Parole in England and Wales

What is Parole?

Parole is the mechanism by which prisoners serving certain sentences are released from custody before the end of their sentence, subject to conditions and supervision. The prisoner remains "on licence" in the community and may be recalled to prison if they breach their conditions or if their risk increases.

The Parole Board for England and Wales is an independent body that makes decisions about the release of prisoners serving indeterminate sentences (life and IPP) and certain determinate sentences where early release requires a risk assessment. The Board's overriding duty is the protection of the public.

The legal framework is primarily found in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (for determinate sentences) and the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 (for life sentences). The Parole Board Rules 2019 govern the procedural conduct of hearings, including the service of the dossier, the right to legal representation, and the rules of evidence. For the full text of these statutes, legislation.uk provides free access to over 15,000 items of UK legislation.

Parole is distinct from automatic release. Most prisoners serving standard determinate sentences of less than four years are released automatically at the halfway point without any Parole Board involvement. Parole applies where a risk assessment is required: for indeterminate sentence prisoners who have served their minimum term, for certain extended sentence prisoners, and historically for longer determinate sentence prisoners eligible for discretionary conditional release.

The principle underlying parole is that continued detention must be justified on grounds of public protection. The question is not whether the prisoner has been punished enough, nor whether they have served a proportionate sentence: those matters were dealt with by the sentencing court. The Parole Board's sole concern is risk. If the risk the prisoner poses can be safely managed in the community, continued detention is not necessary and the prisoner must be released.

History of Parole

Parole in England and Wales was introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 1967, which came into force in April 1968. Before this, there was no formal mechanism for the early release of prisoners based on an assessment of their risk. The 1967 Act created a Parole Board to advise the Home Secretary on whether prisoners should be released on licence before the end of their sentence. In its early form, the Board was purely advisory: it made recommendations, but the final decision rested with the Home Secretary.

The early parole system applied to prisoners serving fixed sentences of more than 18 months. A prisoner could be considered for release after serving one-third of their sentence, or 12 months, whichever was longer. The system was discretionary, and the Home Secretary could accept or reject the Board's recommendation. In practice, political considerations sometimes influenced release decisions, and the process lacked the transparency that would later be required by the courts.

The Criminal Justice Act 1991 brought significant reform. It placed the Parole Board on a statutory footing as an independent body and, for the first time, gave the Board the power to direct the release of certain prisoners (those serving determinate sentences of four years or more). The 1991 Act also created the distinction between automatic conditional release (for sentences under four years) and discretionary conditional release (for sentences of four years or more, decided by the Board). This structure remained in place until the Criminal Justice Act 2003 replaced it.

The Criminal Justice Act 2003, which took effect in April 2005, overhauled the release framework. For sentences imposed after that date, it introduced automatic release at the halfway point for most determinate sentences, removing the Parole Board from the standard release process for shorter sentences. The Board's primary function shifted towards indeterminate sentence prisoners (life and IPP) and extended sentence prisoners. The 2003 Act also created the controversial Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence, which dramatically increased the Board's caseload.

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) abolished the IPP sentence for offences committed after 3 December 2012. However, it did not apply retrospectively, leaving thousands of IPP prisoners subject to the old regime. The Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014 extended post-release supervision to short sentence prisoners (under 12 months) for the first time, creating a new 12-month supervision period managed by the National Probation Service and Community Rehabilitation Companies under the Transforming Rehabilitation programme.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 introduced further changes, including provisions to increase the proportion of the sentence served before automatic release for certain serious offences (from one-half to two-thirds). It also introduced the requirement for the Parole Board to hold public hearings in certain high-profile cases, following the public controversy surrounding the proposed release of John Worboys in 2018.

The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 made additional reforms to the parole process, including a power for the Secretary of State to refer top-tier cases for a second review and enhanced rights for victims to receive information about the parole process. The Act reflected ongoing political and public concern about the release of prisoners convicted of the most serious offences.

The Parole Board

The Parole Board was established in 1968 and placed on a statutory footing by the Criminal Justice Act 1991. It is an independent body sponsored by the Ministry of Justice. Members include judges, psychiatrists, psychologists, probation officers, and independent members with relevant experience. The Board is led by a Chair appointed by the Secretary of State following an open competition. As of 2024, the Board has around 300 members who sit on panels to consider individual cases.

The Board considers cases referred to it by the Secretary of State. For indeterminate sentence prisoners (life and IPP), the Board has the power to direct release. The test is whether the prisoner's continued detention is necessary for the protection of the public. If the Board is not satisfied that detention remains necessary, it must direct release. This test was established in the case of R (Osborn) v Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61, which also confirmed the prisoner's right to an oral hearing in most indeterminate sentence cases.

Parole hearings may be held on paper or as oral hearings. Paper reviews are common for recall cases and straightforward determinate sentence cases. Oral hearings are the norm for indeterminate sentence prisoners, particularly those at or beyond their tariff date. In an oral hearing, the prisoner is entitled to legal representation (usually funded by legal aid). Witnesses may include prison psychologists, probation officers (both the offender supervisor in the prison and the community offender manager), and prison officers. Victims may attend and read a Victim Personal Statement.

The Board sits in panels of one, two, or three members depending on the complexity and seriousness of the case. Single-member panels handle straightforward paper reviews. Two-member panels consider cases of moderate complexity. Three-member panels, which usually include a judicial member, a psychologist or psychiatrist member, and an independent or specialist member, are used for the most serious cases, including those involving murder, serious sexual offences, and high-profile prisoners.

Since July 2022, the Parole Board has had the power to hold public hearings in certain cases where there is a legitimate public interest. The decision to hold a public hearing is made by the panel chair. Public hearings remain rare, but the provision was introduced following sustained public criticism of the lack of transparency in parole decisions, particularly after the John Worboys case in 2018.

The Parole Dossier

The parole dossier is the bundle of evidence and reports prepared for the Parole Board in advance of a hearing. It is the primary source of information on which the Board bases its decision. The dossier is compiled by the Public Protection Casework Section (PPCS) of HMPPS and must be served on the prisoner and their legal representative within the time limits set by the Parole Board Rules 2019.

The core of the dossier is the OASys assessment: the Offender Assessment System used by the National Probation Service and HMPPS to evaluate risk and identify the factors linked to offending. OASys produces a structured risk assessment covering static factors (criminal history, age at first offence, offence type) and dynamic factors (attitudes, relationships, substance misuse, thinking skills, accommodation, employment). The OASys score feeds into the risk management plan and informs the reports of the offender manager and offender supervisor.

Psychology reports are not prepared for every case. They are typically commissioned where there are complex risk factors, a history of serious violence or sexual offending, personality disorder concerns, or where the prisoner has completed (or been referred for) offending behaviour programmes. Psychologists carry out structured professional judgement using validated risk assessment tools such as HCR-20 (violence), Risk Matrix 2000 (sexual offending), or SARA (spousal assault). The psychology report will provide a risk formulation: a narrative explaining why the person offended, what has changed, and what circumstances might increase risk in the future.

The home circumstances report is prepared by a probation officer in the community. It assesses the suitability of the proposed release address, including the attitude of any household members, proximity to victims or exclusion zones, and the availability of local support services. For prisoners with a history of domestic abuse, the report will address the presence of any potential victims in the household. For sex offenders, proximity to schools, nurseries, or other locations frequented by children may be assessed.

Wing reports cover the prisoner's day-to-day behaviour in custody: their engagement with the regime, relationships with staff and other prisoners, any adjudications or security concerns, and their current incentives and earned privileges (IEP) level. Security reports may include intelligence material, which can be disclosed in a "gisted" form (a summary) rather than the full intelligence, to protect sources.

The quality of the dossier is critical. Incomplete or late dossiers are a persistent problem. If the dossier is not served on time, hearings may be deferred, adding months to the prisoner's time in custody. The Parole Board has repeatedly raised concerns about dossier quality and timeliness with HMPPS and the Ministry of Justice.

Who is Eligible?

Indeterminate sentences (life and IPP): The prisoner must serve the minimum term (tariff) set by the sentencing judge. After the tariff has expired, the case is referred to the Parole Board, which decides whether to direct release. If not directed for release, the case is reviewed periodically (at least every two years). The prisoner may request a review at any time after one year from the last decision, although the Board is not obliged to hold an oral hearing in every case.

Extended determinate sentences (EDS): Prisoners serving an extended determinate sentence imposed under section 226A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 are referred to the Parole Board at the two-thirds point of the custodial term. The Board applies the same public protection test. If not directed for release, the prisoner is automatically released at the end of the custodial term but remains on licence for the extended period set by the sentencing court.

Standard determinate sentences: Most prisoners serving determinate sentences of less than four years are released automatically at the halfway point. Prisoners serving sentences of four years or more for offences committed before April 2005 may be considered for release by the Parole Board at the halfway point (Parole Eligibility Date), with automatic release at the two-thirds point. For sentences of seven years or more imposed after April 2020 for certain serious offences listed in Schedule 15 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, release is at the two-thirds point rather than halfway.

Recalled prisoners: Prisoners who have been recalled to custody under section 254 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 are referred back to the Parole Board, which decides whether to re-release them. The Board considers whether the circumstances that led to recall have been addressed and whether the risk can again be managed in the community.

The sentencing guidelines provide context on how sentence lengths are determined, which in turn affects the release point and any Parole Board involvement.

Legal Representation at Parole Hearings

Prisoners appearing before the Parole Board are entitled to legal representation. For most indeterminate sentence prisoners and for oral hearings involving determinate sentence prisoners, legal aid is available through the Legal Aid Agency. Prison law falls within the scope of legal aid, and prisoners do not need to pass a means test for representation at parole hearings.

Legal representation at parole hearings is funded through the controlled legal representation (CLR) scheme. A solicitor with a prison law legal aid contract applies for funding on behalf of the prisoner. The solicitor's role includes: reviewing the dossier, taking instructions from the prisoner, identifying gaps or inaccuracies in the evidence, obtaining independent expert reports where appropriate (such as a psychologist's assessment), preparing written representations, and advocating at the oral hearing.

Specialist parole solicitors play a significant role in the outcome of hearings. Experienced representatives know how to challenge risk assessments, identify weaknesses in the evidence, and present a coherent case for release. They may commission independent psychology reports that provide an alternative risk formulation to the one in the dossier. They can call witnesses, cross-examine professional witnesses, and make submissions on the weight to be given to particular evidence.

The Parole Board Rules 2019 set out the procedural framework for hearings. They require the dossier to be served at least eight weeks before a listed oral hearing. The prisoner's representative may submit written representations and additional evidence. The Rules provide for the disclosure of sensitive information in "gisted" form and for the appointment of a special advocate in cases involving closed material. Oral hearings are conducted in the prison where the prisoner is held, with the panel, witnesses, and legal representative attending in person or by video link.

Prisoners who do not have legal representation may represent themselves, but this is uncommon in oral hearings for indeterminate sentence prisoners. The Board has a duty to ensure that the proceedings are fair, and the panel chair may adjourn a hearing if the prisoner does not have representation and the case is complex. Charities such as the Prisoners' Advice Service and the Howard League for Penal Reform can provide general advice to prisoners on the parole process.

Licence Conditions

All prisoners released before the end of their sentence are subject to licence conditions. Standard conditions apply to every released prisoner and include: keeping in touch with the supervising officer, receiving visits, residing at an approved address, not travelling outside the United Kingdom without permission, and being of good behaviour. These standard conditions are set out in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and apply automatically.

Additional conditions may be imposed depending on the nature of the offence and the risk assessment. These may include: a curfew (often with electronic monitoring via a GPS tag or radio frequency tag), exclusion from specified areas (such as the area where the victim lives or works), non-contact with specified persons (victims, co-defendants, children), attendance at programmes (drugs, alcohol, anger management, domestic abuse, sex offender treatment), polygraph testing for certain sexual offenders, and a requirement to disclose relationships to the supervising officer.

The supervising officer (an officer of the National Probation Service) manages the prisoner on licence in the community. Supervision frequency depends on the assessed level of risk. High-risk offenders may be seen multiple times per week in the initial period after release. The supervising officer can recommend variation of licence conditions to HMPPS if circumstances change, and can initiate recall proceedings if the prisoner's behaviour gives cause for concern.

Electronic monitoring is increasingly used as a licence condition. GPS tags can monitor compliance with exclusion zones and curfew requirements in real-time. If the prisoner enters a prohibited area or fails to return to their approved address during curfew hours, the monitoring centre alerts the supervising officer and, if necessary, the police. Alcohol monitoring tags, which measure alcohol consumption through sweat, can be imposed where alcohol is a factor in offending.

For certain sexual offenders released from a sentence of two years or more, mandatory polygraph testing may be imposed as a licence condition. The testing is designed to monitor compliance with other licence conditions (such as internet use restrictions or non-contact with children) rather than to establish guilt for any new offence. Results of polygraph tests may be used to inform risk management decisions but are not admissible as evidence in criminal proceedings.

Recall to Prison

If a prisoner on licence breaches their conditions, or if their risk increases, the Secretary of State may recall them to prison under section 254 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The probation service recommends recall; the decision is taken by the Public Protection Casework Section (PPCS) of HMPPS. In urgent cases, the supervising officer can initiate an emergency recall, and the prisoner may be arrested by the police before the paperwork is completed.

There are two types of recall: standard recall (the prisoner remains in custody until the Parole Board reviews the case) and fixed-term recall (28 days, for less serious breaches by determinate sentence prisoners). Fixed-term recall is available where the breach does not indicate an increase in risk that would make the prisoner's release unsafe. Typical breaches leading to fixed-term recall include missed appointments or short-term loss of contact with the supervising officer.

Standard recall is used for more serious breaches, including: committing a further offence while on licence, making contact with a victim, entering an exclusion zone, absconding from an approved premises, or any behaviour indicating an increase in risk. On standard recall, the prisoner is returned to custody and the case is referred to the Parole Board. The Board must review the case on paper within 28 days and decide whether to re-release the prisoner or schedule an oral hearing.

The prisoner receives written reasons for the recall and is told how to make representations to the Parole Board. The prisoner may submit written representations, and their legal representative may prepare a case for re-release. If the Board is not satisfied that the prisoner can be safely managed in the community, the prisoner remains in custody and a further review is scheduled.

Recall numbers have risen significantly over the past two decades. In the year to March 2024, there were approximately 12,000 recalls to prison. The recalled population accounts for a substantial proportion of the prison population at any given time. Critics argue that the threshold for recall is too low and that too many prisoners are recalled for technical breaches (such as missing a single probation appointment) rather than for behaviour indicating an increase in risk. The Justice Committee has examined the recall system on multiple occasions and recommended reforms to reduce unnecessary recalls.

IPP Sentences

Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) was introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for offenders considered to pose a significant risk of serious harm. It was an indeterminate sentence with a minimum tariff, after which release depended on the Parole Board being satisfied that detention was no longer necessary for public protection.

The original IPP provisions, which took effect in April 2005, cast the net far wider than Parliament intended. The sentence was mandatory for offenders convicted of specified offences who met the dangerousness threshold, and judges could not decline to impose it. This led to IPP sentences being imposed for relatively minor offences with very short tariffs: some prisoners received tariffs of less than two years but have now spent well over a decade in custody. By 2008, there were approximately 6,000 IPP prisoners, far exceeding the Government's original estimate of around 900.

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 narrowed the IPP criteria by introducing a two-year minimum tariff threshold and removing the presumption in favour of the sentence. This reduced the number of new IPP sentences, but did nothing for those already serving one.

IPP was abolished by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 for offences committed after 3 December 2012. However, over 2,800 IPP prisoners remain in custody, many years beyond their original tariff. The controversy lies in the indefinite nature of the sentence and the difficulty of demonstrating reduced risk from within a prison environment, where prisoners may lack access to the offending behaviour programmes or psychological interventions recommended in their sentence plan.

In 2024, the Victims and Prisoners Act introduced a licence termination scheme for IPP prisoners who had been released and had spent a qualifying period of 10 years in the community on licence without recall. The scheme allowed for automatic termination of the licence, removing the indefinite supervision requirement. For those still in custody, the government committed to reviewing the IPP action plan, but stopped short of resentencing, which would require primary legislation.

The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 reduced the qualifying period for automatic licence termination from 10 years to three years for most IPP prisoners released into the community. It also created a presumption in favour of licence termination once the qualifying period has been served, unless the Secretary of State can demonstrate that continued supervision is necessary. For IPP prisoners still in custody, the Act did not introduce resentencing, but the Parole Board's approach to IPP cases has shifted over time, with a greater emphasis on progression and a recognition of the unique injustice of the sentence.

For an overview of the prison system and the institutions where IPP prisoners are held, free reference material is available.

Victims and the Parole Process

Victims of serious offences have a statutory right to participate in the parole process. The Victim Contact Scheme (VCS), managed by the National Probation Service, is the primary mechanism through which victims engage with the criminal justice system after sentencing. The VCS is available to victims of violent or sexual offences where the offender received a custodial sentence of 12 months or more, and to the families of those who died as a result of the offence.

Under the VCS, victims are assigned a Victim Liaison Officer (VLO), a specialist probation officer who acts as the victim's point of contact throughout the offender's sentence. The VLO keeps the victim informed of key milestones: the prisoner's transfer between prisons, any temporary release (ROTL), the date of the parole hearing, and the outcome. The VLO also explains the victim's rights and helps them to engage with the process.

Victims may submit a Victim Personal Statement (VPS) to the Parole Board. The VPS is a written statement describing the impact of the offence on the victim, any ongoing concerns about the prisoner's release, and any requests the victim wishes to make regarding licence conditions. Since 2018, victims have also been able to attend the oral hearing in person to read their VPS aloud, or to observe the hearing. They may be accompanied by a supporter.

The Board considers the victim's submissions alongside all other evidence, but the decision is based on public protection, not the victim's wishes. A victim who opposes release will not prevent it if the Board is satisfied that the risk can be safely managed. Equally, a victim who supports release does not guarantee it. The VPS is one factor among many.

The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 strengthened victims' rights in the parole process. It introduced a statutory duty on the Parole Board to give the victim the opportunity to make representations when considering whether to hold a public hearing. It also improved the timeliness of notifications to victims and created a right for victims to receive a summary of the reasons for the Board's decision.

Critics of the current system argue that the VCS is under-resourced, that many eligible victims are never contacted or drop out of the scheme, and that VLOs carry excessive caseloads. The Victims' Commissioner has repeatedly called for greater investment in the scheme and for better training for VLOs. Others argue that victim participation, while important, must be carefully managed to ensure that it does not turn parole hearings into a re-litigation of the offence or create undue pressure on the Board to refuse release.

Life Sentence Prisoners

There are three categories of life sentence in England and Wales: mandatory life, discretionary life, and whole life orders. The parole process differs in important respects for each.

Mandatory life (murder): A life sentence is the only sentence available for murder. The judge must impose life imprisonment and sets a minimum term (tariff) that the prisoner must serve before becoming eligible for parole. The minimum term is calculated according to the starting points in Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Act 2020 (formerly Schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003). Starting points range from 15 years (for cases not falling within other categories) to 30 years (for particularly serious cases such as murder using a firearm, murder of a police officer, or murder with sexual or sadistic motivation) and whole life (for the most exceptional cases). The sentencing judge may adjust the starting point upwards or downwards based on aggravating and mitigating factors. For a detailed guide to how minimum terms are calculated, sentencing.uk provides free access to sentencing guidelines for over 250 offences.

Discretionary life: A discretionary life sentence may be imposed for any offence carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment (such as manslaughter, rape, robbery, kidnapping, arson, or grievous bodily harm with intent) where the court considers the offender to be dangerous. The criteria for dangerousness are set out in section 308 of the Sentencing Act 2020: the court must be satisfied that there is a significant risk to the public of serious harm from future offences. The minimum term is set by the judge in the same way as for murder. After the minimum term, the prisoner is referred to the Parole Board.

Whole life orders: A whole life order means the prisoner will never be released. There is no minimum term and no referral to the Parole Board. Whole life orders are reserved for the most serious murders: serial killers, terrorist murderers, and those who have murdered children following abduction. As of 2024, approximately 70 prisoners in England and Wales are serving whole life orders. The European Court of Human Rights confirmed in Vinter v United Kingdom (2013) that a whole life order is compatible with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) provided that there is a mechanism for review. In England and Wales, this review exists through the royal prerogative of mercy, exercised by the Secretary of State in exceptional circumstances (such as terminal illness or total incapacitation).

Life sentence prisoners who are released by the Parole Board remain on licence for life. The licence can be suspended by the Parole Board after a qualifying period (typically 10 years), meaning that the conditions are not actively enforced, but the licence remains in existence. For life sentence prisoners, the licence is never terminated: they remain subject to recall for the rest of their lives. This distinguishes life licence from IPP licence, where termination is now possible under the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024.

Open Conditions and Progression

The prison estate in England and Wales is divided into four security categories. Category A is the highest (prisoners whose escape would be highly dangerous to the public or national security). Category B, C, and D follow in descending order. Category D prisons are "open" prisons: they have no perimeter walls, prisoners may work outside the prison, and the regime emphasises resettlement and reintegration.

For indeterminate sentence prisoners (life and IPP), a move to open conditions is a critical step on the path to release. It allows the prisoner to be tested in an environment with less control, to build community ties, to gain employment, and to demonstrate that they can manage their risk without the physical constraints of a closed prison. The Parole Board may recommend a move to open conditions as an alternative to directing release, particularly where the Board considers the prisoner is making progress but has not yet been tested in less structured conditions.

The recommendation for open conditions is advisory: the final decision rests with the Secretary of State. In practice, the Ministry of Justice accepts most Parole Board recommendations for open conditions, but rejections do occur, particularly in high-profile cases where there is political sensitivity around the prisoner's transfer. A refusal to accept the Board's recommendation is subject to judicial review.

Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) is a key feature of open conditions. ROTL allows prisoners to leave the prison for specific purposes and periods. Types include:

ROTL is not automatic: it is granted by the prison governor based on a risk assessment conducted by the prison's Offender Management Unit. Category A prisoners and those on the escape list are not eligible. ROTL is an important step in the resettlement process and is often a precursor to release on licence. A successful period of ROTL, particularly resettlement day release to a paid job, provides strong evidence to the Parole Board that the prisoner can manage their behaviour in the community.

For life and IPP prisoners, the typical progression route is: closed conditions (Category B or C) where sentence plan targets are completed, followed by a Parole Board recommendation to open conditions (Category D), followed by a period of ROTL, and then a Parole Board direction of release. This process can take many years, and delays in progression (caused by prison transfers, programme waiting lists, or staff shortages) can add significantly to the time spent in custody.

Challenging a refusal of ROTL or a Parole Board decision may involve the appeal routes available through judicial review in the Administrative Court. The Parole Board also has a reconsideration mechanism under Rule 28 of the Parole Board Rules 2019, which allows decisions to be reviewed on procedural grounds.

Statistics

The Parole Board publishes annual statistics on its caseload and outcomes. The following figures are based on the Board's most recent annual report and Ministry of Justice prison statistics. They provide a general picture of the scale and outcomes of the parole process.

Caseload: The Parole Board considers approximately 7,500 cases per year. This includes new referrals, reviews, and recall cases. The number of cases has fluctuated over the past decade, driven by changes in sentencing policy (particularly the abolition of IPP and the introduction of extended sentences), the growth of the recalled prisoner population, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hearing schedules.

Release rates: The Board directs release in approximately 25% of indeterminate sentence cases (life and IPP) heard at oral hearings. For determinate sentence and recall cases, the re-release rate is higher: approximately 40-50%. These figures vary from year to year and depend on the composition of the caseload. The Board emphasises that each case is decided on its own merits and that aggregate release rates do not reflect a policy or target.

Indeterminate sentence prisoners: As of 2024, approximately 9,000 indeterminate sentence prisoners are held in England and Wales. This includes approximately 5,800 life sentence prisoners and approximately 2,800 IPP prisoners (down from a peak of approximately 6,000 IPP prisoners in 2012). Of the remaining IPP prisoners, the majority are beyond their tariff, many by several years.

Recall: In the year to March 2024, approximately 12,000 prisoners were recalled to custody. The recalled population at any given time stands at approximately 6,000, accounting for roughly 7% of the total prison population. The recall rate has risen steadily since the introduction of the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014, which extended post-release supervision to short sentence prisoners who were previously released unconditionally.

Hearing timeliness: The Parole Board aims to hold oral hearings within the target timeframe from referral. However, delays remain common. Dossier quality, the availability of witnesses, and panel member capacity are the most frequently cited causes of delay. The Board's annual report regularly notes the impact of late or incomplete dossiers on hearing timeliness.

Key Legislation

The legal framework governing parole in England and Wales is spread across several statutes. The following table summarises the most important legislation, with links to the full text where available on legislation.uk.

Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL)

Release on Temporary Licence allows prisoners to leave the prison establishment for a specific purpose and period. It is governed by Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 13/2015 (as amended) and the Prison Rules 1999. ROTL is a key part of the resettlement process, particularly for prisoners in open conditions, and is used to test the prisoner's ability to manage their behaviour in the community before full release.

The decision to grant ROTL is taken by the prison governor, not the Parole Board. It is based on a risk assessment conducted by the prison's Offender Management Unit (OMU), which considers the prisoner's offence, sentence plan progress, behaviour in custody, and the risk management plan for the period of temporary release. The prisoner must have a suitable address or destination and the release must serve a legitimate resettlement purpose.

ROTL is not available to all prisoners. Category A prisoners and those on the escape list are excluded. Prisoners who have absconded, failed to return from a previous period of ROTL, or committed a serious offence while on temporary release will normally be refused. The governor retains discretion to refuse ROTL in any case where the risk assessment does not support it.

For indeterminate sentence prisoners in open conditions, ROTL is a critical step in the progression route towards release. A sustained period of successful ROTL, particularly resettlement day release to paid employment, provides the Parole Board with evidence that the prisoner can manage their risk in an uncontrolled environment. The Board will look closely at the nature of the ROTL activity (work, education, family contact), the duration (day release versus overnight), and whether any concerns arose during the temporary release.

Challenging a refusal of ROTL involves the prison's internal complaints procedure (the application/complaint form, then the Prisoner and Probation Ombudsman). Judicial review in the Administrative Court is available for decisions that are irrational, procedurally unfair, or based on an error of law, though the courts are generally reluctant to interfere with operational prison management decisions.