New UK Sentencing Guidelines Can Allow Illegal Immigrants to Avoid Deportation

[Social Media]

 

---

New Sentencing Guidelines Could Allow Illegal Immigrants to Avoid Deportation

 

Proposed sentencing guidelines from the Sentencing Council may lead to hundreds of illegal immigrants avoiding deportation each year by recommending more lenient prison terms than those set by parliamentary law. The independent body has drafted its first-ever sentencing guidelines for immigration offences, but concerns have been raised over the disparity between the proposed sentence lengths and the maximum penalties established by UK law.

 

Under the draft guidance, judges would be advised to hand down sentences of less than 12 months for four key immigration offences, even though the law allows for much longer sentences. This distinction is crucial because, under UK law, foreign nationals sentenced to more than 12 months in prison are eligible for deportation. The guidance, once finalised, will also instruct judges to consider an offender’s first offence as a mitigating factor, allowing for a further reduction in sentencing. Critics argue this is problematic, as many offenders would not have previously been in the UK.

 

 

Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, has voiced strong opposition, warning that the proposed guidelines would severely undermine border enforcement by making it more difficult for the Home Office to deport individuals convicted of immigration offences. “The guidelines the Sentencing Council have drafted will blow a hole in border enforcement. Yet again they are acting in a way that disregards parliament’s will,” he said. Jenrick also pointed to previous controversies involving the council, including new “two-tier” sentencing guidelines that could result in more lenient sentences for criminals from minority groups.

 

The offence of knowingly entering the UK without permission carries a maximum penalty of four years in prison, yet the Sentencing Council’s draft guidelines suggest judges start at just six months. For deception offences, such as using fraudulent means to enter or remain in the UK, the guidance proposes a starting point of nine months—less than half of the maximum two-year sentence outlined in UK law. Similarly, possession of false identity documents related to immigration carries a maximum penalty of ten years, but the council suggests a starting point of only nine months.

 

The possession of false ID without a “reasonable excuse” currently has a maximum sentence of two years, yet the draft guidance recommends a starting point of just nine months.

 

According to figures from the Sentencing Council’s consultation document, these sentencing recommendations would impact hundreds of individuals. The document, first published in March last year, was discussed in multiple meetings involving Ministry of Justice officials before the consultation closed in June. Until now, no formal sentencing guidelines had been issued for immigration offences, but recent legislative changes introduced by the Conservative government prompted the independent council to develop its recommendations. While ministers were able to provide input during the consultation process, the final decision remains with the Sentencing Council.

 

The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 introduced stricter penalties for immigration offences, including potential life sentences for those found guilty of facilitating illegal entry into the UK. However, the Sentencing Council, which was established in 2010 to promote consistency and transparency in the judiciary, operates independently, though it reports to the Ministry of Justice. Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretary, has direct authority over the appointment of half of the council’s members, while her approval is required for the remaining members.

 

Jenrick has renewed his calls for Mahmood to adopt legislation that would allow the government to override the council’s guidelines. He introduced a bill this month that would prevent the Sentencing Council from issuing new guidelines without the justice secretary’s approval while also granting ministers the power to amend existing guidance. “That’s why I brought forward a bill to restore ministerial oversight to the council, but shamefully Labour opposed it. The justice secretary has chosen to be powerless to stop madness like this and the two-tier sentencing rules,” he said.

 

In response to the criticism, the Sentencing Council issued a statement clarifying that “these are draft guidelines which have not yet been published as definitive guidelines.” It further explained that “the draft guidelines for these offences proposed higher sentences for the most serious offending behaviour whilst maintaining current sentencing practice for less serious offending.” The council also noted that the guidelines were designed to ensure that sentences reflected the full range of offences, from minor infractions to the most severe, while still allowing judges and magistrates the discretion to go beyond the guidelines if necessary in the interests of justice.

 

Based on a report by The Times  2025-03-28

 

 

[JonnyF]

Britain is now a 2 tier society, with the indigenous on the bottom rung of the ladder.

 

Shameful. 

[quake]

One more example of how sad and unfair the uk has

become.

Seams each day,  the true British people are not important anymore

to the power that be.

Shameful. 

 

 

[newbee2022]

1 hour ago, Social Media said:

 

---

New Sentencing Guidelines Could Allow Illegal Immigrants to Avoid Deportation

 

Proposed sentencing guidelines from the Sentencing Council may lead to hundreds of illegal immigrants avoiding deportation each year by recommending more lenient prison terms than those set by parliamentary law. The independent body has drafted its first-ever sentencing guidelines for immigration offences, but concerns have been raised over the disparity between the proposed sentence lengths and the maximum penalties established by UK law.

 

Under the draft guidance, judges would be advised to hand down sentences of less than 12 months for four key immigration offences, even though the law allows for much longer sentences. This distinction is crucial because, under UK law, foreign nationals sentenced to more than 12 months in prison are eligible for deportation. The guidance, once finalised, will also instruct judges to consider an offender’s first offence as a mitigating factor, allowing for a further reduction in sentencing. Critics argue this is problematic, as many offenders would not have previously been in the UK.

 

 

Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, has voiced strong opposition, warning that the proposed guidelines would severely undermine border enforcement by making it more difficult for the Home Office to deport individuals convicted of immigration offences. “The guidelines the Sentencing Council have drafted will blow a hole in border enforcement. Yet again they are acting in a way that disregards parliament’s will,” he said. Jenrick also pointed to previous controversies involving the council, including new “two-tier” sentencing guidelines that could result in more lenient sentences for criminals from minority groups.

 

The offence of knowingly entering the UK without permission carries a maximum penalty of four years in prison, yet the Sentencing Council’s draft guidelines suggest judges start at just six months. For deception offences, such as using fraudulent means to enter or remain in the UK, the guidance proposes a starting point of nine months—less than half of the maximum two-year sentence outlined in UK law. Similarly, possession of false identity documents related to immigration carries a maximum penalty of ten years, but the council suggests a starting point of only nine months.

 

The possession of false ID without a “reasonable excuse” currently has a maximum sentence of two years, yet the draft guidance recommends a starting point of just nine months.

 

According to figures from the Sentencing Council’s consultation document, these sentencing recommendations would impact hundreds of individuals. The document, first published in March last year, was discussed in multiple meetings involving Ministry of Justice officials before the consultation closed in June. Until now, no formal sentencing guidelines had been issued for immigration offences, but recent legislative changes introduced by the Conservative government prompted the independent council to develop its recommendations. While ministers were able to provide input during the consultation process, the final decision remains with the Sentencing Council.

 

The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 introduced stricter penalties for immigration offences, including potential life sentences for those found guilty of facilitating illegal entry into the UK. However, the Sentencing Council, which was established in 2010 to promote consistency and transparency in the judiciary, operates independently, though it reports to the Ministry of Justice. Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretary, has direct authority over the appointment of half of the council’s members, while her approval is required for the remaining members.

 

Jenrick has renewed his calls for Mahmood to adopt legislation that would allow the government to override the council’s guidelines. He introduced a bill this month that would prevent the Sentencing Council from issuing new guidelines without the justice secretary’s approval while also granting ministers the power to amend existing guidance. “That’s why I brought forward a bill to restore ministerial oversight to the council, but shamefully Labour opposed it. The justice secretary has chosen to be powerless to stop madness like this and the two-tier sentencing rules,” he said.

 

In response to the criticism, the Sentencing Council issued a statement clarifying that “these are draft guidelines which have not yet been published as definitive guidelines.” It further explained that “the draft guidelines for these offences proposed higher sentences for the most serious offending behaviour whilst maintaining current sentencing practice for less serious offending.” The council also noted that the guidelines were designed to ensure that sentences reflected the full range of offences, from minor infractions to the most severe, while still allowing judges and magistrates the discretion to go beyond the guidelines if necessary in the interests of justice.

 

Based on a report by The Times  2025-03-28

 

 

Humanity first?🥺

[mikeymike100]

It seem the UK is determined to give foreigners more 'rights' than the 'British', not just this insane idea, but there are other ludicrous initiatives, like giving foreigners more lenient sentences than locals.

The use of pre-sentence reports (PSRs) to provide judges with detailed information about an offender’s background, including factors like ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or personal circumstances. The goal is to address disparities in sentencing outcomes, particularly for ethnic minorities. This initiative gives a certain demographic an excuse to commit crime?

[Hatari fan]

Makes you wonder who's running the country, it's certainly not the British people. 

Every day there is something that advances the rights and privileges of immigrants or ethnic minorities at the expense of the British people. 

[topt]

3 hours ago, Social Media said:

The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 introduced stricter penalties for immigration offences, including potential life sentences for those found guilty of facilitating illegal entry into the UK. However, the Sentencing Council, which was established in 2010 to promote consistency and transparency in the judiciary, operates independently, though it reports to the Ministry of Justice.

It seems like left hand/right hand.......

or are the Sentencing Council just thumbing their noses at politicians and the citizens in general...........

[Thingamabob]

Brits are being betrayed by both the government and the civil service.

[Purdey]

It is a draft guideline. It doesn't mean it definitely will be implemented. After discussion, I hope it will be either rejected or adjusted. 

[Watawattana]

2 minutes ago, Purdey said:

It is a draft guideline. It doesn't mean it definitely week be implemented. After discussion, I hope it will be either rejected or adjusted. 

Agree, but I don't have a massive amount of confidence in the UK Government's ability or willingness to reject these guidelines.

[Scouse123]

3 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

It seem the UK is determined to give foreigners more 'rights' than the 'British', not just this insane idea, but there are other ludicrous initiatives, like giving foreigners more lenient sentences than locals.

The use of pre-sentence reports (PSRs) to provide judges with detailed information about an offender’s background, including factors like ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or personal circumstances. The goal is to address disparities in sentencing outcomes, particularly for ethnic minorities. This initiative gives a certain demographic an excuse to commit crime?

 

 

And how do they perform background checks when these immigrants come from lousy countries with little or no rule of law.

 

It would be impossible to perform such checks.

 

This is the problem with the dinghy dodgers, we don't know what is landing on our shores.