Enough Review Possibilities

Considering the European Court of Human Rights judgment in the case of Vinter and Others v United Kingdom 2013, does the UK law provides enough review possibilities for prisoners serving whole life sentences to be released on licence, If not should the UK law be reviewed.

In approaching this question the essay will use Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights as a criteria to assess whether there are enough review possibilities. The criteria will place the UK review possibilities against Article 3 to measure whether the UK provide for enough review possibilities based on the European Court of Human Rights perspective. This is particularly because UK the review possibilities of whole life sentences offends Article 3, also because the

In contrast the United Kingdom ’s Court of Appeal disagrees with the Grand Chamber judgment and provides reasons as to why it is not in

The fact that Judicial Review is a court procedure available for life prisoners, which checks for Secretary of State decision if they have acted beyond their power, is not a justified remedy to cover the lack of clarity in UK law.

And lastly the provision under section 30 of the Crimes (Sentences) Act 1997 provides for a narrow Piece of law does not provide for a real possibility of life for prisoners outside prison. The UK claiming to interpret compassionate grounds to include the meaning to check as to whether penological grounds continues to be justified is two completely different grounds and thus in practice this is extremely vague and unclear and should in response be amended.

Therefore, the requirement for ECtHR was to have a review procedure, which was clear in fact and in practice based on the facts provided my the UK this requirement was not satisfied and thus it was found incompatible with Article 3 of the