Press release

The Court of Appeal has today upheld the human rights of children in secure training centres by quashing restraint rules introduced by Ministers last summer. The rules were brought in following the damning inquest into the death of a child caused by restraint. Instead of increasing child protection in secure training centres, Ministers gave staff extra restraint powers.

Lawyers acting for a child ("AC") at risk of entering a secure training centre successfully argued that the new rules are unlawful. The rules allowed staff to restrain children for "good order and discipline". Restraint methods authorised by Ministers for use on children as young as 12 include the very painful rib and thumb "distractions".

Carolyne Willow, CRAE's national co-ordinator, said:

‘We are thrilled with the judgment. These unlawful rules were pushed through last summer, despite strong opposition from Parliamentarians, child protection experts and human rights groups. The court of appeal has quite rightly put children's rights ahead of the interests of the private companies running these centres. There should be compensation for children who have been unlawfully restrained. Information must now be sent to every child held in a secure training centre telling them about the judgment and who they can contact if they feel frightened or have been hurt.’

Diana Sutton, head of policy at the NSPCC said:

"This crucial judgment is a huge step forward and supports our view that restraint should only be used as a last resort and not as a routine disciplinary measure.

"Evidence we recently received from children held in detention showed that restraint sometimes resulted in them suffering injuries and often left them feeling angry and depressed.

"Many of these children will have suffered abuse or been caught-up in domestic violence before going into custody. They need care not harsh treatment and hopefully this ruling will go some way towards achieving that."

The Court of Appeal has quashed the rules because they breach the European Convention on Human Rights. They violate children's right to protection from inhuman and degrading treatment, as well as their right to a private life. The Court observed, ‘There has been a history of non-observance of the [Youth Justice Board's] Code of Practice. To extend the purposes for [restraint] … would be to aggravate the existing problem, because it would add an inherently vague, ill-defined justification for the use of force.’

The rules were in operation from July 6 2007 until today. This judgment means that potentially hundreds of children have been treated unlawfully and will be eligible for compensation. CRAE has previously tried to get human rights information directly to children in secure training centres. The centre directors, in discussion with the Youth Justice Board, refused to pass on our letters to children. We challenged this refusal and are awaiting a response from Ministers.

Carolyne Willow adds:

‘Today's judgment shows we were right to want to alert children to the probability that centre staff were acting unlawfully. In refusing our request, the centre directors and YJB withheld basic human rights information from children and their families. We hope Ministers will stand up to the centre directors and allow us access.’

The Court criticised the lack of consultation. LJ Buxton explained: ‘despite the absence of a formal consultation process a significant range of persons expressed concern at the proposed introduction of the Amendment Rules. These included persons with experience of running penal institutions, as well as bodies such as the Children’s Commissioner and the NSPCC with concerns for the welfare of children.’

The Court of Appeal has refused Ministers the right of appeal.

The Children's Rights Alliance for England has supported the case throughout, working closely with the NSPCC, INQUEST, the Howard League for Penal Reform and Liberty.

Earlier this year, the joint select committee on human rights condemned the restraint rules. David Hanson, the Prisons Minister, responded to the Committee’s report this month. The select committee, chaired by Andrew Dismore MP, reacted strongly to the Minister's dismissive approach.

On David Hanson's attempt to separate the use of force from discussions about violence against children, the Committee said:

‘… such a distinction does not feature in human rights law. The key question is whether the use of restraint can be justified in the circumstances. Whilst the Minister robustly states that the Government does not sanction violence against children, this is exactly what current legislation permits, albeit using the terminology of "force" rather than violence.’

The Committee summed up the vulnerability of children in custody:

‘Children and young people in detention are in a uniquely vulnerable position. Whilst everyone in detention must be treated with dignity and respect, children in detention have particular needs, distinct from the adult prison population, given their age and stage of development. The use of violence on vulnerable children and young people in detention can rarely be acceptable and risks breaching international human rights standards.’

Ends