• Home
  • Subscribe
  • Case table
  • About
  • Topics
    • Legal topics
      • Children
      • Criminal
      • Employment
      • Environment
      • European
      • Freedom of Information
      • Immigration/Extradition
      • Inquests and Inquiries
      • Family
      • International
      • Media
      • Medical
      • Mental Health
      • Politics / Public Order
      • Prisons
      • Religion
      • Terrorism
    • Introduction to Human Rights
    • Article 2
    • Article 3
    • Article 4
    • Article 5
    • Article 6
    • Article 7
    • Article 8
    • Article 9
    • Article 10
    • Article 11
    • Article 12
    • Article 13
    • Article 14
    • Protocol 1 Article 1
    • Protocol 1 Article 3
    • Protocol 2 Article 1
  • Archive
  • Contact

UK Human Rights Blog

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Human Rights Act helps fight terrorism says head of Supreme Court
Child protection review ordered by Government in light of crumbling system [updated] »

Council of Europe raps UK on prisoner voting [updated]

June 9, 2010 by Adam Wagner

The Council of Europe has expressed “profound regret” that the UK has failed to implement its 5-year-old European Court of Human Rights ruling against the policy which prevents prisoners from voting in elections.

In a Committee of Ministers decision, the Council, which monitors compliance with European Court rulings, has:

expressed profound regret that despite the repeated calls of the Committee, the United Kingdom general election was held on 6 May 2010 with the blanket ban on the right of convicted prisoners in custody to vote still in place

It also appears to be giving the new Government a chance, expressing

confidence that the new United Kingdom government will adopt general measures to implement the judgment ahead of elections scheduled for 2011 in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and thereby also prevent further, repetitive applications to the European Court;

In the 2005 decision of Hirst, the European Court held that Section 3 of the Representation of the People Act 1983, which prevents prisoners from voting, is in breach of the electoral right under Article 1 of Protocol 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Lord Pannick suggested shortly before the election that prisoners may be entitled to around £750 compensation if denied the vote. This figure then became commonly touted as the amount of compensation people may receive having been denied due to administrative incompetence during the election. Solicitor firms are already launching claims, and in theory tens of thousands may follow.

The matter has been now put off until September 2010, where the Committee will “resume consideration of this case at their 1092nd meeting (September 2010) (DH), in light of a draft interim resolution to be prepared by the Secretariat if necessary.” In deciding what to do now, the Coalition government will be wary of the European Court of Human Rights’ recently acquired new powers to punish intransigent states.

Read more:

  • Update 09/06/10 – Richard Grayson, vice-chair of the Liberal Democrat federal policy committee and head of politics at Goldsmiths, writes in the Guardian Lib Dems must dare to be different over prisoners’ voting rights: “Neither Labour nor the Conservatives will take up this case. So it falls to the Liberal Democrats to be different, in line with their principles. If being in government is to mean anything, and if the Liberal Democrats really do mean today’s politics to be “new”, then they have to behave in a new way when confronted by the scaremongering of some tabloids.”
  • Prisoner voting back on the human rights agenda this week
  • European Court of Human Rights sharpens its teeth

Rate this:

Share:

  • Email
  • Digg

Like this:

Like
Be the first to like this post.

Posted in In the news, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections | Tagged European Court of Human Rights, prisoners voting | Leave a Comment

  • Welcome!

    UK Human Rights Blog is written by members of 1 Crown Office Row barristers' chambers. Subscription is free.

    Editorial Team

    • Adam Wagner
    • Rosalind English
    • Angus McCullough QC

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog for free and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 9,414 other followers

  • Browse by legal topic

  • RSS Recommended

    • The Fat Tax - Daniel Barnett - Dale & Co. February 9, 2012
    • Case Law: Axel Springer v Germany, Grand Chamber finds violation of Article 10 – Sara Mansoori February 9, 2012
    • Supreme Court decision on Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Trust - Hempsons February 9, 2012
    • T, R (on the application of) v Greater Manchester Police & Anor [2012] EWHC 147 (Admin) (09 February 2012) February 9, 2012
      Student fails in human rights challenge to Enhanced Criminal Records Certificate with warning incurred when he was 11 for theft of 2 bicycles
    • Strasbourg Rulings on Two Personal Privacy Claims February 8, 2012
    • Open Justice « 2drj February 8, 2012
    • Wigs off, jeans on at the Judicial College | Joshua Rozenberg | Law | guardian.co.uk February 8, 2012
    • Contempt laws are still valid in the internet age | Dominic Grieve February 8, 2012
  • RSS Case law

    • T, R (on the application of) v Greater Manchester Police & Anor [2012] EWHC 147 (Admin) (09 February 2012) February 9, 2012
      Student fails in human rights challenge to Enhanced Criminal Records Certificate with warning incurred when he was 11 for theft of 2 bicycles
    • Othman v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] UKSIAC B1 (6 February 2012) February 8, 2012
      Terrorist suspect Abu Qatada granted bail on strict conditions. However, Secretary of State must show evidence of progress in his deportation in next 3 months then deprivation of liberty will no longer be justifiable.
    • AT v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 42 (07 February 2012) February 7, 2012
      Control order of member of Libyan Islamic Fighting Group ruled unlawful as wasn't given enough information about case against him as mandated in A v UK
    • Moussaoui, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 126 (Admin) (03 February 2012) February 6, 2012
      Detention of Mentally ill foreign criminal pending deportation was unlawful as regular reviews not carried out. Given damages of £1
    • Coogan v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 48 February 1, 2012
      Investigator Glen Mulcaire loses self-incrimination appeal against order that he should reveal phone hacking clients.
    • D and S, R (on the application of) v Manchester City Council [2012] EWHC 17 (Admin) (12 January 2012) January 31, 2012
      Chalenge by 2 elderly disabled people to £17m adult social care cuts by Manchester City Council fails. Consultation and regard to equality duties adequate.
  • Wikio - Top Blogs - Law
  • UKHRB on Twitter

    • RT @SkyNewsBreak: David Cameron has spoken to King Abdullah of Jordan to try to extradite radical cleric Abu Qatada 38 minutes ago
    • RT @daniel_barnett: Here's what I REALLY think about the Stott case - http://t.co/gCIHyevb. @AdamWagner1 also has excellent piece at htt ... 1 hour ago
    • Congrats to @1crownofficerow's Martin Forde QC, to fill Judicial Appointments Commission vacancy left by Lord Sumption http://t.co/wu7yVWAx 2 hours ago
    • RT @INFORRM: Case Law: Axel Springer v Germany, Grand Chamber finds violation of Article 10 - Sara Mansoori http://t.co/r5pBIQU3 2 hours ago
    • ... would have found that but for case law! Mr Justice Parker inviting Court of Appeal / Supreme Court to bite the bullet here 3 hours ago
    • ... also gives permission to appeal. Wld have found scheme "provides no mechanism for review.. disproportionate.. not compatible with A8.".. 3 hours ago
    • ... police warning were for theft of 2 bicycles when 11, student now 20. High Court judge "reluctantly" finds no breach of article 8... 3 hours ago
    Follow @adamwagner1
  • RSS Recent posts

    • Abu Qatada relased on “very restrictive” bail conditions February 9, 2012 Rosalind English
    • Please stow your rights in the overhead compartment February 9, 2012 Rosalind English
    • Hospital had human rights duty to protect voluntary patient from suicide, rules Supreme Court February 8, 2012 Adam Wagner
    • Libya employee can sue for dismissal in UK February 8, 2012 Rosalind English
    • Times contempt challenge thrown out in Strasbourg February 8, 2012 Adam Wagner
    • Indefinite detention: not very British February 8, 2012 freemovement
    • UK Supreme Court is tweeting, but where are the other courts? February 7, 2012 Adam Wagner
    • Axel Springer and Von Hannover: Grand Chamber victory for media – Inforrm February 7, 2012 1 Crown Office Row
  • Links

    • 1 Crown Office Row
    • 1COR Human Rights Update
    • 1COR resources
    • A(nother) Lawyer Writes
    • Ashley Connick's Blog
    • AVMA Blog
    • BAILII
    • Beneath the Wig
    • British Institute of Human Rights
    • Cearta.ie
    • Charon QC
    • David Allen Green
    • ECHR Blog
    • ECHR News
    • Education Law Blog
    • EJIL Talk!
    • eutopia Law
    • Family Lore
    • Free Movement Blog
    • Garrulous Law
    • Guardian Legal Network
    • Halsbury's Law Exchange
    • Head of Legal
    • Human Rights in Ireland
    • Inforrm's Blog
    • Inner Temple Current Awareness
    • Jack of Kent
    • Jailhouse Lawyer's Blog
    • Joint Council for Welfare of Immigrants
    • Joshua Rozenberg's Blog
    • Law and Lawyers
    • Law Think
    • Lawbore
    • Lawyer Watch
    • Legal Week Legal Village
    • Meeja Law
    • Mental Health Law Online
    • Nearly Legal
    • Panopticon Blog
    • PHD Studies in Human Rights
    • Pink Tape
    • RightsNI
    • RPC Privacy Blog
    • Strasbourg Observers
    • The Human Rights Blog
    • The Justice Gap
    • The Magistrate's Blog
    • The Pupillage Blog
    • The Small Places
    • The Time Blawg
    • UK Constitutional Law Group blog
    • UK Freedom of Information Blog
    • UK Immigration Law Blog
    • UK Supreme Court Blog
    • Venables legal resources
    • Watching the Law
  • Disclaimer

    This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.

Blog at WordPress.com. Fonts on this blog.

Theme: MistyLook by Sadish.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 9,414 other followers

Powered by WordPress.com
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.