All inmates are admitted to prison with a valid commitment order


Each person admitted to prison must be identified. The staff verifies the validity of the order or any other document authorising their detention.1

Prisoners can inform their families about their imprisonment


Prisoners can call their family or a legal adviser during imprisonment or after the first night in detention.1

The Chief Inspector of Prisons stated, in their annual report of 2017-2018, that less than half of the men they met during their visits were offered a free call to their family.2

  1. Prison Reform Trust, “Information sheet for women in prison for the first time”, October 2017, p. 2. 

  2. Chief Inspector of Prisons, “Annual Report 2017-18”, July 2018, p. 22. 

There is a reception area for arriving prisoners

in every facility

A copy of the prison regulations is made available to the prisoners


An Introduction to Custody (ITC) proposes a standardised process for the integration of newcomers. The goal of the ITC is to give prisoners the necessary information under the PSI publication of 06/2015. The ITC must be carried out in the five days following arrival. It includes a specific presentation for each facility.1

On placement into a cell, staff must take into account “any risk of mistreatment by or on behalf of the newcomer to other prisoners, and any risk of suicide or self-harm”. All prisoners held in closed prisons will undergo a Cell Sharing Risk Assessment (CSRA). This evaluation is obligatory, wether in a shared space or not. The CSRA is also a part of the admission process. It must assess the risk that a prisoner might “kill his fellow prisoner or commit acts of serious violence against him”.1

The staff in charge of newcomers receive two types of training:

  • Assessment, Care in Custody & Teamwork (ACCT): procedure for identifying and monitoring an at-risk prisoner (suicide risk…). It concerns all officers in contact with prisoners. The Howard League reported, in a study published in 2017, that several officers “believe the ACCT training inadequate”. It voices concerns about its capacity to evaluate the vulnerability of a prisoner.1
  • Cell Sharing Risk Assessment (CSRA): see above. All officers and teams involved in the entry process are required to follow it.2
  • The number of cases of self-harm and inter-prisoner violence at Foston Hall women’s prison was considered “worrying”. The Inspectorate of Prisons’ report stated that the treatment of vulnerable prisoners was inadequate. The findings were based on a visit in late 2021. They were accompanied by recommendations extended to five other women’s prisons in England.

    / HM Inspectorate of Prisons

A sentence execution project, including training, is established for every prisoner with a sentence of more than one year. This training is aimed at “improving behaviour and preventing reoffending”.1 A probation officer accompanies the prisoner with their project.2

  1. National Offender Management Service and Prison Reform Trust, “Information book for prisoners with a disability”, p. 31. 

  2. National Offender Management Service and Prison Reform Trust, “Information book for prisoners with a disability”, p. 14. 

Prisoners can be assisted by a lawyer throughout their incarceration


In 2013, the Secretary of State for Justice stopped the provision of legal aid. The Howard League and the Prisoner’s Advice Service submitted an appeal to the Court of Appeal. In February 2018, the Court of Appeal decided to reintroduce legal aid in three cases:

  • a review, prior to the lifting of the security period, authorising a prisoner to be placed in an open facility
  • a reclassification review of category A prisoners
  • placement in a close supervision centre, CSC 1.2

  1. See Security, Order and Discipline section. 

  2. The Howard League website, Legal aid cuts for prisoners 

Prisoners have access to a legal aid centre

in some instances

The 2013 order from the Secretary of State for Justice also eliminated almost every legal access point available to prisoners. The government agreed, before an appeal hearing by Howard League and the Prisoner’s Advice Hearing, to make legal access points available:

  • in mother-baby units
  • in reintegration facilities
  • for people released on parole (licence)
  • for people in solitary confinement.1

  1. Howard League website, Legal aid cuts for prisoners 

Lawyers meet their clients confidentially under visual control of staff.[^PSI 16/2011]

[^PSI 16/2011]: Ministry of Justice, PSI publication 16/2011 on visits and services to visitors

Legal consultations are managed by Prison Rule 38 or by Rule 16 of the Young Offender Institution. They allow consultations with a legal advisor:

  • about ongoing or upcoming procedures
  • about legal matters, such as the sale of goods or the drawing up of wills
  • about an upcoming disciplinary proceeding.

Legal advisors may make use of any sound recording device. This device must not contain a built-in camera or telephone. Every advisor agrees in writing that the recording must be kept securely. They agree that the recording must only be used in line with the procedures or cases already mentioned. Letters and documents that are exchanged between the prisoner and their advisor are subjected to the same monitoring procedures as mail.[^PSI 16/2011]

Inside Time, the national newspaper for prisoners, published a guide of more than 1,000 pages, which for a long time were available in prison libraries. Now, it is only available online. Friends and family of prisoners are authorised to forward desired extracts to them or to send them to the dedicated service. Email a Prisoner.

[^PSI 16/2011]: Ministry of Justice, PSI publication 16/2011 on visits and services to visitors

Deaths in custody are logged in a register


Number of deaths in custody


  • Eight inmates of Littlehey Prison had died of COVID-19 as of 1st January. This made it the prison most affected by the pandemic. It was closely followed by Wakefield and Whatton prisons. All three of these prisons had a significant proportion of elderly inmates. Prisons in England and Wales recorded 177 deaths among inmates from the beginning of the year.

    / Inside Time

Variation in the number of deaths in custody

an increase of 10%

compared to the previous year

  • The mortality rate for prisoners had been increasing since 2011, after a partial decrease in 2021. This increase primarily affected males.

    / Ministry of Justice

Number of deaths attributed to suicide


from April 2021 to March 2022


Variation in the number of suicides

a decrease


The number of suicides goes from 80 (between April 2020 and March 2021) to 75 (between April 2021 to March 2022). This is a decrease of 6.2%.

Death rate in custody (per 10,000 prisoners)



Suicide rate in custody (per 10,000 prisoners)



The prison service must notify a judicial authority for

of every death

The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman investigates all deaths in prison facilities and Young Offender Institutions.1

Friends and family are informed of the death. Every facility assigns an officer to communicate with the family (Family Liaison Officer, FLO). This officer is selected based on their “personal qualities” (good interpersonal skills, empathy, discretion…). Where possible, the FLO, accompanied by another member of staff, makes a visit to the closest relative or to the nominated person. They inform them of the death. This visit must take place without delay. For practical reasons, an officer from a different facility may be sent to take action. A follow-up visit must be scheduled as early as possible.1

The body must be treated with dignity and returned to their family. The heads of public facilities must offer a “reasonable” contribution to the funeral costs. If the deceased person is from overseas, a “reasonable” contribution to the repatriation costs of the body or the ashes must be offered.1

Suicide prevention policies are implemented


Suicide prevention is obligatory in all facilities. This takes the form of a procedure named Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork (ACCT).1 The Howard League, in its 2016 report on the prevention of suicide in prison, highlights that “these procedures depend on good relationships between staff and prisoners, and on the efficiency of communication between members of staff”. The report also emphasises that: “the prison administration must not rely on the ACCT to flag and support every prisoner presenting a risk of suicide. Of the 89 prisoners who took their own lives in 2015, less than half (35) were subject to ACCT monitoring at the time of death”.2

  • Numerous prisons have been criticised for their inaction concerning suicide prevention.

    At the Exeter prison, ten prisoners died of suicide between 2018 and 2022. The monitoring for newly-arrived prisoners is inadequate, mental health care is poor, and the facility has trouble retaining senior staff. HM Inspectorate of Prisons invoked its Urgent Notification procedure, giving the government 28 days to respond.

    In Liverpool, two staff members were charged with gross negligence manslaughter following the death by suicide of a prisoner.

    At Belmarsh, an inquest jury noted “significant and multiple failings” by the facility following the suicide of an injured prisoner. He was meant to be in a “disabled cell” with a special mattress, but had been transferred into a standard cell, where he was forced to sleep on the floor.

    / InsideTime

In its most recent visit report, the Committee for the Prevention of Torture has described a prison system “in a deep crisis”, pointing to violent, dangerous and overpopulated prisons. The Committee highlights acts of violence perpetrated by staff against prisoners. These include “preventative attacks”, which consist of beating inmates who migh pose a threat in the future. This practice was referred to in an official document from Liverpool prison in 2015, which stated that “there is no rule which specifies whether a person should expect to be attacked before being able to defend themselves”.

The prohibition of torture is enshrined in the Constitution and the legislation

only by law

The prohibition of torture is written in:

  • the Criminal Justice Act of 1988 (section 134)
  • the Health and Social Care Act of 2018
  • the Human Rights Act of 1998

Section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act of 1988 defines torture as: “A public official or person acting in an official capacity, whatever his nationality, commits the offence of torture if in the United Kingdom or elsewhere he intentionally inflicts severe pain or suffering on another”.

The United Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT) was

ratified in 1988

(signed in 1985)

The rules in force (PSI publication 32/2011 on ensuring equality) ensure protection against discrimination, harassment, sexual or other, and victimisation. The legislation concerns staff, prisoners, and any person acting in prison.

All allegations and suspicions of ill-treatment inflicted on prisoners are logged


There are no records of allegations or suspicions of abuse. In the most serious cases, the prison administration must notify the local Police Intelligence leader1(see Incidents section). The United Kingdom’s National Preventive Mechanism (MNP) highlighted, in its 2019 submission to the Committee against Torture, the lack of publication of detailed annual data for allegations of or proven abuse. MNP members criticise conditions, regimes or treatment in detention as being so indecent that they amount to abuse.

  1. Component of the British police responsible, among other things, for compiling information on crime. 

No policy specific to the prevention of toture and abuse has been put in place. Prison staff undergo “training in control and constraint techniques” to prevent inappropriate use of force.1

There is no specific procedure provided in the case of an allegation or suspicion of abuse. Investigators are required to keep a written record of the evidence. For complex investigations, an individual is selected to be responsible for their classification. Special attention is paid to the conservation of evidence that may be subject to forensic examination.2

Medical staff do not receive training in identifying signs of torture.

Number of recorded violent acts between prisoners


/ Her Majesty's Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS)

Around 13% of the violent episodes are serious assaults.1

  1. Serious assaults are, according to the Ministry of Justice,“a sexual assault; an assault which requires detention in outside hospital as an in-patient; requires medical treatment for concussion or internal injuries; or incurs any of the following injuries: a fracture, scald or burn, stabbing, crushing, extensive or multiple bruising, black eye, broken nose, lost or broken tooth, cuts requiring suturing, bites, temporary or permanent blindness”

The PSI publication 32/2011 on ensuring equality provides protection against discrimination, harassment, sexual or otherwise, and victimisation. It also concerns violence between prisoners.

Each prison facility keeps an updated record of violence between inmates


Acts of violence between prisoners are investigated


All acts of violence between prisoners are subject to an enquiry, according to the Ministry of Justice.1

  1. Ministry of Justice, Safety in Custody Statistics Guide, p. 10-11. 

Prisoners are able to make a written complaint against the prison administration by filling out a form Letter boxes designed to collect these forms are available on every ward. The PSI publication 02/2012 on the prisoner complaints procedure also states that “facilities must make sure that a prisoner is able to make a formal complaint orally”.

There is no specialised body to receive complaints. The prison’s management (director or designated officer) deals with complaints about staff behaviour. The prison administration’s regional director (Deputy Director of Custody, DDC) deals with complaints which are sent in sealed envelopes.

Prisoners are able to make a complaint via the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO). The PPO is independent of the prison administration. Prisoners can also address their complaints to:

  • the Queen
  • MPs
  • the court of law (against the prison administration or a member of staff)
  • the Criminal Cases Review Commission
  • the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority
  • the European Court of Human Rights.1

The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) was

ratified in December 2003

(signed in June 2003)

An NPM has been established


in March 2009

Name of the NPM

The UK National Preventive Mechanism

In 2009, the British government assigned 18 existing bodies to form its NPM.

These bodies already held the power to carry out independent inspections of places of detention. The British government must confirm that they meet the requirements outlined by the OPCAT. Three new bodies were created in December 2013.1

The NPM has come into office


in March 2009

The NPM was appointed by

the government

Structure of the NPM

collegiate body, 21 members

The UK NPM oversees 21 supervisory bodies. Those in charge of prisons in England and Wales are:

  • Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP): this carries out regular visits to every prison in England and Wales with the aim of evaluating the treatment of prisoners and the conditions of their incarceration. They are also authorised to inspect other places of detention.
  • The Care Quality Commission (CQC): this monitors, inspects and controls social and health services dedicated to adults in England. The visits that they make are conducted with the HMIP.
  • The Children’s Commissioner for England: this is in charge of the promotion and protection of the rights of children. They have the power to visit, among other places, juvenile facilities.
  • Healthcare Inspectorate Wales (HIW): this monitors and inspects the health services in Wales. They visit detention centres alongside the HMIP. During their visits, they evaluate the quality of care provided to prisoners, assuring that it is equivalent to outside care.
  • Lay Observers: these monitor the treatment of prisoners in England and Wales during transfers and extractions carried out by private companies. Lay Observers are independent volunteers.
  • Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills, Ofsted: this inspects and oversees the services dedicated to minors, and the services in charge of education and training for all ages. Ofsted controls the secure centres which hold children and secure training centres (with the HMIP and the CQC). It ensures access to education and training in prison in Young Offender Institutions.

The activities carried out by the different bodies are coordinated by the HMIP. The representatives of all NPM member institutions attend biannual meetings. They communicate with each other throughout the year about their work via the NPM.1

  1. Consult the UK NPM website 

The NPM reports are made public


The NPM publishes a yearly report, which is presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Justice. The Inspectorate of Penal Institution will publish, in the 18 weeks following a visit, its inspection report.

Number of visits made by the NPM during the year


/ UK NPM, Ninth Annual Report: 1 April 2017 – 31 March 2018, January 2019.
  • HM Inspectorate of Prisons carried out 16 visits between early October and the end of 2022.

    / HM Inspectorate of Prisons

The legislation allows the NPM to carry out unannounced visits


Penal institutions, Young Offender Institutions containing young adults and specialised wards are visited at least every five years. The visits are determined on the basis of risk assessment. The majority of facilities are visited every two to three years. Certain facilities classed as high risk are visited more frequently. Young Offender Institutions (containing minors under the age of 18) are visited every year.1

  1. HM Inspectorate of Prisons, Inspection framework, March 2019, p. 12. 

The NPM can monitor all prison facilities, units and premises


A follow-up mechanism is provided for the recommendations of the NPM . Two months after the publication of the report, the prisons that are visited must produce an action plan responding to the recommendations of the Inspectorate.

The action plan, published on the HMIP website, specifies whether the facility accepts, fully or in part, or rejects the recommendations. It also outlines the actions which are intended or carried out as a consequence of the recommendations. Inspectors use a facility’s action plans, alongside other physical or numerical proof, to assess the progress of a facility and prepare for their visits. The HMIP carries out inspection visits. These visits are announced shortly before they’re carried out and must take place between eight and 12 months after the initial visit. Four or five inspectors will be involved for a duration of two and a half days.

Inspectors assess the improvements implemented based on some 15 recommendations. They give their opinions worded as follows:

  • no significant progress
  • insufficient progress
  • reasonable progress
  • satisfactory progress

The HMIP is required to carry out between 15 and 20 inspection visits each fiscal year. The Independent Reviews of Progress, IRP are published within 25 days.

In the case of worrying allegations from the HMIP, the Chief Inspector of Prisons can address an urgent communication to the Secretary of State for Justice. This letter must be written in the seven days following the end of the inspection. It outlines their preoccupations and their justification. The Secretary of State has 28 days to respond publicly.1

  1. HM Inspectorate of Prisons, Inspection framework, March 2019, p. 12. 

A regional body monitors the places of deprivation of liberty


European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT)

Its reports are made public


The reports from regular and ad hoc visits are available on the CPT’s website.

  • The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment carried out a visit from 8 to 21 June 2021. It published the report on its visit and included the response of the British authorities. It remarked on the prevalence of violence in the men’s prisons it visited. The CPT also noted that most of the staff members in contact with the prisoners have less than two years of experience.

    / Council of Europe

The Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture (SPT) has visited the country


The SPT (United Nations) visited the United Kingdom from the 8 to the 19 September 2019.

Its report was made public


Prison facilities are subjected to other external review mechanisms. Every facility in England and Wales is monitored by an Independent Monitoring Board (IMB). Their members, drawn from civil society, are independent volunteers. They participate in at least three or four visits a month. They are selected by the Secretary of State. They can enter the institution in question without restriction, at any time. They can speak privately with prisoners of their choice. They regularly share their observations with management teams. They may also share their observations during regional meetings and in front of their National Assembly. The supervisory boards produce an annual report for the Minister.

Facilities are also under the supervision of authorised persons. Their visits do not require any special request from the prisoner and are not counted against the visits to which they are entitled. These persons are listed below:

  • English or Welsh MPs
  • Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
  • Representatives from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, EHRC, or from any other organisation, where the goal of their visit is to highlight, specifically and exclusively, any problems associated with equality.

Meetings are confidential.[^PSI 16/2011]

[^PSI 16/2011]: Ministry of Justice, PSI publication 16/2011 on visits and visitor services.

  • A report by the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) noted an improvement in the condition of Hewell Prison. It was said to be “cleaner” and “more comfortable”. The IMB had called the facility “unfit for the 21st century” and had denounced the inhumane treatment of prisoners with disabilities as well as those with “indeterminate sentences”.

    / BBC

The law provides for a sentence adjustment system

  • The Ministry of Justice announced a reform of the parole system with the aim of putting “the emphasis firmly back on public protection”. A Ministerial check by the Ministry of Justice will be added for the release of the “most serious offenders”. Victims can now attend parole hearings and ask questions. Victims, the media and prisoners will be able to request that these hearings be held publicly. The criteria for release will change. Parole Boards will now include greater numbers of members with policing backgrounds and will no longer include professionals working with the prisoners requesting release. The National Association of Probation Officers (Napo) strongly disapproves of these changes. The head of the Parole Board stated that these new rules could lead to a “lack of clarity” in the evidence provided.

    Prison Reform Trust asserted that the changes in the reform give the Ministry of Justice veto power over prisoners’ access to parole. The charity further explained that these decisions are not without political influence. It published a letter it had sent to the Ministry of Justice to support its claims.

    / InsideTime

The Parole Board is the competent authority for sentence adjustments. This independent body evaluates the risks presented by the prisoner. It determines their ability to regain their liberty.

The sentence can be adjusted as soon as it is pronounced (ab initio)


Sentence adjustments can be granted during the incarceration


The Parole Board examines the request for eligibility for parole.1 It reviews life sentences, or IPPs2 at the end of the tariff (the period of unconditional imprisonment)3.

  1. Prison Reform Trust, The Parole Board and parole review 

  2. Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection, see the Specific Populations section, Life Imprisonment category. 

  3. The period of unconditional imprisonment (tariff) is the minimum length of time a prisoner sentenced to an IPP must remain incarcerated 

Prisoners can contest a negative decision of sentence adjustment


Specific categories of prisoners are ineligible for sentence adjustment


The law provides for a temporary release system


Release on temporary licence, ROTL is frequently used to prepare for release, especially for long sentences. Its duration is one day long and may include one night. In 2013, new provisions extended the time needed to procure the permission. Prison Reform Trust (PRT) highlights the significant decrease in their number.1

Prisoners may be granted, within a short period of time, special permission for a few hours (special purpose licences (SPL)). They may be requested in the following cases:

  • Personal reasons (visit to a dying parent, emergencies regarding parental responsibilities, etc.)
  • Medical reasons
  • Marriage or signing of a civil union contract
  • A meeding with a legal advisor2

A release on temporary license (ROTL) is only granted on British territory. The prisoner must spend at least a 24-hour period in prison per week. The prisoner may be authorised to use a vehicle from the facility if the release plays a role in their rehabilitation (cf. PSO publication 5400).

Other specific activities depend on the activity justifying the permission to leave:

  • Paid or unpaid work: the prison ensures the supervision of the prisoner based on the risk assessment at the proposed job and for the prisoner himself. Their employment is monitored (attendance, progress, etc.).
  • Maintenance of family ties: a release on temporary license may be granted every fourteen days. It may be granted every seven days for prisoners who have primary care of a child under the age of 16 or who have the responsibility of a person over the age of 16 who requires substantial care (old age, infirmity, or disability).1

The law provides for a sentence adjustment for medical reasons


The Secretary of State for Justice may grant a release for medical reasons. These decisions are rare. This measure is considered for people who are terminally ill, bedridden, or severely disabled. The law does not suggest any timeframe for the release of a terminally ill patient. In practice, the arrangement is only granted for people whose life expectancy does not exceed three months.1

  1. Prison Reform Trust and Restore Support Network, “Social care or systematic neglect? Older people on release from prison”, 2016, p. 12. 

In exceptional circumstances, condemned people may receive a royal pardon (Royal Prerogative of Mercy, RPM). There are two types of pardon:

  • the free pardon: the sentence and its consequences are cancelled
  • the conditional pardon: the sentence and its consequences are commuted to a lighter sentence.

The Secretary of State for Justice can recommend a royal pardon. This possibility is usually reserved for cases which meet the following three conditions:

  • No appeal is available
  • New elements have appeared
  • New elements show, beyond reasonable doubt, the absence of crime or the innocence of the person charged.

Public opinion calls for greater transparency in the exercise of the right to pardon. 1