Prisoners given go ahead to sue over jail time

Prisoners given go ahead to sue over jail time
By Bonnie Malkin
Last Updated: 8:22am BST 04/06/2007

The Prison Service could be forced to pay prisoners tens of thousands of pounds in compensation for keeping them in jail after they are due for early release on parole.

The Court of Appeal has held that prisoners’ human rights are breached if they are kept in jail beyond the date on which they become eligible for parole. The judgement means the Prison Service could face claims for compensation for wrongful imprisonment if early release deadlines are missed and offenders are then released at a later parole hearing.

The Prison Service and the Prison Board are so concerned over the ruling they are planning to appeal to the Law Lords to overturn the decision. It is estimated between 500 and 700 prisoners each year miss their early release deadline because of hold-ups in the system.

The judgement was based on the case of Derrick Johnson, who was kept in jail for 8 1/2 months beyond the date he was eligible for parole, according to the Court of Appeal. In accordance with usual practice Johnson, who was sentenced to seven years for supplying drugs, was asked whether he wanted to apply for parole six months ahead of time.

He said yes, but there was a long delay in assembling his file. He was eligible for parole in June 2003 but the board didn’t hear his application until February 2004. The board then recommended his release.

Johnson’s solicitor, Tony Stokoe, said last night: “I and other prison lawyers are pleased that the Parole Board and Prison Service are going to have to account for missing deadlines.

“It is a matter that has been concerning us for a number of years. We believe there are many other people in a similar position.” Mr Stokoe said that the rule of thumb for compensation was £1,000 for the first month and £500 for each month that a prisoner was held beyond their parole date after that.

A Prison Service spokesperson said: “We are disappointed by this decision. We will give serious consideration as to whether an appeal to the House of Lords should be made.” A Parole Board spokesman admitted the judgement had “very wide implications”.

He said: “We would have to give prisoners a decision on parole by the date on which they are eligible and at the moment, often we don’t, usually because prisons have not provided the information on time.”

It also emerged last night that two prisoners are suing Lord Falconer, the Justice Secretary, over claims they are being arbitrarily held in breach of their human rights. They say jail overcrowding has meant they have not been able to undertake the programmes they need to persuade the parole board that they have addressed their offending behaviour and no longer pose a threat to the public.

The backlog is thought to affect 1,000 prisoners serving indeterminate sentences for public protection, an initiative for violent and sex offenders implemented by David Blunkett when he was Home Secretary.

The challenge will add to Lord Falconer’s problems as ministers struggle to come up with solutions to the overcrowding crisis that is engulfing the country’s prisons. Prisoner numbers hit a record 80,486 last week.