IPP was first brought into force from 4 April 2005. The final abolition took effect for all offenders convicted after 3 December 2012.
In September 2025 about 2422 individuals were
The direct action group was proscribed as a terrorist organisation in July 2025 but its co-founder has been fighting to have the ban overturned amid a mass civil disobedience campaign.
In February, the high court ruled that the ban was disproportionate and unlawful but its decision was overturned by the court of appeal last month.
The case will be heard in the final quarter of this year.
The exact legal basis for the appeal has yet to be published. Two grounds of appeal were put forwards but the court has allowed the appeal on just one of the grounds.
Law and Lawyers: Proscription of Palestine Action is lawful - Court of Appeal
"the decision adopted by the Special Session of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) on 24 July 2026 to remove the Prosecutor from office, having found that he has committed serious misconduct and serious breach of duty, as reflected in the ASP’s press release on the same day ...
The Deputy Prosecutors will continue to provide the leadership, management and direction of the Office of the Prosecutor ....."
The opinion was requested on 29 March 2023 by the United Nations General Assembly - (Resolution 77/276).
The Resolution requested opinion on two questions
(a) What are the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for States and for present and future generations?
(b) What are the legal consequences
It was noted that -
' ... the court made some comments about the administration of justice more generally. It expressed its concern about the inaccurate reporting and misinformed and inappropriate commentary by members of Parliament, the media and elsewhere that preceded this review and whilst legal proceedings were still ongoing.
The court was particularly critical of the conduct of the Crown Prosecution Service, which published a formal press release following the sentencing hearing which they knew, or should have known, was neither a fair nor accurate representation of the factual basis for sentence. It was this inaccurate press release that appeared to be the root of the misconceptions that followed, in particular the misconception that the offending involved a knife-point rape and that C2 had been forced to give up her phone to avoid tracking. This portrayed the offending as even more serious than it already was. It took almost three weeks for the Crown Prosecution Service to correct the inaccuracies.
Whether
The basic limits are set out section 41 to 43 of PACE - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 section 41, section 42, section 43. The maximum time is 96 hours and (usually) runs from the time of arrest.
When an individual is arrested under under terrorism legislation (e.g. Terrorism Act 2000 section 41) it becomes possible for detention to extend up to 14 days.
Ann Widdecombe:
On 9 July the former Member of Parliament
Back in 2020, this blog looked at the case - Law and Lawyers: Looking back - Ruth Ellis.
The case is a reminder of the rigour of the common law of murder as it was back in 1955..
The grant of a pardon is an exercise of the Royal Prerogative of Mercy - The royal prerogative of mercy | Feature | Law Gazette
The claimants alleged misuse of private information and, in one case, breach of confidence arising from unlawful information gathering (UIG).
Misuse of private information is a tort (civil wrong) and is discussed in an article
Mr Farage was under investigation by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards over financial matters.
How an MP "resigns" is described in this previous post - Law and Lawyers: MP appointed to the "Chiltern Hundreds" - (Stoke, Desborough and Burnham).
What happens to the investigation is covered by the "Procedural Protocol"
Mohindru was called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2004 and was appointed KC ("took silk") in 2020.
Mohindru appealed to the High Court against an order of a disciplinary tribunal of the Bar Standards Board (BSB) that he be disbarred. The BSB decision was in October 2025 and the conduct in question took place over a short period of time in February 2013.
The High Court judgment is at - Mohindru v The Bar Standards Board [2026] EWHC 1604 (Admin) (30 June 2026).
The details of the conduct
Shabir Ahmed, 73, who was known as 'Daddy' by his victims, was jailed for 22 years in August 2012 for a raft of child sexual offences including rape.
This week his victims were told he would be released on licence and despite earlier promises, could not be deported due to a 55-year-old law.
But Sir Keir Starmer has now asked the home secretary to review the case amid calls for the law to be changed to allow him to removed from the country.'
Rochdale grooming gang leader released from prison - BBC News
All right-thinking people
A Previous post looked at the the sentencing of young offenders for very serious offences - Law and Lawyers: Youth Justice and sentencing for very serious offences.
The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) has given judgment in X, Y and Z - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary [2026] EWCA Crim (845) - Lady Carr LCJ, Edis LJ, Norton J.
The case concerned three offenders, X, Y and Z who were convicted (after a 29 day trial in the Crown Court) of rape and other sexual offending committed at Fordingbridge, Hampshire against two separate complainants, C1 and C2 on two separate occasions.
The first incident was on 26 November 2024 (involving all three offenders) and the second incident on 17 January 2025 (involving X and Y only).
Each
1) Sentencing for murder:
The Secretary of State for Justice (David Lammy MP) has announced his intention to alter sentencing for murder ….
Justice for victims as domestic killers to face longer behind bars - GOV.UK
‘Heinous offenders who kill their partner, or ex, could face an additional 10 years in prison, under a change announced today by the Deputy Prime Minister.
About the Inquiry – The Statutory Independent Inquiry into Grooming Gangs
Independent Inquiry into Grooming Gangs - GOV.UK (9 December 2025)
Obiter J - who then authored this blog - was personally opposed to Brexit because he thought that it severely limited life opportunities for the young. In his extensive "blogging" on the topic, he avoided seeking to persuade anyone either way. His choice was to present factual information, look at the twists and turns of the campaign, and comment on the notable legal cases that arose along the way.
ObiterJ's numerous posts about Brexit remain on this blog - please see
Law and Lawyers: Brexit Library - Key materials
As we know, the referendum result was close (overall 52% to 48%) with Scotland and Northern Ireland - two key parts of the UK - voting Remain.
The background to this matter is set out in an earlier post - Law and Lawyers: In the matter of contempt proceedings against Rajiv Menon KC - Court of Appeal (Civil Division) [2026] EWCA Civ 573
Garden Court Statement: Rajiv Menon KC | Garden Court Chambers
Law and Lawyers: R v Charlotte Head and others / Criminal Damage at Elbit's Bristol premises in 2024
Update 1 July 2026:
In the matter of contempt proceedings against Rajiv Menon KC - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
The article states - 'A Brighton woman, CK, was charged with a single offence under s. 127(2)(c) and (3) of the Communications Act 2003, for emails she sent on 10 and 11 June 2025 to senior politicians. The charge concerned emails sent by CK to the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, and her local MP Peter Kyle MP, expressing concerns about the conflict in Gaza.'
The remarks and a press summary may be read at R -v- Charlotte Head and others - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. There is also a judgment addressing the question of whether the defendants’ offence of criminal damage had a “terrorist connection.” The judge held that the criminal damage did have such a connection.
As explained in a previous post, the finding that there was a terrorist connection entitled the judge to increase the sentences - Previous post on section 69 of the Sentencing Act 2020.
The defendants were Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, Fatema Zainab Rajwani. Each of them was convicted by a jury of an offence of criminal damage. Samuel Corner, was also convicted of an offence of inflicting grievous bodily harm - (serious spinal injury to a Police Officer).
The sentences were -
The judgment and a Press Summary may be read at - Home Secretary -v- Huda Ammori - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
The Court concluded - ' The proscription of an organisation like Palestine Action is highly controversial. But it is a fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism. It is not a direct action civil disobedience protest group operating transparently in the open. It is a covert organisation which avoids the detection and prosecution of those using violence to destroy property and cause injury. The Home Secretary had the institutional competence and the democratic accountability to make the decision. The Proscription Decision was consistent with the Home Secretary’s Proscription Policy and was proportionate. It was not unlawful.'
Previous post (14 February 2026) noting the High Court's judgment - Law and Lawyers: Palestine Action ~ judicial review. The quashing order made by the High Court is set aside.
Section 21 of the Act created a new offence of endangering another during a sea crossing to the United Kingdom. In fact, section 21 amended section 24 of the Immigration Act 1971 so it is to that Act that we now look for the detail of the offence. The new offence was brought into force on 5 January 2026.
In the Crown Court at Canterbury, two men are to be sentenced for the offence - Tajik Mohammad (an Afghan aged 32) and Alnour Mohamed Ali (a Sudanese age 27). They both
Previous post 31 May - Law and Lawyers: Youth Justice and sentencing for very serious offences
The Prime Minister said that he was "appalled" at the sentences - Starmer 'appalled' by case of boys spared jail after raping teenage girls - BBC News. Several other politicians could not resist the lure of Twitter (X) - The Independent ()22 May). There was no
There is no ‘grace period’ for implementation of the judgment and so the approach in Cheshire West must not be followed with immediate effect. The many guidance documents which refer to it need to be read in that light.
Links:
R -v- Vickrum Singh Digwa - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
This case has proved to be particularly controversial because of Police conduct at the scene of the murder.
On 3 December 2025, Digwa murdered Henry Nowak (aged 18). Digwa was aged 22 at the time.
The sentence was one of Life Imprisonment. A minimum term of 20 years and 190 days was set before there can be any consideration of release.
Release is far from automatic and is a matter for the Parole Board and Secretary of State.
It should be noted that the minimum term for murder is set by Act of Parliament and not by sentencing council guidelines. The judge applied Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Act 2020. I
The government, in a written statement to Parliament, has said -
'The Government is pleased to support a judiciary-led initiative to modernise the structure of the High Court through the establishment of a new Business and Property Division. This historic modernisation will ensure the UK remains a global hub for corporate litigation.
It will bring together the current Business and Property Courts into a single division, which will replace the Chancery Division.
The Business and Property Courts are
A Treaty was concluded between the UK and Rwanda which may be seen at Agreement between UK and Rwanda for the provision of an asylum partnership to strengthen international commitments on the protection of refugees and migrants (publishing.service.gov.uk).
The Agreement contained provision (Article 22) to refer disputes to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, a body created in 1899 and which sits at The Hague. .
Mohammed Fahir Amaaz was charged with section 47 Actual Bodily Harm x 2, assault against an emergency worker, and common assault (against a member of the public).
Muhammed Amaad was charged with section 47 Actual Bodily Harm.
A trial was held at the Crown Court in Liverpool
The report of the case is at Riley, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 158 (04 February 2026)
The respondent (R) was 18 years of age when, in June 2023, he committed an offence of assault by penetration, contrary to section 2(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The maximum sentence available is life imprisonment. The victim ("C") of the assault was aged 14 at the time of the offence.
On 5 September 2025, in the Crown Court
Court of appeal to review rape sentences of three teenage boys | UK criminal justice | The Guardian (26 May 2026)
The Guardian report provides more detail about the cases. The report states:
The sentences relate to the rape of two girls in separate incidents in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, in November 2024 and January last year.
The reports states - 'Two girls, then aged 15 and 14, were raped in separate incidents in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, in November 2024 and January 2025, by two 14-year-olds. Another boy, then 13, was also convicted for his involvement in the second attack. ..... At a sentencing hearing for the boys on Thursday, Judge Nicholas Rowland said he wanted to "avoid criminalising these children unnecessarily". Instead, the boys were given Youth Rehabilitation Orders (YROs).
The article also tells us that the Law Officers are considering
Mr Simons had agreed to vacate his seat as Member for Makerfield so that the present Mayor of Greater Manchester (Andy Burnham) could, if selected as a candidate by the Labour Party, stand for election at a by-election. The politics behind this are not the concern of this blog but the aim is to try to secure the Labour Party leadership for Burnham and he would then displace Sir Keir Starmer as Prime Minister.
The House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 section 4 provides that - ' ... the office of steward or bailiff of Her Majesty’s three Chiltern Hundreds of Stoke, Desborough and Burnham, or of the Manor of Northstead, shall be treated as included among the offices described in Part III of Schedule 1 to this Act.'
The effect is that the holder of one of those offices is disqualified for membership of the House of Commons.
As far as I know, there is no connection between Andy Burnham and the fact that one of the three Chiltern Hundreds is known as Burnham - see Chiltern Hundreds - Wikipedia.
The Declaration is referred to as the Chişinău Declaration following its adoption in the Moldovan capital. It signals a shared position among member states on how the Convention should be interpreted and applied, including by domestic courts and the European Court of Human Rights.
and see the UK government Press Release
Reforms to secure British borders to be agreed by Foreign Ministers in Moldova this week - GOV.UK
It is reported that section 69 of the Sentencing Act 2020 is to be applied to their sentencing.
Section 69 is headed "Terrorist Connection" and is within Part 4 of the 2020 Act (Exercising the court's discretion) Chapter 3 (Seriousness and Determining Sentence). Terrorist Connection is one of a number of aggravating factors set out in Chapter 3.
The original section 69:
The original section 69 came into force on 1 December 2020 and stated:
In December 2025, a trial was taking place in the Crown Court at Woolwich before Johnson J (“the trial judge”). Six defendants were charged with offences arising out of an incident on 6 August 2024 at a factory in Filton, Bristol, occupied and operated by Elbit Systems Ltd.
Rajiv Menon KC was leading counsel representing Charlotte Head, the first defendant named on the indictment.
There were rulings of law before and during the trial, including in relation to what is sometimes called jury equity; to the defence of lawful excuse to a count of criminal damage; and to the relevance and admissibility of certain evidence.
Following submissions as to the legal directions to be given to the jury, the trial judge gave a ruling on 22 December 2025 in which he said ...
The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 responded to the legacy of “The Troubles”, a period of conflict in Northern Ireland that began in the late 1960s and continued until the Belfast (or Good Friday) Agreement of 10 April 1998. More than 3,500 people were killed during the Troubles, with approximately 40,000 injured. Around 1,200 killings remain unsolved.
The 2023 Act created the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (“ICRIR”), whose functions include carrying out reviews of deaths and serious injuries caused by conduct forming part of the Troubles.
Inquisitorial reviews by the ICRIR have replaced police investigations, investigations by the Police Ombudsman, inquests and civil claims relating to Troubles-related conduct, and the 2023 Act has brought existing investigations, inquests and claims to an end.
The Act also introduced
The four convicted were Leona Kamio (30), Samuel Corner (23), Fatema Rajwani (21), and Charlotte Head (29). The jury returned unanimous verdicts.
Samuel Corner was acquitted of causing grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent (Offences against the Person Act 1861 section 18) for striking a police officer with a sledgehammer but he was convicted (by a majority of 11 to one) of the section 20 offence.
Two other defendants, Jordan Devlin (31), and Zoe Rogers (22), were acquitted of criminal damage.
During the trial, the
Almost a year ago, this blog published The "Rule of Law" - Notes for students in whjch it was noted that there is no precise definition of the term Rule of Law. The post pointed to various authoritative sources of information about that the Rule of Law, as a concept, ought to contain in modern times.
In November 2025, the House of Lords Constitution Committee published - Rule of law: holding the line between anarchy and tyranny - Committees - UK Parliament. This is the Committee's 13th Report of Session 2024-26.
Jonathan Sumption, the former Justice of the Supreme Court, in his book "The Challenges of Democracy and the Rule of Law" notes that there are rival approaches to the rule of law which are referred to as the 'thin' and 'thick' definitions.
