Ministry of Justice

The Deputy Prime Minister has announced that the Crown Court in England and Wales will be funded to hear as many cases as possible next year to speed up justice for victims. We are working closely with the Crown Prosecution Service to ensure that there are sufficient prosecutors, and funding has been provided for this.

We are taking significant action to support defence barristers and the wider criminal defence profession. In December 2025, we announced additional funding of up to £34 million a year for criminal legal aid advocates, and a commitment to work with the profession to match-fund a number of criminal barrister pupillages to open a career at the Criminal Bar to even more young people from across society. The support for advocates is on top of up to £92 million per year in additional investment, announced in December 2024, we have implemented for criminal legal aid solicitors, which built on a £24 million per year investment in criminal solicitors earlier in the Parliament. This investment reflects the valuable role of criminal defence and will help them to continue to make sure justice is served.

An increase in Crown Court staff to support additional sitting days is funded and factored into HMCTS’ workforce planning, and recruitment for these roles is already progressing in each region.

We have ambitious but realistic recruitment plans for judges for the Crown Court. In January 2026, recruitment for Circuit Judges, including 45 in Crime, commenced. We are expecting a positive outcome from the 2024/25 Recorder recruitment exercise for 70 judges, most of whom work in Crime. More recruitment for both salaried and fee-paid Judges is planned for 2026/27.

The authorisation and deployment of judges is a matter for the judiciary. High Court Judges contribute sitting days in Crown, as do some District Judges (Magistrates Court), with the appropriate authorisation. Judges sitting in retirement are also used in Crown.

The Government does not hold data on the number of cases, or their outcomes, where allegations of “parental alienation” were made or where unregulated psychological experts were instructed in Family Court proceedings. This information is not held centrally. It may be held in court records but to obtain this data would require a review of individual case files at disproportionate costs.

The Government does not recognise the concept of “parental alienation” syndrome and does not believe it is capable of diagnosis.

The Family Justice Council’s guidance on “responding to a child’s unexplained reluctance, resistance or refusal to spend time with a parent and allegations of alienating behaviour” provides a comprehensive overview of the reasons a child may reject a parent, including from witnessing domestic abuse and harmful parenting. The guidance also outlines the appropriate timing, scope, and nature of expert witness evidence.

The Government shares the concerns that unregulated experts, often using the title psychologist, have been instructed in Family Court proceedings to give evidence on “parental alienation”. We are working with the Family Procedure Rule Committee to make changes to the Family Procedure Rules and Practice Directions to prevent the instruction of these experts.

The Government does not hold data on the number of cases, or their outcomes, where allegations of “parental alienation” were made or where unregulated psychological experts were instructed in Family Court proceedings. This information is not held centrally. It may be held in court records but to obtain this data would require a review of individual case files at disproportionate costs.

The Government does not recognise the concept of “parental alienation” syndrome and does not believe it is capable of diagnosis.

The Family Justice Council’s guidance on “responding to a child’s unexplained reluctance, resistance or refusal to spend time with a parent and allegations of alienating behaviour” provides a comprehensive overview of the reasons a child may reject a parent, including from witnessing domestic abuse and harmful parenting. The guidance also outlines the appropriate timing, scope, and nature of expert witness evidence.

The Government shares the concerns that unregulated experts, often using the title psychologist, have been instructed in Family Court proceedings to give evidence on “parental alienation”. We are working with the Family Procedure Rule Committee to make changes to the Family Procedure Rules and Practice Directions to prevent the instruction of these experts.

This Government is committed to delivering long-term reform of the Family Courts to better support and protect both adults and children, including those who are victims of domestic abuse or serious violence.

All court staff within HM Courts and Tribunals Service undertake mandatory safeguarding and domestic abuse awareness training as part of their induction and refresher training.

Cafcass and Cafcass Cymru each deliver mandatory domestic abuse practitioner training, which they design and maintain. This ensures Cafcass and Cafcass Cymru practitioners can effectively identify, assess and respond to domestic abuse in Family Court proceedings, and that they maintain up to date, trauma informed, evidence-based skills.

To preserve judicial independence, statutory responsibility for the training of the judiciary in England and Wales rests with the Lady Chief Justice and is conducted by the Judicial College. Domestic Abuse training forms part of both induction and continuation training for all judges, magistrates and legal representatives who sit in the Family Courts. This training is routinely evaluated and refreshed by the Judicial College.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on prosecutions by offence through the Outcomes by Offences data tool on GOV.UK. It is not currently possible to separately identify prosecutions for domestic abuse, as such cases are prosecuted under a range of different criminal offences. However, the Government recognises the importance of consistently identifying domestic abuse offenders at every stage of the system. That is why we are moving at pace to implement a domestic abuse identifier at sentencing in criminal cases, delivering on a recommendation made in the Independent Sentencing Review.

Statutory guidance on the definition of domestic abuse under Domestic Abuse Act 2021 is clear that domestic abuse can include harming or threatening to harm animals, for example as a form coercive and controlling behaviour. In our Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy, published last December, we committed to ensuring all victims and survivors are protected, including those with pets, including to:

• Work with the veterinary profession to support initiatives designed to help vets and practice staff recognise potential signs of domestic abuse through non-accidental injuries
• Strengthen the pet microchipping regime to prevent the records of domestic abuse victims and survivors being accessed inappropriately
• Work with charities to increase the awareness of services available for the pets of domestic abuse victims and survivors to support more victims to escape abuse

As part of this work, Defra has also commissioned research, led by the University of Bristol, into the relationship between animal abuse and domestic abuse, and will consider the findings once the research concludes.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on prosecutions by offence through the Outcomes by Offences data tool on GOV.UK. It is not currently possible to separately identify prosecutions for domestic abuse, as such cases are prosecuted under a range of different criminal offences. However, the Government recognises the importance of consistently identifying domestic abuse offenders at every stage of the system. That is why we are moving at pace to implement a domestic abuse identifier at sentencing in criminal cases, delivering on a recommendation made in the Independent Sentencing Review.

Statutory guidance on the definition of domestic abuse under Domestic Abuse Act 2021 is clear that domestic abuse can include harming or threatening to harm animals, for example as a form coercive and controlling behaviour. In our Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy, published last December, we committed to ensuring all victims and survivors are protected, including those with pets, including to:

• Work with the veterinary profession to support initiatives designed to help vets and practice staff recognise potential signs of domestic abuse through non-accidental injuries
• Strengthen the pet microchipping regime to prevent the records of domestic abuse victims and survivors being accessed inappropriately
• Work with charities to increase the awareness of services available for the pets of domestic abuse victims and survivors to support more victims to escape abuse

As part of this work, Defra has also commissioned research, led by the University of Bristol, into the relationship between animal abuse and domestic abuse, and will consider the findings once the research concludes.

The Ministry of Justice keeps all fees under continuous review to ensure that His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has the resources necessary to operate fairly and efficiently, while ensuring access to justice is protected for all.

The Government has laid legislation to begin the process of implementing a new fees framework in the Property Chamber. The purpose of the new framework is to deliver a fair and sustainable Property Chamber that is accessible to all. The framework includes a fee of £47 for applications to appeal a rent increase, with no hearing fee – this is one of the lowest fees across HMCTS.

The Help with Fees scheme will always be available to provide financial support to those who cannot afford to pay fees. In 2024/25, we remitted £91 million of fees income to protect access to justice.

The changes are subject to Parliamentary consent.

The Ministry of Justice keeps all fees under continuous review to ensure that His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has the resources necessary to operate fairly and efficiently, while ensuring access to justice is protected for all.

The Government has laid legislation to begin the process of implementing a new fees framework in the Property Chamber. The purpose of the new framework is to deliver a fair and sustainable Property Chamber that is accessible to all. The framework includes a fee of £47 for applications to appeal a rent increase, with no hearing fee – this is one of the lowest fees across HMCTS.

The Help with Fees scheme will always be available to provide financial support to those who cannot afford to pay fees. In 2024/25, we remitted £91 million of fees income to protect access to justice.

The changes are subject to Parliamentary consent.

We recognise that structured sport and physical activity can play an important role in supporting rehabilitation by improving physical and mental wellbeing, supporting positive behaviour, and encouraging engagement with wider rehabilitative activity.

All prisons are required to provide physical education. HMPPS promotes participation in activities supervised and organised as part of an establishment’s agreed physical education programme. While Prison Service Instruction 58/2011 Physical Education for Prisoners requires prisons to offer a range of sport and gym-based activity for a minimum of one hour per week for adults and two hours a week for children and young people, establishments are encouraged to align with the Chief Medical Officer’s recommendation of at least 150 minutes of physical activity each week. Provision is tailored across the adult and children’s secure estate. This includes developmentally appropriate physical education for children and young people delivered in partnership with the Youth Custody Service.

HMPPS works with national and community partners, including the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, to complement physical activity delivered by PE staff. These partnerships support rehabilitation by improving health and wellbeing, building skills and encouraging positive engagement in custody and on release.

In the community, the Probation Service works with a range of partners to support access to physical activity as part of a wider rehabilitative offer.

The Government is committed to ensuring that victims of domestic abuse, including children, are properly supported in the Family Courts. This is regardless of whether the abusive parent is resident or non-resident at the time of the case.

Family Courts have a range of tools available to support and protect victims of domestic abuse. The court must assume that the ability of victims of domestic abuse to participate in family proceedings is diminished by vulnerability, and as such can make special measures available to support them in court. Special measures are designed to ensure victims are fully supported throughout proceedings and can include giving evidence by video link or from behind a screen or using separate waiting areas or separate entrances and exits. Additionally, a victim of domestic abuse cannot be cross-examined by their abuser in family proceedings. The court can appoint a qualified legal representative to undertake the cross-examination

To further support victims, court procedures, set out in Practice Directions, make it clear that Independent Domestic Violence Advisers (IDVAs), who provide practical, emotional or moral support, can accompany parties in proceedings.

Where Family Court proceedings would risk causing harm to parents or children the court can make an order to prevent a person from making further applications without permission of the court, such as a civil restraint order or, in relation to proceedings under the Children Act 1989, an order under section 91(14) of that Act.

Legal aid is also available for private family matters such as child arrangements, financial remedy proceedings and divorce if an individual is a victim of domestic abuse or at risk of being abused. Legal aid is also available for individuals in some private family orders, such as prohibited steps orders, if the child subject to the order is a victim of child abuse or at risk of abuse. Funding is subject to providing evidence of abuse and passing the means and merits test.

The Government does not hold data regarding the number of financial remedy hearings that have been adjourned as a result of delays in receiving cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) statements from teachers and civil service pension administrators.

As part of its 2024 scoping report on financial remedies, the Law Commission considered whether there was scope for reform in relation to the treatment of pensions on the division of assets on divorce. This Spring, the Government will be consulting on the challenges raised by the Law Commission in its report.

Interest on Lawyer’s Client Account schemes have been successfully employed in several international jurisdictions for decades. As part of developing this proposal, the Ministry of Justice has undertaken extensive research and engagement with experts, officials and administrators from several international comparators. This includes schemes in Australia, Canada, France and the USA.

The Ministry of Justice remains firmly committed to reducing reoffending by ensuring that prisoners can access high‑quality education, skills training and work opportunities. Rising delivery costs have impacted the level of provision that can be commissioned through the Core Education contracts, but this is one part of a much broader offer designed to support rehabilitation.

Prisoners continue to benefit from a wide range of educational opportunities, including digitally enabled in‑cell learning, locally commissioned programmes, library services, higher‑level study, vocational qualifications, apprenticeships and work in prison industries. Governors retain the flexibility to commission provision that best meets the needs of their population. We will monitor delivery and outcomes through contract management and a full evaluation of the new Prisoner Education Service.

There are currently no plans to reopen the former Chichester Magistrates’ Court.

The building has been closed since 2017 and is now in very poor condition. With the neighbouring Chichester Combined Court having transitioned from a Nightingale court to the permanent estate, HMCTS is now reviewing options for the future of the former Magistrates’ Court site, including its disposal.

There are currently no plans to reopen the former Chichester Magistrates’ Court.

The building has been closed since 2017 and is now in very poor condition. With the neighbouring Chichester Combined Court having transitioned from a Nightingale court to the permanent estate, HMCTS is now reviewing options for the future of the former Magistrates’ Court site, including its disposal.

The Government remains committed to upholding its obligations under the Aarhus Convention, including maintaining access to environmental justice that is not prohibitively expensive. We set up the Environmental Costs Protection Regime (ECPR) in 2013 to enable this, and in May 2025 we committed to a series of measures to strengthen the regime. We keep all policies under review and, importantly, judges already have the power to vary the costs caps upwards or downwards, taking into account the particular circumstances of a case.

Between September and December 2024, the Government ran a Call for Evidence on access to justice in relation to the Aarhus Convention. This Call for Evidence considered the recommendations of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee regarding whether changes are required to the ECPR. The Government intends to publish a response to this Call for Evidence in due course.

Further, the Government published its response to the Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce’s Review on Friday 13 March 2026. The Government recognises the concerns raised by the Taskforce regarding delays caused by a small number of unmeritorious legal challenges against nuclear developments and other major infrastructure projects, which could jeopardise our goal of reaching net zero by 2050. That is why we have accepted the Taskforce’s proposals in recommendation 20 to adjust the costs caps.

These adjustments will be undertaken with a view to prioritising genuine legal challenges, whilst supporting the Government’s growth mission by supporting us to build the necessary infrastructure essential for energy security, economic growth, and net zero. We will therefore invite the Civil Procedure Rule Committee to adjust the ECPR with this aim in mind.

The Ministry of Justice does not collect data on the number of religious-only Islamic marriages that take place in the UK.

The Government is aware of the differential treatment faced by groups that do not have a legally binding religious ceremony under the current law, and that some people, particularly women, can face serious financial problems as a result, if their relationship breaks down.

That is why we have committed to weddings law reform that will make it more straightforward for religious groups to get legally married in accordance with their beliefs. We will be undertaking a consultation on the reform of weddings law in England and Wales, early this year.

The Ministry of Justice does not disclose the scores awarded by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel. These scores are commercially sensitive, both in relation to the Ministry of Justice’s own interests, and to those of third‑party providers, who are entitled to expect that any assessment of their performance will remain confidential.

It is not possible, without incurring disproportionate cost, to confirm which prison rehabilitative projects have been assessed, approved or refused. Details are not held in a single national record. Under the National Framework for Interventions, proposals are predominantly assessed at regional level, with only regionally approved proposals submitted for central consideration.

The Ministry of Justice does not disclose the scores awarded by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel. These scores are commercially sensitive, both in relation to the Ministry of Justice’s own interests, and to those of third‑party providers, who are entitled to expect that any assessment of their performance will remain confidential.

It is not possible, without incurring disproportionate cost, to confirm which prison rehabilitative projects have been assessed, approved or refused. Details are not held in a single national record. Under the National Framework for Interventions, proposals are predominantly assessed at regional level, with only regionally approved proposals submitted for central consideration.

On 11 November, the Deputy Prime Minister announced a five-point national action plan to reduce releases in error, which includes strengthening release checks across prisons and commissioning an independent review led by Dame Lynne Owens.

The Deputy Prime Minister has recently received the review and is carefully considering Dame Lynne’s findings and recommendations. The Government will respond shortly.

The Government has no current plans to review the minimum age to become a magistrate.

The Government is committed to strengthening transparency across the justice system and is already taking significant steps across all jurisdictions.

We are also committed to upholding the principle of open justice, including embracing AI and exploring the opportunities it offers to produce court and tribunal transcripts more quickly and cost-effectively, while still meeting the necessary accuracy and safeguarding standards.

In the Crown Court, sentencing remarks are now published online in cases of significant public interest, and judges can also permit broadcasters to film Crown Court sentencing remarks, ensuring greater public visibility of judicial decisions.

From spring 2027, the Government is expanding free access to Crown Court sentencing remarks to all victims who request them. This builds on the existing process where victims of rape and serious sexual offences and bereaved families of victims of homicide, manslaughter and fatal road accidents were entitled to free transcripts of Crown Court sentencing remarks. These can be requested here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apply-for-a-transcript-of-a-judges-sentencing-remarks.

In the family court, the Government has also been working to support the judiciary to increase the number of family court judgments published in anonymised form, while ensuring the privacy and protection of children and families involved in proceedings. On more targeted transparency measures, the government is working with the judiciary to roll out new provisions relating to Transparency Orders across England and Wales, providing a clear framework for reporting where a journalist or legal blogger has attended a family court hearing. Since 29 September 2025, provisions relating to Transparency Orders have applied to all children’s cases.

In civil proceedings, litigants in England and Wales do not need to pay for the written order or judgment relating to their own case. This is sent to all parties involved, setting out the court’s reasoning for the decision, which parties can refer to if they wish to appeal that decision.

In tribunal proceedings, any judicial decision and the reasons will be provided to the parties unless there has been an order restricting that. Many of the major tribunal chambers also allow parties to proceedings to request fuller written reasons for tribunal decisions for no additional cost.

Ministers value a close and collaborative working relationship with Hillsborough Law Now and Pete Weatherby KC and have engaged continuously since 18 January through phone calls, messages and official meetings including on 19 January and 6 March.

The Government strongly supports the work that the Enforcement Conduct Board is doing to raise standards in the enforcement agent industry to ensure that people in debt are treated fairly. On 9 June 2025, the Government announced a balanced package of measures that seek to protect those facing enforcement action, whilst ensuring that there is a fair system of enforcement. As part of this package, we have consulted on how to establish an independent regulatory framework, to build on the work that the Enforcement Conduct Board is doing on a voluntary basis to raise standards.

The Government will respond to that consultation in due course and implement reform when parliamentary time allows.

For the Family Court, the most recent Shropshire vacancies were advertised from 1 February 2024 and closed on 29 February 2024. For the Adult (crime) Court, the vacancies were advertised from 2 July 2024 and closed on 29 July 2024.

Appointments to the Shropshire bench arising from these campaigns were made in June and July 2025.

We expect Shropshire to open its next recruitment in May 2026.

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) sets out the matters in scope of legal aid and the eligibility criteria, and seeks to ensure that legal aid is available to those most in need.

The rights of adults to be registered as British citizens under the British Nationality Act 1981 is not within scope of legal aid. Where an issue falls outside the scope of legal aid, individuals can apply for Exceptional Case Funding (ECF). ECF will be granted if, without legal aid, there is a risk that the person’s human rights may be breached. ECF applications are determined by the Legal Aid Agency on a case-by-case basis.

Legal aid is available for separated migrant children for applications for registration as a British citizen or British subject, and for immigration applications for entry clearance, leave to enter, or to remain in the United Kingdom. This provision is available due to the particular vulnerability of this cohort, subject to means and merits testing as applicable.

We regularly engage with other government departments to understand the impact of their policies on immigration legal aid and consider taking action to expand the scope of legal aid where needed.

Sir Brian’s report set out a blueprint for pragmatic structural reform in our criminal courts and made clear that action across the process is essential.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is the first step to putting that blueprint into law. Coupled with record investment in sitting days and criminal legal aid and modernisation of listing practices and use of case coordinators and blitz courts to boost efficiencies, we are taking a neglected service and bringing it, finally, into the 21st century.

Sir Brian’s report set out a blueprint for pragmatic structural reform in our criminal courts and made clear that action across the process is essential.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is the first step to putting that blueprint into law. Coupled with record investment in sitting days and criminal legal aid and modernisation of listing practices and use of case coordinators and blitz courts to boost efficiencies, we are taking a neglected service and bringing it, finally, into the 21st century.

Sir Brian’s report set out a blueprint for pragmatic structural reform in our criminal courts and made clear that action across the process is essential.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is the first step to putting that blueprint into law. Coupled with record investment in sitting days and criminal legal aid and modernisation of listing practices and use of case coordinators and blitz courts to boost efficiencies, we are taking a neglected service and bringing it, finally, into the 21st century.

The safety and security, welfare, and independence of the judiciary remain paramount. Engagement with the judiciary on the court reform measures in the Courts and Tribunals Bill included consideration of personal safety and security. We will continue to work with the judiciary as the Courts and Tribunals Bill progresses and these measures are implemented.

When implemented, judge‑only trials will operate within the existing robust HMCTS security framework. This already includes a range of judicial security policies and procedures, such as the Judicial Harassment Protocol, designed to protect judicial office holders in court, outside of court, and online as a result of their judicial role.

Last year, the Department invested over £20 million extra funding in judicial security, and HMCTS is continuing to improve its security procedures. We stand ready to do more if required.

The safety and security, welfare, and independence of the judiciary remain paramount. Engagement with the judiciary on the court reform measures in the Courts and Tribunals Bill included consideration of personal safety and security. We will continue to work with the judiciary as the Courts and Tribunals Bill progresses and these measures are implemented.

When implemented, judge‑only trials will operate within the existing robust HMCTS security framework. This already includes a range of judicial security policies and procedures, such as the Judicial Harassment Protocol, designed to protect judicial office holders in court, outside of court, and online as a result of their judicial role.

Last year, the Department invested over £20 million extra funding in judicial security, and HMCTS is continuing to improve its security procedures. We stand ready to do more if required.

Today, the Deputy Prime Minister announced national rollout of the Child Focused Model, formerly known as Pathfinder, over the next three years.

We are investing £17 million next year to expand the model across courts in the North East, North West and East Midlands so more children and families can benefit.

There were 92 self-inflicted deaths of people serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence while in prison custody in the period from the introduction of the sentence in 2005 to December 2025. There were 44 such deaths of people serving an IPP on licence in the community between April 2019 and March 2025.

Data on community‑based deaths is only available for this more restricted period because:

• Before April 2019 information was collected through manual returns, and identifying individuals serving an IPP sentence would require matching thousands of records, which cannot be done without disproportionate cost; and

• Data for the period from April 2025 to March 2026 is scheduled for publication in October 2026.

The category of self-inflicted deaths includes a broader range of deaths than suicide. Definitions for apparent causes of death are provided in the ‘Safety in Custody’ and ‘Deaths of Offenders in the Community’ statistical publications. For breakdowns by year and other accompanying notes, please refer to the tables below. Information on self-inflicted deaths in prison by IPP prisoners are published annually in the detailed deaths tables accompanying the ‘Safety in Custody’ statistics (see Table 1_7 of Deaths in prison custody 1978 to 2025 for the most recent data, as provided here).

Table 1: Self-inflicted deaths in prison custody by Imprisonment for Public Protection sentence type since 2005, England and Wales

Data sources and quality

Deaths figures are derived from the HMPPS Deaths in Prison Custody database. As classification of deaths may change following inquests or as new information emerges, numbers may change from time to time.

Notes

(1) Deaths in prison custody figures include all deaths of prisoners arising from incidents during prison custody. They include deaths of prisoners while released on temporary license (ROTL) for medical reasons but exclude other types of ROTL where the state has less direct responsibility.

(2) Due to the number of deaths that remain unclassified (awaiting further information) in recent years, and the latest year particularly, caution should be used when comparing with earlier periods.

(3) Apparent cause is based on the HMPPS classification of deaths in prison custody. The self-inflicted deaths category includes a wider range of deaths than suicides. When comparing figures with other sources it is important to determine whether the narrower suicide or broader self-inflicted deaths approach is in use.

(4) All classifications of deaths remain provisional until confirmed at inquest.

(5) In addition to deaths in prison custody which occur in hospitals, hospices or nursing homes, a small proportion will occur while in an ambulance on the way to hospital, while on escort.

(6) An indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) was introduced in 2005. It was intended for high-risk prisoners considered ‘dangerous’ but whose offence did not merit a life sentence. The number of prisoners held on this sentence increased initially and the increase was offset by reductions elsewhere.

(7) Recalled prisoners are those held in custody for breaching the terms of their licence conditions following release into the community. Recalled prisoners are not shown separately within the deaths tables, they are recorded against their initial sentence type.

(8) Caution should be used when comparing the number of deaths from one year to the next due to low numbers which are subject to fluctuation.

p) The 2024/25 figures are provisional and may be updated in future publications to account for any changes or additions to the data since they were originally collected

(1) Apparent causes for years prior to 2023/24 are based on data reported through annual returns (prior to 2020/21 only) or the national Delius case management system and have not been independently verified. From 2023/24 onwards, cause data sourced from Delius have been independently verified by the General Register Office (GRO) and updated accordingly. The latest provisional data for 2024/25 remain based on apparent causes, i.e., they have not been independently verified. For further details about the GRO verification process, refer to the guide to deaths of offenders supervised in the community statistics.

(2) The reporting period for these statistics (financial year 1 April to 31 March) relates to when the death occurred.

(3) A new set of death classifications was implemented on 1 April 2022 and, as such, figures for 2022/23 onwards are not comparable to those presented for previous years. The category of 'self-inflicted death' up to 31 March 2022 includes any death of a person who has apparently taken his or her own life, irrespective of intent. The category of 'self-inflicted death' from 1 April 2022 includes any death of a person at their own hand, including where intent is undetermined. This includes some drug poisonings (e.g., where a suicide note is found or the circumstances are suspicious) but not drug poisonings which appear to have been the accidental result of consumption for another purpose. Refer to the guide to deaths of offenders supervised in the community statistics for further details about the new set of classifications.

(4) In June 2025, a data sharing agreement was established with the General Register Office (GRO) to provide access to official cause of death data following the registration of a death. This information is then used to update the provisional categorisation of deaths on the probation case management system. Official causes of death from the GRO are only available for deaths occurring from 1 April 2023 onwards. Also, the registration of a death can be delayed when a case is referred to the coroner and, as such, the official cause of death from the GRO is not available for deaths that occurred in the most recent period. Comparisons across cause of death categories over time should, therefore, not be made, as periods prior to 1 April 2023 and the most recent reporting period are based on provisional classifications, which are not directly comparable to GRO-verified data.

Data sources and quality

The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Source: National Delius case management system.

The Government is determined to ensure that grooming gang members face the toughest possible sentences for their crimes.

This is why we are introducing a new statutory aggravating factor requiring courts to consider grooming when sentencing for specified sexual offences committed against those under 18.

The safety and decency of our prisons is paramount. We continually monitor prison conditions and take places on and offline depending on safety, stability, staffing levels and maintenance needs.

We recognise that overcrowding can make it harder for prisons to deliver safe, stable and rehabilitative regimes and we will not take decisions that create unacceptable risks to prison safety.

That is why we are increasing capacity at record rates, and our Sentencing Act will place the prison population on a more sustainable footing, paving the way for further reform of our prison systems so we can create better conditions and outcomes for our prisoners.

We are also improving access to rehabilitative services and purposeful activity and are increasing staff capability to support improved rehabilitation outcomes. We are strengthening safety and security by investing around £15 million in protective equipment.

The cost of running prisons has generally increased over the past decade, with particularly sharp changes during the Covid-19 period. Analysis of the published Prison Unit Costs series shows that average running costs per place have risen by around 5% per year over the period from 2014/15 to 2023/24. The trend is not linear, with the most pronounced volatility observed between 2020/21 and 2022/23, reflecting the exceptional operational impacts of the Covid19 pandemic.

In assessing these trends, it is important to note that cost per place reflects both total running expenditure and the level of certified prison capacity in any given year. As a result, changes in the availability of prison places and population pressures can affect unit costs over time.

The published statistics (Prison and Probation Performance Statistics - GOV.UK) do not provide a detailed breakdown of running cost components. However, accompanying official commentary has consistently noted that movements in prison unit costs over time reflect a combination of factors, including investment in frontline staffing and prison maintenance to support safety and the effective operation of the prison estate, alongside wider operational and capacity pressures.

All new prison officers complete foundation training which focuses on professional standards, effective communication, and working safely and respectfully with a diverse prison population. This includes training on identifying and supporting vulnerable prisoners, managing sensitive situations, and acting in line with organisational policy and the law.

Training also covers information management and recordkeeping, reinforcing the importance of handling personal and medical information appropriately. HMPPS data protection and information governance requirements apply across the prison estate to safeguard confidentiality.

In addition, HMPPS, working with Skills for Justice, has developed a core capabilities framework for prison and probation staff who work with individuals with health, care and wellbeing needs. The framework sets out the skills, knowledge and behaviours required to support individuals in a person-centred way, including recognising needs, working in partnership with healthcare professionals, and managing sensitive information. It also supports leadership capability and can be used to strengthen existing training provision and identify gaps.

Prison healthcare services in England are commissioned by NHS England. HMPPS works in close partnership with NHS England to ensure people in custody have access to HIV testing and treatment, and that services are delivered safely and confidentially. This collaboration is underpinned by the National Partnership Agreement, which sets out shared priorities and responsibilities to improve health outcomes and reduce health inequalities in custodial settings.

Assaults statistics, including assault on staff incidents by prison, are published quarterly. These were last published in January 2026, covering data up to September 2025: Safety in custody: quarterly update to September 2025 - GOV.UK.

Centrally collated data on assaults does not go into the depth of specific residential location requested, meaning the data requested could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

Domestic Abuse Awareness and Stalking Awareness learning is available to all those working in HMPPS.

Training on stalking is embedded within probation practitioners’ mandatory domestic abuse and safeguarding learning. All probation staff complete Domestic Abuse Awareness learning every three years, with practitioners undertaking additional facilitated, advanced and specialist learning, including on stalking and Spousal Assault Risk Assessment, to support effective risk identification and management.

Alongside this learning there are general continuous professional development resources on stalking (such as stalking workbook, videos) that can be accessed by staff both in the Prison and Probation Service.

Three incidents recorded as concerted indiscipline have taken place at HMP Whitemoor in the last six months: on 6, 12 and 17 February.

Six staff responding to one of the incidents reported minor injuries that did not require hospitalisation. No prisoners or staff were injured in the other incidents.

The three incidents resulted in a total of 12 adjudications, 10 of which were referred to the police for investigation. 11 prisoners were relocated to another wing, and 10 were downgraded to a basic regime under the Incentives Policy Framework.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

On 29 January 2026, we published our second annual statement on prison capacity, which sets out the prison projections up to November 2032 and our assessment of them: Ministry of Justice – Annual Statement on Prison Capacity: 2025.

On 29 January 2026, we published our second annual statement on prison capacity, which sets out the prison projections up to November 2032 and our assessment of them: Ministry of Justice – Annual Statement on Prison Capacity: 2025.