Lawyers and justice bodies have leapt to defend the Sentencing Council after its latest guidance sparked a major political backlash – with the lord chancellor declaring she has asked the independent body to reconsider its guidance and is reviewing the independent body’s powers.
On Wednesday, the Sentencing Council issued significantly revised guidance on the imposition of community and custodial sentences, which comes into force on 1 April. However, a section on pre-sentence reports incurred the wrath of politicians – in particular, courts being told that pre-sentence reports will normally be considered necessary if the offender is from an ethnic, cultural and/or faith minority community.
Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick said the guidance would mean prison sentences will be less likely for people from ethnic and faith minority communities – creating a ‘two-tier’ justice system.
Lord chancellor and justice secretary Shabana Mahmood said she strongly opposed the guidance and has asked the Sentencing Council to review it urgently. ‘I am also reviewing the Sentencing Council’s role and its powers. I will review whether ministers and parliament should have greater powers here too,’ she added.
Solicitor Dr Laura Janes, who specialises in prison law and criminal appeals, defended the guidance.
Writing in the Gazette, Janes said: ‘They are just guidance and do not require judges to take a particular course of action. What they do is ensure that when judges sentence people, they have enough information about the person to make a reasoned and justifiable decision. Pre-sentence reports do not bind a judge.’
Criticising the lord chancellor’s response, Pavan Dhaliwal, chief executive of justice reform charity Revolving Doors, said ‘we already have a two-tier justice system where black, Asian, and minority ethnic people face harsher sentences and are less likely to receive community alternatives’.
The Sentencing Council confirmed it has received the lord chancellor’s letter and is considering its response.
