The prisoner complained that having written an autobiography, the manuscript materials had been withheld, and that this interfered with his rights of freedom of expression.
Held: Such an action by the prison authorities was not incompatible with the prisoner’s rights. The materials were not privileged, but were intended for publication contrary to the standing orders. A restriction on freedom of speech had to be necessary in pursuance of a pressing social need, and that connoted something beyond ‘useful, reasonable or desirable’ The elements supported by the rules were not limited to good order and discipline within the prison system. There was no special position enjoyed by an autobiography over other works. The respondent had clearly carried out a proportionality assessment, and the response was proportional and rational. Despite the existence of other copies it was not futile to seek still to control futher dissemination of this material.
Judges:
Maurice Kay, J
Citations:
[2003] EWHC 3160 (Admin), Times 02-Jan-2004, [2004] EMLR 9
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 10, Prison Act 1952 47(1), Prisons Rules 1999 (1999 No 728)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
Cited – Nilsen and Johnsen v Norway ECHR 25-Nov-1999
The court considered a complaint that the Norwegian defamation law interfered with the applicant’s freedom of speech, and placed an unfair burden of proof on them in defending themselves. One of the defamatory phrases under consideration was . .
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .
Cited – Raymond v Honey HL 4-Mar-1981
The defendant prison governor had intercepted a prisoner’s letter to the Crown Office for the purpose of raising proceedings to have the governor committed for an alleged contempt of court.
Held: The governor was in contempt of court. Subject . .
Cited – Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and Others v Turkey ECHR 13-Feb-2003
Hudoc No violation of Art. 11 ; Not necessary to examine under Arts. 9, 10, 14, 17 and 18 41340/98 ; 41342/98 ; 41343/98 ; 41344/98
‘ . . ..the expression ‘prescribed by law’ requires first that the impugned . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mellor CA 4-Apr-2001
A prisoner had no right to facilities to artificially inseminate his wife. In this case, he might not be released for several years, and there were no medical reasons advanced for finding exceptional reasons under the Department policy. Provided the . .
Cited – Hirst v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 22-Mar-2002
The applicant, a prisoner challenged the uniform ban on contact by prisoners with the media by telephone, arguing that it infringed his Article 10 rights.
Held: Restricting telephone contact with the media was not part of imprisonment. A . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Central Broadcasting Limited 1993
The applicant sought to restrain transmission of material involving the notorious murderer Nilsen.
Held: ‘The broadcasting of an interview with Dennis Nilsen carries with it to all the dangers which the Home Office policy is designed to guard . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department (ex parte Bamber) Admn 24-Apr-1998
The applicant was refused leave to apply for judicial review of a decision as to his release made on the basis of his refusal to accept his guilt. . .
Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Cited – Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Pro-life Alliance HL 15-May-2003
The Alliance was a political party seeking to air its party election broadcast. The appellant broadcasters declined to broadcast the film on the grounds that it was offensive, being a graphical discussion of the processes of abortion.
Held: . .
Appealed to – Nilsen v HM Prison Full Sutton and Another CA 17-Nov-2004
The prisoner, a notorious murderer had begun to write his autobiography. His solicitor wished to return a part manuscript to him in prison to be finished. The prison did not allow it, and the prisoner claimed infringement of his article 10 rights. . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Nilsen v HM Prison Full Sutton and Another CA 17-Nov-2004
The prisoner, a notorious murderer had begun to write his autobiography. His solicitor wished to return a part manuscript to him in prison to be finished. The prison did not allow it, and the prisoner claimed infringement of his article 10 rights. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Prisons, Media, Human Rights
Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.189147
