Daily Mail gets it wrong on prisoners votes yet again!

Daily Mail gets it wrong on prisoners votes yet again!

Robert Greens is a convicted rapist, not that his offence has got anything to do with his human right to vote, because that entitlement is based upon him being a human being and not a label attached by a criminal offence and made a meal out of it by the tabloid press.

The judges of the European Court of Human Rights are elected by the Parliament Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), unlike our unelected judges in the UK. Therefore, the claim by the Daily Mail that the judges are unelected is a lie.

Spot the difference...

Text within main article:

"If judges rule that deadline should be brought forward, the Prime Minister could be forced to rush legislation through the Commons".

Text under the photo of David cameron

"Headache: David Cameron faces further problems if a legal bid by a convicted rapist is successful - as he will need to rush through legislation to block any move".

The implication in the former is that legislation will be rushed through to comply with the judgment.

It is doubtful that he could get legislation through to block the move. It would mean withdrawing from the ECHR and EU.

"Ministers will hope that because they are urgently considering how to resolve the fiasco, the case will be thrown out".

There is no evidence that Ministers are urgently considering fully complying with the decision in Hirst v UK (No2). The case is over 5 years old now. It should have been resolved within 6 months. There is plenty of evidence that the UK has tried to get out of fully complying. And, that is what is a fiasco.

The High Court decision last week was wrongly decided. I suspect it will be overturned on appeal.

The solution is quite simple. All Kenneth Clarke has to do is make a remedial order under s.10 of the HRA 1998 to amend s.3 of ROPA 1983 and lay it before Parliament. Sorted. Simples.