Independent Sentencing Review 2024 to 2025: Call for Evidence

Question 1

Foreword – The Rt Hon David Gauke

Accepted Answer

The prison population in England and Wales has doubled over the last 30 years. We now have the highest incarceration rate of any Western European country and the prison population is projected to continue to rise by four and a half thousand offenders a year. Supply of new prison places has not kept up with the increase in demand and for the eighteen months after February 2023, the male estate was routinely operating at above 99% capacity.

In Summer 2024, these capacity pressures brought this prison system within days of collapse, forcing the Government to introduce measures to release some prisoners early. This acted as a pressure valve, freeing up capacity in the short-term enabling the criminal justice system to continue to function, but it has not provided a long-term solution to the challenges of a rising prison population and high rates of reoffending.

There are many factors that have contributed to this, but the fact that the average custodial sentence length stands at nearly 21 months, up from about 13 months 20 years ago, has undoubtedly had a profound impact.

Building prisons costs vast amounts of taxpayer money, and we cannot build at a fast enough rate to keep up with current levels of demand. We need to fundamentally look again at sentencing policy if we want to get control of the prison population. Prison will always play a key role in our justice system, and for many offences it will always be the only answer, but we must face reality that the vast majority of offenders will be released. We need to make sure that when that happens, we have a probation system fully equipped to manage them, and that they are less likely to reoffend and create more victims of crime. We also need to look at the areas where the current system is failing, like tackling the issue of hyper-prolific offenders.

This review provides an opportunity to look at how we can make the system better and more effective, looking to other jurisdictions who have faced similar challenges, and at how we can harness new technology to manage offenders outside of prison.

The scale of this challenge should not be underestimated, but the review will not shy away from the difficult questions. I encourage all those responding to the call for evidence to be ambitious, and I welcome any ideas which challenge current thinking, are innovative, or which spotlight best practice and how it can be extended, so we can build a justice system which is sustainable now and in the future.

Question 2

Guidance

Accepted Answer

This Call for Evidence exercise is intended to gather evidence as part of the Independent Sentencing Review. This Call for Evidence is open for eight weeks, from 14 November 2024 until 9 January 2025. 

Views are welcomed from all who have an interest in this area. Respondents are asked to consider the issues raised in this document and to provide responses to some or all of the questions asked, providing any documentary or other evidence available to support their position.  

All submissions and evidence provided will be considered and used as part of the Independent Sentencing Review to assist the Chair and Panel in developing recommendations. The Review is working to tight timeframes, so respondents are encouraged to submit evidence as soon as convenient. The Chair and Panel will issue the outcome of the review to the Ministry of Justice and this evidence may be referenced in a final report. Given the immediacy of the problems the review addresses, this call encourages evidence that extends existing ideas, or that may be ambitious, innovative, or new.

An Impact Assessment has not been prepared for this paper, as its purpose is to gather evidence, rather than to put forward policy proposals for consultation. 

If respondents are unable to submit evidence through the online portal, evidence can also be shared with the Independent Review via email SentencingReview2024-25@justice.gov.uk or via letter to the Independent Sentencing Review Secretariat, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ.  

Question 3

Terms of Reference

Accepted Answer

In Summer 2024, the capacity pressures on the prison system brought it dangerously close to total collapse. On taking office, the new government was forced to announce emergency measures that reduced the custodial term of some standard determinate sentences from 50 percent to 40 percent of a sentence.

This review of sentencing is tasked with a comprehensive re-evaluation of our sentencing framework. Its goal is to ensure we are never again in a position where the country has more prisoners than prison places, and the government is forced to rely on the emergency release of prisoners.

To do so, the review will be guided by 3 principles:

firstly, sentences must punish offenders and protect the public - there must always be space in prison for the most dangerous offenders
secondly, sentences must encourage offenders to turn their backs on a life of crime, cutting crime by reducing reoffending
thirdly, we must expand and make greater use of punishment outside of prison

In developing their recommendations, the independent Chair and panel are encouraged to draw not only on national data but also on international comparisons. This sentencing framework must follow the evidence of what reduces offending.

Sentencing is a matter for the independent judiciary and the review will therefore not look at sentencing in individual cases or the role of the judiciary.

The review will provide long term solutions for our justice system by:

examining the use and composition of non-custodial sentences, including robust community alternatives to prison and the use of fines
looking at the role of incentives in sentence management and the powers of the probation service in the administration of sentences in the community
looking at the use and impact of short custodial sentences
reviewing the framework around longer custodial sentences, including the use of minimum sentences, and the range of sentences and maximum penalties available for different offences
looking at the administration of sentences, including the point at which offenders are released from prison, how long they are supervised in the community on licence, recall to prison, and how technology can support this
considering whether the sentencing framework should be amended to take into account the specific needs or vulnerabilities of specific cohorts, such as young adult offenders, older offenders, and women
considering the approach to sentencing in cases of prolific offenders
considering specifically sentencing for offences primarily committed against women and girls

There are some important areas which we consider are best-placed to be progressed outside of the review. The review will not consider:

the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence or the administration of it
the use of remand
the youth sentencing framework
wholesale reform of the murder sentencing framework: Whilst the review may consider the impact of sentencing for murder on the wider sentencing framework, the department is considering wholesale reform of homicide law and sentencing separately
out of court resolutions

The review should submit its findings in full to the Lord Chancellor by Spring 2025.

Question 4

Themes

Accepted Answer

Theme 1: History and trends in sentencing

Background:

There are five statutory purposes of sentencing: the punishment of offenders, the reduction of crime (including its reduction by deterrence), the reform and rehabilitation of offenders, the protection of the public, and the making of reparation by offender to persons affected by their offences.
There have been significant legislative changes to sentencing in recent years, for example the introduction of Schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for the sentencing of murder, increases in maximum penalties, and the expansion of mandatory sentences. There has also been an increase in the average time spent in custody from 12.7 months in 2003 to 20.9 months in 2023.
This review will examine to what extent these changes have met the statutory purposes of sentencing and what the impacts have been, including on levels of crime and the views on sentencing of those who have been impacted by crime.
The review will also examine how these changes have contributed to prison population growth and high probation caseloads.
It will look to learn from countries who have successfully reversed inflationary trends. For example, the Netherlands has seen its prison population steadily decrease by over 40% between 2006 and 2023, from one of the highest incarceration rates in Western Europe.

What have been the key drivers in changes in sentencing, and how have these changes met the statutory purposes of sentencing?