MPs debate fairness as legislation aimed at preventing ‘two-tier’ justice system moves forward
A Government Bill to prevent differential sentencing based on race or religion has passed its first hurdle in the House of Commons, amid intense debate about fairness and equality before the law.
The Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Bill, introduced by Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, seeks to block new judicial guidance that would have encouraged judges to consider an offender’s ethnicity, culture, or faith background when ordering pre-sentence reports. These reports play a crucial role in helping judges decide appropriate penalties for convicted criminals.
The Bill was prompted by draft guidelines from the independent Sentencing Council, which suggested that individuals from ethnic and cultural minorities, alongside other groups such as young adults and pregnant women, should usually be assessed by a probation officer before sentencing. Critics argued that the move risked introducing a “two-tier” justice system.
Addressing the Commons, Ms Mahmood said:
“While I agree with the Sentencing Council’s diagnosis of disparities in outcomes, I believe they have prescribed the wrong cure. The foundations of our justice system are built on the principle of equality before the law. We cannot risk undermining that by appearing to offer preferential treatment based on race or religion.”
She continued:
“Going ahead with the guidelines would have been an extraordinary and dangerous precedent. We are all safer when everyone knows they will be treated the same. If we sacrifice that in pursuit of equality, we risk bringing the whole edifice crashing down.”
The Bill, which was approved at second reading on Tuesday, will now proceed to further scrutiny next week. It proposes to ban the Sentencing Council from including offenders’ personal characteristics—such as race or religion—in any future guidance related to pre-sentence reports.
While the Government insists the Bill restores fairness, critics from across the political spectrum voiced concerns.
Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick described the legislation as “half-baked” and “political theatre,” accusing the Government of failing to address deeper systemic issues.
“This is not a solution—it’s a fig leaf,” he told MPs. “The Sentencing Council remains in place, staffed by the same individuals who proposed the guidelines. Unless that changes, we’ll be back here again and again.”
Jenrick added:
“Equality before the law is sacred. We must root out any attempt to tilt justice based on identity.”
Veteran Labour MP Diane Abbott, however, took a different view, urging Parliament not to ignore disparities in the justice system. Citing data showing disproportionate arrest and conviction rates among Black Britons, she called for a “Macpherson-style” inquiry into judicial institutions—referring to the 1999 report into the Metropolitan Police which found it was “institutionally racist.”
More Read
“We’ve known for decades why the figures are skewed. If we achieve equal treatment, that is not special treatment—it is long overdue,” Abbott said.
Labour’s Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) called for the outright abolition of the Sentencing Council, claiming it represented “unelected officials clashing with democratically accountable politicians.”
“There are far too many quangos operating outside the will of the people. This is a democracy, not a technocracy,” he said.
The Sentencing Council had planned to implement the new guidance earlier this month, but the move was put on hold following the introduction of the Bill. The Council, which has yet to respond formally to the proposed legislation, maintains its role is to improve consistency and fairness in sentencing.
The Bill now enters the committee stage, where MPs will examine the finer details. If passed into law, it could reshape the way courts handle sentencing guidance—reinforcing the principle that justice must be blind, impartial, and equal for all.
