The Information Commissioner has upheld CRAE's complaint about the Youth Justice Board's refusal to disclose the Physical Control in Care restraint manual, used in secure training centres.  On 10 December, the Commissioner issued a Decision Notice under section 50(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 indicating that it agrees with CRAE that disclosure of the manual is in the public interest, and requiring the Youth Justice Board to disclose the manual to us within 35 days.

CRAE wrote to the YJB in 2007 under the Freedom of Information Act asking for a copy of the manual, which is thought to set out in detail the techniques authorised for use on children in secure training centres (STCs).  This includes so-called 'distraction' techniques which deliberately inflict pain, and which were found by the Court of Appeal in 2008 (AC v Secretary of State for Justice [2008]) to have been routinely used unlawfully on children in STCs.  The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights also requested a copy of the manual, in the context of its 2007/08 inquiry into the restraint of children in custody.  The YJB refused to disclose a full copy of the manual to either CRAE or the JCHR, on the grounds that this could undermine security in child prisons by allowing children and young people to see how the techniques work. The YJB argued that a statutory exemption therefore applied allowing non-disclosure.

CRAE submitted a complaint to the Information Commissioner in August 2007, arguing that the YJB had not presented evidence to support its case that there was any real risk to security, and that the statutory exemption was therefore not engaged.  CRAE also argued that there was a significant public interest in disclosure of the manual.  The Commissioner agreed with the YJB that the exemption was engaged, but held that the public interest in disclosing the manual outweighed any public interest in keeping it secret.  This was in light of the serious concerns surrounding the use of restraint on children in custody and the Court of Appeal's judgment in AC.  In the decision, the Commissioner set out in some detail why restraint of children in custody is such a serious matter of public concern, for example stating:

‘The complainant [CRAE] is amongst those who question the morality and ethics of techniques designed to inflict pain upon children.  The Commissioner again notes that the complainant is not isolated in holding this opinion, rather is part of a significant body of organisations and individuals who argue against the use of distraction techniques on moral and ethical grounds.’

CRAE is delighted with this outcome, while being disappointed that it took so long for the Commissioner to make his finding.  The decision reflects the significant public interest in this area and the need for increased transparency in order to ensure children and young people in custody are kept safe and their rights are respected.  It is not yet known whether the YJB plans to appeal to the Information Tribunal.