Prison Law in Ireland Enters Adulthood: Simpson v Governor of Mountjoy Prison

Abstract

Simpson v. Governor of Mountjoy Prison represents a considerable maturing of prison law jurisprudence in Ireland. Until very recently, prison law has been a niche area of legal practice and suffered from a lack of specialist focus amongst practitioners and specific attention from the Superior Courts. The dearth of caselaw on Irish prison conditions was surprising in light of the well documented failings of many aspects of our prison system, including domestic and international critique of overcrowding, violence and the egregious practice of slopping out. Slopping out, the euphemism to describe the practice whereby people in prison are required to attend to the needs of nature through the use of a bucket or other receptable and ‘slop out’ the contents thereof, was a key focus for the Simpson litigation before the High Court and Supreme Court, though by no means the only concern at issue. Both courts provided useful and much-needed guidance on when prison conditions breach rights under the Irish Constitution, with the Supreme Court also taking the opportunity to clarify the role of European Convention on Human Rights jurisprudence in Irish law more broadly and to develop further the jurisprudence on the protection of the right to the person. This article assesses the judgments in Simpson, noting their importance for the specific resolution of multiple cases involving the use of slopping out in Irish prisons, but also for how constitutional and Convention rights are interpreted in the prison setting more broadly. Simpson has provided valuable illumination of many complex issues in Irish prison law, including questions of intention on the part of authorities concerning poor material conditions and the threshold which must be reached before treatment in prison constitutes a breach of the personal rights under Article 40.3.