Introduction

The case of AB, R (on the application of) v. Secretary of State for Justice ([2021] UKSC 28) addresses critical questions surrounding the treatment of minors within the youth justice system, particularly focusing on the legality and humaneness of solitary confinement. The appellant, a 15-year-old detained at Feltham Young Offenders Institution (YOI), contended that his solitary confinement was inherently inhuman and degrading, violating Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Supreme Court's judgment delves into whether such confinement of individuals under 18 can automatically breach Article 3 or if a nuanced, fact-sensitive approach is warranted.

Summary of the Judgment

The Supreme Court examined two primary legal questions:

1. Whether solitary confinement of individuals under 18 is inherently inhuman and degrading, thereby violating Article 3 of the ECHR.
2. If not inherently unlawful, whether a universal test exists to determine its compatibility based on exceptional circumstances and strict necessity.

After a thorough analysis, the Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts, rejecting the appellant's claims. It affirmed that solitary confinement of minors does not automatically breach Article 3, emphasizing the necessity of a fact-sensitive evaluation of each case's specific circumstances. The Court dismissed the appellant's arguments advocating for an absolute prohibition or a strict necessity test based on international instruments beyond the ECHR, reinforcing adherence to established jurisprudence.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment extensively references key precedents from both domestic and European courts to contextualize and support its reasoning:

• Ramirez-Sanchez v. France: Highlighted the necessity of a fact-sensitive approach in Article 3 analyses, considering all circumstances.
• Ahmad v. United Kingdom: Emphasized that no fixed rules can determine breaches of Article 3, advocating for a comprehensive evaluation of the measure's purpose, stringency, duration, and effects.
• Van der Ven v. Netherlands: Established that removal from association does not inherently constitute inhuman or degrading treatment.
• R (Ullah) v. Special Adjudicator: Clarified that domestic courts must align with Strasbourg's jurisprudence without overstepping to create new principles.
• Boug-id v. Belgium: Used as an analogy to argue that a strict necessity test should apply universally, although the Court distinguished between contexts.

Legal Reasoning

The Court's legal reasoning can be distilled into several key points:

• Fact-Sensitive Approach: Echoing European jurisprudence, the Court insists on evaluating the specific facts of each case rather than applying blanket rules. This ensures that the unique circumstances of each minor's detention are adequately considered.
• No Automatic Breach: Solitary confinement, as defined and applied in the appellant's case, does not automatically violate Article 3. Instead, its legality hinges on whether it is justified by exceptional circumstances and strict necessity.
• Role of International Instruments: While international treaties and guidelines inform interpretations, the Court maintains that only the ECHR and its own case law are binding. Reports and recommendations from bodies like the UNCRC do not hold authoritative legal weight in this context.
• Judicial Restraint: The Court emphasizes adherence to established jurisprudence, cautioning against domestic innovation that diverges from Strasbourg's interpretations.

Impact

This judgment reaffirms the necessity for a nuanced, case-by-case assessment in matters of solitary confinement, particularly for minors. It clarifies that:

• Judicial bodies should not adopt rigid or automatic standards without considering individual circumstances.
• Domestic courts must align closely with European Court of Human Rights decisions, ensuring consistent application of human rights principles.
• The decision may limit advocacy efforts aiming for absolute bans on solitary confinement for minors, directing future arguments towards demonstrating strict necessity in exceptional cases.

Consequently, youth detention institutions must ensure that solitary confinement is reserved for truly exceptional situations, thoroughly documented, and periodically reviewed to meet Article 3 standards.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Article 3 of the ECHR

Article 3 prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It is absolute, meaning it cannot be derogated from, even in times of emergency.

Solitary Confinement

Solitary confinement refers to the practice of isolating an individual in a separate cell with minimal human contact. Its severity can vary based on duration, conditions, and reasons for isolation.

Fact-Sensitive Approach

A fact-sensitive approach involves evaluating each case based on its unique facts and circumstances rather than applying a universal rule or standard.

Strict Necessity Test

The strict necessity test assesses whether a particular measure is absolutely required in exceptional circumstances to achieve a legitimate aim, ensuring that no less severe alternatives are available.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's decision in AB v. Secretary of State for Justice underscores the paramount importance of a meticulous, fact-specific examination when assessing the compatibility of solitary confinement practices with Article 3 of the ECHR, especially concerning minors. By rejecting the appellant's arguments for an automatic prohibition or a rigid necessity test, the Court maintains a balanced approach that respects both the rights of detainees and the operational necessities of youth detention institutions. This judgment reinforces adherence to established European jurisprudence, emphasizing that any evolution of human rights interpretation within domestic law must align with the Strasbourg Court's determinations. Consequently, while solitary confinement remains a permissible measure under strict conditions, it demands careful justification to safeguard against potential human rights violations.