The majority of recommendations made by the Parole Board last year in cases of prisoners serving long sentences were accepted, the board’s annual report reveals.
The board advises the Minister for Justice on the administration of long-term prison sentences in respect of those serving sentences greater than eight years.
It advises of the prisoner’s progress to date, the degree to which he or she has engaged with the various therapeutic services and how best to proceed with the future administration of the sentence.
Minister for Justice Alan Shatter published the board’s annual report for 2010 today.
The board reviewed the cases of 81 prisoners last year, with recommendations made to the Minister in 79 of those cases.
In some 72 of those cases, the recommendations of the board were accepted in full. In four cases, the Minister accepted the recommendations of the board in part.
The Minister rejected the board’s recommendations in just one case and noted them in another. In one case, the prisoner had been released on remission prior to a decision being taken.
A total of 58 prisoners were interviewed by the board.
Some 66 cases were referred to the board for review in 2010, more than a fifth less than the 83 referred the previous year. Just 48 of those prisoners accepted the board’s invitation to participate in the review process.
The board, however, noted while the number of cases referred to it last year dropped, its workload increased by 13 per cent.
This arose because there were 195 cases at various stages carried over from 2009. Its total caseload for last year was 261.
In his foreword to the report, chairman John Costello said prisoner interviews were a “significant demand” on board members, but that during his brief period as chair he had realised their value.
“The interview affords the prisoner the opportunity to discuss the contents of his/her dossier, of course, but it also adds the human dimension to the process which paper files can never provide,” he said.
“For example, many individuals serving life sentences for murder may never have perpetrated their crimes if one small detail in their case history had been altered, eg the unavailability of a weapon or a little less alcohol had been consumed.”
He said that in such circumstances Parole Board members were faced with remorseful individuals who are anxious to address their offending and to pay their debt to society.
Citing figures from the Irish Prison Service’s report published at the end of August, Mr Costello noted a “worrying trend” was the steady increase in the number of people receiving sentences of five to 10 years, mainly for drug offences.
He also noted recent comments by Mr Shatter that sending offenders to prison without tackling the underlying social conditions of their criminality, the lack of skills, education and employment while they are in prison only served to “reinforce the cycle of criminality”.
“This is a challenge for the Prison Service and the Parole Board,” Mr Costello said.
He welcomed the report of the Thornton Hall Review group, which recommended new prisons at Thornton Hall in Dublin and at Kilworth in Cork.
Mr Shatter thanked Mr Costello and the board for their report and work throughout the year.
He paid tribute to the work of the former chairman Gordon Holmes, who died in January, and who he said had made "such an enormous contribution" during his tenure.
The Minister said he intended to enact legislation to place the Parole Board on a statutory footing.
“This will help to strengthen the Parole Board and improve its functions. In that context, he will be considering what role the board will play and what powers it should have.”
The total cost to the State for the operation of the board last year was less than €400,000.
The board is an independent non-statutory body and was established on an administrative basis in April 2001 replacing the Sentence Review Group.