Helping the IPP stain disappear

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