The home secretary has warned judges to keep their hands off ministerial powers which allow the government to keep murderers in jail.

David Blunkett has hit back at a European court of human rights decision over-ruling Home Office powers to keep convicted murderers in prison against the advice of the Parole Board after sentencing "tariffs" have expired.

He has warned that the Home Office will not accept judicial encroachment on sentencing issues which the government considers to be a political matter.

"I am disappointed with this judgement which has the effect of removing the home secretary's statutory power to decide the release of adult murderers whose tariff has expired," he said.

"We will study today's judgement in detail. In practice, the home secretary agrees with the Parole Board's advice in the vast majority of cases already and all adults convicted of murder whose tariff has expired will continue to undergo a rigorous assessment before being considered for release on life licence."

Blunkett warned campaigners seeking to remove controversial powers to set jail sentences not to regard the judgement as a green light for further human rights challenges - perhaps involving prisoners such as Moors murderer Myra Hindley or the Yorkshire "ripper" Peter Sutcliffe.

"I am concerned that this judgement may serve as encouragement for those who would like to remove the home secretary's powers to set tariffs for adult murderers," he warned.

"If this judgement were to be used to support a legal process to achieve this, I would seek to use domestic legislation to enshrine the power of parliament to provide adequate punishment for the guilty - including life meaning life."

The home secretary's anger reflects broader political concern that key crime and punishment issues should not be handed over to the judiciary.

"Policy on the protection of the public and punishment of the guilty must always be the domain of the elected parliament," argued Blunkett.

"My overarching priority will remain protecting the public from dangerous offenders, while doing everything we can to assist and support victims and their families.

"It is crucial that jurisprudence does not interfere with this basic right on behalf of the elected government."

The government's robust response to the ruling is backed by the Conservatives but opposed by the Liberal Democrats.

Shadow home secretary, Oliver Letwin, backed Blunkett on powers taken by his Conservative predecessor Michael Howard.

"We believe that the home secretary should retain the ability to overrule the Parole Board in specific cases involving murderers, and we think it would be wrong for the European court to prevent the home secretary from making such a judgement," he said.

But Lib Dem home affairs spokesman, Simon Hughes, believes that in individual cases politicians should stay out of sentencing.

"Maximum sentences for particular crimes can properly be fixed by parliament. But the individual sentence for an individual case should be fixed by a magistrate or judges not by politicians," he said.

"The decision about when a prisoner should be released early must be taken by independent authorities and not open to influence by political considerations.

"In the future, when indefinite sentences are given, it should be for the court to decide when, and on what terms, it is safe for the prisoner to be released."

Human rights campaigners, Liberty, have welcomed the Strasbourg ruling as weakening Blunkett's sentencing role.

"Politicians are subject to short-term tactical pressures," said spokesman Mark Littlewood.

"The decision to grant or refuse should not rest on what the home secretary might have read in the newspaper that morning nor on focus group research and spin. If the parole board's verdicts can be out-trumped by a politician, this is a recipe for arbitrary and ill-considered decisions. The court's judgement today is a welcome and significant step in depoliticising the criminal justice system."

European Court of Human Rights judges backed a claim by convicted murderer, Dennis Stafford, that a decision to keep him in jail longer than recommended by the Parole Board was unlawful.

The court has awarded Stafford, from County Durham, nearly £10,500 damages and £17,865 in legal costs and expenses.