Life imprisonment for dangerous prisoners does not breach human rights, rule UK judges

Last Updated: Thu, Nov 22, 2012 08:50 hrs

Judges in the UK have ruled that locking up most dangerous prisoners for life does not breach their human rights.

The Court of Appeal made the judgment in cases bought by two murders and a rapist who claimed whole-life orders were inappropriate.

Although the judges overturned the whole-life tariff for murderer Danilo Restivo and rapist Michael Roberts, they upheld the sentence for killer David Oakes.

Oakes 'sadistically tortured' his former partner before shooting her and their two-year-old daughter, the Telegraph reports.

His appeal against a whole life tariff was rejected with Lord Judge saying that he had been 'utterly merciless' in putting his former partner through 'the most terrifying and agonising ordeal that he could envisage', the report said.

According to the report, the judges ruled the imposition of whole-life terms was not incompatible with Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment.

"We should perhaps emphasise at the outset that each of these appellants is dangerous, and on the available evidence, likely to remain dangerous for the indefinite future," Lord Judge said.

"At present it is difficult to see how it will ever become safe for any of them to be released from custody," he said.

The panel, headed by Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, also upheld the 30-year minimum term imposed on Kiaran Stapleton, who was jailed for life after he 'executed' a stranger in the street, the report said.

Stapleton, who labelled himself 'Psycho' when he appeared in court, shot Indian student Anuj Bidve, 23, at point-blank range in Salford, Greater Manchester.

The court had reached the conclusion that the minimum term should be fixed at 40 years. (ANI)

More from Sify: