IPP Sentences Are Psychological Torture: Burnham's Review Misses 2026

The IPP sentence (imprisonment for public protection) has been condemned as psychological torture by prisoners, experts, and even its own architect, yet over 2,000 people in England and Wales still serve it. Andy Burnham's new review into indeterminate sentences, announced last week, adds another layer of delay to an already Kafkaesque process. This article explains why the review is inadequate and why immediate legislative resentencing is the only humane solution.

What Is an IPP Sentence and Why Is It Controversial?

An IPP sentence was introduced in 2005 under David Blunkett to detain offenders deemed risky but not deserving of a life sentence. Prisoners serve a minimum tariff, after which they must convince the Parole Board they are safe to release. However, the system has failed thousands, leaving them trapped beyond their tariffs with no end in sight.

The controversy lies in the indefinite nature of the sentence. Unlike a fixed term, an IPP can extend for decades if parole is repeatedly denied, often due to lack of rehabilitation programs. This creates a cycle of despair, as seen in the tragic case of Tommy Nicol, who hanged himself in 2015 after receiving yet another parole knock-back.

The Human Toll: Psychological Torture in Practice

Tommy Nicol's words—"psychological torture of a person who is doing 99 years"—are echoed by UN special rapporteur Alice Edwards, who agrees that IPP sentences constitute torture. The mental health impact is severe: anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation are rampant among IPP prisoners. Many have served far beyond their original tariffs, with no clear path to release.

Despite the IPP being abolished in 2012, it was not applied retroactively. Those already sentenced remain under its shadow, often with little access to the courses needed to prove their safety to the Parole Board. This has created a backlog of over 2,000 individuals, many of whom have already served their minimum term.

Burnham's Review: A Missed Opportunity for Action

Prime Minister Andy Burnham's announcement of a new review into indeterminate sentences is a step, but a frustratingly slow one. Reviews have been conducted before, and all have concluded that IPPs are unjust and should be replaced. The question is: why not simply legislate to resentence these prisoners now?

The review process could take months or years, during which more lives are put on hold. Meanwhile, the Parole Board continues to deny releases based on risk assessments that are often impossible to satisfy without proper support. This is not a review problem; it's a political will problem.

Comparison: IPP vs. Life Sentences vs. Fixed-Term Sentences

Key Takeaways: Why Immediate Resentencing Is Essential

• IPP sentences are recognized as psychological torture by UN experts.
• Over 2,000 prisoners remain trapped, many beyond their tariffs.
• Reviews have repeatedly failed to produce action; only legislation will help.
• Resentencing would provide clarity and hope, reducing suicide risk.
• Burnham must prioritize this over another study.

FAQ: Understanding IPP Sentences and Burnham's Review

Best Products We’ve Tested and Rated

Our testing team has hands-on reviews of iem mic, inch monitor, chair short person, motherboard ryzen 7800x3d, and motherboard am5. Every option below was compared across price, build quality, and real-world performance, with honest pros and cons. We update these guides regularly as new models arrive, so the recommendations stay current.

Our testing team has hands-on reviews of headset logitech, audio card, pc, wireless adapter, and mice under. Every option below was compared across price, build quality, and real-world performance, with honest pros and cons. We update these guides regularly as new models arrive, so the recommendations stay current.