header-logo header-logo

09 August 2007 / Julian Broadhead
Issue: 7285 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

What a mess!

Sentences of imprisonment for public protection are under-funded and ineffective, says Julian Broadhead

Is there a man or woman among us who has not puzzled on what the government was thinking when it created the indeterminate sentence for public protection (IPP)? In April 2005, at a time when the prisons were full to overflowing and the lifer population had doubled in a decade, the Criminal Justice Act 2003, ss 225 and 226 introduced what is in effect another form of life sentence. But whereas a few hundred life sentences are passed each year, over 3,000 people are now serving an indeterminate sentence for public protection—and that is only in the first two years. It has been officially estimated that the total indeterminate prison population—currently 9,000 including lifers—will have reached 25,000 by 2012. An unimaginable prospect in terms of prison management maybe, but by no means unrealistic, on current trends. One did not need to be a soothsayer to envisage this situation (see 155 NLJ 7174, p 641); why did the government not see it?

WELLS AND

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll