State (Richardson) v Governor of Mountjoy Prison

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: High Court
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1980
• Date: 01 January 1980

(H.C.)

State (Richardson)

and

Governor of Mountjoy Prison

Condition of confinement - Subsisting rights of convicted prisoner - Complaint by prisoner that conditions of confinement conflict with health and privacy rights - Whether motive for complaint relevant - Whether State in breach of duties under Constitution and Prison Rules - Appropriate remedy - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Article 40.3 - Rules for the Government of Prisons, 1947 (S.R. O. No.320), Rules 34, 46, 108, 172. Habeas corpus -Inquiry under Article 40.4 - Whether habeas corpus or Article 40.4 inquiry appropriate form of relief - Subsisting rights of convicted prisoner - Right of access to courts - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Articles 40.3, 40.4.

The prosecutrix was a convicted prisoner who was detained in Mountjoy Prison. She applied for an inquiry by the High Court under Article 40.4 of the Constitution into the conditions relating to toilet facilities in the women's section of the prison on the grounds that they failed to have proper regard to her right to health, privacy and human dignity. Evidence was given that each morning the women, whose number averaged 16, in a procedure known as slopping out emptied out the chamber pots given to them the previous night in the one toilet available for this. The women should have used a cold water tap over the sink of the toilet to rinse the chamber pot, clean it with steel wool and then empty the water into the toilet bowl, but the prosecutrix claimed that due to pressure of time to finish slopping out before breakfast some women emptied chamber pots into the sink in which they were to wash themselves and that she had seen the remains of human waste in the sink. She had made a verbal, though not a written complaint to the prison officers and members of the Visiting Committee regarding these conditions. She also complained that the toilet doors consisted of opaque glass and could not be locked from the inside. In evidence, the prison's medical officer stated he would be concerned if 15 prisoners had to go through the slopping out process in 30 minutes and were human waste to be poured into the sink. He thought hot water should be made available to the prisoners and the slopping out area should be separate from where the prisoners washed. The governor stated that as a result of the prosecutrix's application he took a decision to have the condition of the women's toilet facilities improved. Held, by Barrington J: (1) although the...