PAS and the Howard League have issued joint judicial review proceedings against the government over the proposal to remove legal aid in Parole Board cases known as ‘pre-tariff reviews’. These cases affect prisoners on indeterminate sentences and concern decisions by the Parole Board on whether to move them to open conditions before release. PAS says that the proposals to remove the cases from scope were not in the government’s original consultation. PAS argues that the consultation process was unfair and has said in a statement: ‘Making prisoners go through the pre-tariff review stages without representation is short sighted and will slow down the process of rehabilitation.’

Simon Creighton, a prison law specialist and partner at Bhatt Murphy, in London, is acting for PAS and the Howard League. Speaking to Legal Action, he said that PAS and the Howard League ‘are surprised and saddened’ that the minister has forced them into taking the action. He pointed out that ‘no one, including the Parole Board, understood the original consultation to envisage the removal of legal aid for parole hearings’ and the Parole Board Rules 2011 SI No 2947, which govern such hearings, ‘have whole sections that are premised on prisoners being represented’. Simon Creighton believes that ‘it is impossible to imagine how the system can function without legal representation and the impact on the ability of prisoners to progress towards release, as well as public safety, will be severely compromised.’

Meanwhile, Bindmans is to act for the PLP in a judicial review case challenging the legal aid residence test which the government plans to implement. Under the test, people who wish to claim civil legal aid will have to prove lawful residence in the UK for 12 months; there are a few exceptions to the general rule. The residence test is thought to be illegal by many human rights law specialists under both EU law and the Equality Act 2010.