A High Court judge wants the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission to provide more information on its bid to be joined to actions against the State by four youths held in Oberstown Detention Centre claiming their human rights have been breached.
Mr Justice Robert Eagar said he believed the cases, which are listed for hearing next month, raise “significant” issues involving the human rights of juveniles.
The commission could potentially offer a distinctive human rights-focused perspective to the court that might not be offered by the parties in the context of an adversarial dispute, he said.
The commission had said, inter alia, human rights appeared central to the determination of the case, the court’s decision could significantly affect the human rights of others not involved and it would bear its own costs and abide by court directions concerning submissions.
The judge found the information supporting the commission’s application to be joined as an amicus curiae – assistant to the court on legal issues – was insufficient for the court to decide the application, he said.
‘Invidious’ position
The court found itself in an “invidious” position as the respondents – the director of Oberstown and the Minister for Justice and Equality – had not clearly set out whether they were objecting or consenting to this application, he said.
The respondents had said they did not believe the commission had made an uninformed decision to apply to appear as amicus but there was little information why it had decided to apply.
The judge said additional information would help him to decide the application, including on the precise role the commission intended to adopt, for example, if it proposed to make oral or legal submissions.
The court also required information concerning expertise in the area of human rights engaged in the case, including more elaboration of what regard the commission had to various documents referred to by it, including the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003, the Council of Europe Rules for Juvenile Offenders and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.
He sought further information about how the commission can avoid adding to the legal costs and said it should “shed more light” on the decision-making process that caused it to decide to apply to be joined as an amicus.
Disturbances
The cases were brought following disturbances and fire damage to the Oberstown centre near Lusk, Co Dublin, last August. These led to some detainees allegedly having to be held in 23-hour lock-up and allegedly being denied visits by family members.
The court was previously told, on the night of August 29th/30th, some boys got on to the roof of the centre and a fire broke out rendering one unit useless and two others out of action while repairs were carried out.
In their actions, the plaintiffs want declarations and damages on grounds including that not being allowed family visits breached their rights to private and family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. They also want orders prohibiting operation of a regime of solitary confinement.
In opposing the cases, the respondents deny operating a solitary confinement policy and plead the policy in place is a “separation policy”.
