Latest news with #JusticeSelectCommittee
ITV News
6 days ago
- Politics
- ITV News
'Crushed by a flawed system': More than 2,000 prisoners being held under defunct UK law
IPP (Indeterminate Sentences for Public Protection) sentences were supposed to have been banned 13 years ago. Now the stress of being left languishing in prison, has been recognised in court for the first time, ITV News West of England Report Sangita Lal explains I've been speaking to IPP prisoners for the last five years and they don't just feel trapped in a flawed system, they feel crushed by it. Indeterminate Sentences for Public Protection were brought in in 2005 by the then Labour government to be handed to a prisoner deemed dangerous but whose crime didn't merit a life sentence. The whole point was to protect the public from someone who could cause harm. Prisoners were given minimum terms they had to serve but crucially - their detention was unlimited. This is an endless sentence. There is no release date. When the new sentence became law, judges had to use them. If they didn't they had to explain why. I've spoken to judges about how and why IPP sentences were so widely used for petty crimes, like stealing a bike or phone, and I have been told that it's because it was easier for a judge to use it than it was for them to explain why they weren't going to. In 2012 the law was abolished. By that time more than 8,000 people had been given an IPP sentence. Campaigners say there are still almost 2,500 stuck behind bars. The former Supreme Court Judge Justice Lord Brown called it "the greatest single stain on our criminal justice system". It's hard to comprehend how the UK justice system, which is built on criminals serving time and being released, is holding people in prison under a law that was abolished 23 years ago. One of the most difficult aspects of covering this story has been to see how much hope IPP prisoners had recently, when there was an inquiry by the Justice Select Committee, and how devasted they were at the lack of action by successive governments. In 2022, after a three-year-long inquiry, the Justice Select Committee called on the government to resentence all IPPs still in prison. The system was described as 'irredeemably flawed' which was causing inmates to self harm. In response the then Conservative government said it wasn't going to resentence IPPs, it was going to review the licensing conditions for those who are released. This was a significant blow for campaigners but they had another glimmer of hope when a Labour government returned, because they believed the party would want to right its wrong. Still though, nothing has changed for IPP prisoners. They're still stuck in prison and feel left behind. Campaigners and prisoners feel no one is listening and this doesn't just impact those held on IPP sentences, it has changed their families lives. In 2021, I interviewed the sister of Wayne Bell, when he was 17 years old he stole a bike in 2007. He's now detained under the mental health act, as he lives with schizophrenia. His sister Alana told me he believes he must have killed his dad, who's since died while he's been behind bar, because he can't understand why he's still in jail. Leroy Douglas stole a mobile phone in 2005, he's completed 35 courses in jail but is still there, desperate to get the chance to speak with the parole board and have his case reviewed. These are two of more than two thousand who feel they have no voice. A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: "It is absolutely right that the IPP sentence was abolished and we have significantly improved support for these offenders, with greater access to rehabilitation and mental health support. 'By law, the Parole Board considers the case of each IPP prisoner every two years, judging whether they are safe for release. We consider this an important safeguard for the public's protection.'
Evening Standard
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Evening Standard
Law should change to allow review of cases of jailed officers, lawyer says
When asked if he had political support for the law change, Mr Foot said: 'We are talking to the Justice Select Committee, we're talking to the junior minister, and we believe that it is something that could be put into Hillsborough Law, alongside that, as a very simple reform that could stop this sort of thing ever happening again.'
Scoop
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Free Speech Union Warns Stalking And Harassment Bill Risks Abuse, Changes Make It Worse
The Crimes Legislation (Stalking and Harassment) Amendment Bill suffers from the common fault of slogan laws with good intentions, without realism about the risks of misuse. The announced expansion of what is considered a 'specified act' goes in the wrong direction, says Stephen Franks, Council Member of the Free Speech Union. 'We've already seen the broad and vague terminology in the Harmful Digital Communications Act being used to silence legitimate dissent many times. This Bill is likely to be similarly abused. 'Truth should be a defense for 'damaging, or undermining [a person's] reputation, opportunities, or relationships'. That would save the centuries-long principle that protects the public interest in learning home truths about powerful people and wrongdoers. It is not enough to say the Bill lets you argue that truth is for a proper purpose. We know that courts have not held that telling the truth is presumptively a proper purpose. 'The broad definition of 'specified acts' as inducing fear or distress, combined with the low threshold for establishing a 'pattern of behaviour', already leaves wide scope for misuse against legitimate surveillance, and dissent. Likewise, the inclusion of 'contacting or communicating with a person' is vague and has the potential to be weaponised. 'By prioritising the term 'fear or distress' without a clear objective override, the Bill raises similar issues to 'hate speech' legislation. The law does not recognise that some people ought to be ashamed ('distressed') by exposure of their own conduct. 'The Government's decision to increase the timeframe for establishing a 'pattern of behaviour' from contact twice over 12 to 24 months also widens the net, making it more likely that isolated or infrequent expressions of dissent could be criminalised. 'We submitted our concerns in February, urging the Justice Select Committee to narrow their definitions, to clarify 'specified acts', and to provide better defences that would let the courts protect free speech. We call on the Minister of Justice to protect Kiwis' speech rights as well as victims of stalking and harassment.'
Times
17-05-2025
- Politics
- Times
Justice watchdog ‘misled parliament' over Andrew Malkinson case
The head of the miscarriages of justice watchdog is being investigated by MPs over allegations she misled parliament. Karen Kneller, the chief executive of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), is accused of giving 'thoroughly inaccurate' evidence to the justice select committee about the organisation's handling of the Andrew Malkinson case. MPs were sent evidence this week undermining her testimony and detailing the CCRC's attempts to limit the damage of an independent review into its handling of the case. Malkinson was imprisoned for 17 years for a rape he did not commit. Chris Henley KC, the author of the review, wrote to MPs saying Kneller's evidence had been incorrect. 'Karen Kneller misled parliament,' Henley told The Sunday Times. 'Her answers to the select committee were
