A total of nine prisoners offered parole turned it down, the latest set of figures for the Parole Board have revealed.

And out of a total of 156 cases, according to parole board members, only 34 were allowed out of prison before they had served their time.

The news came in the 2013 annual report of the Parole Board, tabled by Premier and National Security Minister Michael Dunkley in the House of Assembly today.

Mr Dunkley said: “It’s possible some decline parole because of the conditions placed on them.”

And he said the public perhaps did not appreciate the range of factors and possible conditions considered by the Parole Board before it agreed to early release.

He added: “The deliberations are intense because of the nature of the decisions they make.”

The report said: “The Parole Board has a profound responsibility — we recognise that taking away, or giving, people their freedom is never to be taken lightly.

“The safety of the community weighs heavily with the board. Each deliberation is done with great consideration.”

The report added: “Unfortunately, human behaviour can never be predicted with 100 percent accuracy.

“It is every Parole Board’s nightmare that someone it releases will commit a violent offence.

“If that should happen, one hopes all facts are considered before blaming anyone other than the perpetrator.”

The report said that most sentences were reduced by at least half by law after offenders start their sentence.

“It should be noted that the majority of prisoners will eventually be released, either by parole or on completion of their sentence.”

The report said that research had shown that just releasing prisoners without any supervision or support was “a dangerous precedent.”

It added: “It is much more prudent to release an individual with enough time to help set up a successful transition back to society with the watchful guidance of a parole officer.

“These individuals are going to come back into our community as our neighbours and positive re-entry takes time.”

The report said that ways to ensure released prisoners do not slip back into a life of crime included the possible use of a “transitional facility”, finding housing and a job, as well as community-based treatment, money planning and reintegration with families.

It said that the use of monitoring — including electronic tagging where needed — was important, with a total of five parolees in 2013 ordered to wear an electronic ankle bracelet as a condition of their release.

The report said: “While non-violent offenders may be obvious candidates for the board to consider, what the public must realise is that even the most heinous offenders will eventually have their sentence expire and such individuals have a greater need for the close supervision and monitoring that parole provides.”

But Parole Board chairman Ashfield DeVent said that the rehabilitation of offenders continued to be held back due to a failure over several years to change the law to ensure that prisoners served at least a year behind bars before being eligible for parole.

He added: “The unavailability of programmes mandated by the case plan continues to plague the parole process and 2013 saw several prospective parolees yet again highlight this flaw in their efforts at rehabilitation and prepared for community supervision.”