Murderer’s challenge to whole-life tariff to be heard by Grand Chamber

Arthur Hutchinson, who murdered a couple and their son in Sheffield in 1984, claims his whole-life sentence breaches his human rights.

His case will be heard by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

A judgment made earlier this year ruled there was no violation of Mr Hutchinson’s human rights but a panel of five judges has now given him permission to appeal.

The appeal will bring the issue of “life means life”, which the Court of Appeal in England ruled last year is not in breach of human rights, into the spotlight again.

Lord Thomas said Parliament was capable of allowing such sentences because the crimes were “so heinous” and that they were “entirely compatible” with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

He said: “Judges should therefore continue as they have done to impose whole-life orders in those rare and exceptional cases.”

Mr Hutchinson broke into the home of Basil and Avril Laitner and stabbed both of them to death before killing one of their sons.

At the original trial the judge sentenced him to 18 years in prison but the Home Secretary at the time, Leon Brittan, changed this to a whole-life sentence.

In 2008 the Court of Appeal rejected his appeal against the whole-life sentence.

But in 2013 the Grand Chamber ruled whole-life tariffs are in breach of human rights on the basis they violate article 3 ECHR – the prohibition against torture and “inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” – because they are not “reducible”.

Judges did not say they are incompatible with the ECHR, however, merely that at some point there had to be the possibility of a review of the sentence and that the existing law governing release in exceptional circumstances was unclear.

The Court of Appeal ruled in 2014 that the Grand Chamber was wrong to rule, in a previous case, that English law did not provide for “reducibility” – stating that domestic law “is clear as to ‘possible exceptional release of whole-life prisoners’”.

In particular, they noted that the Secretary of State can release prisoners if they believe there are exceptional circumstances.

The ECtHR found in February that there was no violation of article 3 in Mr Hutchinson’s case because of the Secretary of State’s power to review whole-life tariffs.