Sentencing Review ~ final report issued

The Sentencing Review led by former Lord Chancellor David Gauke (previous post 15 May 2025) issued a report at 6 am this morning - ahead of a statement in Parliament.

Independent Sentencing Review - Final Report and proposals for reform (pdf pages).

In february, the review issued an earlier report  - History and Trends in Sentencing (18 February 2025).

Annex A to the final report sets out the full terms of reference. 

As the Executive Summary notes -

"In the summer of 2024, capacity pressures brought the prison system dangerously close to collapse. The adult prison population, estimated to be over 87,000 as of April 2025,  currently exceeds the capacity the system is designed to accommodate and is projected to increase."

Subsequently, the executive summary notes - " ... the approach of the last few decades of sending more
people to prison and for longer is unsustainable. Part 1 of the Review’s report found that the huge cost to
government and the taxpayer has been exacerbated by more offenders receiving custodial sentences, and
custodial sentences becoming longer."

Part 1 of the report - History and Trends in Sentencing (18 February 2025).

I am wary of immediate reactions to reports but there are two issues which I believe are missed or, at least, not fully considered. 

One is the role of Parliament in setting maximum sentences. Often Bills seek to create new offences and specify what the maximum sentences are to be. Politicians are of course influenced by likely media reaction. Unfortunately, media statements such as " X walked free" when sentences of imprisonment are suspended influence the sentencing climate.

The other issue is the role of the Sentencing Council which must obviously set guidelines that are consonant with the maximum sentences set by Parliament. Given that courts are required to follow guidelines (Sentencing Act 2020 section 59) it is worth asking whether guidelines have themselves contributed to the extensive use of imprisonment.

One idea discussed in the report is the possibility of "Pharmaceutical Interventions" for some offenders - see Chapter 6. This is likely to prove highly controversial and, if adopted, may raise concerns under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The government's response to the Final Report is awaited.