Understanding the individuals involved in court proceedings is essential, and the courts gaining deeper insights into those they sentence can only be beneficial. Recently, the shadow justice secretary, Robert Jenrick, launched an attack on guidelines suggesting pre-sentence reports be completed for individuals from ethnic and religious minorities, as well as women and younger adults. This move highlights the cultural politics he often engages in.
Jenrick appears to be challenging the judiciary’s independence by pushing for legislative changes that would shift the final decision-making power from the 14-member Sentencing Council for England and Wales to the secretary of state. These guidelines are currently on hold, pending new legislation that could render parts of them illegal.
Jenrick’s tactics play into populist politics. By alleging that the guidelines might discriminate against Christians and “straight white men,” he is stirring up racial and religious tensions. His assertions are misleading, given that the guidelines don’t address sexual orientation and that “faith minority community” can encompass many Christian groups, including Catholics and Quakers. Such false narratives fuel unnecessary divisions, detracting from critical issues like the high vacancy rate in the probation service, which hampers the production of the thorough reports necessary for the courts.
There is a well-documented racial disparity in sentencing, especially concerning black men facing drug-related charges. Despite recent findings indicating these disparities aren’t as vast as reported in the landmark Lammy report, statistics reveal black offenders in England and Wales are 40% more likely to face imprisonment compared to their white counterparts for similar crimes. Utilizing reports more frequently to tackle such issues — and others, like the impact on children when their mothers are incarcerated — should not be contentious. However, spurred by concerns over rightwing attempts to incite grievances among white voters, justice secretary Shabana Mahmood has championed this cause. If the government proceeds with its current stance, advising on pre-sentence reports based on “personal characteristics” will soon be illegal, although individual circumstances will still be considered.
The theme of law and order has long enticed authoritarian populists. An earlier version of these guidelines was dismissed by Mahmood’s Tory predecessor, Alex Chalk, which should have prepared her for potential challenges. Her ministry’s relationship with the Sentencing Council and parliament seems underdeveloped, with the last testimony from its chair to the justice committee dating back to 2022.
Mahmood faces substantial challenges. Prisons are overcrowded, and the public accounts committee recently highlighted a projected cost overrun of £4.2 billion to add 20,000 more places. Following the neglect by the previous Tory administration, Mahmood released thousands of prisoners early last autumn. Ministers are now awaiting recommendations from former Conservative justice secretary David Gauke to chart a path forward.
Finding a resolution to this crisis seems impossible without more community sentences, supported by technology and a bolstered probation service. Mahmood urgently needs to regain control of the situation. Attempts to frame white Christian men as victims of overly egalitarian judges should be categorically rejected.
We welcome your thoughts on the issues presented in this article. If you’d like to submit a 300-word response for potential publication in our letters section, please click below to email us.
