Updated | Greens and M.T. v. the United Kingdom (application nos. 60041/08 & 60054/08) – Read judgment / press release (which the case summary below is based on) The European Court of Human Rights is to give the UK a deadline of six months in order to allow prisoners to vote in elections, or it [...]
Archive for the ‘Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections’ Category
Europe sets deadline for UK to let prisoners vote, or else
Posted in Case summaries, European, In the news, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged prisoner vote on November 23, 2010 | 1 Comment »
Council of Europe warns UK again over prisoner voting rights
Posted in In the news, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections on November 19, 2010 | 2 Comments »
The Council of Europe, which monitors compliance with European Court of Human Rights judgments, has warned the United Kingdom to stop dragging its feet over the implementation of judgments on politically sensitive issues. In a draft resolution, the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, which was unanimously adopted on 17 November 2010, said: The [...]
Austrian prisoner vote decision now final, implications for UK
Posted in European, In the news, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections on November 4, 2010 | 1 Comment »
Updated | The dust has hardly settled on the government’s decision to allow prisoners to vote when, with uncanny timing, the European Court of Human Rights has denied the Austrian government permission to appeal in a similar case involving prisoners’ voting rights. The Strasbourg court has notified Austria that its request for referral of the [...]
Prisoners to vote in next general election, end of 5 year wait since Euro decision
Posted in European, In the news, Politics / Public Order, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged prisoner vote on November 1, 2010 | 5 Comments »
Updated | According to the Daily Telegraph, the prime minister has conceded that the government has no choice but to comply with a five-year-old European Court of Human Rights judgment and grant prisoners voting rights in the next general election. The Telegraph reports: on Wednesday a representative for the Coalition will tell the Court of [...]
Does Nick Clegg want prisoners to vote?
Posted in European, In the news, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged Nick Clegg, prisoner voting on September 20, 2010 | 1 Comment »
Updated, Tue 21 Sep | It is being reported that Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, is looking to end the ban on prisoners voting in elections. If the law were to change, it would represent the end of a very long road for campaigners. However, they have been waiting since 2005 and may well [...]
UKIP can keep donation despite breach of party funding rules
Posted in Politics / Public Order, Protocol 1 Art. 1 | Peaceful enjoyment of property, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged party funding, UKIP on July 29, 2010 |
The Supreme Court has narrowly held that the UK Independence Party (UKIP) can keep nearly all of a £349,216 donation despite the donor not being a permissible donor at the time of receipt, contrary to party funding rules under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. The Supreme Court upheld an order originally made [...]
Watchdog calls for rule changes after barred voters fiasco
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, In the news, Politics / Public Order, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged General Election on July 27, 2010 |
The Electoral Commission has released its full report into the events surrounding the May 2010 election during which thousands of voters were barred from polling stations due to administrative problems. The Commission, whose report can be downloaded here, has used the fiasco as a chance to emphasise and bring forward its reform program. The watchdog reports that [...]
Council of Europe raps UK on prisoner voting [updated]
Posted in In the news, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged European Court of Human Rights, prisoners voting on June 9, 2010 |
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 [...]
Prisoner voting back on the human rights agenda this week
Posted in In the news, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged Hirst v UK, prisoners rights, voting on May 30, 2010 |
The Guardian reports today that prisoner voting rights will be back in the public eye this week with critical comments from Europe and increased pressure from compensation claims. Interestingly, the article has now been amended to remove part of a quote from the Ministry of Justice, who had initially said that “Disenfranchisement is an outdated, [...]
Electoral commission report opens door for barred voter claims
Posted in In the news, Politics / Public Order, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged Electoral Commission report, human rights, voters compensation on May 21, 2010 |
The Electoral Commission, an independent body which sets standards for the running of elections, has released its report on problems experienced by voters during the 2010 General Election. It calls for “urgent action” to ensure that “the restrictive rules which prevented participation should be changed”. This has probably opened the door to legal claims. The [...]
Voters seeking compensation will face uphill climb
Posted in In the news, Politics / Public Order, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged general election 2010, human rights, unable to vote, voter compensation on May 13, 2010 |
We posted earlier this week on whether those who were locked out from voting in the 2010 General Election can claim for compensation under the Human Rights Act 1998 (read our post here). Liberty are asking spurned voters to contact them with a view to further legal action. But Joshua Rozenberg argues in this morning’s [...]
Feature | Barred voters and the right to compensation under human rights law
Posted in Features, In the news, Politics / Public Order, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged compensation, general election 2010, human rights, right to vote, UK on May 9, 2010 |
With possibly thousands of people prevented from voting in the 2010 General Election, can those who were locked out claim for compensation for breach of their human rights, and how much are they likely to receive? The legal basis: Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the European Convention on Human Rights, the duty on States to [...]
The human rights cost of preventing people from voting
Posted in Case comments, In the news, Politics / Public Order, Prisons, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged £750, ECtHR, election results, General Election, human rights, hung parliament, Prisoners, results 2010, UK election, voting compensation on May 7, 2010 |
See a more recent post on this topic here One of the enduring images of the 2010 General Election will be of long queues of people turned away from polling stations due to lack of facilities. This may well result in legal action. But according to Lord Pannick, the worse scandal may be the exclusion [...]
The General Election and human rights
Posted in In the news, Politics / Public Order, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, tagged election, general election 2010, human rights, Human Rights Act on May 6, 2010 |
The UK General Election takes place today. For the 38% of voters who may yet still change their minds, below are our previous posts on the General Election 2010 and human rights: Promises: The three main parties have set out their stalls on human rights in their manifestos Goodbye HRA? The Human Rights Act may [...]
Welcome!
Browse by legal topic
Recommended- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012Supreme Court rules by 5-2 majority that Julian Assange must be extradited to Sweden. Definition of "judicial authority" is a wide one.
- Supreme Court judgment: Assange v Swedish Judicial Authority - Carl Gardner May 30, 2012
- Julian Assange's extradition stayed thanks to quick legal footwork | Joshua Rozenberg | Law | guardian.co.uk May 30, 2012
- New Judgment: Assange v The Swedish Judicial Authority [2012] UKSC 22 May 30, 2012
- What if Julian Assange loses in the Supreme Court? May 29, 2012
- Secret justice concessions won't silence its critics | The Spectator May 29, 2012
- ICLR's case summaries are now on Guardian Law | Daniel Hoadley | Law | guardian.co.uk May 29, 2012
- The High Court is unable to agree on Twitter Joke Trial appeal - David Allen Green May 28, 2012
- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012
- Case law
- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012Supreme Court rules by 5-2 majority that Julian Assange must be extradited to Sweden. Definition of "judicial authority" is a wide one.
- SCOPPOLA v. ITALY (No. 3) - 126/05 [2012] ECHR 868 (22 May 2012) May 23, 2012ECtHR Grand Chamber: automatic and indiscriminate disenfranchisement of prisoners unlawful but up to individual states how to implement changes were such a ban exist
- Dishonesty in entry clearance applications May 21, 2012An Upper Tribunal (UT) decision confirms that, where an application for entry clearance is “marred by dishonesty” – whether in the applicant’s knowledge or not and even where the applicant is presently eligible for entry – it is not a disproportionate response for the Home Secretary to refuse the application, even in light of Article 8
- MM and AO (A Child), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 668 (18 May 2012) May 18, 2012Secretary of State acted lawfully in not ordering independent inquiry into 2009 protest at Immigration Detention Centre. Challenge by children separated from parents during protest and claiming pschiatric damage as result.
- British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & Ors, R (on the application of) v Chelmsford Crown Court [2012] EWHC 1295 (Admin) (17 May 2012) May 17, 2012Sky, BBC, ITN etc. succeed in JR of decision by court to order production of 100+ hours of video footage to Essex Police of Dale Farm protesters: "... there were no reasonable grounds for believing that the footage of over 100 hours included material likely to be of substantial value to the investigation"
- Humphreys v Revenue and Customs [2012] UKSC 18 (16 May 2012) May 16, 2012Supreme Court: paying child tax credit to "main" care giver not discriminatory under art.14 ECHR to father caring for child 3 days per week. The specific test for justifying discrimination in the context of state benefits is that with questions of social and economic strategy the Court will generally respect the legislature’s policy choice unless i […]
- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012
-
UKHRB on Twitter
- #Assange loses SC appeal 5 votes to 2. Like to be #ECtHR application to block #extradition 4 hours ago
- #Assange Supreme Court decision imminent bbc.co.uk/news/uk-182594… #extradition 5 hours ago
- Also fresh on the blog- The Erika: Cour de Cassation has its thinking cap on by David Hart QC ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/29/the… 5 hours ago
- Good morning all, @IsabelMcArdle here. Justive and Security Bill- the govt is not for turning by Angela Patrick ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/29/jus… 5 hours ago
Adam Wagner on Twitter
- RT @simonmckay: Catt v Metropolitan Police. Important case on #protest and #dataretention. Would be surprised if it was not appealed:htt ... 54 minutes ago
- For anyone who hasn't read it > Justice & Security Bill: Government is not for turning - Angela Patrick of @justicehq: wp.me/pJiO3-3Gc 1 hour ago
- RT @CrowtherSimon: Excellent piece by @justicehq's Angela Patrick on Just& Sec Bill on @ukhumanrightsb ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/29/jus… #secretj ... 1 hour ago
- RT @I_am_peevee: @AdamWagner1 @gideonconn "and excellent artist"... 1 hour ago
- My friend and brilliant musician @GideonConn has a brand new video: youtube.com/watch?v=tX-ZrZ… 1 hour ago
- Excellent from @joshuarozenerg on the potentially embarrassing mess surrounding the #Assange ruling is.gd/4Qs0h3 1 hour ago
- Recent posts
- The Erika: Cour de Cassation has its thinking cap on May 29, 2012 David Hart QC
- Justice and Security Bill: The Government is not for turning – Angela Patrick May 29, 2012 1 Crown Office Row
- We need to think about Kevin May 29, 2012 Rosalind English
- Key Justice and Security Bill resources May 29, 2012 Adam Wagner
- Free Speech at Work: A 1COR Seminar and Mock Trial – Wed 27th June May 29, 2012 1 Crown Office Row
- Time and time again: Article 6 to the rescue May 27, 2012 David Hart QC
- Prisoner voting, Bratza’s replacement and peaceful protest – The Human Rights Roundup May 27, 2012 Wessen Jazrawi
- The case for letting prisoners vote – Reuven Ziegler May 24, 2012 1 Crown Office Row
Disclaimer
Analysis: Phil Woolas loses his seat and has judicial review refused
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 6 | Right to Fair Trial, Case comments, Case law, Criminal, Defamation / Libel, Freedom of Information, In the news, Politics / Public Order, Protocol 1 Art. 3 | Free elections, Terrorism, tagged Phil Woolas on November 10, 2010 | 4 Comments »
Robert Elwyn Watkins v Philip James Woolas [2010] EWHC 2702 (QB) 5 November 2010- read judgment Update – read our 3 December 2010 post on his defeat in the administrative court The Election Court has ruled that the Labour MP for Oldham knowingly and deliberately misled the constituency and as a result his election is [...]
Read Full Post »