Expanding the Use of PAVA Spray in Young Offender Institutions: The King (on the application of The Howard League for Penal Reform) v The Secretary of State for Justice

Abstract

This case note critically examines the January 2026 High Court judgment in The King (on the application of The Howard League for Penal Reform) v The Secretary of State for Justice which dismissed a judicial review challenging the expansion of the use of PAVA spray in Young Offender Institutions (YOIs) in England. PAVA is a synthetic chemical irritant designed to cause immediate and intense pain. While the High Court found the Secretary of State's decision‐making process to be procedurally lawful, the case note argues that the judgment fails to engage with the rights of children in custody. It neglects the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and the Child First guiding principle of the youth justice system in England and Wales. The note also challenges the assumption that PAVA causes only minor and transient harm. Drawing on evidence of deteriorating conditions in YOIs, including isolation, poor education and strained staff‐child relationships, it contends that the expansion of chemical restraint risks entrenching a punitive rather than rehabilitative model. The case note concludes with a recommendation that to address violence effectively within the youth secure estate, YOIs should be abolished and replaced with smaller rights‐compliant, child‐centred alternatives.