Courts right victory for mentally ill prisoners

LEGAL history was made yesterday after a prison reform group won the right to take court action against the State on behalf of mentally ill prisoners.

If the Irish Penal Reform Trust (IPRT) is successful in its case, it paves the way for thousands of prisoners with psychiatric problems to sue the State for damages.

In a ground-breaking decision, the High Court ruled that the IPRT was entitled to represent mentally ill prisoners in legal proceedings against the State.

The IPRT is seeking a declaration from the courts that the detention of mentally ill prisoners in padded cells breached their constitutional rights and was contrary to human rights obligations.

Mr Justice Paul Gilligan also granted two former inmates of Mountjoy Prison the right to sue the State for damages and declaratory reliefs.

Their action is the first case of its type and will be heard together with the case taken by the IPRT.

IPRT chairwoman Claire Hamilton said: “These two former prisoners are looking for damages and declaratory relief. We’re not looking for damages, but our case is being taken in tandem.

“We are there as a voice for other prisoners who may have gone through this regime. It’s an unspecified number. Our estimation is we’re not talking hundreds, we’re talking thousands.”

Ms Hamilton, who is also a barrister and lecturer at Dublin Institute of Technology, said that if the “substantive case” succeeded, these people could then sue the State for damages.

“Ultimately if we were successful, other prisoners who’ve gone through this padded cell regime and been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment could certainly seek damages.”

She claimed the use of padded cells were “degrading and debasing”.

The IPRT showed research to the court claiming that 78% of prisoners put into padded cells had a mental illness.

Mr Justice Gilligan said the IPRT had the expertise and the financial ability to mount an effective action on behalf of prisoners. He said while prisoners might be theoretically capable of asserting their constitutional rights, he was not satisfied they were in a position to adequately assert them.

The governor of Mountjoy and the Minister for Justice said the IPRT did not have legal capacity to take proceedings on behalf of prisoners and that the two prisoners’ action should be limited to their own specific circumstances.

Mr Justice Gilligan rejected the defence submissions.

He said that if the IPRT was denied standing, then those prisoners it represented may not have an effective way to bring the issues before the court.