Our latest eBulletin, sent out to subscribers on Friday, 13 December. Sign-up for our free eBulletins here.
Twenty years ago, the Law Commission described the law on murder in England and Wales as “a mess”.
Two years later, the Commission’s weighty 2006 review of homicide was no less sparing in its criticisms:
The law governing homicide in England and Wales is a rickety structure set upon shaky foundations. Some of its rules have remained unaltered since the seventeenth century, even though it has long been acknowledged that they are in dire need of reform. Other rules are of uncertain content, often because they have been constantly changed to the point that they can no longer be stated with any certainty or clarity
Last week’s news that the Lord Chancellor has asked the Commission to review the homicide laws and sentencing framework for murder has therefore been widely welcomed. Campaigners against joint enterprise prosecutions were also pleased to see a specific reference to those particular rules.
The Law Commission’s 2006 report recommended a US-style three-tier structure for homicide: first degree murder, second degree murder, and manslaughter. Only first degree murder would attract a mandatory life sentence.
This proposal was controversial and was never implemented. The smart money is on the Commission making much the same recommendation this time round. Given the state of crisis in the justice system, there will likely be more appetite to implement it this time round.
The Law Commission review is just one of a number of significant reviews the Lord Chancellor has initiated.
First, there is the Independent Sentencing Review, under former Conservative Justice Secretary David Gauke.
While Gauke and the panel of experts working with him have been asked to undertake a “comprehensive re-evaluation of our sentencing framework”, the Lord Chancellor has specifically excluded the murder sentencing framework and the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence from Gauke’s remit.
While murder will be covered by the Law Commission review, those under the IPP sentence are, yet again, being short-changed by ministers. That shameful sentence sits outside the scope of both the Law Commission and Gauke reviews.
The Lord Chancellor has also announced a “once in a generation” review of the criminal courts, under the former High Court Judge, Sir Brian Leveson. Leveson’s review will, among other things, look at the case for “intermediate courts”, covering cases deemed too serious for magistrates’ courts, but not serious enough for a full jury trial at the Crown Court.
Taken together, these various reviews suggest a clear direction of travel towards some form of ‘big bang’ sentencing and court reform over the coming few years.
Richard Garside
Director
New briefing highlights the lack of transparency of government’s knife crime pilot
This week, we published Serious Violence Reduction Orders: the impression of doing something, a briefing in collaboration with StopWatch and funded by T2A Alliance.
The briefing outlines Serious Violence Reduction Orders (SVROs), introduced under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, which allow for suspicion-less stop and search of individuals previously convicted of certain knife-related offences. Drawing on data from the pilot, which began in April 2023 across fours areas in England, the briefing highlights the restricted access to crucial information about the use of the orders. It argues that this lack of transparency undermines public accountability.
The limited available information shows that the number of searches under SVRO powers is significantly below the Home Office’s predictions.
Helen Mills, Head of Programmes at the Centre and co-author of the briefing, commented:
The lack of openness about how SVROs are being used makes it impossible to answer basic questions about how an important new measure has been implemented. Violence reduction is too important an ambition for governments not to match the attention-grabbing claims with which new powers are introduced with transparency about what actually happens next.
You can read more about the briefing in The Independent.
If you’d like to support the briefing on social media, please consider reposting this Twitter/X thread or this BlueSky thread.
Mike Guilfoyle essay prize launched today
The Mike Guilfoyle essay prize, launched today in partnership with the probation staff union Napo, honours the late Mike Guilfoyle. Mike Guilfoyle was an active member of NAPO and was awarded an honorary life membership by Napo in 2022. Mike wrote regular articles for the Centre on probation practice based on his vast experience. He passed away peacefully in November 2023, and this essay prize is intended as a tribute to him and his work.
This year’s essay question is: What does professionalism mean in probation?
It is open to all serving and former probation staff, as well as those in training to become probation officers.
The closing date is 28 February 2025, 11:59pm. You can access the guidelines and submission page here.
The latest on Imprisonment for Public Protection:
Last month, the government published the first Annual Report on the Imprisonment for Public Protection Sentence. It reveals that the number of IPP prisoners released each year has been declining, while recalls to custody and the duration of such recalls have increased. This has led to a growing population of recalled prisoners in custody, now outnumbering those who have never been released.
Our director, Richard Garside, responded to this report:
The IPP system is reproducing itself like a virus, infecting everything that it touches. Short of decisive action, such as resentencing those under an IPP to a determinate (time-limited) sentence, the risk is that it will just continue to reproduce itself.
But the question remains on whether a resentencing exercise is likely to happen. The government has so far rejected the Justice Committee’s 2022 recommendation for a resentencing exercise, claiming that it ‘would automatically release a number of people who we do not believe it would be safe to release’.
However, last month the Justice Committee negated these claims. In a recent letter addressed to Lord Timpson and Sir Nic Dakin MP, the Committee notes that the government’s objections to a resentencing exercise appear to misunderstand the recommendations made in the 2022 inquiry. The Committee chair Andy Slaughter MP highlights that the recommendation does not mean automatic releases, and some individuals may remain in custody due to the severity of their original offences or ongoing risks to public safety. Rather, the resentencing exercise would include a time-limited expert committee to develop a practical and proportionate resentencing scheme, as well as legislative safeguards to ensure public protection and appropriate post-release supervision.
Other recent action on IPP:
- The second reading of Lord Woodley’s Private Member’s Bill passed on 15 November. You can read the transcript here. The Bill is now in the Committee Stage, which is yet to be scheduled.
- Yesterday, a Short Debate in the House of Lords saw Baroness Burt of Solihull ask the government what further steps they are taking to reduce the size of the Imprisonment for Public Protection prison population, following the publication of the HMPPS Annual Report.
Ongoing prison capacity crisis
With the government’s plan to build 14,000 more prison places at the cost of billions has drawn criticism. Our director, Richard Garside, argues that it is time for a reality check on these unrealistic demands:
Ongoing crisis management in the short-term and an unrealistic plan to waste billions on prison expansion over the longer-term will not solve the entrenched problems in the prison system.
This follows last week’s release of the National Audit Office (NAO) report, which criticised the “previous governments’ failure to align criminal justice policies with funding for the prison estate, leading to reactive solutions which represent poor value for money”. Read about the key findings of the report here.
Commentary and analysis
The second annual lecture in memory of Lord Ramsbotham, former chief inspector of prisons, took place on November 26. The lecture was held in the House of Lords, chaired by Mary Glindon MP and with guest speaker Sir Ian Gilmore, professor of hepatology and chair of the Alcohol Health Alliance.
Sir Ian Gilmore spoke on Alcohol Policy, discussing the health and economic costs, as well as recommendations for Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP), availability restrictions, and marketing regulations. The link to the offender population is clear, with Sir Ian Gilmore noting:
Almost two-thirds, 63 per cent, of people in prison have a measurable alcohol-use disorder, with almost half of those, 31 per cent, seriously dependent on alcohol. The risk of death from alcohol is three times higher for those who have been in prison than for the general population.
You can read the rest of the transcript here.
Last month, Greater Manchester Police faced allegations of forcibly removing Romany, Gypsy and Irish Traveller (RGT) children from a Christmas market and transporting them up to 100 miles away. Gavin Wilkson, in collaboration with a service user from the travelling community, writes about the systemic challenges faced by RGT individuals navigating the criminal justice system. They write:
...many RGT prisoners enter the prison system unable to read or write, with little or no employment skills, and leave prison feeling even more disempowered and socially isolated. Finding it difficult to reintegrate back into society, and inevitably because of prejudicial license conditions, they are too frequently recalled to prison.
Together, they have created a support group and a handbook to support RGT people with societal reintegration following release from prison.
Have something to add on this topic? Drop us a line.
What’s what in The British Journal of Criminology?
For more than sixty years, The British Journal of Criminology has published some of the most significant research in the field.
A number of open-access advance articles have been published in since our last eBulletin:
- Andrzej Uhl and Justin T Pickett explore the instability of public preferences about punishment.
- Anita Heber and Tea Fredriksson examine victim credibility assessments in Swedish courts.
- Matthew Mitchell, Tully O’Neill, and Curtis Redd discuss anti-queer violence in LGBTQ media.
- Melissa Mendez looks at how incarcerated young male offenders in Trinidad and Tobago perceive the influence of family background on their offending behaviour.
- Indra de Soysa uses empirical data to analyse the link between democracy, egalitarianism and homicide rates.
Prison Service Journal survey
The October general edition includes articles by Dr Sarah Waite on the concept and operalisation of trust in prisons, and Raeanne Valois on the experiences of people who have completed the cognitive-behavioural programme ‘Kaizen’. Also included is the PSJ’s first extended book review, looking at moral communication and men convicted of sex offenders, by Alice levins and reviewed by the prisoners and staff at HMP Rye Hill.
Read all the articles and download the entire edition here.
We are pleased to announce the publication of a backlog of five PSJ issues. Of particular interest, PSJ 90 features an insightful article by Tony Blair discussing the future of the prison service. The other published issues include PSJ 97, 103, 142, and 143.
News from our partners
We would like to congratulate our friends at StopWatch and at Commons, who were both featured in The Times last month.
In early November, The Times championed Commons as one of the best law firms in the UK in 2025. Their holistic defence model, ‘Justice+’, provides legal and social support to those who in the criminal justice system, offering help for problems that can exacerbate offending such as drug addiction, alcoholism and homelessness.
Later in November saw The Times cover a recent StopWatch report, which evaluates the controversial search power Section 60. The report argues for scrapping Section 60, which enables the police to conduct searches of people without needing reasonable grounds. In the report, StopWatch Executive Director Habib Kadiri claims that Section 60 unfairly targets black and minority ethnic people and does not comply with British and European human rights laws. Read the full report here.
Additionally, our friends at UNGRIPP are hosting an MP drop-in event for MP’s to learn more about the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence. The event will be host at Portcullis House on 15 January 2025. If you want to support this event, please write to your local MP and encourage them to attend. For more detailed information, see the UNGRIPP flyer here.
Support our work
In the last 12 months, around one pound in every ten we received in income came from individual donations. We are so appreciative of the vital support we receive from our donors and supporters.
If you like what we do, and can afford to make a donation to support our important work, we would be very grateful.
You can also spread the word about our work by forwarding on this bulletin to others and encouraging them to sign up.
