Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

Life Sentences: Public Understanding

30 April 2024 · 0 other contributors · 4,725 words

Opened by Kieran Mullan Con Bexhill and Battle

Responding minister: Not recorded

Justice & Courts

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Kieran Mullan raised concerns about life sentences: public understanding in Westminster Hall. Response awaited from government.

Key points

  • Concerns raised about the public misunderstanding of the term "life sentence" in the justice system.
  • Government urged to reconsider terminology for sentences that are not whole-life orders.
  • Suggestion made to adopt a Finnish model for press judges to ensure accurate reporting on sentencing decisions.

Key requests to Government

I ask the Government to consider changing the terminology used for sentences that are not true whole-life orders and to ensure transparency in reporting sentencing decisions. I suggest adopting the Finnish model where press judges engage directly with media, writing accurate initial reports on sentencing decisions.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Kieran Mullan Con Bexhill and Battle

I am concerned about the use of the term 'life sentence' in the justice system, which is frequently misreported and misunderstood. The public often believe that a life sentence means someone will spend the rest of their life in prison when, in reality, it usually refers to a minimum term followed by potential release on licence. This misunderstanding can undermine public confidence in the justice system and the sense of justice for victims' families. Since October 2023, my office has contacted eight police forces regarding incorrect use of 'jailed for life', with only three admitting their mistake.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy