Newsnight on prisoners votes: My criticisms

Newsnight on prisoners votes: My criticisms

Hundreds of violent offenders could vote, figures show

By Iain Watson

BBC Newsnight

I was disgusted with Newsnight's report on prisoners votes by Iain Watson. Before the programme came on I received a Google Alert and read his report "Hundreds of violent offenders could vote, figures show" in print. As the old saying goes "Lies, damned lies and statistics"! Lo and behold, what did Newsnight run with? "Figures reveal that 1,780 criminals convicted of violent or sexual offences would be eligible to vote under plans to give prisoners voting rights". Iain Watson has broken the first rule that states writers should only write what they know about.

Iain Watson began his report on television with "Newsnight has learnt...". It would have been better had he instead apologised for only now reporting what was in the newspapers and on the internet 2 weeks ago!

The day before yesterday I telephoned Newsnight to report the latest news on prisoners votes and was informed that Newsnight was not doing the story that night. Last night they did do it but only reported on old and inaccurate news!

The day before yesterday, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe debated and voted on the issue of implementation of the ECtHR judgments.

FYI:

"Resolution

7.10. The United Kingdom must put to an end the practice of delaying full implementation of Court judgments with respect to politically sensitive issues, such as prisoners’ voting rights.

In favour 77
Against 8
Abstention 3

UK MEPs how they voted

Lord Tim BOSWELL In favour

Mr Christopher CHOPE In favour

Mr Mike HANCOCK In favour

Mr Alan MEALE In favour

Ms Claire PERRY Abstained

Mr Jim SHERIDAN Abstained

Lord John E. TOMLINSON In favour".

FYI:

"Recommendation

In favour 83
Against 10
Abstention 3

1. The Parliamentary Assembly, referring to its Resolution ... on the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, urges the Committee of Ministers to increase, by all available means, its effectiveness as the statutory guarantor of the implementation of the Court's judgments, and to that effect recommends that it:

1.1. ensure special priority treatment for the most important problems in the implementation of the Court’s judgments, notably the systemic problems identified in Resolution ..., and regularly inform the Assembly of the results achieved towards resolving these problems;

1.2. induce States Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights with structural problems to provide comprehensive strategies which outline a clear and detailed approach to execute Court judgments, and ensure effective assessment of the adequacy of measures taken through such action plans;

1.3. strongly encourage governments to improve and, where necessary, to set up domestic mechanisms and procedures to secure timely and effective implementation of the Court's judgments through action of all national actors concerned, co-ordinated at the highest political level;

1.4. increase pressure and take firmer measures in cases of dilatory and continuous noncompliance with the Court’s judgments by states parties, and to work more closely on this subject with the Assembly.

UK MEPs how they voted

Lord Tim BOSWELL In favour

Mr Christopher CHOPE In favour

Mr Mike HANCOCK In favour

Mr Alan MEALE In favour

Ms Claire PERRY Abstained

Mr Jim SHERIDAN Abstained

Lord John E. TOMLINSON In favour".

As this information is already out there in the public domain if you know where to look for it, there really is no excuse for Newsnight not to have covered it. Investigative journalism and not lazy journalism is what is called for with this issue.

The only one who had an idea what he was talking about was Lord Lester of Herne Hill. Instead of giving him a 30 second soundbite, he should have been given more airtime.

Your programme was neither fair nor balanced reporting applying the Wednesbury reasonableness test. That is you took into account irrelevant factors and failed to take into account relevant factors.

For example, you interviewed Sara Payne and described her as "the Victim's Champion" and she stated that in her view prisoners should not have the vote. As a public authority, I contend that you have breached convicted prisoners human rights.

According to the HRA 1998:

"6 Acts of public authorities.

(1)It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right".

The leading authority on prisoners votes is Hirst v UK (No2). According to the Court, convicted prisoners have the human right to vote under Article 3 of the First protocol.

The leading authority on Hirst v UK (No2) is me. Moreover, it is my case in that the Council of Europe has stated via email that I own the case on the ground that it is my intellectual property right.

According to the HRA 1998:

"7 Proceedings.

(1)A person who claims that a public authority has acted (or proposes to act) in a way which is made unlawful by section 6(1) may—

(a)bring proceedings against the authority under this Act in the appropriate court or tribunal, or

(b)rely on the Convention right or rights concerned in any legal proceedings,

but only if he is (or would be) a victim of the unlawful act".

According to Hirst v UK (No2):

"72. Turning to this application, the Court recalls that the applicant, sentenced to life imprisonment for manslaughter, was disenfranchised during his period of detention by section 3 of the 1983 Act which applied to persons convicted and serving a custodial sentence. The Government argued that the Chamber erred in its approach, claiming that it had assessed the compatibility of the legislation with the Convention in the abstract without consideration of whether removal of the vote from the applicant as a person convicted of a serious offence and sentenced to life imprisonment disclosed a violation. The Court does not accept this criticism. The applicant’s complaint was in no sense an actio popularis. He was directly and immediately affected by the legislative provision of which complaint is made and in these circumstances the Chamber was justified in examining the compatibility with the Convention of such a measure, without regard to the question whether if the measure had been framed otherwise and in a way which was compatible with the Convention, the applicant might still have been deprived of the vote. The Divisional Court similarly examined the compatibility with the Convention of the measure in question. It would not in any event be right for the Court to assume that, if Parliament were to amend the current law, restrictions on the right to vote would necessarily still apply to post-tariff life prisoners or to conclude that such an amendment would necessarily be compatible with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1".

In case you missed the point, "He was directly and immediately affected by the legislative provision of which complaint is made", in other words I was a victim.

It follows, that all other convicted prisoners who would be eligible to vote if the government followed the Rule of Law and fully complied with the ruling in my case are victims too. It beggars belief that a public authority, the BBC, has allowed a former public authority figure, the ex-Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses, Sara Payne, to abuse the human rights of victims!

This is a bit like Monthy Python's Dead Parrot sketch, she is an ex-.

According to Hansard:

"30 Mar 2010 : Column 112WS
Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses

The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Jack Straw): I am today pleased to announce the appointment of Louise Casey as Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses.

The Victims Commissioner's key objectives, as defined in Coroners and Justice Act 2009, are to:

promote the interests of victims and witnesses;

encourage good practice in the treatment of victims and witnesses; and

keep under review the operation of the code of practice for victims.

Additionally, the Victims' Commissioner will chair the Victims' Advisory Panel.

The Victims' Commissioner is an independent role appointed through an open recruitment exercise. Although this was not formally an Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (OCPA) process, the appointment was made in accordance with OCPA principles. The Commissioner will make an annual report to the three Criminal Justice Ministers and will be accountable to parliament as chair of the Victims' Advisory Panel-victims of crime who advise ministers on how we can do things better".

Sara Payne is lucky that she no longer holds public office because I would have demanded her resignation for her comments.

It now remains for the BBC to remedy their abuse of victims human rights. The convicted prisoners are the victims. It would appear that the BBC has failed to note that in my case it is the State which is in the dock for human rights abuse and not the prisoners. Therefore, I demand that fair, balanced and impartial reporting on my case in future.