Prisoners votes: It's just not cricket
I have no doubt in my mind that Charles Falconer placed spin on the Prisoners Votes Case aka Hirst v UK(No2). I just don't know whether Alastair Campbell was behind the delivery?
The Times Online ran with the headline "Government will block blanket vote for prisoners after ruling"
"Thousands of UK prisoners are likely to be given the right to vote after a former lifer won a long legal battle at the European Court of Human Rights today.
But the Government has indicated that not all the UK's 60,000-plus convicted prisoners would automatically be able to vote from jail after a ruling by the Strasbourg court".
Lord Falconer said: "I can make it absolutely clear that in relation to convicted prisoners, the result of this is not that every convicted prisoner is in the future going to get the right to vote".
Jonathan Aitken has said "The Lord Chancellor on The World at One gave a dangerous hostage to fortune when he said yesterday, "Not every convicted prisoner is in the future going to get the right to vote … we need to look and see whether there are any categories that should be given the right".
It would have helped if he had even read the judgment before spouting off...
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
1 comment:
These fuckers make me ill. Consistently ignoring high court rulings and/or appealing against the ones they don't like repeatedly until their appeal is accepted. This is not a democracy by any means.
Post a Comment