UN experts urge UK to review IPP sentences

UN experts today renewed calls for the United Kingdom to undertake an urgent review and re-sentencing exercise for individuals still subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences applicable in England and Wales, warning that continued inaction is perpetuating serious human rights violations. “Thousands of people remain trapped in prisons under a scheme that Parliament itself abolished more than a decade ago,” the human rights experts said.

Despite the abolition of IPP sentences in 2012, approximately 2,400 people remain subject to the regime, including hundreds who have never been released and many others who have been repeatedly recalled to prison. Nearly all unreleased IPP prisoners have reportedly served beyond their original tariff periods, while almost three-quarters have spent more than a decade in prison beyond the punishment originally considered necessary by the sentencing court.

“These penalties involve prolonged uncertainty and cause serious psychological deterioration among prisoners, including an increased risk of self-harm and suicide. Such punishments may amount to psychological torture,” the experts said. The human consequences are reflected in eight individual cases recently transmitted to the attention of the Government.

Joseph Brady has spent 18 years in prison on a tariff of four years. Released and recalled four times, he has reportedly experienced severe mental health deterioration, including incidents of self-harm linked to the uncertainty of indefinite detention. Kerry Parish-McCann has served 17 years on a tariff of three years for robbery. She was 25 years of age at the time and has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and epilepsy. She has repeatedly cycled between release and recall while experiencing significant trauma, instability and repeated episodes of self-harm.

Thomas White has spent more than twelve years detained on a tariff of two years. Diagnosed with schizophrenia after more than a decade in custody, concerns have been raised that his mental health condition was not properly understood at sentencing and that his illness may prevent him from ever satisfying the requirements expected for release. “These are not isolated cases,” the experts said. “They illustrate wider systemic failings that have left many individuals trapped in a cycle of excessive punishment, repeated recall, deteriorating mental health, and diminishing hope.”

They also expressed concern that the IPP regime lacks an effective review mechanism or referrals to mental health support outside of prison. While parole authorities can consider release, they cannot revisit the original sentence itself. As a result, many prisoners continue to face indefinite detention without any realistic opportunity for judicial reconsideration of whether the sentence remains justified.

The experts raised particular concern regarding prisoners with disabilities, neurodivergence, acquired brain injuries, severe mental health conditions and histories of childhood trauma. In a number of cases, these factors appear either not to have been properly identified at sentencing or not adequately accommodated within the prison and parole systems. “The purpose of imprisonment must be rehabilitation and reintegration. A sentence that leaves people without a realistic route to release, while causing profound psychological suffering, is fundamentally at odds with those principles,” they said.

The experts reiterated previous recommendations that the Government undertake a comprehensive re-sentencing exercise for all remaining IPP prisoners. If a full review is considered impracticable, clear criteria should be established for an initial phase of partial re-sentencing. “The United Kingdom has a responsibility to protect both the dignity and integrity of those in its custody,” they said. “The continued existence of this discredited sentencing regime cannot be allowed to drift indefinitely.”