Prime Minister Keir Starmer is preparing to fast-track emergency legislation to block new sentencing guidelines that critics say could introduce a dangerous “two-tier” justice system in the UK. The move comes in direct response to proposals from the Sentencing Council for England and Wales, which advised judges to consider factors such as ethnicity, cultural background, religion, sex, and other personal characteristics when handing down criminal sentences.
The controversial guidelines, which many argue threaten the principle of equal justice under the law, have been met with fierce backlash from legal experts, Conservative MPs, and even Labour’s own ministers. Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood has taken the lead in opposing the Sentencing Council’s move, calling the guidelines “unacceptable” and contrary to British legal values. She confirmed that the government will use every tool at its disposal to prevent them from being implemented—including emergency legislation.
Under the proposed sentencing changes, judges would be encouraged to take into account the “lived experience” and “life circumstances” of defendants. Proponents argue this could lead to more humane and individualized sentencing, particularly for vulnerable groups. However, critics argue it would result in unequal justice, where offenders receive lighter or harsher sentences based not on the severity of the crime, but on their background or identity.
Mahmood and Starmer firmly reject the notion that justice should differ based on race, religion, or socio-economic status. In a statement, Mahmood warned, “The public must have confidence that our justice system treats everyone equally. We cannot allow a system where two people committing the same crime face different outcomes because of who they are.”
The emergency legislation, expected to be tabled within hours, aims to override the Sentencing Council’s guidance by explicitly reaffirming the legal principle that all individuals are equal before the law. If passed, it would prevent judges from applying the Council’s recommendations and maintain uniformity in sentencing.
This rapid legal intervention is unprecedented but not without justification, say insiders. The government has expressed serious concern about the erosion of public trust in the justice system if the guidelines are allowed to go into effect. Ministers are reportedly confident that they have the parliamentary support needed to rush the bill through all stages in a single day.
The Sentencing Council, for its part, has defended the proposed rules. It argues that recognizing individual context helps address systemic inequality and improves outcomes for minority communities. Yet their refusal to revise or delay implementation in the face of growing opposition has forced the government’s hand.
Public reaction has been swift. A large majority of voters, according to early polls, back the government’s decision to intervene. Many believe that sentencing should remain blind to factors such as ethnicity or gender, focusing solely on the crime itself and its impact on victims.
The emergency law represents a major test for Starmer’s Labour leadership. Since taking office, he has faced accusations of being soft on law and order. By acting decisively against the two-tier sentencing model, Starmer is attempting to draw a clear line: his government will not tolerate preferential treatment in the justice system—no matter how well-intentioned the proposal.
This development also shines a spotlight on the role of the Sentencing Council, an independent body that advises courts on criminal sentencing. While it does not set binding laws, its guidelines carry significant influence and are often followed by judges. The current confrontation may lead to broader calls for reform of the Council’s mandate and transparency.
Legal analysts suggest that the emergency legislation could open the door to a wider overhaul of how sentencing policies are crafted and enforced. If passed, it would not only block this specific rule change but set a precedent for direct government intervention in judicial guidance.
As Parliament prepares for what could be a dramatic and fast-moving session, all eyes will be on Starmer’s administration. Success could reinforce Labour’s commitment to fairness and equality before the law—while failure might invite criticism that the government was unable to control radical shifts within the justice system.
The bill’s text is expected to be published shortly, and ministers have pledged full transparency. Mahmood reiterated the government’s stance: “Justice should not depend on who you are. It should depend on what you’ve done.”
