§ Mr. MichaelTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what options are available to review the sentences of juveniles sentenced to detention during Her Majesty's pleasure if there is exceptional progress before the expiry of the tariff; how many cases have been reviewed in each year since 1983; and in how many cases in each year since 1983 early release has been authorised. [7927]
§ Miss WiddecombeAs the then Home Secretary announced on 30 November 1983, interim review procedures ensure that consideration can be given to any special circumstances or exceptional progress which might justify changing the Parole Board review date. Advancement of review dates under this policy, which applies equally to life sentenced prisoners and those detained during Her Majesty's pleasure or sentenced to custody for life, is exceptional. We have identified only four prisoners whose review dates have been advanced under this policy, none of whom was detained during Her Majesty's pleasure.
All life-sentenced prisoners, including those detained during Her Majesty's pleasure, are now given details of their tariff and may make representations about it at any time. All representations are carefully considered and a response is given.
Further statistical information is not available in the form requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
§ Mr. MichaelTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions in each year since 1983 he has(a) increased, (b) decreased and (c) upheld the judicial recommendation on tariff for juveniles sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's pleasure. [7942]
§ Miss WiddecombeThe information is not readily available for the period requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, since the judgment in the House of Lords in 1993 in Doody, which requires the disclosure of tariff information and the consideration of representations, 22 persons convicted of murder, and sentenced to be detained during Her136W Majesty's pleasure, have had a tariff set for the first time. Of these 22 tariffs: 20 are in line with the recommendation of the trial judge or of the Lord Chief Justice; and two are higher than the recommendations of both the trial judge and the Lord Chief Justice.
Similarly, 14 such persons whose tariffs had been set before the Doody judgment, have since had a fresh tariff set after submitting representations. Of these 14 fresh tariffs, three are lower than the first tariff. Two of these three lower tariffs are higher than, and one is in line with, the judicial recommendations. The remaining 11 new tariffs are the same as the original tariffs. In six of these 11 cases, the tariff has been set and has remained higher than the recommendations of both the trial judge and the Lord Chief Justice.