The Queensland government is investigating reports of a child being detained for a month despite the boy telling a court he wanted to plead guilty to charges for which a judge says he was unlikely to be sentenced to detention.
The 13-year-old boy, referred to in court documents as Nathan*, was detained in Cleveland youth detention centre in Townsville for 32 days after being charged with six offences, including unlawful use of a motor vehicle and entering a dwelling, in February.
Judge Alexander Horneman-Wren said Nathan wanted to plead guilty as soon as possible but the courts had been unable to accommodate a sentence.
“It is a cruel and unusual punishment to detain a child for what is presently an unknown period, in knowledge of the fact that he should, ultimately, in all likelihood, not be sentenced to detention for the offences for which he is being held in custody,” Horneman-Wren said in a written judgment.
The judge said the boy was kept in solitary confinement for all but 60 seconds a day on 11 occasions, despite “not a shred of evidence” that it was for his protection. This included 11 hours 59 minutes during the day, plus a 12-hour lockdown at night, he said.
“On its face, repeated separation for 11 hours and 59 minutes cannot be seen as anything other than the most calculated contrivance to avoid the oversight of the chief executive,” he said.
“If what I have been informed of the regulatory regime is correct, and for the purposes of delivering this decision in a timely manner … then these matters should be referred to the responsible ministers.”
Horneman-Wren granted the teenager bail, saying he had “performed reasonably well on a conditional bail program” and his “continued detention for these offences is, on no view of it, justified”.
The state’s premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, said the department of youth justice would “investigate” the reports.
A spokesperson for the department said a review of logbooks has shown the boy has spent “significant periods out of their room during the times he was recorded as ‘separated’”.
The spokesperson said information about the “separations” that was provided to the court lacked context.
“In this case, the information about separations provided to the court was limited to broad information readily available within the tight timeframe requested by the court,” a spokesperson said.
“The information did not detail the need for the separations, the relevant approvals and the amount of time the young person spent out of his room during the separation and the range of supports they received.”
The spokesperson said during separations, young people have access to visits, support services, phone calls, education material and recreational activities.
“A separation … can occur in response to a number of situations, including emergencies and other types of incidents, as well as health, safety and security requirements, and staff shortages,” they said.
The department is working to develop “detailed automated reporting” to ensure courts receive “more fulsome and detailed information in the future”, the spokesperson said.
