s obligations under multiple international human rights laws.
What are the impacts for people inside, especially in solitary confinement?
Fresh air is fundamental to the physical and mental health of every human being. Restricting access to fresh air increases isolation, psychological distress and the profound harms associated with prolonged confinement. For people already living with trauma, mental ill-health or disability, these conditions compound suffering, increase the risk of self-harm, suicidal ideation and long-term psychological harm.
The Bill will disproportionately harm Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, who continue to be subjected to mass incarceration resulting from the ongoing impacts of colonisation and laws, policies and practices shaped by systemic racism.
One hour in the open air every day is a lifeline for people in prison, particularly those locked away in solitary confinement.
Will this bill impact community safety in general?
People in prison are not separate from our communities. They are family members, neighbours and loved ones. When the state treats people inhumanely, they don’t rehabilitate them: they inflict harm that is carried back into communities. Trauma created in prison doesn’t stay behind prison walls, it follows people home, impacts families, and reverberates throughout our communities long after a prison sentence ends.
We don’t build safer communities inflicting pain and suffering; we build safety by upholding human rights, preventing trauma, and keeping government accountable to everyone’s rights and wellbeing.
