Earlier today the Government laid out in detail how it plans to abide by a court ruling against the current ban on prisoners voting in elections.
The plans, due to be put to the vote in Parliament next year, separate prisoners into two categories – those sentenced to four years or longer (who will be banned from registering to vote) and those on shorter sentences, who will normally be entitled to register to vote but on sentencing a judge will have discretion to remove their right to vote also.
Prisoners will vote on the basis of their address prior to entering prison, removing the issue that otherwise some constituencies where large jails are located would see a significant influx of prisoner voting.
Votes can be cast either by post or by proxy, without any intention of introducing polling stations in prisons.
Under these plans, the right to vote will only extend as far as Westminster and European elections.
An historical footnote: contrary to the Cabinet Office’s own press release, prisoners were entitled to vote briefly in the late 1960s in the UK.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Murder Capital: Words Lost Meaning
Campaigning in Lincoln
Blackness Avenue - 1910 #dundeewestend
Rwanda scheme ICT costs revealed
David Evans
Tristan Ward
Craig Levene
Nick Baird
8 Comments
So, the government leaves it until Xmas before dropping what it thinks is a bombshell.
Have I Got News For You. Hirst v UK (No2) requires that the UK give all convicted prisoners the vote. The Court ruled that the only exception is, for example, in the case of someone convicted of electoral fraud or abuse of a public office (MPs guilty of fiddling expenses?). And, only then if a judge removes the right to the franchise upon sentence. In other words, it is not up to the Executive or Parliament but a matter for the Judiciary.
The UK appears to be labouring under the false impression that it can both lose the case and dictate the interpretation of the judgment. However, this is a matter for the Council of Europe. And, they have ordered that the UK must fully comply within 6 months or face severe sanctions.
A merry Christmas to all my readers except those in favour of denying human beings their human rights.
How do these proposals comply with the actual court ruling? They seem more concerned with curtailing hysterical tabloid headlines rather than meeting the full requirements of the judgment.
I believe that all prisoners should be able to vote. The length of the sentence shouldn’t come into it.
People who commit crimes which are serious enough for them to be sent to prison should lose their vote. If they want to vote they have a simple way to ensure they can do so – don’t commit the crime.
This sort of thing just brings the HRA into disrepute.
“The plans, due to be put to the vote in Parliament next year, separate prisoners into two categories – those sentenced to four years or longer (who will be banned from registering to vote) and those on shorter sentences, who will normally be entitled to register to vote but on sentencing a judge will have discretion to remove their right to vote also.”
I think this is really a bit of a fudge. I also think it is internally inconsistent. If taking on civic duty is a part of rehabilitating a prisoner into society and four years is a sort of magic time, the vote should surely be restored when the prisoner reaches being within four years of release.
At present, is the vote be restored on full release or on de-facto release, such as parole?
I also think it is small minded to withhold the vote in National (Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) and English Regional (Greater London) elections.
More sensible would be adding judicial discretion to those convicted with sentences more than 4 years, for Westminster/EU elections alone, and allowing the right to vote in local elections for those with sentences less than 4 years, again subject to judicial discretion. After all, the prisoner may need their councillor’s assistance upon their release.
If Jailhouselawyer is correct, UK.gov could be forced into making this change anyway. The absolute ban makes no sense at all.
But not those who smash old ladies’ skulls in with axes? Fortunately, they still will be loose the franchise.
Voting is a civil right. Not a human right.