Parole Board hints at clampdown on early release of serious crime prisoners

A CLAMPDOWN on early release for people convicted of serious offences is under consideration by the Parole Board.

In the board’s first annual report, published yesterday, chairman Gordon Holmes defended the judicial system on the remission of sentences for long-term prisoners, claiming it could not be considered as “excessively liberal”.

He said prisoners of good behaviour could only be entitled to remission of the balance of their sentence after serving three-quarters of the term.

Mr Holmes hinted that the board is likely to take an even tougher stance in future in relation to granting early release for people convicted of the more serious offences, such as murder.

“Contrary to what appears to be a widely held belief, the system of remission of sentences in this country cannot be described as being excessively liberal,” said Mr Holmes.

The chairman said the system in England and Wales was much more liberal as prisoners there could be eligible for remission after serving half their sentence.

Mr Holmes said he believed this explained why people had the impression that sentences for similar offences in Britain appeared longer than those imposed in Ireland.

“They are, in many cases, but their length is reflected by the fact that the remission system in the UK is more liberal or generous than it is here,” said Mr Holmes.

The primary function of the Parole Board, which was established in 2001, is to advise the Minister for Justice on the administration of sentences, including the granting of temporary release to prisoners. It can only review the cases of prisoners serving a prison sentence of eight years or more.

In his foreword to the report, Mr Holmes suggested it was hard to argue with the recent comments by Justice Minister Michael McDowell that persons convicted of murder, except in the most ordinary circumstances, should serve more than single digit sentences.

Mr Holmes said the board’s general attitude to such criminals was that they should serve at least 12 years of a life sentence before they are considered for early release. However, he said the board’s future recommendations should also respond to the fact that “human life in this country is cheaper than it was five or 10 years ago.”

“Persons who commit murder must realise that a long period of imprisonment awaits them. The board feels it must indicate that the sanctity of human life must be preserved and maintained,” said Mr Holmes. “If this means that persons committing murder can expect to serve longer sentences, so be it.”

The board criticised difficulties faced in rehabilitating and resettling some prisoners due to the unavailability of certain facilities, such as accommodation.

In the period July 2001 to December 2002, 157 prisoners out of 180 referrals (or 87%) accepted an invitation to participate in the parole process. Almost 40% of cases involved prisoners serving sentences for murder, while one-fifth of cases related to sex offenders.

Two-fifths of prisoners eligible for parole are serving life sentences, while another 40% are serving sentences of eight to 10 years.

Only one of 79 recommendations made by the Parole Board was not accepted by the Minister for Justice.