Parole rules add 'exceptional' test from 5 March 2026

A small but important change to how parole is decided in England and Wales is now on the books. From Thursday 5 March 2026, panels will start with a paper decision in some cases and will only hold an oral hearing if there are exceptional circumstances to justify one. The change sits within the Parole Board Rules 2019 and has been made to correct a defect identified in last year’s amendments.

Why the fix? In January, Parliament’s Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments reported the Parole Board (Amendment) Rules 2025 for defective drafting. The Ministry of Justice has since issued a new Statutory Instrument in consequence of that defect, clarifying when paper decisions should be used and how the ‘exceptional circumstances’ threshold applies. (publications.parliament.uk)

Before we go further, a refresher. Parole is the process where an independent panel decides whether someone who is in prison can be safely released on licence, or whether a licence should be ended or revoked. The Parole Board works to the Parole Board Rules 2019, which set the procedure for paper reviews and hearings across England and Wales. (gov.uk)

Paper decision or oral hearing? An oral hearing brings witnesses and experts into the room so the panel can test evidence face to face. In a leading 2013 case, the UK Supreme Court said fairness to the prisoner is the key test: if a paper decision risks an unjust outcome, the Board should hold an oral hearing. That judgment reshaped practice and led to many more hearings being listed. (supremecourt.uk)

What’s changing now is narrow but practical. In three situations, panels are told not to direct an oral hearing unless they consider there are exceptional circumstances: where the prisoner is under investigation for a new offence that is relevant to risk; where they have been charged with such an offence but the charge is unresolved; or where a fixed‑term prisoner’s automatic release date is so close that a hearing is impractical. The same presumption applies when a member considers requests for a hearing after a provisional paper decision. (gov.uk)

Key term to learn: exceptional circumstances. The Rules do not give a checklist. In plain terms, panels look for reasons why fairness can’t be achieved on the papers. Classic examples from case law and official guidance include important facts being disputed, complex expert evidence that needs questioning, or a situation where seeing and hearing the prisoner helps assess risk. Saving time, trouble or expense is not a reason to refuse a hearing. (supremecourt.uk)

So who will notice this most? Imagine a prisoner recalled to custody who is also being investigated for a new assault. Because that allegation speaks directly to risk, the starting point is to decide the case on the papers unless there’s something unusual that calls for a hearing. Or take a short‑sentence prisoner days away from automatic release; scheduling constraints may make a hearing unworkable, so a paper decision will usually be the route unless fairness clearly demands more. (gov.uk)

Dates and how law travels. The Rules were made on Wednesday 11 February 2026, laid before Parliament on Thursday 12 February 2026, and come into force on Thursday 5 March 2026. ‘Laid’ means the instrument is formally presented to both Houses; most parole rules use the negative procedure, where the law takes effect on the stated date unless either House objects within a set period. Departments aim to lay at least 21 days before commencement. (parliament.uk)

If you get a paper refusal, there is still a route to ask for a hearing. Under Rule 20, you can apply for an oral hearing after a negative paper decision, typically within 28 days. Under the new presumption, the duty member must still consider fairness but will only send it to a hearing if they consider there are exceptional circumstances in the specified scenarios. (insidetime.org)

Context for classrooms. After the Supreme Court’s Osborn ruling, the Board ran far more hearings; commentary drawing on official data puts oral hearings at over eight thousand in 2024/25. The 2026 clarification doesn’t roll back the principle of fairness; it fine‑tunes when a hearing is truly necessary in a few defined situations. (insidetime.org)

Study tip: when you see an SI, scan the first page for three anchors-made, laid, and coming into force-then look for which existing rules it amends. Here, it amends Rules 19 and 20 of the 2019 Rules. Cross‑reading with Osborn helps you see how common‑law fairness and procedure work together in parole. (gov.uk)

What this means for you. If you’re learning about criminal justice, treat this as a live case study in how Parliament and the courts shape procedure. If you work with learners or inside the system, the takeaway is simple: for the three listed situations, expect paper decisions unless there is a strong, clearly explained reason-grounded in fairness-to hold a hearing. (publications.parliament.uk)