Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Prisoner’s solitary confinement was justified by his challenging behaviour and safety concerns
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court has refused judicial review sought by a prisoner concerning his placement in solitary confinement, affirming the prison governor's decisions as lawful. The prisoner, serving a life sentence for murder, claimed his rights were violated by protracted periods in the Challenging Behaviour Unit (CBU) without lawful justification, alleging fabricated disciplinary records. The court found that the prisoner's confinement was justified due to his challenging behaviour and the need to maintain good order and safety in the prison. The court also noted that the prisoner had refused multiple offers for alternative accommodation, contributing to the length of his solitary confinement.
judicial review, certiorari, solitary confinement, Challenging Behaviour Unit (CBU), prison discipline, P19 reports, European Convention on Human Rights, constitutional rights, Rule 62 (Removal of Prisoner from Structured Activity or Association on grounds of Good Order), Rule 63 (Protection of Vulnerable Prisoners), proportionality, Mandela Rules, judicial discretion, prison management, safety and security, fabricated records, progression plan, refusal of accommodation, threats to prison staff, good order, voluntary confinement, Prison Rules 2007.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
