Senior judges reveal regret at handing out ‘unfair' indefinite jail terms and call for scandal to be ‘put right'

Independent

a day ago

Senior judges who imposed 'unfair' indefinite jail terms, which have left scores of inmates locked up for minor offences languishing in prison for decades, have revealed their regret for their part in the 'injustice'.
Former High Court judge Sir John Saunders said he would apologise to offenders he handed imprisonment for public protection (IPP) jail terms, which were scrapped in 2012, but not retrospectively, leaving thousands already jailed incarcerated with no release date.
Now the very judges who dished out the punishment have joined calls for the government to take urgent action to help more than 2,500 prisoners still trapped under the abolished jail term, which has been branded 'psychological torture' by the UN.
Victims of the scandal, whose tragic cases have been highlighted by The Independent, include Leroy Douglas, who has served almost 20 years for stealing a mobile phone; Thomas White, 42, who set himself alight in his cell and has served 13 years for stealing a phone; and Abdullahi Suleman, 41, who is still inside 19 years after he was jailed for a laptop robbery.
Sir John, 76, who served as recorder of Birmingham before he was appointed to the High Court, told The Independent that if he met an IPP prisoner he had jailed who was years over tariff, he would apologise.
'I should say I'm really sorry this has happened, it's extremely unfair,' he said.
'I didn't want to be party to unfairness. I would feel very bad about it, I would apologise to them.'
He said that when the sentence was introduced in 2005 by New Labour in a bid to be tough on crime, it appeared there was a 'certain degree of sense' to plans to ensure offenders completed rehabilitation courses before they were approved for release by the Parole Board.
But judges had no idea those prisoners would find themselves trapped in prison indefinitely, often without access to the courses they needed to be released.
He added: 'I think the essence of the job of a judge is to be fair. And we really do all try to do that. So when we conduct criminal trials, we attempt to be fair. In passing sentences, we attempt to be fair.
'If we have been party to something which has been accepted by everybody as unfair and we have been part of it… it's a bit of an affront to the job.'
He and Simon Tonking, the former recorder of Stafford, have lobbied prisons minister Lord James Timpson to help those still trapped under the jail term.
Both have backed a package of proposals put forward by an expert panel convened by the Howard League for Penal Reform, calling for IPP prisoners to be given a release date within a two-year window at their next parole hearing.
Mr Tonking recalled imposing an IPP sentence with a minimum tariff of just six months for a relatively minor offence after a man was caught following a woman in an alley.
'Now I wonder what happened to him,' he told The Independent. 'He was in his late twenties. For all I know, he may still be there [in prison].
'And when I look back at that case, I think I should have tried harder not to impose it.'
Although he was doing his best to administer the laws in place at the time, he is now determined to be part of the solution.
'I don't feel guilty, but I do feel, having been part of that, I should be doing all I can to put what has turned out to be an injustice right,' he added.
'And I am driven in part by the fact that I was part of the administration of justice at a time when these sentences were being passed.
'I have been a part of the system that is wrong. I feel that I ought to be part of the system to put it right.'
Successive governments have resisted calls to resentence IPP prisoners, claiming they cannot risk letting prisoners out until they have passed the Parole Board's release test.
However, at least 94 inmates have taken their own lives in custody after losing hope of being freed, according to campaigners, with many struggling as their mental health deteriorates in prison.
Mr Tonking urged the Labour government to use its majority to finally end the injustice by taking up the Howard League's proposals, adding: 'Virtually everybody who has had any professional dealings with IPP knows that it's unjust and now is the time to act.'
The proposed reforms also include providing a package of mental health support for released IPP prisoners and tightening up the criteria for recalling them. Currently, many find themselves hauled back to prison indefinitely for minor breaches of strict licence conditions, despite committing no further offences.
Paul Glenn, who last year retired from his role as the most senior judge in Stoke-on-Trent, also backed the charity's proposals.
He told The Independent: 'Nobody envisaged that 10 years after they should have been released, they would still be in custody. The injustice there is pretty obvious.
'It's undoubtedly right that we should be sentencing people for what they have done, rather than what they might do in the future.'
Prisons minister Lord Timpson said: 'It is absolutely right that the IPP sentence was abolished.
'As the IPP annual report shows, we have significantly improved support for these offenders, with greater access to rehabilitation and mental health support.
'There is more work to do as we reduce the number of IPP offenders in custody, but we will only do so in a way that protects the public.'