The High Court found that four young people’s constitutional rights were breached during their separation at Oberstown Children Detention Campus after a major disturbance in August 2016. The breaches concerned the lack of daily exercise, the absence of contact with their families and failures to use procedural safeguards when imposing and continuing the regime.
In a judgment delivered on 6 November 2017, Ms Justice Ni Raifeartaigh said the Director had authority under the Children Act 2001 to separate detainees where necessary to maintain order and prevent injury or property damage. Oberstown’s separation policy, including its three-day limit, was guidance rather than a legally binding rule. The court said the Constitution nevertheless imposed limits on the Director’s actions.
The four applicants, all minors identified by initials, were separated after a disturbance on 29 August 2016. The court found on the balance of probabilities that the incident occurred as described in the evidence: young people took control of a unit, accessed a roof and caused considerable damage. The disturbance lasted about eight hours and required the attendance of Gardaí and other emergency services.
The court accepted that the incident and continued threats and aggressive behaviour recorded in the following days created serious safety concerns. It was not persuaded that the approximately three-week separation was disproportionate. Nor did it find that the detention conditions, considered as a whole, amounted to inhuman or degrading treatment. It said the evidence did not establish actual psychological harm to the applicants.
However, the court found that the complete absence of exercise for a substantial period had not been shown to be strictly necessary. It reached the same conclusion about withholding all family contact. It also found that decisions to impose and continue separation lacked sufficient procedural safeguards: there were no formal written authorisations and reasons, and the young people had no adequate opportunity to make representations, such as through an independent advocate.
The court granted declarations limited to those three areas. It did not declare the separation’s duration unconstitutional and did not make a finding that the overall conditions amounted to inhuman or degrading treatment. It awarded each applicant €100 in nominal damages for the constitutional breaches. The judgment did not decide the separate criminal investigation into the disturbance, and it made no further findings on the alleged European Convention breaches.