A scandal reminiscent of the Post Office miscarriage of justice is brewing in the UK’s prisons, according to concerned members of the House of Lords. At the heart of the controversy lie imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences—indefinite jail terms that have left thousands languishing behind bars long past their original minimum terms.
Ministers Reject Calls for IPP Sentencing Reform
Despite urgent pleas from campaigners and prisoners’ families, the government has refused to support legislation that would see IPP prisoners resentenced with fixed terms. Prisons Minister James Timpson acknowledged the need for improvements but stopped short of endorsing the imprisonment for public protection (re-sentencing) bill brought forward by Labour peer Tony Woodley.
Timpson told the House of Lords that the 2,964 individuals currently serving IPP sentences would instead benefit from more regular reviews of their readiness for release every six months. A new “traffic light” system is set to rate prisoners as green, amber, or red in terms of their progress towards freedom. Yet critics argue this falls far short of the fundamental reform needed.
IPP Sentences: A Controversial Legacy
IPP sentences were introduced for offenders convicted of serious violent or sexual crimes who were deemed to pose a significant public threat without meriting a life sentence. While abolished for new offenders in 2012, this change was not applied retrospectively, leaving thousands trapped in a perpetual cycle of assessment and denial.
Many prisoners are still living this nightmare and it’s those people who I focus my bill on, which quite simply seeks to convert these never-ended IPP torture sentences into regular, normal, determinate sentences with an end date, giving them hope.
Lord Tony Woodley
A Toll on Mental Health and Public Funds
The psychological impact of indefinite detention has been severe, with IPP prisoners experiencing high rates of suicide and mental illness that paradoxically hinder their chances of release. An astonishing 86 IPP prisoners have taken their own lives, including a record nine in 2023 alone.
Beyond the human cost, the financial burden on the public purse is immense. One former IPP prisoner, identified as Mike, served an additional ten months after forgetting to inform his probation officer of a holiday abroad—17 years after his initial release. Crossbench peer Michael Hastings denounced this as a “scandalous destruction of a marriage opportunity” and “pernicious persecution of an individual’s freedom.”
The Path Forward: Resentencing vs. Piecemeal Reform
Lord Woodley and fellow reformists argue that replacing IPP sentences with fixed terms is the only just solution. However, the government maintains this would put the public at an unacceptable risk by automatically releasing prisoners the Parole Board still deems dangerous.
Instead, Timpson points to measures like the early termination of some IPP offenders’ licenses and tailored rehabilitation support as evidence of progress. Yet peers from across the political spectrum remain unconvinced, urging against a “risk-averse glacial pace” of change.
Conclusion: A Crossroads for Justice
As the calls for IPP reform grow louder, the government faces a stark choice. Will it proactively remedy a well-documented injustice or risk another stain on the justice system akin to Windrush, Hillsborough, or the infected blood scandal?
What a waste of public money, what a scandalous destruction of a marriage opportunity. What a pernicious persecution of an individual’s freedom, hard-earned, for a simple act many decades earlier.
Lord Michael Hastings
For the thousands of IPP prisoners who have served far beyond their original terms, reform cannot come soon enough. The onus now lies with ministers to avert another Post Office-scale tragedy before it’s too late.
