NCJ Number
145169
Journal
Howard Journal of Criminal Justice Volume: 32 Issue: 3 Dated: (August 1993) Pages: 191-202
Date Published
1993
Length
12 pages
Annotation
This article examines the British Home Office's responses to Lord Justice Woolf's report on the 1990 prison disturbances regarding procedures for adjudicating alleged inmate misconduct.
Abstract
Lord Woolf's report concluded that whatever the riot causes, the Home Office had not convinced most inmates of their fair management during their sentences. This led to the removal of the adjudicatory function from the boards of visitors. As of April 1, 1992, Prison Rules mandate that prison governors adjudicate all alleged inmate infractions of prison rules. This article argues that this policy jeopardizes elements of natural justice. Governors' stake in prison management issues makes it impossible for them to render unbiased judgments in discipline cases. Lord Bridge's dictum in ex parte Leech (1988) that the governor adjudicates as someone other than a servant of the Secretary of State is difficult to sustain in practice. The adjudicating governor may violate Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which requires that those who adjudicate alleged inmate rule infractions be independent of the prison administration. This article recommends the redrafting of Prison Rule 47 to distinguish between criminal and noncriminal inmate infractions and proposes that an official uninvolved in daily prison management adjudicate criminal infractions that do not reach the courts. 26 references