The High Court has recently upheld a complaint by a prisoner that the procedure used to continue his detention in high security conditions was unfair.
The Court accepted that the prisoner, who maintains his innocence of the crime he was convicted of, should have had the opportunity of an oral hearing to put forward his case, rather than it being decided on paper by civil servants in
The key reasons for this decision were that he had been in custody for over 20 years, the high security status was preventing progression and the possibility of release, local report writers who knew him best had recommended a downgrade in security and a Parole Board had noted that it may not be necessary to continue detention in a high security prison.
Mike Pemberton, an Associate solicitor at Stephensons Solicitors LLP, acted on behalf of the prisoner and Hugh Southey of Tooks Chambers represented him at the hearing.
Mike said: “This case is interesting because the Court have looked objectively at the procedure for detaining my client in a high security prison and have accepted the difficulties in convincing someone who just reads brief reports without actual knowledge of your client.
“In this case, the majority of staff who have written reports recommended a downgrade in security, but a decision was taken that my client was too dangerous. If a page in a report says someone is dangerous and no actual investigation is undertaken into this then injustice can occur. This was specifically reflected in the current case because people who had day to day contact with him commented that he could be transferred to a normal security prison.
“The fact he has been held in high security for over 20 years is having a major effect on progression through the prison system and I hope that the opportunity of an oral hearing will now provide my client with some hope of moving through the system.”