As has been stated by someone else, we can’t take a universal approach to this. To treat every case and every person the same is a bad idea. Maybe those convicted of terrorism ought to be subjected to a more rigorous appraisal than some other types of criminals as terrorism is generally carried out by those with a very deep-rooted ideology, but a judge can also determine on a case-by-case basis what the absolute minimum sentence is or whether or not a person would be eligible for early release. I think that’s where the decision making on this needs to remain - with the judges.
We have to also question our own motives on issues like this. Why do we view terrorists differently than other offenders? It’s emotion. That’s it. Terrorism is a deeply emotional subject. But, our legal system is supposed to be more rational than emotional. It’s not that the emotions are invalid, just that, for the justice system to work, emotion can’t be the primary factor.