Jailhouselawyer's Blog

The case for prisoners votes in a legal sense is HIRST v UNITED KINGDOM (No2), application No. 74025/01, judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, 6 October 2005. Despite this legal decision, the case for winning the hearts and minds of the public and politicians in this matter has not been won. Under EU law, the government is under an obligation to implement the decision of the ECtHR. And, the Committee of Ministers supervises the execution of judgments of the ECtHR. However, the government over the years has adopted a policy of minimum compliance with the ECtHR decisions. Disturbingly, the Joint Committee On Human Rights - 19th Report, shows that the UK has so far failed to implement the decisions in 50 cases in which violations of human rights against the UK have not been remedied. This is not even minimum compliance. This is non-compliance on a large scale.

It is disappointing to still hear and read the views why prisoners should not have the vote after these views were aired by the government in its submission to the Court and the Court rejected these views as being incompatible with human rights. Its a bit like Ground Hog Day all over again and again and again. Iain Dale accused Shami Chakrabarti on Vox Politix on 18doughtystreet.com of going around in circles on this subject. However, she was trying to move the subject forward and it was Iain Dale with his entrenched views that kept him going around in circles. Whilst Shami was right in stating that if the franchise is to be taken away from prisoners it needs to be justified, Iain was wrong to keep airing his views based on fear, ignorance and prejudice as though these amounted to the necessary justification needed.

Iain Dale's Victorian mentality dates back to the Forfeiture Act 1870. This introduced the notion of "civic death", that is, that convicted felons are deprived of citizenship upon receiving a custodial sentence and therefore are denied the franchise. However, the common man in the street had not been given the franchise at this time so it is difficult to see how something can be taken away that has not been given in the first place! I am attempting to discover the reasoning behind Parliament passing the Forfeiture Act 1870. Meanwhile, prison case-law since 1979 recognises that prisoners have rights of the citizen, and that prisoners are a section of the public. Therefore, it would appear that the notion of "civic death" and prisoners being denied citizenship upon entering prison is now a thing of the past and should be left there. This is because the ECtHR accepts that the right to vote is not a privilege. In the 21st century, the presumption in a democratic State must be in favour of inclusion. Universal suffrage has become the basic principle.