BACKGROUND

IPP sentences were introduced in England and Wales by the New Labour government with the Criminal Justice Act 2003, as it sought to prove it was tough on law and order. They were put in place to detain indefinitely serious offenders who were perceived to be a risk to the public. However, they were also used against offenders who had committed low-level crimes.

Astonishingly, this sentence has led to some people spending 18 years in jail for trying to steal a coat or imprisoned for 11 years for stealing a mobile phone.

UNLAWFUL

In 2012, after widespread condemnation and a ruling by the European court of human rights that such sentences were, “arbitrary and therefore unlawful”, IPP terms were abolished by the Conservative government. But the measure was not retrospective, and thousands remain in prison.

Over 90 people serving sentences under the discredited IPP regime have sadly taken their own lives whilst in prison. In 2023 we saw the second year in a row of the highest number of self-inflicted deaths since the IPP sentence was introduced.

The former supreme court justice Lord Brown has called IPP sentences: “the greatest single stain on the justice system”. When Rt Hon Michael Gove MP was justice secretary, he recommended, “executive clemency” for IPP prisoners who had served terms much longer than their tariffs. But he didn’t act on it. Lord Blunkett, the Labour Home Secretary who introduced the sentences, regrets them, stating: “I got it wrong.” And more recently, Dr Alice Edwards, the UN rapporteur for torture has called IPP sentences an “egregious miscarriage of justice.” Even the Justice Secretary Rt Hon Alex Chalk KC MP has also called them a stain on the justice system, despite that, the Government has so far refused to implement the Justice Committees recommendation to re-sentence all prisoners subject to IPP sentences.

CAMPAIGN FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE

Campaign groups and their families have been fighting to end this tragic miscarriage of justice for more than a decade and now a film posted online by social media campaigner Peter Stefanovic, a lawyer and CEO of CAMPAIGN FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE has ignited a wider public storm on this tragic miscarriage of justice and has been viewed 14 million times. It is not surprising that the public reaction to this film has been one of shock, outrage, and disbelief.

PUBLIC SUPPORT

Stefanovic said:

“The public support for my film has been overwhelming and the comments it is getting are a testament to the public’s anger, outrage and disbelief at this tragic miscarriage of justice. If Labour step up and back the amendments supported in the Lords by both Lib Dem and Green Party peers we can end this tragedy now. It’s time to do what we all know is right before more lives are tragically lost.”

HOUSE OF LORDS DEBATE

His film was mentioned by Baroness Jones, Lord Moylan and Baroness Fox in the House of Lords debate on March 12.

HOPE FOR JUSTICE

Hope for justice at last now comes in the form of amendments tabled in the House of Lords to the Victims and Prisoners Bill, two of which are particularly significant – 161 by Lord Moylan and 167 by Baroness Fox which have the backing of the Lib Dems and Green Party peers, and which have wide cross bench support.

AMENDMENTS

Amendment 167 seeks to implement the Justice Committees recommendation to re-sentence all prisoners subject to IPP sentences.

Amendment 161 would require the state to demonstrate that a prisoner is still a risk to the public rather than, as at present, requiring the prisoner to prove the opposite.

Under the proposed amendment, they would be released unless the Parole Board “is satisfied that it remains necessary and proportionate for the protection of the public from serious harm that they should continue to be confined”.

Amendment 161 is supported by Lord Blunkett, Baroness Chakrabarti and the former deputy president of the Supreme Court Lord Hope of Craighead. It is also supported by the Bar Council, representing 17,000 barristers in England and Wales.

On amendment 161 Lord Ponsonby, leading for Labour, said in the debate which took place in the House of Lords on 12 March.

“Lord Moylan in his amendment 161 effectively reversing the burden of proof for IPP prisoners described it as a nudge to the parole board and discussed in his contribution how significant that nudge would be but it’s a welcome nudge nevertheless, and he has the historic credentials of being supported originally by Lord Brown. It’s a welcome amendment.”

Voting on the amendments will take place in the coming weeks. If Labour vote for them this is finally a real opportunity to put right an egregious miscarriage of justice.