NCJ Number
96794
Journal
British Journal of Criminology Volume: 24 Issue: 4 Dated: (October 1984) Pages: 394-398
Date Published
1984
Length
5 pages
Annotation
Disturbances at England's Albany and Wormwood Scrubs prisons in May and June 1983 brought domestic litigation, which expedited changes in prison practices in relation to assistance for the accused at Board of Visitors adjudications.
Abstract
Following a riot and rooftop demonstration at Albany and a violent disturbance at Wormwood Scrubs, five prisoners charged with offenses under the Prison Rules sought judicial review of the proceedings before their respective Boards of Visitors based, in all five cases, on the refusal to allow legal assistance at the hearings and, in two of them, the refusal to allow a friend/adviser to assist. Delivering the leading judgment, J. Webster held that he was bound by the precedent of Fraser v. Mudge, i.e., a prisoner has no right to legal representation at a Board of Visitors hearing, and that the Board of Prisoners had a 'discretion' to allow such assistance. The Home Office response to the judgment was to write to governors and to chairpersons of boards recommending changes in procedure at adjudication. Despite the fact that legal assistance is being granted nationally at the rate of about 1 in every 20 adjudications, prison staff express concern. The European Court of Human Rights' judgment, in the case of Campbell and Fell v. United Kingdom, implies more changes in internal procedure. The Court held, 'inter alia,' that the denial of legal advice and assistance to prisoners at a Board of Visitors adjudication constituted a violation of Article Six of the Convention. Government response to the judgment is awaited. A total of 31 footnotes are given.