The study is limited to an examination of some of the legal safeguards that are in place or should be in place to ensure those affected are protected and have adequate recourse when the standards of care or prisoners' constitutional rights are breached. It explores the scope for improving the operation of the correctional system in the new and burgeoning area of contracting out of government services, which has become increasingly prevalent since the Hilmer Report (Independent Commission of Inquiry 1996). The aim of the study is not to take a pro or anti-privatization stance but to ensure that appropriate standards of care for prisoners are in place, that public accountability and transparency are in place, and that government retains its fundamental role in correctional services, whether public or private. A discussion of issues of governance addresses the source of executive power to make contracts, the rationale for the policy of contracting out government services to private companies, the contracting process, contractual terms and specifications, and the public interest. A review of some administrative law safeguards considers the position of the Crown, freedom of information, and the Corrections Commissioner. An overview of some common law safeguards addresses contractual remedies, which encompasses the doctrine of privity of contract, as well as principal and agency relationships. Overall the paper shows how very limited are the rights to protection for persons affected by the contracting out of prison services. In addition, it highlights that their rights generally are limited in both the public and private prison spheres. A list of 13 court cases and 26 references