header-logo header-logo

05 December 2012 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7541 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

The meaning of life

HLE Blogger Sarah Lewis explores the debate surrounding whole life tariffs

Last month, the Court of Appeal considered the issue of whole life tariffs, which in three separate cases heard together were appealed on the basis that whole life orders were incompatible with Art 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment.

Although the panel, comprising the Lord Chief Justice and four appellate judges, overturned the whole life tariff for murderer Danilo Restivo and rapists Michael Roberts and David Simmons, they upheld the sentence for killer David Oakes. Their ruling, which comes just prior to the appeal by Jeremy Bamber and two other murderers to overturn their whole life tariffs at the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, sends a signal to the Strasbourg that the courts in England and Wales are content that power to jail someone forever is, in some instances, justified.

Lord Judge stated that it was open to the individual state to make statutory provision for the imposition of a whole life minimum term and, if appropriate, as a matter of judicial discretion, for the court to make such an order; it was not for the European Court to intervene. In the UK, Parliament has legislated to enable judges to impose whole life sentences without the possibility of release, which for would be appropriate where punishment and retribution required detention for life in the literal sense.

So who do whole life tariffs apply to? They are, and should remain the court held, reserved for the few exceptionally serious offences committed by offenders judged to be the most dangerous to society. Currently 46 offenders are subject to whole life orders. Unlike other life term prisoners, they are not eligible for release on licence if, after their minimum term, they can prove that they are no longer a risk to society...

Rightly or wrongly, such offenders can wind up languishing in prison with no hope of ever being able to demonstrate that they are no longer a danger to society: life really meaning life…”

To continue reading go to: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

Issue: 7541 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Constantine Law—Anita Vadgama

Constantine Law—Anita Vadgama

New senior partner hire at consultant-led employment / regulatory law firm

Ward Hadaway—Emma Swann & Jill Donabie

Ward Hadaway—Emma Swann & Jill Donabie

Firm adds two partners to growing education practice

mfg Solicitors—Lauren Collins, Emily Stancer & Sara Southall

mfg Solicitors—Lauren Collins, Emily Stancer & Sara Southall

Trio of newly qualified solicitors strengthens Worcester office law firm

NEWS
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
The treasury has sought to reassure the legal profession over concerns about cost, bureaucracy and independence when the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) takes over regulation of anti-money laundering compliance
One out of two barristers has come under pressure from clients to act unethically, according to the results of this year’s Barristers’ Working Lives survey
The Court of Appeal has held the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) was wrong to set aside a Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) decision on unfair pricing of phenytoin, an epilepsy drug
A flagship employment law reform is due to come into effect on 1 July, extending unfair dismissal rights to employees after six months in their job instead of two years
back-to-top-scroll