AYJ Comment: Court ruling on PAVA spray leaves children at risk and reinforces the need to close Young Offender Institutions

This week, the High Court found in favour of the government, dismissing a legal challenge brought by the Howard League for Penal Reform following the decision to authorise the use of PAVA spray in Young Offender Institutions (YOIs).

We are deeply disappointed by the Court’s judgement. Evidence from the adult prison estate shows that the use of PAVA spray has not reduced violence, has undermined trust, and has been used disproportionately against racially minoritised people. The risk that this policy will disproportionately harm Black and racially minoritised children, and disabled children, compounding existing inequalities in the children’s secure estate, remains very real.

The Alliance for Youth Justice (AYJ) has consistently opposed the use of PAVA spray in the children’s secure estate and, in April 2025, led a joint statement opposing its introduction, bringing together 37 organisations and individuals working in children’s rights and youth justice. We will continue to work with our members to monitor the use of PAVA in YOIs and to hold the government to account for the safety, rights and welfare of children in the children’s secure estate.

The Howard League for Penal Reform has published its response to the judgement, making clear that it will continue to challenge the use of PAVA spray against children despite this ruling.

Jess Mullen, Chief Executive of the Alliance for Youth Justice, said:

“This judgement enables the continued use of PAVA spray on some of society’s most vulnerable children, normalising harm rather than addressing its causes.

It reflects a wider failure to address the crisis in safety and wellbeing in children’s custody, with punitive measures used in place of meaningful reform. Evidence shows that what supports children to move away from the justice system and to fulfil their potential is trusting relationships, care, education and stable support. Young Offender Institutions are not providing this. Custody must be a last resort, and where necessary, delivered in small, therapeutic units close to children’s homes, such as Secure Children’s Homes.”