Campaigners have hit out at the “short-sighted” decision not to include prisoners on indefinite sentences in the plans to reduce the prison population.
On Thursday, the government published its long-awaited sentencing review, led by former Conservative justice secretary David Gauke, who recommended that some offenders who behave well in jail only serve a third of their term in custody before being released.
Not included in the scheme are prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for public protection (IPP) – a type of open-ended jail term that was abolished more than a decade ago and which critics have denounced as inhumane.
Andrew Morris was given an IPP sentence in 2007 for false imprisonment and threats to kill, for which he was given a tariff – the minimum amount he must serve in jail before being considered for release – of two years.
Owing to the indefinite nature of the sentence, he was released 12 and a half years later.
He told Sky News that many offenders on IPP are still languishing in jail despite serving years over their minimum term.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
He said he found it “mind boggling” that IPP prisoners were not included in the Gauke review and in the early release scheme, which the government has admitted could result in sex offenders and domestic abusers serving sentences of under four years being eligible for early release.
Prison officer Peter Sugden, who delivered sex offender programmes, caught sending messages to girl, 13
Former teacher charged with sexual offences against teenage girls
Woman’s testimony from beyond the grave helps to convict rapist Steven Connery
“I think it’s incredibly short-sighted and it’s really frustrating that everybody is talking about the need to free up space in prisons and there is an answer that is glaringly obvious to everybody – but for reasons no one is clear about, no one wants to take that option,” he said.
“Even if you take out the most serious offenders on IPP who potentially have mental health issues that make them unsafe to be released, there is still the potential for thousands of places to be freed up.”
What are IPP sentences?
IPP sentences were a type of sentence the courts could impose from 2005 until they were abolished in 2012.
They were intended for serious violent and sexual offenders who posed a significant risk of serious harm to the public but whose crimes did not warrant a life term.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Although the government’s stated aim was public protection, concerns quickly grew that IPP sentences were being applied too broadly and catching more minor offenders, who often ended up serving years beyond their initial term.
Anyone jailed on an IPP can only be released once they have served their minimum term or tariff and after the parole board is satisfied they no longer pose a risk to the public.
Those who are released are done so on licence, where they are subject to strict conditions. If they breach those conditions, they can be recalled to prison at any time – even if they did not commit a further offence.
The coalition government scrapped the sentence in 2012, but the change was not applied retrospectively, leaving around 2,544 prisoners behind bars. Of those, 1,012 have never been released.
Successive governments have rejected calls from MPs and the House of Lords for IPP prisoners to be resentenced, arguing that such a process would risk releasing offenders who still pose a threat to the public.
Read more:
‘It’s broken me as a man’, says released IPP inmate
Inside the lives of prisoners serving open-ended sentences
Instead, the focus of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) under the Conservatives and now Labour has been to reduce the IPP prison population through providing access to rehabilitative courses and programmes.
However, families have long complained about the availability and access to such courses.
‘Inhumane and unjust’
Campaigners argue that IPP prisoners – who are reportedly more than two-and-a-half times more likely to self-harm than the general prison population – continue to be penalised by a sentence that was abolished more than a decade ago.
Ungripp, the United Group for Reform of IPP, said it was “extremely disappointed that yet again people on IPP sentences are being further penalised by the government by excluding them from the current changes to recall.
“It’s inhumane and unjust, morally wrong and a waste of taxpayers’ money.
“The government could help fix the prison crisis by fixing the IPP altogether or at the very least, release those 1,075 people who’ve been recalled but committed no further crime, which would empty one of the largest prisons entirely.”
The government was moved to carry out a review of sentencing amid an overcrowding crisis in prisons in England and Wales – where the male prison population is at 99% capacity and set to run out of room in November.
It is understood that the IPP sentence was not included in the review because it is no longer used.
The review has made a series of recommendations with the aim of reducing the prison population by 9,800 people by 2028, including chemical castration for the worst sex offenders to reduce reoffending.
An MoJ spokesperson said: “It is right that IPP sentences were abolished. IPP prisoners are considered for release by the independent parole board every two years and those who are deemed safe will be released.
“The government is supporting IPP prisoners achieve their release but this must be done in a way that does not put the public at risk.”
