Blunkett is stripped of power to set tariffs, but plans sentencing reform

David Blunkett has been stripped of his power to set a minimum jail term for convicted murderers before they can apply for parole.

A specially convened panel of seven law lords ruled that the Home Secretary's statutory power to set the "tariff" for adult murderers was incompatible with a prisoner's right under human rights law to be sentenced by an "independent and impartial tribunal".

The law lords considered a legal challenge by a convicted murderer, whose minimum sentence had been raised by the Home Secretary, and concluded that tariff-setting should be left to judges, not politicians.

The ruling means that 225 "lifer" prisoners who have had their minimum sentences set by a Home Secretary will now have the right to have their tariffs decided by a judicial authority. Of these prisoners, 70 have already served more time than was originally recommended by the judiciary.

Mr Blunkett immediately responded by saying he was "determined to maintain" the principle of parliamentary accountability introduced when Parliament abolished the death sentence in 1965.

He took succour from the acknowledgement by the law lords that the idea of a "mandatory life sentence" was not unlawful and said he would ensure that, "for the most serious crimes, such as the sexual, sadistic murder of children, life should mean life".

Mr Blunkett said he intended to introduce new legislation in this parliamentary session, which could be law by next autumn and would lay out a set of principles that judges must follow in determining tariffs.

He said any deviation from these principles, which will be agreed in Parliament, would require explanation from judges in open court. Mr Blunkett said the Attorney General would be able to challenge any minimum sentence if it was considered judges had not followed the principles or if they had been "unduly lenient".

Attempting to ensure the law lords' ruling had minimal impact on current arrangements, the Home Secretary said: "The principles will be based on the same mitigating or aggravating factors on which I, and previous Home Secretaries, have based decisions. Aggravating factors will include murder committed in the course of armed robbery or the murder of prison or police officers in the course of their duty."

The much-awaited ruling is the latest in a succession of legal defeats for the Home Secretary since the introduction of human rights laws.

Mr Blunkett had already lost the right to set the minimum tariff for child killers, after a challenge by Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, the murderers of two-year-old James Bulger. The Home Secretary also lost powers to keep in custody a prisoner who has been recommended for release by the Parole Board.

Yesterday's judgment was described by civil liberties campaigners as "a good day for impartial, fair British justice". John Wadham, director of the pressure group Liberty, said: "Sentencing is part of the trial – and judges, not politicians, must be responsible for it.

"Judicial sentencing doesn't mean soft sentencing – it means sound sentencing. Trial judges have all the facts in front of them and are best able to make the right decision."

Harry Fletcher, assistant general secretary of the probation union Napo, said: "This is a sound decision – the judges involved in sentencing and the parole authorities should decide release dates based on the information before them."