![[Logo] The Howard League for Penal Reform](fileadmin/howard_league/template/resources/logo.gif "The Howard League for Penal Reform"){kind=logo}
Legal Achievements
Our legal team have taken a number of cases which have led to changes in policy and practice for children and young adults in custody.
In 2003 the Howard League for Penal Reform was awarded the Human Rights award, organised by Liberty, Justice and the Law Society, in recognition of our work to promote the human rights of children in prison.
Children facing extra days in prison should get legal representation
Howard League lawyers won an important case for children in prison. We represented a 17 year old boy who kept getting into trouble in prison and instead of dealing with minor infractions within the institution, he was referred to an external tribunal that has the power to award additional days of imprisonment. The high court judge quashed additional days that the boy received for refusing to go back to his wing. The judge said that it is important that proactive steps should be taken to make sure children facing extra days in prison get legal representation.
The Howard League case on the Children Act
The Howard League for Penal Reform brought a judicial review against the Home Secretary, arguing that the Children Act 1989 applied to children in prison. The case was supported by Sir David Ramsbotham, the former Chief Inspector of Prisons and eight national children's and penal reform charities.
Mr Justice Munby held that the Children Act did not cease to apply to a child in a Young Offenders Institution but should operate subject to the requirements of custody. This was a very important case. As a result, the Prison Service had to re-write Prison Service Order 4950, which deals with the regime for juveniles, so that a range of child protection measures could be incorporated.
Duties owed to children who are leaving care: the Caerphilly judgment
This case concerned a boy who was entitled to leaving care rights and raised important issues about the need for leaving care assessments to be meaningful. It was very clear that these plans should say who will do what and by when! The case also made it clear that assessments that do not meet these standards can be challenged through the courts. The case has been very helpful in making sure that lots of young people get the services they need.
Our press release on Caerphilly
Duties owed to children leaving custody: the K v - Manchester case
This case establishes some very important details about the ways in which children who are leaving custody should be assessed under the Children Act 1989. It made it clear that assessments under the Act should be carried out by local authority social services departments instead of Youth Offending Team workers and that the assessments should explicitly cover the future needs of the child on release from custody.
Duties owed to children who are subject to parole: the K v- Parole Board case
As more and more young people are given long term sentences of imprisonment which will be subject to parole, the ways in which the parole process applies to children will require greater scrutiny. This case has made an important contribution by making it clear that children should have the assistance of an appropriate adult when reviewing the documents that will be sent to the parole board and in making their own representations. The case also commented that young people should be explicitly told by the parole board that they can apply to have an oral hearing.
Segregation (solitary confinement)
The practice of isolating young people for long periods of time has been an issue of great concern and was also the subject of the Carlile Inquiry. The Howard League's cases of BP and SP challenged this policy and led to changes in the Prison Service policy of placing children in segregation or solitary confinement.
Mixing children with adults in prison
The case of DT confirmed that it is unlawful to mix children with adults in prison and helped to speed up the Youth Justice Board's commitment to removing all 15 and 16 year old girls from prison custody.
Judgment on DTUnaccompanied asylum seeking children should not normally be given prison sentences says Court of Appeal
This case concerned a criminal appeal on behalf of an unaccompanied child who was convicted of entering the UK without the correct immigration documents. The child was sentenced to a four-month detention and training order which the Court said was inappropriate, as adults would expect to receive a two-month sentence. As children cannot get sentences of less than four months, the Court held that a non-custodial sentence should normally be imposed in theses cases.
Homeless teenagers: landmark judgment from the House of Lord
In order to ensure effective and coordinated care by local authorities of homeless 16 and 17 year olds, it was necessary to have a joint protocol between the local housing authority and the children's services authority to assess needs and make sure that the most appropriate agency took responsibility. If the criteria in the Children Act 1989 were met, social services should take long term responsibility, and it could not avoid such responsibility by looking to the housing authority to accommodate the child.
The Howard League online