Tanner's (Curtis) Application and in the matter of a decision of The Northern Ireland Prison Service
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Scoffield J |
| Judgment Date | 15 May 2023 |
| Neutral Citation | [2023] NIKB 60 |
| Court | King's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
Neutral Citation No: [2023] NIKB 60
Judgment: approved by the court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: SCO12163
ICOS No: 22/030034/01
Delivered: 15/05/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
KING’S BENCH DIVISION
(JUDICIAL REVIEW)
___________
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY CURTIS TANNER
FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
AND IN THE MATTER OF A DECISION OF
THE NORTHERN IRELAND PRISON SERVICE
___________
Dessie Hutton KC and Stephen Toal (instructed by Owen Beattie & Co Solicitors) for the
Applicant
Tony McGleenan KC and Terence McCleave (instructed by the Departmental Solicitor’s
Office) for the proposed Respondent
___________
SCOFFIELD J
Introduction
[1] This challenge relates to the absence of a published policy in respect of when
officers of the proposed respondent, the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS), will
intercept or monitor prisoners’ communications such as telephone calls.
[2] Initially, the application was presented as a challenge to a purported failure
on the part of NIPS to formulate a policy or, in the alternative, a failure on the part of
NIPS to publish such policy as it had adopted. The proposed respondent then
served affidavit evidence, along with various exhibits, which were asserted by it to
constitute, or to at least transparently set out, the policy which it applied.
Accordingly, the applicant’s complaint was reformulated to relate only to the
proposed respondent’s failure to publish the policy documents which exist.
[3] The case proceeded by way of a rolled-up hearing. Mr Hutton KC appeared
with Mr Toal for the applicant; and Mr McGleenan KC appeared with Mr McCleave
for the proposed respondent. I am grateful to all counsel for their helpful written
and oral submissions.
Rule 68A of the Prison Rules
[4] A key provision in this case is rule 68A of the Prison and Young Offenders
Centres Rules (Northern Ireland) 1995 (“the Prison Rules”), which provides as
follows:
“(1) The Department of Justice may give directions to
any governor concerning the interception in a
prison of any communication to or by any prisoner
or class of prisoners if the Department of Justice
considers that the directions are –
(a) necessary on the grounds specified in
paragraph (4) below; and
(b) proportionate to what is sought to be
achieved.
(2) Subject to any directions given by the Department
of Justice, the governor may make arrangements for
any communication by a prisoner or class of
prisoners to be intercepted in a prison by an officer
or a person employed in the prison authorised by
the governor for the purposes of this rule (referred
to in this rule as an “authorised employee”) if he
considers that the arrangements are –
(a) necessary on any of the grounds specified in
paragraph (4) below; and
(b) proportionate to what is sought to be
achieved.
(3) Any communication to or by a prisoner may,
during the course of its transmission in a prison, be
terminated by an officer or an authorised employee
if he considers that to terminate the communication
is –
(a) necessary on any of the grounds specified in
paragraph (4) below; and
(b) proportionate to what is sought to be
achieved by the termination.
To continue reading
Request your trial