Current sentencing practices fail Black, Asian, and Mixed heritage people. The Sentencing Review provided an opportunity to fix that – but the panel has decided against considering racial disparities.
🕒 Estimated read time: 3 minutes
Today (May 22nd) the final report from the Independent Sentencing Review was published. The report includes several recommendations that Action for Race Equality welcomes, particularly on strengthening alternatives to custody in the community, and encouraging a move away from the “tough on crime” narrative that has had a negative impact on sentencing policy.
Disappointingly, the Review fails to properly consider the impact of racial disparities within its final report, with the panel explaining that “in accordance with its Terms of Reference, the Review has not considered these disparities in detail”.
The Terms of Reference did not explicitly exclude consideration of racial disparities from the Review’s remit. However, it did seek to consider “whether the sentencing framework should be amended to take into account the specific needs or vulnerabilities of specific cohorts”.
Black, Asian, and Mixed Heritage people frequently face harsher outcomes at every stage of the criminal justice system, including in sentencing. According to research, legally relevant factors do not fully explain disparities in remand and sentencing outcomes between ethnic minority groups and the White British group.
Black and ethnic minority people are being systematically sentenced more harshly than their white counterparts due to discriminatory sentencing. In ARE’s view, this should be considered a ‘specific vulnerability’.
Understanding isn’t action
We welcome the review’s acknowledgement that ‘understanding the causes of any disproportionate outcomes in the criminal justice system’ is important, however we are concerned that calling for a ‘bespoke exercise or review’ is yet another disappointing shift of responsibility.
Disparities in the justice system are already well documented. Successive reviews have identified institutional racism as an urgent and persistent problem and yet change has not occurred.
In 1981, Scarman warned that “urgent action” was needed to prevent racial disadvantage becoming an “endemic, ineradicable disease threatening the very survival of our society”. In 2025, that urgent action has still not happened.
Ineffective intervention
The report calls for the use of equality impact assessments (EIAs) as its recommendations are implemented, as well as regular monitoring to identify any disproportionate outcomes. While it also calls for processes to be put in place ‘to understand their causes and how they can be addressed’, there is a concern that this intervention will fail to impact on the continuing high levels of racial disparities happening in sentencing.
While EIAs can be an effective tool that provides more transparency on areas of inequality, they are currently inefficient at tackling disparities.
The cumulative disadvantage that Black, Asian, and Mixed Heritage people experience through the legal system is directly contributing to the capacity crisis that initiated this important review. The failure to properly consider this in the scope of the review will result in worsening disparities.
Author
Meka Beresford
Head of Policy
