We met this afternoon to consider the implications of the
judgment in the Worboys case.
I want to repeat my admiration for the courage and tenacity of
the women who brought the judicial review. Their success will
have consequences that go far beyond this individual case and
will benefit victims and the administration of justice for years
to come.
I am very pleased that the court declared the Rule that prohibits
the Parole Board from explaining its decisions should go and that
the judgment recognised that this was something I had been
calling for. I am pleased too that as a result of Dame Glenys
Stacy’s investigation into victim communication in the case,
these processes will be improved in future and that she made no
criticism of the Parole Board’s actions in this matter. I am also
confident that as a result of this case a much simpler system for
reviewing Parole Board decisions will be established and, as I
have already made clear in my submission to you, this is
something I would very much welcome.
Consistent with these principles, I have been clear throughout
the legal processes that followed the decision in the Worboys
case that I welcomed the scrutiny to which it was subject. I
instructed that there should be no procedural moves to prevent
such scrutiny, as the judgment indicated could have been made,
and that our disclosure of material relating to the case should
be as full as possible. I am as anxious as everyone else that the
correct decision should be made.
The court was critical of some aspects of the panel’s
decision-making processes although it did not overturn the
panel’s decisions on these grounds. It could not, no more than
you or I, put itself in the place of the expert and experienced
panel members who heard the evidence and made the decision. The
court did however find that the panel’s understanding that it
could not go beyond the offences for which Worboys was convicted
was mistaken in this “difficult, troubling case with many
exceptional features.” I shared the panel’s misapprehension in
this matter and this was supported by the advice I received. We
were wrong.
You told me that you thought my position was untenable. I had no
role in the decision of the panel in the case and believe I am
capable of leading the Parole Board through the changes, many of
which I have advocated, that will now be necessary. I am sorry
for the mistakes that were made in this case but I have always
made it clear that I will support the members and staff of the
Board in the very difficult individual decisions they make and I
will accept accountability for the work of the Board. I will not
pass the buck to those who work under me. In these circumstances
I inform you of my decision to resign with immediate effect.
In conclusion, I want to state my concern about the independence
of the Board. I believe this matter raises very troubling
questions about how the Board’s independence can be safeguarded.
I hope Parliament will consider what structural changes are
necessary to ensure this independence is protected in future.
