Richard Ford, Home Correspondent
Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes
The Justice Secretary lost his last power to block the release of dangerous prisoners from jail yesterday when the Court of Appeal ruled that it was a breach of human rights.
Three judges ended the 40-year power of ministers to reject recommendations from the Parole Board for the release of prisoners.
The judges made their ruling in a test case brought by Wayne Thomas Black, described as a “ruthless and dangerous” armed robber, who is serving 24 years for a string of offences including robbery and escaping from a prison van. Black, 39, was involved in a raid on a pawnbrokers’ shop in Golders Green, North London, in 1993 in which a member of the shop’s staff and her mother were handcuffed, blindfolded and held hostage in their home before the £200,000 robbery.
He was given a 20-year sentence at the Old Bailey in 1995. The following year he received another four years for escaping from a prison van while being transported from the Old Bailey to Belmarsh jail in southeast London.
The Parole Board recommended his release on licence in May 2006 but the then Home Secretary refused to comply, saying that Black posed too great a risk of reoffending. Black’s lawyers told the Appeal Court that his fate was “entirely dependent upon a decision by the Executive” and that was a breach of his human rights. They said that Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights dictated that prisoners are entitled to have their release dates reviewed “speedily by a court”. Lord Justice Latham said in the judgment: “The inescapable logic is that a prisoner serving a determinate sentence is entitled to have the lawful-ness of his detention determined, not merely speedily, but by a court”.
The judge, sitting with Lord Justice May and Lord Justice Moore-Bick, said that the law as it stood involved a procedure that did not compy with Article 5. He added that it left the “the decision as to release in the hands of the Executive and is therefore capable of being applied arbitrarily”.
Lord Justice Latham said that the Justice Secretary’s power was incompatible with the Human Rights Act.
The ruling affects hundreds of serious and dangerous offenders serving prison terms of more than 15 years but less than life. An estimated 150 a year have their cases considered by the Parole Board, which recommends release in between 30 and 50 cases.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: “We note the court’s judgment and will be actively considering whether to seek permission to appeal to the House of Lords. No prisoner will be immediately released as a result of this judgment.”
Christine Glenn, chief executive of the Parole Board, said: “I welcome this decision. I think we [the Parole Board] should be a court and I think every decision that has happened points us towards that destination.”
After yesterday’s decision Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, retains only the power to block a Parole Board recommendation that a life sentence prisoner should be transferred from a closed to an open prison. Mr Straw has indicated that he no longer wants to be “second-guessing” the Parole Board’s recommendations on transfers to open prisons. When he was Home Secretary, between 1997 and 2000, the rejection rate of recommendations to move offenders to open prisons was running at between 6 and 9 per cent, but by 2006-07 it was almost 40 per cent.
Yesterday’s ruling is the latest in a series of court judgments in which po-liticans have lost the power to block the release of prisoners on parole and to set the minimum terms that murderers should serve in prison. In 1991 ministers lost the power to block the release on parole of prisoners given life sentences for crimes. In 1997 the Parole Board won the right to direct the release of juveniles detained at Her Majesty’s Pleasure after being convicted of serious crime and of those given an automatic life sentence for a second sexual offence. And in 2002, after a European Court ruling, ministers lost the power to block recommendations for release of those serving a mandatory life sentence for murder.

Sam Coates's blog about Westminster, politics and spin
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Perhaps we should be looking at a revision of the law - abolishing parole completely - so that the sentence given is the sentence served. There wouold be no denial of human rights then and politicians would be cut out of the loop altogether.
Bill Q, Derby,
Who is feeling the back lash of human rights than the Government, the installed it let them live with like many victims do.
Geoffrey Fish, Pontefract, UK
The judge's comments about the lawfulness of detention would be hilarious, if he wasn't trampling on the rights and responsibilities of the court that issued the sentence in the first place. They determined the lawfulness on the evidence of the crime committed and the associated risk the public, not on subsequent behaviour in the controlled environment of a prison.
Judges and parole boards should only be able to issue such decisions if they can show an absolutely clear-cut reduction in the public risk if the criminal is set free early. Otherwise, the original judgement, including its risk assessments, should stand.
KR, Stockport,
Yet again, Jack truly lives up to his surname!!
Milo, Uckfield, UK
The decision to release a prisoner should clearly be made by the Parole Board. When you read this guys rap sheet - your immediate reaction is "we should throw away the key" but here's the rub..."between 1997 and 2000, the rejection rate of recommendations to move offenders to open prisons was running at between 6 and 9 per cent, but by 2006-07 it was almost 40 per cent" - that smacks of political decision making, the executive desperately trying to avoid bad headlines.
The Parole board is there to make these evaluations on a daily basis - let them get on with their job. I'm more disappointed that the Times hasn't had the common sense to dig out figures on re-offending when criminals of this type are let out on license - then we'd get a clear picture of whether the Parole Board are doing their job and the executive is interfering on a political basis.
Richard Symons, London,
We dance to the tune of the European Union and the Court of Human Rights. Time well overdue to get out of both and restore some sanity to our seriously damaged country. The UK Independence party has been the sole voice of common sense in warning of exactly what is now happening. Will the voting public wake up to this? Doubt it.
SA, Monmouth, United Kingdom
Labour have messed up again. Instead of passing laws they make rules which they expect everyone to keep. TOUGH ON CRIME, that'll a be the day.
steve tea, manchester, cheshire
Fair enough, but the Parole Board should be made responsible for their decision. If a released dangerous prisoner commits another serius crime, then the parole board members should be held to account. The problem with the application of human rights is that it does not take into account the rights of others to have a peaceful law-abiding life.
Chris D, Edinburgh, Scotland
This country MUST destroy the treaty binding us to the Human Rights Laws. If this entails leaving the EU then so be it. The judges are acting correctly under the law but common sense has deserted us all. The law is being brought into as much contempt as the public holds for certain politicians.
Pete, Lincoln, UK
Straw hoist by his own petard. The judges may or may not be right in their decision - I have no strong opinion - but this is what happens when a national authority cedes power to a transnational institution.
Billy Barnett, HK,