This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26609536

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Prisoner legal aid challenge rejected Prisoner legal aid challenge rejected
(35 minutes later)
The High Court has rejected a challenge by charities to government plans to cut legal aid for prisoners. The High Court has rejected a challenge by two charities against cutting legal aid for prisoners.
The Howard League for Penal Reform and the Prisoners' Advice Service had sought a full judicial review. The Howard League for Penal Reform and the Prisoners' Advice Service had sought a full judicial review, arguing vulnerable inmates would suffer.
They said vulnerable inmates, such as those with mental health problems, would suffer injustice. They say they will now appeal.
Announcing plans in 2013, ministers said taxpayers' money was being used for "unnecessary legal cases" that could be handled by the prison service. Minsters said the changes, introduced in 2013, would stop taxpayers' money being used for "unnecessary legal cases" that could be handled by the prison service.
Justice Secretary Chris Grayling, who is also the Lord Chancellor, said it would mean 11,000 fewer cases - and savings of £4m - a year.Justice Secretary Chris Grayling, who is also the Lord Chancellor, said it would mean 11,000 fewer cases - and savings of £4m - a year.
'Political' concerns'Political' concerns
Mr Justice Cranston and Lady Justice Rafferty, sitting in London, said they could "well understand the concerns" raised by the new rules.Mr Justice Cranston and Lady Justice Rafferty, sitting in London, said they could "well understand the concerns" raised by the new rules.
"But we simply cannot see, at least at this point in time, how these concerns can arguably constitute unlawful action by the Lord Chancellor," they added."But we simply cannot see, at least at this point in time, how these concerns can arguably constitute unlawful action by the Lord Chancellor," they added.
"For the time being, the forum for advancing these concerns remains the political.""For the time being, the forum for advancing these concerns remains the political."
The charities, in a joint statement, said the High Court "did not dismiss the possibility of successful future challenges".
Howard League for Penal Reform chief executive Frances Crook said: "These cuts will not result in savings for the taxpayer.
"On the contrary, they will result in increased costs as children remain in prison for longer than is necessary for want of a safe home to go to."
She said the charities would "take this to the Court of Appeal as the High Court made fundamental errors in its understanding of some of the key points".
"It did not properly deal with the concerns of the Joint Committee on Human Rights that the complaints system cannot be effective in certain cases," she added.
"The court completely failed to address how unfairness would not arise in particular situations where prisoners are unrepresented."
She said these included parole board hearings where secret evidence was used against prisoners or "other cases which turn on expert evidence that cannot be commissioned without legal representation and funding".