![[Logo] The Howard League for Penal Reform](fileadmin/howard_league/template/resources/logo.gif "The Howard League for Penal Reform"){kind=logo}
Embargo:
00.01 Monday 29 July 2002
Blunkett
faces high court challenge for failure
to protect children in prison
In the High Court today (29 July) the Howard League will
challenge Home Office refusal to apply the Children Act 1989 to prisons.
The penal reform organisation is supported in its action by the former Chief
Inspector of Prisons, Sir David Ramsbotham, and six national children's
charities - the Children's Society, NSPCC, Childline, Save the Children,
National Children's Bureau and NCH Action for Children.
Sir David and the Children's Society have provided expert witness
statements for the case.
The Howard League has launched the judicial review
because of a long-standing concern over the inferior conditions and treatment of
children in prison. Children
in prisons are routinely treated in ways that in other circumstances would
trigger a child protection investigation for abuse. For example, since April
2000, 976 juveniles have been held in segregation (essentially solitary
confinement) for more than one week.
Segregation as a punishment has been used 4,437 times in all during this
period.
As well as a general failure of prisons to meet the needs
of teenagers, the Howard League believes they are at risk of significant harm
from high levels of violence, impoverished regimes and excessive use of physical
restraint by staff. Between April
2000 and January 2002 control and restraint was used 3,615 times on children.
The Howard League is also concerned that when a child
self-injures or attempts suicide this is not considered a child protection
issue. There were 554 reported
cases of deliberate self-injury by children from April 2000 to November 2001.
Four sixteen year olds have committed suicide.
The Howard League is asking the Court to find that the
Home Office policy that the Children Act 1989 does not apply to prisons is
unlawful. This policy creates effectively a ‘no-go zone’ for the agencies
responsible for ensuring that a child’s needs are met. As far as most local
authorities are concerned, once a child from their area goes into custody, they
have no further obligation towards him/her until they are released.
The Children Act brought into British law obligations enshrined in the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is the most important piece of
legislation outlining the state's responsibility to protect children.
It sets out duties that local authorities and others owe to children
throughout the country to keep them safe from harm and ensure their needs are
identified and met. Whilst these standards apply to children anywhere in the
country, including those serving sentences in local authority secure units, they
are not provided for the 2,858 young people aged 15 to 17 currently held in
prison.
In a statement provided for the court Sir David Ramsbotham, HM Chief Inspector
of Prisons from 1995 to 2001, said that he expressed deep concern about
conditions and treatment of children held in Prison Service establishments
throughout his time as Chief Inspector, arguing consistently that the Children
Act was needed.
He revealed that such was his concern that after seeking independent legal
advice he planned to mount his own judicial review of the Home Secretary (then
Rt Hon Jack Straw MP) for his failure to apply the Children Act to Prison
Service institutions. Sir David agreed to abandon those plans only after being
given assurances that at the earliest opportunity any ambiguity would be cleared
up and the Children Act made to specifically impose legal obligations in
relation to children in prison. These assurances have not been met.
Sir David Ramsbotham said today:
"If there is a strategy on how children should be
brought up in this country and how they should be treated by public
institutions, that same strategy must have surely been intended to apply to all
children in the country including those in prisons.
"It
has been a huge disappointment to me that the Home Office has failed to ensure
the Prison Service is bound by the Children Act. Without that legal duty the
treatment of children in prison will continue to be substandard?.
Frances Crook,
Director of the Howard League, said:
"Despite
some improvement in the treatment of children in prisons since the advent of the
Youth Justice Board the conditions for children in prison remain dangerous.
Applying only the spirit of the Act rather than its full legal authority
will never succeed in ensuring children are properly protected in prisons.
?Not
only do we have a moral obligation to protect children from harm even when they
have committed crimes, we have legal and international obligations to do so.
?Children
in prison are highly vulnerable. Half have been in care and the majority
assessed as having special needs."
Sharon
Moore,
Manager of the Children’s Society’s Youth Justice programme said:
?There
are no half measures when it comes to protecting children.
The Children Act is there to protect all children from abuse,
neglect and harm. Yet those who
most need its protection are being denied it.
This constitutes an alarming abuse of basic human rights.
Having
worked in prisons we have first hand experience of the inadequacy of the
Government's approach to child protection.
It expects staff who don’t have specialist training to care for
vulnerable and troubled children. It
expects child protection without providing the necessary resources.
And it expects all this to be achieved while denying staff the
professionalisms, structure and support afforded by the Children Act.
Amateurism in child protection is an inadequate and dangerous policy.?
Lisa
Payne,
Principal Policy Officer of the National Children's Bureau said:
"NCB
has a long history of working for and with children and young people, and has
particular expertise in children's residential care. We also work within the
provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and are aware that,
in the youth justice sector, the UK falls sadly short of fulfilling its
international obligations.
NCB
believes that children in prison cannot be adequately protected and cared for
unless the Children Act applies to them in the same way it applies to children
in other forms of residential care. We therefore fully support the Howard
League's legal challenge."
Mary Marsh,
Director and Chief Executive of NSPCC, and Carole Easton, Chief Executive
of ChildLine, issued a joint statement:
"The
NSPCC and ChildLine believe that children in prison cannot be adequately
protected and cared for unless the Children Act applies to them in the same way
it applies to children in other forms of residential care. We therefore fully
support the Howard League's legal challenge"
?????????????????????????????????????Ends
For
more information contact:
Frances
Crook,
Fran Russell or Mike Grewcock on 020 7249 7373.
·
The
Howard League has ISDN facilities
Return
to press centre
The Howard League online