Robert Jenrick’s proposal to eliminate the Sentencing Council is being criticized as a manipulative tactic. The Shadow Justice Secretary is being accused of diminishing the judiciary’s independence in favor of granting more authority to politicians.
During a speech at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester on Tuesday, Jenrick is expected to allege that the Sentencing Council has been softening sentences and advocate for increased ministerial control over sentencing policies. This move follows Jenrick’s ongoing criticism of what he perceives as activist judges injecting politics into court proceedings.
In response, the Labour party condemned the announcement as another display of hypocrisy, blaming the Conservatives for deteriorating the justice system over their 14-year tenure. A recent sentencing review highlighted the escalating prison sentences without a corresponding increase in prison capacity, resulting in overcrowded prisons.
The Labour party spokesperson emphasized the neglect by the Tories, leading to overwhelmed courts, bursting prisons, and a loss of public trust in the justice system. Criticism was also directed at Jenrick for undermining judicial independence for personal gain.
The Government’s recent crackdown on the Sentencing Council, prohibiting the issuance of guidelines for judges, stemmed from disagreements over the concept of two-tier justice. The Council’s consideration of factors like ethnicity or gender in sentencing decisions was met with disapproval from the Government.
In his upcoming address, Jenrick will emphasize the need for equal treatment under the law, denouncing the perceived two-tier justice system emerging under Keir Starmer’s leadership. The Law Society of England and Wales president stressed the importance of maintaining judicial independence and adherence to the rule of law through sentencing guidelines that balance consistency and judicial discretion within the legislative framework.
Overall, the ongoing debate surrounding the Sentencing Council’s role and the balance of power between politicians and the judiciary continues to spark controversy within the legal landscape.