News EditorSolicitors Journal

UK government rejects Committee recommendation to review IPP sentences

UK government rejects Committee recommendation to review IPP sentences

Committee report called for a review of Imprisonment for Public Protection sentences

The UK government has rejected a recommendation made by the Justice Committee calling for a review of all indefinite prison sentences imposed under legislation known as Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP). The UK government has now responded to the Justice Committee’s 2022 report on IPP sentences rejecting several of its key recommendation, including that prisoners still detained under the scheme should be resentenced.

The Justice Committee’s report states that IPP sentences are “irredeemably flawed” and calls the now abolished IPP scheme “the single greatest stain on our criminal justice system.” Despite the abolishment of the scheme in 2012, the Committee claims that almost 3000 people remain detained under the legislation.  

The government’s response explains that His Majesty's Prison and Probation Service has already begun a review of the current action plan concerning IPP offenders, which is focused on improved, clear performance measures, achievable deadlines and a robust governance structure, in order to provide opportunities for those serving an IPP sentence to progress towards a safe and sustainable release.

Specifically on the Committee’s primary recommendation on the resentencing of all remaining IPP offenders who have not yet had their licence terminated, the government states “Retrospective resentencing of IPP offenders could lead to the immediate release of many offenders who have been assessed as unsafe for release by the Parole Board, many with no period of supervision in the community. The Government’s long-held view is that this would give rise to an unacceptable risk to public protection and that the IPP Action Plan, suitably updated, remains the best option by which these offenders can progress towards safe release. As such, the Government has no plans to conduct a resentencing exercise.”

The government has also rejected the recommendation that the licence period during which released IPP prisoners can be recalled to custody for breach of their conditions be reduced from ten years to five years. However, the government did state that it will review the policy and practice for suspending the supervision requirements of the IPP licence.

Chair of the Justice Committee, Sir Bob Neill, calls the government’s response a “missed opportunity to right a wrong that has left nearly 3,000 people behind.” He adds that the Committee’s recommendations recognised that addressing this issue would not be easy, which is why the report also recommended that a committee of experts be specifically set up to advise on the resentencing of IPP offenders.

“We are not only disappointed with this government response but genuinely surprised. There is now a growing consensus that a resentencing exercise is the only way to comprehensively address the injustice of IPP sentences and that this can be done without prejudicing public protection,” concludes Neill. “Our report said this nettle needed to be grasped by all three branches of the State – Government, Parliament and the Judiciary. But the government has not listened. The nettle has not been grasped and, as a result, these people will remain held in an unsustainable limbo.”

AdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisement
Latest News

UN and coalition of NGOs write to Unilever to voice deep concern regarding victims of violence at Unilever tea plantation

Tue Sep 26 2023

Live Facial Recognition: How to Stay Within the Law

Tue Sep 26 2023

Ethics Institute launches taskforce to examine legal services to oligarchs and kleptocrats

Mon Sep 25 2023

Legal Departments See Higher Matter Volumes but Flat or Declining Budgets: Thomson Reuters 2023 Legal Department Operations Index

Mon Sep 25 2023

More Than 200 Employers Named And Shamed For Failing To Pay National Minimum Wage

Mon Sep 25 2023

Browne Jacobson collaborates with LGiU on report highlighting “critical” role of local government to hit net zero

Fri Sep 22 2023

BSB publishes new guidance on barristers’ conduct in non-professional life and on social media

Fri Sep 22 2023

The Chancery Lane Project expands to the USA

Thu Sep 21 2023

Delay in Final Report of the Infected Blood Inquiry

Thu Sep 21 2023
FeaturedThe Pre-Action Protocol review final report – full steam ahead?
The Pre-Action Protocol review final report – full steam ahead?
New report highlights the transformative effects of domestic abuse training on family lawyers
New report highlights the transformative effects of domestic abuse training on family lawyers
Asylum seekers stranded on Diego Garcia win challenge against return to Sri Lanka
Asylum seekers stranded on Diego Garcia win challenge against return to Sri Lanka
A solicitor’s stance on EDI in the workplace
A solicitor’s stance on EDI in the workplace
SJ Interview: Hannah Ambrose
SJ Interview: Hannah Ambrose
Whose human rights are more important, yours or mine?
Whose human rights are more important, yours or mine?