Death in custody - nature and scope of state's duty to investigate - minimum standards requiring appropriate levels of public scrutiny and family participation

R (Amin) v Secretrary of State for the Home Department: HL (Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Hutton): 16 October 2003

The deceased prisoner was murdered by a cellmate with a history of violent and racist conduct.

An inquest was adjourned when the cellmate was charged with murder and not resumed after his conviction.

An internal prison service inquiry recommended regime changes but that no staff member could be disciplined.

Police investigations concluded that no prosecution could be brought against employees of the prison service.

The Commission for Racial Equality, in investigating racial discrimination in the service, permitted only minimal publicity or family participation.

The deceased's uncle challenged, by way of judicial review, the home secretary's refusal of the family's request for a public investigation.

Mr Justice Hooper [2001] EWHC Admin 719, concluding that such an investigation was necessary to satisfy the state's duty under article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, granted the relief claimed.

The Court of Appeal [2002] EWCA Civ 390; [2003] QB 581, allowed the secretary of state's appeal.

The claimant appealed.

Patrick O'Connor QC and Martin Soorjoo (instructed by Imran Khan & Partners) for the claimant; John Larkin QC and Peter Coll (instructed by J G O'Hare, Belfast) for the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, intervening; Jonathan Crow and Martin Chamberlain (instructed by Treasury Solicitor) for the home secretary.

Held, allowing the appeal, that the state's duty to secure the right to life under article 2 required it to protect the lives of those involuntarily in its custody and, where death occurred, imposed a procedural duty to investigate the circumstances; that, at minimum, that required the state to ensure sufficient public scrutiny to secure accountability and an appropriate level of family participation to safeguard their legitimate interests; and that, since none of the inquiries satisfied those standards, the state had not discharged its duty and the judge's order would be restored.

(WLR)