This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/jul/09/whole-life-sentences-david-cameron-human-rights
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Tory ministers condemn ECHR ruling on whole-life prison sentences | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| Tory cabinet ministers have condemned the European court of human rights for its ruling on the need for a right to review whole-life prison sentences, with the prime minister, justice secretary and home secretary all voicing their "profound disagreement". | |
| Chris Grayling, the justice secretary, claimed it would leave the original authors of the European convention on human rights "turning in their graves" and said it simply reinforced his determination to curtail the role of the Strasbourg court. | |
| "The British public will find this ruling intensely frustrating and hard to understand," he said. | |
| Theresa May, the home secretary, said she dismayed by the decision but also surprised as it went against several rulings last year by the same court which upheld the extradition of several suspects to face life terms without the possibility of parole. | |
| They found strong support from the former Labour home secretary David Blunkett, who defended his original 2003 decision to scrap the right to a review after 25 years for life sentenced prisoners, saying he had made it "to ensure that life means life" in the most heinous cases. | |
| Backbench Tory MPs were less measured, with Dominic Raab claiming it as evidence of Strasbourg's "warped moral compass", a gross distortion of the human rights convention and toxic for the reputation of human rights with the public. | |
| Downing Street slammed the ruling. The prime minister's spokesman said David Cameron would not rule out abandoning the ECHR if he won the next general election. | |
| The spokesman said: "[The prime minister] is very very, very very disappointed. He profoundly disagrees with the court's ruling. He is a strong supporter of whole-life tariffs." | The spokesman said: "[The prime minister] is very very, very very disappointed. He profoundly disagrees with the court's ruling. He is a strong supporter of whole-life tariffs." |
| Asked about the ruling that tariffs without a review amount to a breach of human rights, the spokesman said: "We profoundly disagree. [The prime minister] is a strong supporter of judges – of course – having the ability to award whole-life tariffs. Sentencing obviously is a matter for the judges. But the PM believes that should be available in certain cases." | Asked about the ruling that tariffs without a review amount to a breach of human rights, the spokesman said: "We profoundly disagree. [The prime minister] is a strong supporter of judges – of course – having the ability to award whole-life tariffs. Sentencing obviously is a matter for the judges. But the PM believes that should be available in certain cases." |
| The spokesman said that nothing would be off the table – in reforming Britain's relationship with the ECHR – when the Conservative party draws up its manifesto for the next general election. | The spokesman said that nothing would be off the table – in reforming Britain's relationship with the ECHR – when the Conservative party draws up its manifesto for the next general election. |
| "I would simply point you back to his words at the weekend – with regard to the ECHR and the next Conservative manifesto – where he said nothing was off the table." | "I would simply point you back to his words at the weekend – with regard to the ECHR and the next Conservative manifesto – where he said nothing was off the table." |
| Downing Street conceded that Britain could not appeal against the decision of the grand chamber of the ECHR. "The next step is the government, through the Ministry of Justice, has six months to consider its response. We will consider the detail of that judgment." | Downing Street conceded that Britain could not appeal against the decision of the grand chamber of the ECHR. "The next step is the government, through the Ministry of Justice, has six months to consider its response. We will consider the detail of that judgment." |
| But Juliet Lyon of the Prison Reform Trust said restoring the principle of review of "whole life" sentences would help restore balance to a penal system distorted by the 2003 Criminal Justice Act: | |
| "Rehabilitation is a purpose of sentencing alongside punishment. Re-instating the possibility of review, albeit with little prospect of release, puts a degree of hope into the lives of those very few people serving whole life tariffs and affirms prison staff in their work to enable prisoners to progress even the longest of sentences," said Lyon. | |
| "In fairness, it might be better if the Prime Minister were a strong supporter of rehabilitation and redemption rather than the eternal punishment and damnation that is a whole life tariff with no prospect of review." |