Ministry of Justice

The requested information has been provided as an Excel file alongside this response. The dataset for December 2024 is a subset of data scheduled to be published as part of the Offender management statistics quarterly - GOV.UK release and cannot be provided in advance of that publication.

Around 99% of prisoners have an origin location - i.e. addresses that are recorded in our central IT system. If no address is given, an offender’s committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident.

This information is included in the data provided in the tables attached. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 1% of all offenders; these figures are excluded from the tables attached.

HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) is committed to tackling the threat posed by illicit mobile telephones. It has a wide-ranging programme in place to prevent them from entering prisons, to detect and disrupt their use, and to investigate cases where a prisoner may have committed an offence.

HMPPS uses powers under the Prisons (Interference with Wireless Telegraphy) Act 2012 to enable prisons to use technology to suppress the use of wireless telegraphy such as mobile phones.

As part of their local security strategies, prisons are able to deploy a range of measures, but owing to security and operational sensitivities, it would not be appropriate to provide detailed information about the countermeasures that are in place.

Sentencing in individual cases is a matter for our independent courts. There are a range of communication related offences, both summary-only and triable either way, across different pieces of legislation with varying maximum penalties. For example, section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 which criminalises the sending of a communication that is either grossly offensive, or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character. This offence carries a maximum 6 months’ imprisonment and/or unlimited fine.

The Government has launched an Independent Review of Sentencing chaired by former Lord Chancellor, David Gauke. The Review will examine options following three core principles: sentences must punish offenders and protect the public; sentences should encourage prisoners to turn their backs on a life of crime and we must expand and make greater use of punishment outside of prison.

The Law Commission’s 2022 report on weddings law made 57 recommendations for the wholesale reform of weddings law, including recommendations for an officiant-based weddings model. This would shift the focus of regulation from the building or venue where the wedding takes place to the officiant. The Law Commission set out its view that its recommendations would provide greater choice for couples in deciding how and where they get married, and the form and content of the ceremony.

I am sure you will agree that marriage will always be one of our most important institutions, and we have a duty to consider any changes to the law carefully. As a new Government, we need time to consider this issue, and we will set out our position on weddings reform in the coming months.

The Government continues to explore the use of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) to improve the efficiency of courts and legal processes.

The Ministry of Justice has established a new Justice AI Unit, led by the Department’s first Chief AI Officer, to develop a comprehensive AI strategy for the Department and its agencies.

With regards to the criminal courts, the Government is committed to bearing down on the outstanding caseload in the Crown Court and the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts led by Sir Brian Leveson will assess how the use of new technologies, including AI, could be used to improve efficiency across the criminal courts. Furthermore, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has ambitious plans to leverage new technologies to redesign and enhance legal systems and processes. Plans include the integration of AI into casework, potentially unlocking thousands of hours in improved productivity.

In the Family Courts, we are considering where both policy and technology can work together to improve services. We are seeking to reduce demand by using AI to signpost people to the right information to assist in their situation and provide AI tools such as parent arrangement planners to help separating parents to resolve issues quickly and without the need to involve courts. We aim to blend both AI, other technologies and policy to form cohesive services that address both court backlogs and court demand.

HMPPS adheres to an internal Performance Management Policy that applies to all staff in Ministry of Justice Headquarters and its agencies upon confirmation of successfully completing probation. The policy includes setting agreed performance expectations, having regular performance conversations, supporting performance and holding quarterly reviews to identify members of staff who are high performing and those that may require support.

The HMPPS policy was published in April 2022, with no imminent date for review. There is no requirement to submit annual appraisal markings for individual staff.

The duty to collaborate (“the Duty”) (sections 13-14 of the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024) will require collaboration in relation to the commissioning of services for victims of modern slavery where the crime amounts to serious violence. Section 13(8) of the 2024 Act will allow commissioners to determine what constitutes serious violence in their area. Modern slavery is a complex crime and the Duty does not encompass every situation where modern slavery occurs.

It is expected that statutory guidance for the Duty (issued pursuant to section 15 of the 2024 Act) will point commissioners towards the Modern Slavery Statutory Guidance to increase local commissioners’ understanding and awareness of modern slavery when preparing local joint commissioning strategies.

In practice, modern slavery victims can access support regardless of the exploitation type, which is currently delivered through the Modern Slavery Victim Care Contract. Further, the Duty does not preclude commissioners from collaborating in relation to other crime types when considering local need or arranging provision, if that would benefit a local area.

Recruitment rates for the magistracy are published in the annual Judicial Diversity Statistics, found here. As of 01 April 2024, there were 14,576 active magistrates in England and Wales, an increase of 2,907 since the start of the Magistrate Attraction and Recruitment Campaign in January 2022. Of these, 786 were re-appointments following changes to the Mandatory Retirement Age. The next set of statistics for the period April 2024 to March 2025 will be published in July 2025.

This information requested is not held centrally.

Where proceedings are before a court or tribunal in England or Wales, legal aid is available to individuals who qualify for services irrespective of their nationality or usual place of residence. As nationality is not a determinative factor in the availability of legal aid this information is not requested with an application for legal aid.

Every death in custody is a tragedy and we continue to do all we can to improve the safety of prisoners. Deaths in custody are subject to a police investigation on behalf of the Coroner in all cases and, where necessary, a criminal investigation, an investigation by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman; and a Coroner’s inquest (before a jury in non-natural deaths).

After each death that is apparently self-inflicted and any other unexpected death that is not obviously from natural causes, an internal Early Learning Review is conducted to identify lessons that can immediately be learned in order to improve local practice and prevent further death.

HMPPS also provides additional support to prisons where there has been a cluster of self-inflicted deaths, and fund Samaritans to provide support to prisoners and staff.

We are looking into the issue of Crown Immunity, although it is an incredibly complex matter.

Sentencing is an important part of the criminal justice system for victims. However, we know the experience of attending court in person, including sentencing hearings, can be distressing. In May 2024, the Ministry of Justice launched a one-year pilot for victims of rape and sexual offences, whose cases were heard at the Crown Court, to request a copy of the judge’s sentencing remarks free of charge.

We are actively working to promote the pilot to eligible victims. We have, for example, published a dedicated webpage on Gov.uk, shared information on the scheme with over 70 national and local stakeholders who work with or represent victims, and created social media posts on X (formerly Twitter), Instagram and LinkedIn. We are also working with the Witness Service to ensure that they can provide information on the pilot to victims at court.

Offenders who refuse to attend their sentencing hearings deny victims and their families the opportunity to explain how their crimes have impacted their lives. This Government wants victims to have faith that justice will be delivered and to see criminals face the consequences of their actions.

The Government is committed to legislating to enhance court powers to require offenders to attend their sentencing hearings. This measure will be included in the Victims, Courts and Public Protection Bill which is due to be introduced as soon as parliamentary time allows.

Information about appeals to the First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support) (SSCS) is published at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics.

From 29 July to 30 September 2024 (the latest period for which statistics have been published), the Tribunal received 40 Pension Credit appeals. As of 30 September 2024, (the latest publication) none of those cases had been disposed of, as appeals need time to work their way through the Tribunals system. These disposals will be counted in future quarterly publications.

The requested information has been provided as an Excel file alongside this response. The dataset for December 2024 is a subset of data scheduled to be published as part of the Offender management statistics quarterly - GOV.UK release and cannot be provided in advance of that publication. In addition, the numbers 1 and 2 have been replaced with the symbol ‘≤2’ to avoid any risk of individual identification.

Around 99% of prisoners have an origin location - i.e. addresses that are recorded in our central IT system. If no address is given, an offender’s committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. This information is included in the data provided in the tables attached. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 1% of all offenders; these figures are excluded from the tables attached.

It is also important to stress that ithe data shown are not necessarily representative of those who identify as English or Welsh. The results are sorted by origin address (home address on reception into custody) and not nationality.

The requested information has been provided as an Excel file alongside this response. The dataset for December 2024 is a subset of data scheduled to be published as part of the Offender management statistics quarterly - GOV.UK release and cannot be provided in advance of that publication. In addition, the numbers 1 and 2 have been replaced with the symbol ‘≤2’ to avoid any risk of individual identification.

Around 99% of prisoners have an origin location - i.e. addresses that are recorded in our central IT system. If no address is given, an offender’s committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. This information is included in the data provided in the tables attached. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 1% of all offenders; these figures are excluded from the tables attached.

It is also important to stress that ithe data shown are not necessarily representative of those who identify as English or Welsh. The results are sorted by origin address (home address on reception into custody) and not nationality.

The requested information has been provided as an Excel file alongside this response. The dataset for December 2024 is a subset of data scheduled to be published as part of the Offender management statistics quarterly - GOV.UK release and cannot be provided in advance of that publication. In addition, the numbers 1 and 2 have been replaced with the symbol ‘≤2’ to avoid any risk of individual identification.

Around 99% of prisoners have an origin location - i.e. addresses that are recorded in our central IT system. If no address is given, an offender’s committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. This information is included in the data provided in the tables attached. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 1% of all offenders; these figures are excluded from the tables attached.

It is also important to stress that ithe data shown are not necessarily representative of those who identify as English or Welsh. The results are sorted by origin address (home address on reception into custody) and not nationality.

The requested information has been provided as an Excel file alongside this response. The dataset for December 2024 is a subset of data scheduled to be published as part of the Offender management statistics quarterly - GOV.UK release and cannot be provided in advance of that publication. In addition, the numbers 1 and 2 have been replaced with the symbol ‘≤2’ to avoid any risk of individual identification.

Around 99% of prisoners have an origin location - i.e. addresses that are recorded in our central IT system. If no address is given, an offender’s committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. This information is included in the data provided in the tables attached. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 1% of all offenders; these figures are excluded from the tables attached.

It is also important to stress that ithe data shown are not necessarily representative of those who identify as English or Welsh. The results are sorted by origin address (home address on reception into custody) and not nationality.

Offenders released on home detention curfew (HDC) are still serving the custodial element of their sentence and it is a statutory requirement that the curfew is electronically monitored for at least 9 hours a day. In cases where it is not possible to electronically monitor offenders in the community, like Gaie Delap, they will be recalled until it is possible for them to be monitored in the community.

Where there are limitations in the technology and devices available, Ministry of Justice staff continue to work with suppliers to develop innovations and solutions in both technology and processes to expand the use of Electronic Monitoring, and this includes developing a wider range of strap sizes.

The Ministry of Justice does not offer employees shared parental leave from their first day of employment.

The Department’s shared parental leave policy aligns with the statutory provisions. To be eligible for leave, employees must meet the continuity of employment test, and the employment and earnings test set out in the Shared Parental Leave Regulations 2014.

For the continuity of employment test, an employee must have worked for the same employer for at least 26 weeks by the end of the 15th week before their baby is due or their adoption match date.

For the employment and earnings test, an employee and their partner must have worked for at least 26 of 66 weeks before the expected birth date or adoption match date.

There are other criteria an employee must meet relating to sharing the caring responsibilities for a child.

As with any changes to employment legislation, internal policies and processes will be updated as appropriate in preparation for when the Employment Rights Bill 2024 comes into effect.

The Ministry of Justice does not offer employees paternity leave from their first day of employment. The Department’s policy on paternity leave aligns with statutory entitlements. To qualify for paternity leave, employees must have worked continuously for the Civil Service for at least 26 weeks up to the 'qualifying week'. The qualifying week is set out in the Paternity and Adoption Leave Regulations 2002 and is different depending on whether an employee is adopting, is the partner of a birth parent, or is having a child through surrogacy.

As with any changes to employment legislation, internal policies and processes will be updated as appropriate in preparation for when the Employment Rights Bill 2024 comes into effect.

The Ministry of Justice has comprehensive people policies in place to protect staff from unfair dismissal. These policies set out a clear, fair and legally compliant process for dealing with conduct, attendance, performance and failed probation related dismissals. These policies are applicable to Ministry of Justice staff from day one of employment.

All dismissals are handled in line with current legislation and appropriate Codes of Practice. Where an employee feels they may have been unfairly dismissed, appropriate internal appeal routes may be instigated. Where an employee is unable to solve a problem internally, they may be able to go to an employment tribunal to claim unfair dismissal, as set out in legislation.

This position will be reviewed when unfair dismissal rights are updated in line with proposals in the Employment Rights Bill.

The key contractual dates for the current privately-operated prisons are set out in the table below.

*Inherited from the Home Office

The key contractual dates for prisons that were previously privately-operated are set out in the table below.

The key contractual dates for the current privately-operated prisons are set out in the table below.

*Inherited from the Home Office

The key contractual dates for prisons that were previously privately-operated are set out in the table below.

The Parole Board publishes performance data annually. The period of time it covers is a financial year, 1 April to 31 March. Therefore, data is provided for a) 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022 and b) 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023.

The release outcomes are for all releases, whether following paper review or oral hearing and regardless of the number of parole reviews/hearings the prisoner has had. The Parole Board do not currently hold data for the number of life sentenced prisoners released at their first Parole Board hearing.

The release outcomes are for all releases, whether following paper review or oral hearing, and regardless of the number of parole reviews/hearings the prisoner has had. The Parole Board does not currently hold data for the number of IPP sentenced prisoners released at their first Parole Board hearing.

The Parole Board publishes performance data annually. The period of time it covers is a financial year, 1 April to 31 March. Therefore, data is provided for a) 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022 and b) 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023.

The release outcomes are for all releases, whether following paper review or oral hearing and regardless of the number of parole reviews/hearings the prisoner has had. The Parole Board do not currently hold data for the number of life sentenced prisoners released at their first Parole Board hearing.

The release outcomes are for all releases, whether following paper review or oral hearing, and regardless of the number of parole reviews/hearings the prisoner has had. The Parole Board does not currently hold data for the number of IPP sentenced prisoners released at their first Parole Board hearing.

The mean time that unreleased prisoners serving an indeterminate sentence (that is, a life or an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence) spent over tariff was 121 months, as of 30 September 2024. These prisoners are spending time beyond tariff because the Parole Board did not deem them safe to release.

Table 1 shows a breakdown of unreleased prisoners serving IPP sentences that are 15 years over tariff, as of 30 September 2024.

It is right that the IPP sentence was abolished, and this Government is determined that those serving the sentence get the support and opportunities they need to make further progress towards a safe and sustainable release.

We published the updated IPP Action Plan on 15 November, which puts a stronger emphasis on effective frontline delivery in our prisons. We are ensuring that prisoners serving IPP sentences have robust and effective sentence plans, which they are actively engaging with, and that they are in the correct prison to access the right interventions and rehabilitative services.

The mean time that unreleased prisoners serving an indeterminate sentence (that is, a life or an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence) spent over tariff was 121 months, as of 30 September 2024. These prisoners are spending time beyond tariff because the Parole Board did not deem them safe to release.

Table 1 shows a breakdown of unreleased prisoners serving IPP sentences that are 15 years over tariff, as of 30 September 2024.

It is right that the IPP sentence was abolished, and this Government is determined that those serving the sentence get the support and opportunities they need to make further progress towards a safe and sustainable release.

We published the updated IPP Action Plan on 15 November, which puts a stronger emphasis on effective frontline delivery in our prisons. We are ensuring that prisoners serving IPP sentences have robust and effective sentence plans, which they are actively engaging with, and that they are in the correct prison to access the right interventions and rehabilitative services.

Information relating to the time spent on custodial remand is not centrally held by the Ministry of Justice. To obtain the data to answer this question would involve a manual interrogation of court records which would result in a disproportionate cost to the Department.

HM Prison and Probation Service continues to operate five working farms which provide employment, skills, and produce for the internal market. Over 70 prisons offer horticultural training opportunities, which assist prisoners with gaining sector-specific skills and experiences.

We also recognise the value of farms, horticultural and land-based activity for improving wellbeing and addressing poor mental health. We continue to develop a range of opportunities for accessing farms and gardens to learn new positive skills, including growing food and environmental improvement.

The Department carries out media training in-house and so did not spend any money on media or voice training for Ministers in this period.

We are working hard to deter, detect and disrupt the illegal use of drones to deliver contraband into prisons. HM Prison & Probation Service uses targeted countermeasures such as improvements to windows, netting and grills to stop drones delivering contraband such as drugs, mobile telephones and weapons.

A vulnerability assessment has been conducted to assess the risk of drone incursions at HMP Garth, and an action plan has been developed and implemented to manage and mitigate this threat. Owing to the operational sensitivity, it would not be appropriate to disclose the exact countermeasures that have been put in place.

The table below shows the average time for decisions to be made on applications* for criminal injuries compensation by people resident in Warrington**.

*The table does not include archived bereavement applications because the address of the applicant is not retained. In most cases, applications are archived three years after the case has been closed.

**The above table includes all awards where the applicant named Warrington as the town in their home address in their application.

Over the last three years, we have seen continued growth in people coming forward to claim compensation. To help meet this rising demand and to boost our capacity to assess claims, we continue to uplift staff numbers in line with funding. We are working to identify efficiencies in the way we work led by an in-house continuous improvement team.

We have sponsored work to explore and implement helpful case management system changes and the potential for Artificial Intelligence applications to deliver further efficiencies by assisting our claims officers as they identify key information relevant to the assessment process.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is at the heart of the Government’s plan to kickstart an era of economic growth, transform how we deliver public services, and boost living standards for working people across the country.

To seize this opportunity, the Ministry of Justice has established a new Justice AI Unit, led by the Department’s first Chief AI Officer, to develop a comprehensive AI strategy for the Department and its agencies.

Officials are trialing the use of Microsoft 365 Copilot across 1,300 staff in the Department, specifically on its ability to reduce the time spent on repetitive tasks. In addition, we are exploring various pilots to support key functions, including frontline and operational staff.

We adhere to a safety-first policy and have co-developed an AI ethical framework and toolkit with the Alan Turing Institute. This resource is designed to assist stakeholders, developers, policymakers, and decision-makers in understanding the requirements for fostering responsible innovation in the use of AI within the criminal justice system.

Employees have a statutory right to request flexible working which applies from the first day of employment. Employees can make two statutory requests for flexible working in any 12-month period. This will include requests to support employees who undertake foster caring outside of their employment. In addition, foster carers may apply for flexible working when settling a new child into their home.

We do not have a policy which explicitly covers paid time off for foster carers for (A) training and/or (B) settling a new child into their home. Employees are able to take annual and flexi leave as required and request flexible working.

In the Ministry of Justice, special leave may be granted to foster carers who need time off work to attend to their caring responsibilities. It may be planned or unplanned, and paid or unpaid. Employees may request special leave for several reasons including:

• to undertake an assessment process to gain approval that they are suitable to foster;

• to take time off when the child is first placed with them settle the child ensure appropriate childcare arrangements can be put in place to allow the employee to continue to work; and

• to take emergency leave to care for dependants.

At the discretion of a manager, special leave without pay may be granted for other personal reasons not mentioned above.

The table below provides the number of compensation awards paid in each of the last five calendar years to applicants living in Warrington.

Number of compensation awards paid to applicants living in Warrington* **

*The above table includes all awards where the applicant named Warrington as the town in their home address in their application.

**The table does not include archived bereavement applications because the address of the applicant is not retained. In most cases, applications are archived three years after the case has been closed.

Child sexual abuse and exploitation are the most horrific of crimes and the Government is determined to act to strengthen the law in this area. We have committed to legislate to make grooming an aggravating factor in the sentencing of child sexual offences, to ensure that this behaviour is reflected in the sentencing of perpetrators. We will also make it a mandatory duty for those working with children to report child sexual abuse – a key recommendation of Professor Alexis Jay’s report – and this will go into the Crime and Policing Bill due to be introduced to Parliament this spring.

Sentencing guidelines are developed by the independent Sentencing Council for England and Wales, in fulfilment of its statutory duty to do so. The guidelines produced provide the Court with guidance on factors that should be considered, which may affect the sentence given. They set out different levels of sentence based on the harm caused and how culpable the offender is.

Sentencing guidelines for child sex offences, including for the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming, were first published by the Council in 2013. Following consultation, revised guidelines for some child sex offences were published in May 2022. As an independent body, the Council decides its own work plan and priorities.

This Government has outlined its ambitions through the Plan for Change, which sets out an ambitious set of milestones - across the missions - for this Parliament.

As the House would expect, the Government continually reviews its work to ensure that it is delivering the best outcomes for the people of the United Kingdom, and that its policies continue to represent the best value for the taxpayer.

Public reviews will be available on Gov.uk as they are published.

The requested information, by prisoner ethnicity and religious affiliation, is provided in the tables below:

PAVA incident reports by ethnic group (2022, 2023)

PAVA incident reports by religion group (2022, 2023)

The Use of Force Policy Framework sets out the context in which force is used lawfully by trained prison staff as well as setting out a professional standard for using force.

All prison officers trained in how to use PAVA undergo regular refreshers which cover the lawful use of force in the custodial setting.

HMPPS is closely monitoring the use of PAVA in all sites at senior levels.

These figures have been drawn from HMPPS Management information. Care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, but the detail is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system. We do not provide exact data when the figure is five or fewer, as this risks identification of individuals. In these cases, the figure has been replaced by the symbol *. This approach is in accordance with our standards on data disclosure.

Information relating to the use of PAVA spray on prisoners with disabilities is recorded in a number of formats. To be able to identify all such cases, it would be necessary to review all potentially relevant records, and this could not be done without incurring disproportionate cost.

A range of evidence-based interventions and services are provided for women in prison. Referrals for all services are encouraged from across the female estate, to support women to access the services they need. These services include the Women’s Offender Personality Disorder Pathway, as well as the Women’s Estate Psychology Service team, which provides forensic psychologists within all 12 women’s prisons to deliver therapeutic services.

HMPPS is piloting an enhanced approach to supporting women in their first weeks in custody, which is often the time when they are most vulnerable. This pilot is fully operational at five women’s prisons. It includes one-to-one psychological support and psychology-based group work.

The Women Offenders Repeat Self-Harm Intervention Pragmatic Trial piloted the delivery of face-to-face therapy. The provider subsequently proposed to move to a digital model. HMPPS was concerned that this could carry significant risks, given the vulnerability of the women. It was not clear how the wellbeing of the women would be safeguarded.

HMPPS would be glad to consider a new proposal to deliver the programme in women’s prisons, on condition that delivery was on a face-to-face basis to support the vulnerability of the women engaging in the therapy, and with provision of after-care.

A range of evidence-based interventions and services are provided for women in prison. Referrals for all services are encouraged from across the female estate, to support women to access the services they need. These services include the Women’s Offender Personality Disorder Pathway, as well as the Women’s Estate Psychology Service team, which provides forensic psychologists within all 12 women’s prisons to deliver therapeutic services.

HMPPS is piloting an enhanced approach to supporting women in their first weeks in custody, which is often the time when they are most vulnerable. This pilot is fully operational at five women’s prisons. It includes one-to-one psychological support and psychology-based group work.

The Women Offenders Repeat Self-Harm Intervention Pragmatic Trial piloted the delivery of face-to-face therapy. The provider subsequently proposed to move to a digital model. HMPPS was concerned that this could carry significant risks, given the vulnerability of the women. It was not clear how the wellbeing of the women would be safeguarded.

HMPPS would be glad to consider a new proposal to deliver the programme in women’s prisons, on condition that delivery was on a face-to-face basis to support the vulnerability of the women engaging in the therapy, and with provision of after-care.

The information requested in can be found in the attached table.

Data sources and quality

Note that the tariff length is the time between date of sentencing and tariff expiry date, and does not take into account any time spent on remand. The figures do not include whole-life orders. The numbers are subject to revision as more data become available; any changes in the numbers since the last publication of this information is as a result of more sentencing data becoming available.

The data have come from administrative IT systems which, as with some large-scale recording systems, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be amended as part of data cleansing or updates.

I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on 18 December to Question 18879: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-12-10/18879.

Sharia Councils are not part of the judicial system.

I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on 18 December to Question 18879: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-12-10/18879.

Sharia Councils are not part of the judicial system.

I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on 18 December to Question 18879: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-12-10/18879.

Sharia Councils are not part of the judicial system.