logo
It's beyond time to end the scandal of IPP

It's beyond time to end the scandal of IPP

Gulf Today15-07-2025
It comes to something when a senior member of a recent government – the former justice secretary, no less – describes actions by the state that were part of his remit as 'overbearing, unfair and almost totalitarian'. Yet this is how Alex Chalk KC, who held that office for 14 months in the government of Rishi Sunak, describes imprisonment for public protection (IPP) orders – which can keep someone in prison indefinitely after conviction for a relatively minor crime.
Ousted from government by his party's defeat at the last election, and also from his parliamentary seat, Mr Chalk has returned to his legal practice. It is from this perch that he is now asking his successor, Shabana Mahmood, to consider new proposals — from the Howard League and a former lord chief justice, Lord Thomas — with a view to righting this now longstanding wrong, according to The Independent.
At The Independent, we make no apology for returning once again to the iniquity of IPP orders that go against so much of what should constitute any civilised judicial system. Two features stand out. There is the glaring disproportionality in so many cases between the crime and the punishment, with some prisoners having served almost 20 years (and still counting) for offences such as robbing someone of their mobile phone or laptop. This is not, by the way, to diminish such crimes, but to point up the disparity between the standard tariff for such a conviction and the actual time served by many of those still subject to IPP orders.
The other feature is the cruelty of imposing a sentence that has no end, which has been described by the UN as psychological torture. With no prospect of a release date, more than 90 such prisoners have taken their own lives. Altogether, more than 2,500 are still languishing in jail on IPPs.
This is in spite of these indefinite prison terms having been abolished in 2012, just seven years after they were introduced. The clear mistake then was not to have made the abolition retrospective. It applied only to new convictions, not to those already in jail, leaving the glaring injustice that one day could make a difference between someone left to serve what could become a lifetime sentence and someone convicted of a similar crime with a clear idea of the timetable for release or parole.
The failure to make abolition of IPP orders retrospective has had consequences of its own. At least some of those still not released are now so damaged by their experience and will be so hard to rehabilitate that they could indeed present a danger to society if they were released. This is the very opposite of what a penal system should set out to achieve and amounts, in Mr Chalk's words, to nothing less than a failure on the part of the state.
At which point, there is an obvious and not unreasonable question for the former justice secretary to answer. If the injustices and perverse effects of IPP orders were so apparent when he came to office — as they were — why did he not do something about it? Why did he not condemn the policy in the same terms as he is doing now and make the changes he is demanding be made by his successor?
Part of his answer is that he did do something. He reduced from 10 to three the number of years that a released IPP prisoner was on licence and so subject to recall. That is not nothing, but it was nothing like enough. Two small pleas might also be made on his behalf in mitigation. As he says, there was 'not a single vote' in even the change in the licence period that he made, because of the general lack of public sympathy for prisoners.
As he does not say — but is a sentiment with which the current government could well concur — a year can be too short a time in UK politics when it comes to getting anything done. The ponderous nature of the legislative process can be a minus as well as a plus. On the other hand, the size of the Labour government's majority and the years it still has to run mean it has time on its side.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Iran and European powers resume nuclear talks in Istanbul
Iran and European powers resume nuclear talks in Istanbul

The National

timean hour ago

  • The National

Iran and European powers resume nuclear talks in Istanbul

Iran and European powers have begun talks in Istanbul over Tehran's nuclear programme, before a deadline to reimpose UN sanctions in September. Iran's nuclear negotiators and deputy foreign ministers, Kazem Gharibabadi and Majid Takht-Ravanchi, met in closed-door discussions with political directors from the foreign ministries of the UK, France and Germany at the Iranian consulate in Istanbul. These were the first in-person talks between Iran and the European countries, known as the E3, since the 12-day Israel-Iran war in June, and subsequent US air strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Last Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told foreign ministers from the E3 that they have no grounds to reactivate UN sanctions after they threatened to do so unless there is progress in nuclear talks. Speaking in Tehran on Thursday night, Mr Araghchi said his country's positions would be 'completely clear" in Friday's talks. "The Islamic Republic of Iran, while advancing its peaceful nuclear programme, has always been ready to adopt confidence-building measures", he added. 'Especially after the recent war, it is important for them [the E3] to understand that the Islamic Republic of Iran's position remains unshakable, and that our uranium enrichment will continue', the Tasnim news agency quoted Mr Araghchi as saying. The negotiations centre on the so-called snapback mechanism, which would allow remaining parties to the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers to reimpose UN sanctions on Tehran that are due to expire in the autumn. While the US left the 2015 nuclear deal in President Donald Trump 's first term, the E3, as well as China and Russia, are still parties to the agreement. In the deal's dispute resolution clauses, any of those parties can trigger a unilateral reimposition of UN sanctions, which include arms embargoes, asset freezes and restrictions on Iran's missile and nuclear programmes. Iranian officials have claimed repeatedly that European nations do not have the right to reimpose UN sanctions because they breached commitments under the 2015 deal and adopted what Tehran saw as pro-Israeli stances during the war in June. If the snapback process is not used and UN embargoes expire in October, Iran could in theory advance its nuclear programme without international restrictions, although remaining US sanctions would likely still complicate any such efforts. Clock ticking on sanctions Analysts and diplomats have said European powers could offer Iran an extension to the deadline. Without one, Germany, France and the UK must decide whether to activate the snapback process 30 days before the curbs expire completely on October 18. An extension would allow time for negotiations between Tehran and Washington in an attempt to reach a deal over Iran's nuclear programme, and impose limits on that activity in exchange for sanctions relief. Such a move would probably come in exchange for commitments from Iran to co-operate with international nuclear inspectors and re-engage in talks with the US. Iran said this week that it agreed to host a technical team from the UN nuclear watchdog to discuss future co-operation, while cautiously signalling openness to renewed talks with the US. The development comes after Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian this month ended co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and said it could only be restored if the agency addressed Tehran's concerns over perceived bias. "A snapback extension remains a difficult means to an even more difficult end – securing new US-Iran negotiations and a new nuclear deal," Ellie Geranmayeh, a senior fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in an analysis on the snapback mechanism this week. "But Europeans need to be fully invested in this process." Iranian officials have voiced scepticism over an extension. 'We oppose it,' Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told state media on Friday. The talks in Istanbul are an opportunity for European countries 'to make up for their previous unconstructive approaches that have tarnished Europe's credibility', he added. Iran and the US held five rounds of negotiations in Rome and Oman this year, before a sixth round was cancelled when Israel attacked Iran in June. The talks had also faltered over Iran's rights to uranium enrichment, which Tehran wants to continue, with possible limits. The US position hardened during the talks and Washington wants to deny Iran any nuclear enrichment capacity under a deal. Tehran insists its nuclear programme is for strictly peaceful purposes and denies seeking to develop a bomb. But uranium enrichment levels of up to 60 per cent, far exceeding the needs of civilian purposes, have raised suspicions in the West that Iran wants to build a weapon.

Rubio condemns French decision to recognise Palestinian state as policy gap widens between US and Europe
Rubio condemns French decision to recognise Palestinian state as policy gap widens between US and Europe

The National

time6 hours ago

  • The National

Rubio condemns French decision to recognise Palestinian state as policy gap widens between US and Europe

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has condemned an announcement by French President Emmanuel Macron that his country will recognise a Palestinian state, calling it a "reckless decision". Mr Rubio described the move as a setback for peace and said it was an affront to the victims of the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, that sparked the Gaza war. Mr Macron said on Thursday that France intended to recognise a Palestinian state in September at the UN General Assembly, adding that he hoped it would help bring peace to the Middle East. The announcement widens a rift between Europe and the US on policy towards Palestine, after Washington's ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, said in June that he did not think an independent Palestinian state remained a US foreign policy goal. "This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace," Mr Rubio said. "It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7." About 140 countries now recognise or plan to recognise Palestinian statehood, but France would become the biggest European power to do so, and the first G7 state. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has criticised the move, saying it "rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became". "A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launchpad to annihilate Israel, not to live in peace beside it," he added. However, there has been widespread praise for the French decision. Saudi Arabia's Foreign Ministry called it historic. "The kingdom reiterates its call for all countries that have not yet recognised the State of Palestine to take similar positive steps and adopt serious positions that support peace and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people," it said. Jordan's Foreign Ministry also commended Paris. "This is a step in the right direction towards the realisation of the two-state solution and the end of the occupation," ministry spokesman Sufyan Qudah said in a statement. Senior Palestinian Authority official Hussein Al Sheikh praised the move, saying it "reflects France's commitment to international law and its support for the Palestinian people's rights to self-determination and the establishment of our independent state". In Europe, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, whose country already recognises Palestine, welcomed the announcement. "Together, we must protect what Netanyahu is trying to destroy," Mr Mr Sanchez, an outspoken critic of the conflict in Gaza. "The two-state solution is the only solution." Hamas, meanwhile, also welcomed the decision as a "positive step in the right direction towards doing justice to our oppressed Palestinian people and supporting their legitimate right to self-determination". "We call on all countries of the world, especially European nations and those that have not yet recognised the State of Palestine, to follow France's lead," it said. France will join European states Norway, Ireland and Spain in recognising Palestine. To date, only nine EU members have taken the step, making France's move significant, especially given its status as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Mr Macron's move comes as anger mounts over the death toll in the Gaza war and the growing number of people starving in the enclave. 'The urgent thing today is that the war in Gaza stops and the civilian population is saved,″ the French President said. In Britain, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he would hold an "emergency call" on Friday with France and Germany on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, urging a ceasefire and steps towards Palestinian statehood. "I will hold an emergency call with E3 partners tomorrow, where we will discuss what we can do urgently to stop the killing and get people the food they desperately need while pulling together all the steps necessary to build a lasting peace," he said in a statement. "A ceasefire will put us on a path to the recognition of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution which guarantees peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis." Mr Starmer said the situation in Gaza had "reached new depths and continues to worsen". He added that the "suffering and starvation unfolding in Gaza is unspeakable and indefensible".

Hamas says French pledge to recognise State of Palestine 'positive step'
Hamas says French pledge to recognise State of Palestine 'positive step'

Khaleej Times

time6 hours ago

  • Khaleej Times

Hamas says French pledge to recognise State of Palestine 'positive step'

Palestinian militant group Hamas hailed France's pledge on July 24 to recognise a State of Palestine as a "positive step" and urged all countries to do the same despite Israeli opposition. "We consider this a positive step in the right direction toward doing justice to our oppressed Palestinian people and supporting their legitimate right to self-determination," Hamas said in a statement, after French President Emmanuel Macron's announcement that France would formally state its recognition in September. "We call on all countries of the world --especially European nations and those that have not yet recognised the State of Palestine — to follow France's lead," Hamas added. French President Emmanuel Macron said on July 24 his country would formally recognise a Palestinian state during a UN meeting in September, the most powerful European nation to announce such a move. Macron said the "urgent priority today is to end the war in Gaza and rescue the civilian population". "We must finally build the State of Palestine, ensure its viability and enable it, by accepting its demilitarisation and fully recognising Israel, to contribute to the security of all in the Middle East," he wrote on social media. At least 142 countries now recognise or plan to recognise Palestinian statehood, according to an AFP tally — though Israel and the United States strongly oppose the move. Several countries have announced plans to recognise statehood for the Palestinians since Israel launched a bombardment of Gaza in 2023 in response to the October 7 attacks by Hamas. Macron's announcement drew immediate anger from Israel, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying it "rewards terror" and poses an existential threat to Israel. Netanyahu said in a statement that the decision "risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became", which would be "a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it".

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store