Time to reform "torturous and unfair" indeterminate sentences

The briefing, A death row of sorts, takes its title from the remark of a prisoner in Scotland, subject to an indeterminate sentence.

Life sentence-like indeterminate prison sentences across the UK

All three of the UK’s three main criminal justice jurisdictions – England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland – operate life sentence-like indeterminate prison sentences. Unlike the conventional life sentence prison sentence, which can only be imposed for a relatively narrow range of offences (such as murder), these life sentence-like indeterminate sentences can be imposed for a far wider range of offences.

In England and Wales, the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence, abolished in 2012 for any new sentences (but not retrospectively) was recently described as “irredeemably flawed” by the House of Commons Justice Committee. The Committee called for far-reaching reform, including a resentencing exercise for all those still subject to an IPP sentence.

In Scotland, the Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR) combines an indeterminate period of imprisonment, after which the prisoner can apply for release. If granted, they are subject to lifelong restriction on their movements and liberties.

In Northern Ireland, the Indeterminate Custodial Sentence (ICS) operates in a similar way to the OLR and the IPP. The Northern Ireland Court of Appeal has described the ICS as “the most draconic sentence the court can impose apart from a discretionary life sentence”.

Unlike the partially-abolished IPP in England and Wales, both the OLR and ICS remain available to the courts in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Is it torture?

A report last year by the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies highlighted the psychological impact of the IPP sentence on prisoners. Today’s briefing asks if the IPP, OLR and ICS sentences could amount to psychological torture. As the briefing points out, prisoners under these sentences face many hurdles, many false dawns, in seeking their release. As a result:

it is the cumulative experience of disappointments and rejections over long periods that is likely to lead to despair and a sense of helplessness.

It quotes the conclusions of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, who argued in 2020 that: 

in order to be ‘lawful’, sanctions cannot be open-ended, indefinite or grossly excessive to their purpose, but must be clearly defined, circumscribed and proportionate

Take action

Earlier this month, the Chair of the House of Commons Justice Committee, Sir Robert Neill, tabled an amendment to the Victims and Prisoners Bill, currently making its way through parliament, to allow for a resentencing exercise in relation to those still subject to the IPP sentence.

If brought into law, the amendment would give a definite end date to all existing IPP sentences, and has the support of IPP campaign groups such as the United Group for Reform of IPP (UNGRIPP) and IPP Committee in Action.

The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies is encouraging as many people as possible to write to their MP, asking them to support Sir Robert Neill’s amendment.

If you do not know who your MP is, you can find them here.

Read Russell Webster’s write-up of A death row of sorts.