The chair of the Parole Board, Nick Hardwick, has resigned as judges overturned a decision to release the rapist John Worboys from jail.

Hardwick was forced to quit after the justice secretary, David Gauke, told him his position was “untenable”.

Hardwick’s resignation came before three high court judges ruled that the Parole Board’s decision to release Worboys should be quashed and ordered a “fresh determination” in his case, meaning he will remain in prison for the time being.

In his resignation letter to the justice secretary, Hardwick makes it clear he was forced to resign.

“You told me that you thought my position was untenable,” he wrote. “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.”

The Parole Board’s chief executive, Martin Jones, said: “Nick Hardwick and I have always been clear that we will support our members when they face criticism in making these important decisions. I am deeply sorry that Nick Hardwick has decided to resign, he is a man of real integrity, and I have been proud to work with him.”

Gauke said: “I accept Prof Hardwick’s resignation and believe this is the correct decision in light of the serious failings outlined in today’s judgment. I would also like to express my appreciation for his committed service to the board and the contribution he has made to my department’s review of parole processes.



“It is crucial the Parole Board now takes all necessary measures to ensure that public confidence is maintained in its decision-making processes. I look forward to working closely with the new leadership team to see through these vital changes.”





Q&A What is the Parole Board? Show The Parole Board is an independent body that carries out risk assessments on prisoners to determine whether they can be safely released into the community. It manages the early release of prisoners serving fixed-length sentences of four years or more; the release of prisoners who are serving life sentences or indeterminate sentences for public protection; and the re-release of prisoners who have been given life or indeterminate sentences and were then re-imprisoned.

Some prisoners seeking release may have to attend a hearing before Parole Board members. Up to three members of a panel will decide whether to release the prisoner based on a file of documents including information on the inmate’s behaviour in prison, their plans once released and risk of committing further crimes. Medical, psychiatric and psychological evidence can also be heard. As well as the prisoner, a solicitor, psychologist and witnesses could attend. The victim of the prisoner’s offences may also be present. The Parole Board has 234 members who make the assessments and decisions and employs 120 members of staff to support them.

In his first detailed statement on the case in January, Hardwick defended the decision to release Worboys, saying the three-member panel that considered the case was chaired by “one of our most experienced women members”, considered a dossier of 363 pages and heard evidence from four psychologists, and from prison and probation staff responsible for Worboys.

“The secretary of state was represented at our request. Worboys himself was questioned in detail. The panel considered a written statement from one victim,” Hardwick said.

He stressed that in any Parole Board decision to release a prisoner the burden was on the prisoner to demonstrate that he or she was safe to release.

“The law governing us is clear. We have to decide about future risk. We cannot reassess guilt or innocence, or whether the original sentence was appropriate. Instead, our decisions are informed by evidence of how the prisoner has changed and the plans to manage him or her in the community,” he said.

Lawyers for two women, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had argued in the high court that the Parole Board’s decision to release the 60-year-old serial sex attacker was “irrational”, and should be overturned.

The two victims who brought the case in the high court said they believed something went “badly wrong” with the board’s decision to free him.



They say it should have taken into account “critical evidence” of the “wider allegations” against Worboys.

The judges heard that Worboys, who has served 10 years behind bars, including remand time, has denied committing any offences other than those for which he was convicted.