Total Pageviews

Sunday, 6 July 2025

Welcome! I’ve put together some templates and guidance materials for people affected by IPP sentences—whether you’re currently inside, a family member, or a supporter. These templates are designed to help you express your experience clearly and powerfully, whether you’re writing to the Parole Board, MPs, or others involved in the justice system. I know how hard it can be to find the right words or even know where to start. That’s why I’ve created these resources to give you a solid base you can adapt to your own story, your own voice, and your own needs.



GUIDANCE FOR IPP PRISONERS AND SUPPORTERS

Please remember: These templates and tips are tools to help you make them your own. If you’re submitting anything officially, always share it with your legal representative first so they can ensure your words work in your favour.

1. Note to IPP Prisoners and Supporters

This letter template is designed to support IPP prisoners, family members, and survivors in telling their truth, explaining the injustice they’re facing, and calling for change.

  • Please adapt it to reflect your personal experience, your sentence, your efforts to progress, and your concerns. It’s your voice that matters. 

  • If you're currently in prison and wish to submit this to the Parole Board, Probation, or any other decision-maker, it is strongly recommended that you send it through your legal representative or solicitor first.

  • Unfortunately, it’s a reality that in some cases, probation or decision-makers may misinterpret or twist words to justify continued detention. Having your solicitor review your submission is a way to protect yourself and ensure your voice is heard clearly and not selectively.

2. How to Personalise Your Letter

  • Make it your own: Use your own words wherever possible. Explain your IPP sentence, your tariff, and your personal experience with the IPP system.

  • Be honest and respectful: The Parole Board and legal professionals respect honesty and sincerity. Avoid exaggeration or aggression.

  • Highlight your efforts: Mention any courses, work, or rehabilitation you have completed or attempted, even if you were unable to access them due to system failures.

  • Explain the barriers: If courses or programs were unavailable or delayed, say so clearly. This provides important context.

  • Ask clear questions: For example: “What more do I need to do to be released?” or “When can I expect a fair decision?”

3. Top Things to Avoid Saying in Parole Submissions

  • Do not admit to risk or dangerousness you do not believe you pose. Focus on your progress and readiness.

  • Avoid blaming or attacking individual staff members or departments. This can be seen as uncooperative.

  • Do not make threats or ultimatums. This can damage your case.

  • Be cautious when discussing other prisoners or incidents. Only mention them if directly relevant and factual.

  • Avoid emotional outbursts. Stay calm and focused on your key points.

4. Legal Routes and Points of Appeal

  • Seek legal advice: Always discuss your written letters or submissions with a solicitor or legal representative before sending them.

  • Judicial Review: If you believe your detention is unlawful or the Parole Board has acted unfairly, legal action may be possible.

  • Resentencing Applications: Some IPP prisoners may be eligible to apply for resentencing, which could reduce or fix the length of their sentence.

  • Complaints: If you feel your treatment breaches your rights, formal complaints through the prison or Probation may helpbut get legal advice first.

5. Important Tips Before Submitting Your Letter

  • Send through your solicitor: They can advise on how to present your letter and protect you from misuse of your words.

  • Even honest statements can be misinterpreted. Keep your tone respectful and avoid anything that could be seen as hostile or aggressive.

  • Ask for confirmation: Request that your solicitor confirms when your submission has been received and added to your parole dossier.

  • Be patient but persistent: The parole process can be slow. If there is no response in the expected time, you or your solicitor should follow up.

  • Protect yourself: Legal oversight can prevent misrepresentation.

  • Keep copies: Always save a copy of what you send for future reference.

  • Know your rights: You are entitled to a fair hearing. If you believe the process is being mishandled, ask your solicitor about possible legal remedies.

6. Find Your Voice and Keep Fighting

No one knows your story better than you. These templates and tips are here to help you find the words and the confidence to speak up and demand the justice you deserve.

You are not alone. Thousands are facing the same struggle, and more voices are rising every day to call for fairness, release, and respect for those living under the IPP sentence.

Every letter you send, every question you ask, every step you take puts more pressure on the system to change. Your voice matters.

Take this tool, make it your own, and use it to be heard. Stay strong, stay hopeful, and remember: You deserve to be free.

Your fight for freedom matters to all of us.

......................................................................................................... 

Template Letter From IPP Prisoner to the Parole Board


Your Name
Prison Number
Prison Name
Date


To the Members of the Parole Board,

Re: My Continued Detention Under the IPP Sentence – Request for Clarity and Release

I write this letter out of deep frustration and with a desperate need for clarity. I have now served well beyond my original tariff, and I remain indefinitely detained under the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence. I have done my time and more. What I now seek is a clear and honest answer:

1.      What more must I do to be released? And when, realistically, will that happen?

I understand the Parole Board must assess risk. I do not question that responsibility. But I must respectfully highlight that the conditions for progression, as set out by the system, are simply not possible to meet within the current state of the prison estate.

Rehabilitation courses that I am told I “Must complete" are either unavailable, oversubscribed, or simply not running. Staff shortages mean that even legal visits and basic support are falling through. Court hearings are being delayed because prisoners cannot even meet with their solicitors in time.

We are being asked to prove readiness for release within a system that has no means to provide the very tools we need to demonstrate that readiness.

Organisations such as UNGRIP and the Howard League for Penal Reform have made it clear: the government cannot continue to blame individuals when it is the state itself that is failing to meet its own duties.

I know the Parole Board is independent. I respect that. But I must ask again:

  • What are you waiting to see that you haven’t already seen?
  • Is there a real pathway to release for someone like me, or am I just waiting for a system to fix itself around me, while I lose more years of my life?

I do not pose a risk to the public. I simply want a chance to rebuild my life after this long and traumatic chapter. My continued detention is not protecting the public it is compounding the damage already done by this unjust sentence.

The government’s rhetoric that we are all unsafe does not match the reality. The vast majority of IPP prisoners have served far beyond their tariff and are trapped in a cycle of impossible expectations and system failure.

So I ask you plainly and respectfully:

If I cannot progress through courses that do not exist, what is the actual basis for my continued detention? When will I be released?

Please consider this letter not only as a personal plea but as a demand for fairness, realism, and justice. The IPP sentence has already been condemned by Parliament, by public opinion, and by experience. Now, it must be condemned in action too by giving us a route out.

Yours sincerely,
Your Name
Prison Number

Prison address

DATE

............................................................................................................. 


Key Points 

Proposed Two-Year Parole Deadline: Parole Board must commit to release within two years. Places onus on the system, not just the individual, to prove readiness.

Systemic Failure in Prisons: No capacity for mandated courses or rehabilitation. Legal visits disrupted, court hearings delayed clear breach of due process and access to justice.

IPP Prisoners Over Tariff: Around 99% are over tariff continued incarceration is punitive, not protective. Government narrative about "dangerousness" is misleading and unsustainable.

Trauma and Harm: Ongoing imprisonment is causing psychological damage.Most just want a fair route to rebuild their lives.

How to Advocate

Keep the Human Story Front and Center: “that a Everyday over tariff is a day of unjust punishment.” “This isn’t justice it’s indefinite detention without cause.”

Parliamentary Pressure: MPs and Lords should be pushed to ask the government:
“How can you claim to protect the public when the system can't even run basic legal visits or rehabilitation?”

Use the System’s Own Failures: The fact that prisons can't deliver courses undermines the government’s excuse for continued IPP detention. Call for automatic release or resentencing where state failure prevents progression.

Support for William’s Bill, Even though it’s in early stages, public and parliamentary support must be visible to force concessions. Encourage people to write to Lords and MPs to support the reform even in its amended form.

pressure remains, and that’s no small thing. Every debate, every report, every visit refused, every court delay it all paints the same picture: a broken, indefensible policy kept alive by political cowardice. Let’s turn that pressure into momentum.


William’s Bill is now in the Committee Stage


  • Lord Wigley = Dafydd Wynne Wigley William’s Bill = Bill introduced by Lord Woodley, also known as the Imprisonment for Public Protection (Re-sentencing) Bill. The Bill has now entered Committee Stage, where proposed amendments are examined in detail (e.g., changes proposed by Lord Blunkett, Lord Woodley, and others) commonslibrary.parliament.uk+8crimeandjustice.org.uk+8researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk+8.

  • It's still in the Lords, awaiting completion of Committee deliberations and any Report Stage debates. After that, it would move to the Commons. 

 genealogy.com+3members.parliament.uk+3en.wikipedia.org+3.

*To note that William’s Bill and Lord Woodley are one and the same. The Imprisonment for Public Protection (Re-sentencing) Bill was introduced by Lord Woodley (a variant spelling of his title), officially titled “Imprisonment for Public Protection (Re-sentencing)”, and is focused squarely on resolving injustices affecting IPP prisoners 

publications.parliament.uk+2bills.parliament.uk+2lordslibrary.parliament.uk+2.


Why Buckingham Matters Now

 In summary:William’s Bill (Lord Woodley’s IPP Resentencing Bill) is currently active in Parliament, in the House of Lords Committee Stage.

      • Its next steps:

        • Final amendments and debates in the Lords.

        • Potential passage to the Commons.

        • If successful, it will receive Royal Assent and initiate a precedent-setting resentencing exercise for IPP prisoners.

Amendments Under Consideration at Committee Stage (Lords)

The Imprisonment for Public Protection (Re‑sentencing) Bill [HL]—sponsored by Lord Woodley (William’s Bill)—is currently in Committee Stage in the House of Lords. Here are key amendments being debated

(as of March 2025) prisonreformtrust.org.uk+2theguardian.com+2theguardian.com+2theguardian.com+12bills.parliament.uk+12researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk+12:

* (Re-sentencing) Bill [HL]Imprisonment for Public Protection (Re-sentencing) Bill [HL]

AmendmentProposed Change
Amendment 1Change “must” to “may” for establishing the expert advisory committee—shifting it from mandatory to permissive.
Amendment 2Limit resentencing to those on licence, excluding prisoners still in custody.
Amendment 3Restrict the remit to IPP prisoners who are 10+ years over tariff (Baroness Burt).
Amendment 4Specify that designated Crown Courts must handle resentencing to judicially reviewed standards.
Amendment 5Allow the court to confirm an IPP only if the offense meets current life-sentence threshold and the individual is considered high-risk.
Amendment 6Permit the court to impose an extended licence on release.
Amendment 7 (Baroness Fox)Option for substituting an IPP with a hospital order for mentally disordered offenders.
Amendments 8–10Include clauses to: report on the Act’s impact; remove licence restrictions if recall is invalid; clarify definitions for juvenile IPP sentences.

These amendments are being carefully examined—some seek to tighten the bill’s scope, others aim to strengthen safeguards for both prisoners and the public.

2. Expected Timelines in Parliament

  • Committee Stage (Lords) – Currently underway; includes line-by-line scrutiny of the amendments.

  • Report Stage & Third Reading (Lords) – Likely to follow once Committee Stage concludes; no public date yet, but may occur in summer 2025.

  • Commons Stages – If passed in the Lords, the Bill will move to the Commons: First Reading, Second Reading, Committee, Report, Third Reading.

  • Royal Assent – Assuming passage in both Houses, the Bill could reach Royal Assent by autumn 2025, triggering the required 24‑month resentencing period.

Summary up

  • Bill stage: House of Lords Committee Stage—critical period for shaping its impact.

  • Key amendments: Range from procedural tweaks to significant scope definitions and safeguards.

  • Timeline: Likely to progress to Report Stage and Commons in the coming months, with potential Royal Assent by late 2025.

  • Your action: Contact MPs and Peers, support or propose amendments that preserve universal resentencing, prevent re-sentencing inflation, and include appropriate safeguards.Your voice can make a real difference at this vital stage.



Template Letter to MPs and Policymakers – Strategic and Emotional Appeal for IPP Reform

Your Name
Prison Number
Prison Name
Date

Dear MP/Peer/Decision-Maker’s Name,

I’m writing to you not just as a member of the public, but as someone who can no longer stay silent about the inhumanity of the IPP sentence and the way it continues to destroy lives, long after it was abolished.

Thousands of men and women remain in prison today, trapped under a sentence that Parliament itself has condemned. These are people who have served their time, some more than twice or three times their original tariff, and yet still have no guarantee of release. The system tells them they must show they are "safe" but fails to provide the tools, courses, or support to do so. That’s not justice. That’s entrapment.

The passage of William’s Bill offers one of the few glimmers of hope in this bleak landscape. It doesn’t call for blanket releases or reckless shortcuts it proposes a structured and responsible route out for those who have already paid their debt, by putting the onus on the Parole Board and system to act fairly and clearly.

Many of these prisoners are not dangerous. They are damaged. Damaged by the sentence. Damaged by years of indefinite imprisonment. Damaged by the very system that was meant to rehabilitate them. And yet they are still being punished for the state’s failure to fix the conditions of their release.

We must stop pretending this is working. The government’s rhetoric that these individuals remain too risky to release is out of touch with the reality inside our prisons:

  • Prisons are at breaking point, operating at nearly full capacity.

  • Basic legal visits are now being cancelled due to staff shortages.

  • Rehabilitation courses often a condition of release are unavailable or backlogged by years.

  • The trauma of indefinite imprisonment has caused a mental health crisis behind bars. Some have taken their own lives. Others live in constant fear that they may never leave.

So I ask you, with urgency and conviction:

  • Support William’s Bill and work to strengthen its provisions where needed.

  • Challenge the government’s narrative that these people are beyond help when it’s the system that has failed them.

  • Push for legal redress and resentencing options, so that no one is left serving a life sentence for a fixed-term offence.

These prisoners are not forgotten by their families, by campaigners, or by growing numbers of legal professionals. They are remembered, grieved for, and fought for every single day.

They deserve justice. They deserve hope. And above all, they deserve a release date.

Please don’t let this issue be passed to the next government, the next decade, or the next tragedy. The time to act is now.

Yours sincerely,
Your Full Name If applicable: Campaigner / Family member of IPP prisoner / Supporter of penal reform
Add your  Contact Information

.........................................................................................................


Template from a Family Member of an IPP Prisoner

Your Name
Prison Number
Prison Name
Date

Dear MP’s Name / Peer’s Name,

I am writing to you as a family member of someone still imprisoned under the abolished IPP sentence. I live every day knowing that someone I love has no idea when or if they will ever come home.

They have served well beyond their original tariff. In any just system, they would have been released years ago. But instead, they are trapped in a sentence that was condemned as unjust over a decade ago, and yet somehow continues to punish people in the shadows.

I’m asking you to support William’s Bill, and to stand up against a government narrative that has left thousands in a cruel limbo. These are not monsters. These are people fathers, sons, daughters, mothers many of whom were sentenced for minor offences, and most of whom have now served two, three, even five times their original tariff.

They are told they must prove they are safe for release. But how can they, when the very system that makes the rules is the same system that withholds the tools? Prisons are overflowing. Courses aren’t running. Staff are stretched to breaking point. Solicitors can’t even visit their clients before hearings. And still, the Parole Board is told to wait for evidence of rehabilitation that the system itself has no capacity to deliver.

This is not justice. It is institutional cruelty. It is abandonment. And it is trauma for them, and for every family who waits in silence and fear.

William’s Bill offers a measured and principled path forward. It doesn't promise to release everyone. It simply requires that if the system cannot show how a person will be released within two years, then they must be. It gives a deadline to the endlessness. It forces the system to take responsibility.

Please, help us end this. Help bring our loved ones home.

With respect and urgency,
Your Full Name
Relationship, e.g. "Sister of an IPP prisoner serving 14 years beyond tariff OR OTHER ….."
Your address/ Email



.......................................................................................



Template Support the progression of William’s Bill

Your Name
Prison Number
Prison Name
Date

Dear MP’s Name,

I am writing to ask that you actively support the progression of William’s Bill, currently at the Committee Stage in the House of Lords, and call for an urgent change in the Government’s approach to IPP (Imprisonment for Public Protection) sentences. The continued incarceration of thousands of individuals well beyond their original tariff is not only unjust but entirely unworkable under current conditions.

The IPP sentence was rightly abolished for new cases in 2012, yet thousands remain indefinitely imprisoned under its legacy many for minor offences, most having served far beyond their tariff, and with no clear route out. The system continues to punish people indefinitely for historic risk, not current behaviour, and places release conditions on them that the prison estate itself cannot meet.

Why William’s Bill Matters

William’s Bill proposes a fair and pragmatic approach: that the Parole Board should identify when an IPP prisoner is likely to be released within two years, and if they cannot be, clear and reasonable steps must be taken to progress them or else they must be released.

This approach:

  • Respects public protection, by using the Parole Board’s discretion.
  • Acknowledges the trauma and damage of prolonged, indefinite detention.
  • Challenges the current hypocrisy, where release is blocked by rehabilitation courses that either don’t exist or are impossible to access.
  • Restores confidence in justice by ensuring the state does not continue to hold people unfairly.
  • A System at Breaking Point

The reality is that most prisons are operating at or near 100% capacity. Staff shortages are so severe that legal visits are being denied, hearings delayed, and rehabilitation programmes suspended. Yet IPP prisoners are still told that they must complete these unreachable goals to be considered safe for release. This is not a matter of personal risk it is a systemic failure.

Over 99% of IPP prisoners are now over-tariff. This is no longer about punishment or risk management it is about fear, inertia, and political avoidance.

 The Moral and Legal Imperative

The public understands this injustice. The families live with its consequences every day. The Parole Board, the Sentencing Council, and countless independent voices have called for change. Now Parliament must act.

I ask you to:

  1. Support William’s Bill in principle and in detail.
  2. Challenge the Ministry of Justice to explain how they can continue to detain people without the means to support their progression.
  3. Push for proper investment in parole reform and resettlement, to ensure people are not just released, but supported to reintegrate.

This is not about being soft on crime. It is about being honest about justice, risk, and responsibility. It is time for the government to drop the failing rhetoric of “dangerousness” and replace it with fact-based, trauma-informed, and legally sound solutions.

Every day an IPP prisoner remains locked up beyond their tariff is another day that justice is denied.

Sincerely,
Your Full Name
Your Address / Email


................................................................................................................


*Disclaimer:
The template letters and guidance provided here are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. Please adapt them to your personal situation and consult a qualified legal professional before submitting any documents to the Parole Board or other authorities.



Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, 1 July 2025

It is now 2025, and yet we are still here still fighting for the same justice that should have been delivered long ago. The IPP sentence, abolished for new cases more than 2 decades ago, continues to destroy lives. Rather than being treated as individuals capable of rehabilitation, IPP prisoners have been cast aside political casualties of a system more concerned with optics than fairness. I struggle to understand how such a sentence was ever permitted, let alone allowed to persist for nearly two decades. Over a hundred people have died as a direct result of this injustice many by suicide, driven by despair and hopelessness. These are not just numbers. They are mothers, fathers, sons, daughters human beings who were promised justice, but condemned to endless punishment instead. What have we truly achieved, if not the institutionalisation of suffering? I know that writing letters may not lead to an immediate reply or change. But I still believe it is worth trying. Sometimes, you have to speak up, even when you’re not sure anyone will listen because if we don’t try, we’ll never know. And if we remain silent, nothing will ever change.


4th July 2024 .

Your Full Name
Your Address 
Your Email – optional
Date

To: (MP’s Full Name
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

Email: MP’s official email ,RE: Urgent Action on the Ongoing Injustice of IPP Sentencing

Dear (MP’s Name),

I write this with deep frustration, sadness, and disbelief that in the year 2025, we are still confronting the lasting damage of the IPP (Imprisonment for Public Protection) sentence  a failed and inhumane policy that has cost hundreds of lives and destroyed countless more.

Even though IPP sentences were abolished for new cases in 2012, thousands remain imprisoned under their weight. Many have served far beyond their original tariffs and remain detained or recalled  not for new crimes, but for perceived risks or minor breaches. This is, in effect, indefinite punishment.

The government has treated IPP prisoners not as individuals with the capacity for rehabilitation, but as political pawns  casualties of a justice system more focused on appearing “tough” than delivering fairness. Over 100 people have died under IPP, many by suicide, driven by hopelessness and despair. These are not just statistics. They are sons, daughters, parents  human beings whose lives could have been saved with justice and compassion.

We are now 13 years on from the abolition of new IPP sentences, and yet we are still here, asking the same questions and witnessing the same suffering. What has truly changed, if those affected remain abandoned  if the same retraumatisation through recall continues unchecked?

I respectfully urge you to act on this matter. Specifically, I ask you to on behalf

  • Raise this matter directly with the Secretary of State for Justice

  • Submit a Written Parliamentary Question or speak on the issue during relevant debates

  • Support or initiate a full review of all existing IPP sentences, with a pathway to proper resentencing and release

  • Write to the Secretary of State for Justice on your behalf

  • Submit Written Questions in Parliament

  • Request a debate or speak during relevant debates

  • Work with the Justice Committee or APPGs (All-Party Parliamentary Groups)

  • Push for urgent reform and hold the government to account

You are in a position of authority and responsibility  and your action could help save lives. Please do not treat this simply as a logged concern. I am asking you, as my representative, to take this further in Parliament.

This is a national scandal. Justice delayed is justice denied. The IPP sentence is one of the most shameful legacies of our justice system and history will remember how long it took to end it.

As my MP's your role is to represent the interests and concerns of their constituents, not just their personal views. 

While I understand that individual MPs may hold personal views about particular justice policies, this matter goes beyond individual belief. This is about upholding the rights, voices, and concerns of your constituents  of which I am one.

As my elected representative, I am asking you not to dismiss this based on personal conviction, but to act in your public duty to advocate for justice, fairness, and accountability.

Whether or not you personally agree with reforming IPP, the facts are clear: lives are being lost, families are being broken, and the system is failing. The voices of people affected by IPP deserve to be heard in Parliament  and I am asking you to be that voice.

I would be grateful for confirmation of what steps you are willing to take.

Your Sincerely

Name ......

Sign...........

I  am a constituent. 



 Template Letter from a Serving Prisoner (Adaptable) 


(Your Full Name)
(Prison Number)
(Prison Name and Address)
(Date)(MP’s Name)
House of Commons

London SW1A 0AA

Dear (MP’s Name),

I am writing to you as one of your constituents currently serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence. I hope you will take a moment to read my letter and consider the reality faced by those of us caught in this broken system.

I have already served well beyond my original tariff, and yet I remain detained indefinitely, not for new crimes but because of the IPP sentence’s harsh and indefinite nature. The uncertainty and constant risk of recall have taken a devastating toll on my mental health and hope for the future. Every day feels like a battle to survive in a system that does not seem to want to help me rehabilitate or reintegrate.

The government treats IPP prisoners as statistics or political tools rather than human beings capable of change. Over 100 prisoners have died under IPP sentences, many by suicide a tragedy that haunts us all.

If you or other MPs do not personally believe in the IPP system or its reform, I ask you to remember that representing your constituents means standing up for those in dire straits  even when it is difficult or unpopular. This is not about political belief; it is about justice and humanity for people trapped in a system that continues to fail us.

I urge you, as my representative, to raise this issue urgently with the Secretary of State for Justice and in Parliament. I ask you to push for a full review and resentencing of IPP prisoners to end this injustice and offer a fair chance of release and rehabilitation.

I respectfully urge you to act on this matter. Specifically, I ask you to on behalf

  • Raise this matter directly with the Secretary of State for Justice

  • Submit a Written Parliamentary Question or speak on the issue during relevant debates

  • Support or initiate a full review of all existing IPP sentences, with a pathway to proper resentencing and release

  • Write to the Secretary of State for Justice on your behalf

  • Submit Written Questions in Parliament

  • Request a debate or speak during relevant debates

  • Work with the Justice Committee or APPGs (All-Party Parliamentary Groups)

  • Push for urgent reform and hold the government to account

You are in a position of authority and responsibility  and your action could help save lives. Please do not treat this simply as a logged concern. I am asking you, as my representative, to take this further in Parliament.

I appreciate the many demands on your time and responsibilities, but please remember that behind these sentences are lives waiting for justice. Your voice could make a real difference.

Thank you for your attention.

(Your Full Name)
(Your Full Name)

I  am a constituent. 

(Prison Number)
(Prison Name and Address)
[Date]

Follow-up template letter if the MP does not reply. This follow-up captures the imates frustration and reminds the MP of their duty.

If you’re a constituent  for example Luton (your home address is in Luton), your official MP is the one who represents your home constituency so you write to your Luton MP, even if you’re currently in prison in Birmingham or anywhere else,  explain the situation  why you have a different  different address ,different city. if say imprisoned in Manchester Your representation is tied to where you  last lived), not where you are physically detained.



(MP’s Name)
House of Commons

London SW1A 0AA

Dear (MP’s Name),

I am writing as one of your constituents currently serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence. I hope you will consider my situation and the injustice faced by many caught in this system.

I have served well beyond my original tariff and remain detained indefinitely, often for minor breaches or perceived risks, not new crimes. This has taken a heavy toll on my mental health and my hope for a future outside prison walls.

If you or others do not personally support IPP reform, please remember that your role as an MP is to represent and stand up for all your constituents — including those who are vulnerable and trapped in unjust circumstances.

I respectfully ask you to raise this issue with the Secretary of State for Justice and in Parliament, to push for a full review and proper resentencing of IPP prisoners.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Yours sincerely,
(Your Full Name)

I  am a constituent. 

Your address

(Your Prison number)

.......................................................................................................................................


When writing to His Majesty The King, especially for formal  request for mercy or royal pardon (even symbolic), the tone must be respectful, .The actual power to pardon is exercised on the advice of government ministers (especially the Secretary of State for Justice), people still write to the Sovereign to make moral appeals, symbolic requests, or to ask for royal attention on matters of national concern. Below is a formal letter to the King concerning the IPP prisoners’ campaign and a plea for intervention or royal mercy.





His Majesty The King
Buckingham Palace
London
SW1A 1AA

(Date)A Humble Petition for Mercy and Attention to the Crisis of IPP Sentencing

Your Majesty,

I write to you with the deepest respect, humility, and desperation, as a concerned citizen and on behalf of those still suffering under the cruel and inhumane burden of the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence  a policy that continues to claim lives, despite having been abolished more than a decade ago.

Thousands of individuals, many of whom committed minor offences, remain trapped in prison under indeterminate sentences that offer no clear path to release. Some have served more than 15 years for offences that originally carried tariffs of two years or less. Many suffer from severe mental health deterioration; over one hundred deaths have occurred, including suicides, in a system that has stripped people of hope, dignity, and any sense of justice.

While I understand that the exercise of royal pardon is a constitutional formality subject to ministerial advice, I write to Your Majesty not only in hope of compassion, but as a moral appeal to the conscience of the nation. Your Majesty has long stood as a symbol of continuity, duty, and humanity  and it is in that spirit I ask you to acknowledge the plight of IPP prisoners, many of whom are among the most forgotten and voiceless in our society.

This is a stain on our justice system that cannot be justified by public protection alone. It is prolonged punishment without end. Families are suffering, lives are being lost, and yet still there is delay, denial, and silence.

Your Majesty, I humbly ask you to use your position  symbolically or practically to urge reflection, reform, and above all, mercy.History will remember how long this injustice was allowed to continue. I pray that your voice might help hasten its end.

History will remember how long this injustice was allowed to continue. I pray that your voice might help hasten its end.

I have included a few links below which offer further insight into the IPP sentence, its human impact, and the ongoing campaign to bring this national scandal to a close: 

With the highest respect and hope,

Your humble and obedient servant,
(Your Full Name)
(Your Address – 
(Your Email – optional)




Template letter to His Holiness Pope Francis, appealing for compassion and attention to the ongoing suffering of IPP prisoners. The tone is respectful, for leader of the Catholic Church. 

The address the church of England: The Most Reverend Justin WelbyArchbishop of CanterburyLambeth PalaceLondon SE1 7JU (Date) you could start with letter with : Your Grace,.....

.Please feel free to adapt this letter to reflect your own experiences or views. Everyone’s story matters  and the more voices, the stronger our call for justice. Try to keep your message focused and heartfelt. Avoid unnecessary detail or repetition, and speak plainly. The most powerful letters are often the simplest and most sincere.



His Holiness Pope Leo XIV
Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City
(Date)

A Humble Appeal for Compassion and Justice for IPP Prisoners in the United Kingdom

Your Holiness,

I write to Your Holiness with the deepest respect and humility, as a concerned member of the public and as one who believes in the sanctity, dignity, and redemptive potential of every human soul  especially those who are forgotten by society.

I wish to draw Your Holiness's attention to a grave and ongoing injustice in the United Kingdom: the continued incarceration of individuals under the now-abolished Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence.

This policy, introduced in 2005 and officially abolished in 2012, has left more than 2,800 people trapped in prison with no fixed release date. Many of these individuals were originally sentenced to short minimum terms  sometimes as little as 12 months  but remain incarcerated 10, 15, even 20 years later, not for new crimes, but for perceived “risk” or administrative recall. Some have never been released at all.

The psychological torment this system causes is profound. Many of those still held are among society’s most vulnerable living with learning difficulties, neurodivergence, trauma, and severe mental illness. Over 100 individuals have died while serving IPP sentences, many by suicide. These are not just statistics. These are lives lost to hopelessness and despair, families shattered, and communities scarred.

Although the sentence has been condemned by the European Court of Human Rights, by UN experts, and by cross-party parliamentary committees, meaningful reform has been painfully slow. Political fear has outweighed mercy. The result is a form of indefinite punishment that serves neither public protection nor justice.

Your Holiness, I understand that the exercise of justice in each country is complex and that the Holy See does not intervene in secular legal processes. However, I humbly ask you to consider lending your moral voice and prayers to the many men and women still suffering under this unjust regime. A single word of compassion from Your Holiness could reignite public conscience, encourage leaders to act, and offer dignity to those who feel utterly forgotten.

Your lifelong advocacy for the poor, the excluded, and the imprisoned inspires hope in many. You have shown us again and again that no one is beyond God’s mercy. I ask, with all sincerity, that you consider acknowledging this suffering and urging those in positions of power to seek mercy and justice for the IPP prisoners.

I have included several links below which offer further context and testimony about the IPP sentence and its devastating impact: May your voice continue to uplift the downtrodden and remind us that no one is beyond redemption



 Your faithful servant 


(Your Full Name)

(Your Address )

...........................................................................................................................................


30 jun e 2025 . How can prisoners trapped on endless sentences persuade the Parole Board that they are safe to release? A psychologist offers advice.

The Supreme Court justice Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood once opined that the IPP (Imprisonment for Public Protection) sentence was “the greatest stain on the criminal justice system”.  However, whilst the legislation was removed in 2012, the consequences live on, and concern continues to increase, particularly regarding the number of recalls.

Ministry of Justice figures show that at the end of December 2024, there were 1,569 individuals in prison having been recalled on IPP sentences. I wonder how long it will be before this figure is twice the number of never-released IPP prisoners?

Alarmingly, between January and September 2024, 471 individuals were recalled, and in the same period, 451 individuals who had been recalled were re-released. Why probation has become so risk adverse is poorly understood, and it will be important to try and find out from the Parole Board how many of those recalls were judged as ‘unfair’ by them. 

However, my greater concern is the 1,035 IPP prisoners who have never been released at all, despite all of them being post-tariff. Why not release? What has gone wrong?

Possible answers are as follows:

a. I think that the most obvious reason is that IPP individuals still in prison, without having been released even once, have been tried out in open conditions, perhaps even more than once, and been returned to the closed estate. The reasons for this will be varied, but undoubtedly include substance misuse, and perhaps less-than-perfect compliance with external rules and regulations, i.e. expectations regarding self-management.

If that is the case, and you yourself are one of the 1,035, then my advice is that when you next appear in front of the Parole Board, you accept at least a significant share of personal responsibility for triggering a recall to closed. Then have a meaningful plan of how it is going to work out better next time around. And explain that plan clearly!

Unfortunately, the chances of a parole panel simply releasing you without you having to prove yourself in open conditions in this context are relatively small, and I advise you to think about going to open again first, and making it work for you this time.

b. For those who have never been tried in open, you also need to think long and hard about the Parole Board’s reasons as to why they did not make a recommendation on the last occasion. Then do what you can, or must, to indicate to them, next time around, that you are no longer exactly the same person. Therefore, you can learn from carefully and slowly reading the Board’s decision letter, and are quite prepared, in a variety of ways, to go to a location where there is much less supervision, and some contact with the general public. And be a good man! Learn to be your own policeman!

Of course, it is certainly possible that you are still, and regularly, demonstrating a variety of offence-paralleling behaviours. If that is the case, I suggest that you seek successful intervention to basically bring that to a juddering and immediate halt.

c. A third possibility is that you have had a recommendation for open but it was turned down by the Secretary of State. Recent figures, published by Inside Time in January 2025, show that the new Government has, in my opinion, a poor acceptance rate, given that the Ministry of Justice approved 64 cases, but blocked 54, i.e. an approval rate of only 54 per cent. If you are in this unfortunate boat, you should discuss this very carefully indeed with your legal advisor.

d. As many of you will know, I have very strong feelings regarding the effectiveness of psychological treatment within the prison estate. If, heaven forbid, you are on some form of waiting list for a ‘course’, do all that you can to make sure that you have the outcome information, i.e. evidence, regarding whether and when that course reduces risk in the community.

e. All of the well-known lawyers will know how to best present your case, and therefore please listen to them carefully, and undertake any homework exercises that they may assign.

f. As far as providers of independent assessments are concerned, I have to advise you to pick carefully, since some are better informed than others. Do seek your own copy of any information, or research, they refer to.

If they ask you to compare “old me” with “new me”, give this some time too.

g. There are three places not to be if you are an IPP prisoner applying for progression. They are the Close Supervision Centre, Segregation, or somewhere in dispersal on Category A.  All of these locations and issues will need to be carefully addressed by your legal team, and very much so by any independent assessment. If you are unfortunately in one of those locations, you need to think long and hard about how you got there and, of course, why.

However, never forget the Parole Board’s test, which is: “Is it necessary for the protection of the public from serious harm that you are detained?” This assessment is about how you will behave in the community, and this is not necessarily wholly and simply driven by your behaviour within the prison estate. 

Indeed, it may be possible for you to argue that the reason you are not in perhaps a standard category C location is to do with how the prison service itself is under stress through overcrowding, underfunding, or whatever, and your adverse location is simply an example of how you have been coping with that, albeit poorly.

I hope for the 1,035 that this is helpful.  If I do get the opportunity to meet any of you, I very much look forward to that experience.

Dr Peter S Pratt is a consultant clinical and forensic psychologist


.......................................................................................................................................................................

What Gauke’s reforms might mean for you

30 june 2025. An Independent Sentencing Review led by former justice secretary David Gauke published its findings in May – and the Government has said it will adopt most of the recommendations. But the proposals raise questions for people in prison. 

There is no doubt that the intention behind the Gauke review is to relieve the pressure on our overcrowded prisons.  

Two significant measures designed to achieve this are a proposal to allow a significant number of people the chance to ‘earn’ release earlier than is currently possible, and a proposal to remove Parole Board oversight of recalls for people on standard determinate sentences (SDS).

These measures have been welcomed by some as “radical” and criticised by shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick as a “get out of jail free card for dangerous criminals”.

But a closer look at the proposed changes, along with the initial response by Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood as to what she will and will not implement, raises a number of concerns:

• In some cases release could be later

• There will still be a risk of people spending short and ineffective periods in prison

• The chance to ‘earn’ early release could disadvantage people from minoritised backgrounds or with health difficulties

• The overriding worry is that release dates will become a lot less certain for everyone.

Later release in some cases?

Despite concerns about increased early release, for some people, the earliest opportunity for release will be later, not earlier.  

At the moment, some people can get Home Detention Curfew (HDC) from the 20 per cent mark. Under the new scheme, nobody will be released before they have served 33 per cent of their sentence in custody. This is because the Review proposes to abolish HDC – even though it now covers more people for a longer period than it ever has before. At present there is a presumption that those eligible for HDC will be released. Gauke’s Review states the “expectation” that “most” people on SDS would be released early.  At a recent meeting in Parliament, the Prisons Minister said people should expect to be released at one third if they behave well. But it is clear that “earning” release is at the heart of the scheme.

Under the new scheme, it is unclear how or whether automatic release points will operate. It is most likely that they will remain in principle but will be later in many instances (moving from 40 per cent to 50 per cent). However, the Justice Secretary has said she will not place an “upper limit” on release dates, so that people who behave “excessively badly” will not be released at a fixed point before the end of their sentence. 

There is no proposal in Gauke’s Review to maintain the automatic release point of 40 per cent introduced by SDS40: all references in the Review to what appears to be the equivalent to the current automatic release points are to the halfway point for ordinary SDS and two-thirds for the cohort of serious sexual and violent offences.

How will ‘earned’ release be decided fairly?

The chance to ‘earn’ early release sounds great.  But it needs to be handled fairly, and everyone needs to have a chance to demonstrate they meet the test.

But it is already clear that not everyone on determinate sentences will get the chance to earn early release. The Justice Secretary has already said she will exclude anyone on an extended sentence or serving a sentence for a terrorism offence.

The Review proposes that the criteria should change over time.  To start with, it suggests that release should be earned through ‘compliance’. It says this should include, but not be limited to, compliance with prison rules plus the expectation of engaging in purposeful activity, work, education and treatment where available. The Review is clear that violations/offences against discipline will result in the release point being pushed back. This means that things like prison disciplinary measures, or problems with attending work or education, will have an added consequence: they may prevent early release. Legal aid has not been available for treatment and conditions, sentence planning, or governor adjudications for many years on the basis that they do not have a direct impact on liberty. With the new system, they will impact on liberty. But there is nothing in the review about better access to legal support for people in prison for these things.

The Review anticipates that the goalposts will move and that as prison capacity eases and fuller regimes become possible, “compliance requirements for earned release should become more demanding”. We have seen how problems in accessing courses have affected people on IPP sentences and how, even though the number of children in prison has reduced by 80 per cent in the past decade, their conditions and opportunities to do meaningful work have not increased significantly.

It is not clear who will be making these decisions and how good behaviour will be measured. Will it be up to officers on the wing, or probation officers in OMU? Will it be possible to appeal negative decisions or apply again after a period of improved behaviour?

An end of short stays in prison?

Although Gauke says short stays in prison are disruptive and inefficient, there will still be lots of people spending less than 12 months in prison. This is because everyone on a standard determinate sentence will no longer be liable to Parole Board oversight when recalled. Instead, recalls will be for a fixed term of 56 days, with some flexibility for it to be shorter or longer (although it is not clear how that will work). Many will be relieved to know that recalls without any definite end point before the sentence end date will no longer be possible for fixed-term prisoners. But it is unclear why 56 days (around two months) is considered appropriate, and how those recalled by probation will be able to challenge an unjust recall.

With opportunity comes uncertainty

At present, around half of people in prison do not have an absolutely certain release date because they are on remand, recalled, or serving extended or indeterminate sentences. If the proposals in the Review are implemented as currently envisaged, almost nobody in prison will have an absolutely certain initial release date.   

There is a real risk that, unless measures are put in place to ensure that the new system will operate fairly and people in prison are afforded appropriate opportunities to meaningfully challenge unfair decisions in prison that may affect release, then the well-intended changes will backfire.

Remember, these changes will all require a change in law. The detail of the proposals is still to be ironed out, and nothing is expected to change this year. This means that there is time to raise concerns and make the case for steps to be taken to ensure that the plans are implemented in a fair and progressive way.

Dr Laura Janes is a consultant solicitor and chair of the Association of Prison Lawyers

The Prison Reform Trust have produced an information sheet about the Senten-cing Review which you can request through their contact details on page 34

.................................................................................................................................................................

A Lawyer Writes

Call to free IPP inmates

JUNE 24 2025. Prisoners should all be released within two years, says former chief justice.

All IPP prisoners should be “released within a two-year window”, a working group led by a former lord chief justice has recommended. In a report published yesterday by the Howard League for Penal Reform, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd says the proposals “provide a route to ending this grave injustice while protecting the public”.

More than 2,600 inmates who were sentenced to imprisonment for public protection before the penalty was abolished in 2012 were still in prison at the end of last year. Among them were more than 1,000 who had served the minimum term set by the court — sometimes several times over — but had never been released.

At present, the Parole Board must decide whether an IPP prisoner’s continued detention is necessary for the protection of the public. The working group proposes that the Parole Board should be asked set a date within a two-year window when the offender will be released. The board would also decide how to achieve that safely.

“We recognise the concern that this might lead to setting a date to release people who may still considered a risk to the public,” the report accepts. So it lists a number of safeguards:

  • Setting a date up to two years ahead in the most serious cases would provide a long period of time to enable professionals and statutory agencies to work together to plan and help the IPP prisoner prepare for a safe release.

  • Those individuals who present the greatest concerns about risk could be prioritised to receive more support while being prepared for release and managed safely in the community.

  • Decisions could be reviewed or set aside in certain circumstances.

  • The secretary of state can now ask the Parole Board to set aside a decision if certain conditions are met.

The review makes other recommendations dealing with recalls, rehabilitation. aftercare, reviews and appeals.

On the two-year release proposal, the working party addresses its conclusions to the public at large.

We know that the remaining cohort of people serving IPP sentences includes some people who have committed very serious offences. These include sexual offences, which have occasioned serious harm to victims. These people have now been punished for far longer than would have been the case if they had been sentenced after the abolition of the IPP sentence and received an extended sentence.

While we appreciate public concern at the nature of this offending, contrary to common perception this group of prisoners have among the lowest rates of reoffending of anyone leaving prison.

Every day, people who have committed serious crimes are released from prison at their custody end dates. People serving IPP sentences who have more than served their time for these same serious offences also must be released. Our proposals would see this achieved in the safest way possible for the public.

The working party is well aware that successive governments have not been willing to risk releasing prisoners who are thought to remain dangerous. But it says that if nothing is done there is a “real risk that many will languish in prison until they die”.




..................................................................................................................


June 24 2025




PAS on X: "Six recommendations have been put forward to end the #detention of people on #IPP sentences – including that the Parole Board give IPP #prisoners a certain #releasedate - within a two-year window - and set out the required action to achieve it safely." / X


PAS
@PrisonersAdvice
Six recommendations have been put forward to end the #detention of people on #IPP sentences – including that the Parole Board give IPP #prisoners a certain #releasedate - within a two-year window - and set out the required action to achieve it safely.
Quote
The Howard League
@TheHowardLeague
“Although 12 years have passed since the IPP sentence was abolished, it continues to cause despair to those serving it, and to their family and friends. We must now deliver justice for those who were left behind in 2012." howardleague.org/news/expert-wo
Image
736
Views
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)