The prisoner had been released on licence but then recalled. He complained that the procedure infringed his human rights. He had been convicted of manslaughter, and was seen to be a long term danger. The court awarded him compensation saying that the parole board had unduly delayed in informing him of the reasons for his recall, and in providing him with a copy of the dossier relating to the decision, but rejected other submissions. He now said that the section allowed imposition of an arbitrary decision of the executive, where it should be a judicial one.
Held: The appeal failed. The ‘appellant’s recall was justified in law by the link between the discretionary sentence of life imprisonment imposed following his conviction for manslaughter and his behaviour during the short period while he was living in the community on licence. This gave rise to realistic concerns for public safety. These considerations underpin the statutory scheme in section 32, which, no doubt with the decisions of the European Court in mind, was designed to protect the public from the risk of harm consistently with the entitlements provided for the appellant by article 5. Far from creating hesitation with the legitimacy of such processes, the jurisprudence of the European Court endorses them. ‘
Judges:
Sir Igor Judge, President, Scott LJ, Hallett LJ
Citations:
[2006] EWCA Civ 945, Times 12-Jul-2006
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 5, Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 32
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Hirst, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Admn 21-Jun-2005
Challenge to recall of lifer to prison after release on licence. . .
Cited – Weeks v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-1987
The applicant, aged 17, was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment in the interests of public safety, being considered by the trial judge on appeal to be dangerous.
Held: ‘The court agrees with the Commission and the . .
Cited – Waite v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Dec-2002
The claimant had been sentenced to be detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure when a youth. After release on licence, the Parole Board met and revoked that licence without an oral hearing, and in contravention of the rules. He did not dispute the facts . .
Cited – Stafford v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-2002
Grand Chamber – The appellant claimed damages for being held in prison beyond the term of his sentence. Having been released on licence from a life sentence for murder, he was re-sentenced for a cheque fraud. He was not released after the end of the . .
Cited – Regina (Noorkoiv) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 30-May-2002
The claimant was a prisoner. He became entitled to be considered for release on parole, but was not released because the Parole Board had not made a decision.
Held: The system for consideration of the release of discretionary and life . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Prisons, Human Rights
Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242993
