Indefinite sentences 'unlawful', court rules

The policy of locking up some prisoners until it is considered safe to free them is in crisis after it was condemned as "arbitrary, unreasonable and unlawful" by the High Court.

Two inmates, a sex offender and a man convicted of attempted robbery, won a landmark challenge to the system of indeterminate sentences, which have no fixed end-dates.

Related articles

• Leading article: Crime and punishment
• Search the news archive for more stories

They argued they could not demonstrate their eligibility for release as offending behaviour courses were not provided at the jails where they are held.

More than 3,000 offenders have been given indeterminate sentences since they were introduced two years ago. The court ruling against the Government and the Parole Board could leave ministers with a multimillion pound bill as they are forced to plough cash into treatment programmes.

David Walker, who was given an indeterminate sentence after being convicted of sexual assault, and Nicholas Wells, whose 12-month minimum term for attempted robbery expired last September, both challenged their sentences. They could not be released because their prisons did not have necessary rehabilitation courses.

Lord Justice Laws, sitting with Mr Justice Mitting, said: "To the extent that the prisoner remains incarcerated after tariff expiry without any current and effective assessment of the danger he does or does not pose, his detention cannot in reason be justified. It is therefore unlawful."

The Ministry of Justice, which is to complete a review of the operation of the sentences this month, was granted a stay on the ruling pending an appeal.