European court gives Cameron ultimatum on prisoner votes

European court gives Cameron ultimatum on prisoner votes

European judges yesterday gave David Cameron a six month ultimatum to give prisoners the vote after snubbing the views of the UK parliament.

By Tom Whitehead, Home Affairs Editor 1:21AM BST 13 Apr 2011

The Coalition lost its final appeal against a ruling that some inmates should be allowed to vote because of their human rights.

The rejection, from the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, came despite a vote in parliament that overwhelmingly opposed giving prisoners a vote.

It means the Government now has until September to act or face a flood of compensation claims, which it will almost certainly lose.

And Europe is even demanding that it dictate a time frame in which the Government passes any necessary legislation.

Ministers were last night “disappointed” by the decision while one MP accused the Strasbourg court of “shocking arrogance” to dismiss the concerns of British politicians.

The ECHR ruled in 2005 that the blanket ban on prisoner voting was illegal because it breached their human rights.

The last Labour Government did not comply with the decision and the Coalition is still deciding what action to take.

Mr Cameron has said the ruling makes him “physically sick".

In February, MPs backed a Commons motion opposing the European ruling by 234 to 22.

The vote was not binding on ministers but the Government used the outcome as part of its appeal to the Grand Chamber, the upper tier of the European Court, to demonstrate the strong opposition to it.

But the Chamber yesterday rejected the appeal and ruled that action must be taken within six months.

At least 4,000 compensation claims from prisoners here are currently lodged with the European Court but have been stayed while the Grand Chamber ruled on the appeal.

If the Government fails to act they are likely to be re-enacted and could pave the way for thousands more.

In November two UK prisoners were awarded 5,000 euro (£4,350) in costs and expenses for their loss of voting rights.

It a related move, the Chamber said that the UK Government is “further required to enact the relevant legislation within any time frame decided by the Committee of Ministers, the executive arm of the Council of Europe, which supervises the execution of the Court's judgments".

That would effectively mean Europe dictating the parliamentary process of the UK.

Dominic Raab, the Conservative MP who has been campaigning against the ruling, said: “It is shocking arrogance for the Strasbourg Court to dismiss the legitimate concerns of Britain's elected lawmakers without even listening to the arguments.

“Britain must stand firm against this growing abuse of power by unaccountable judges."

A Cabinet Office spokeswoman said: “We are disappointed with the Court’s decision not to reconsider the judgement. We will consider the next steps.”

Last year the Prime Minister said: “It makes me physically ill to contemplate giving the vote to prisoners. They should lose some rights including the right to vote."

But he said the Government had to comply – or face possible compensation claims running into millions in a flood of new human rights claims by inmates.

Earlier this month Lord Neuberger, the Master of the Rolls and the country’s second most senior judge, said the domestic courts would not interfere if Parliament chose to reject the controversial decision.

He said any outcome was a "political decision" and if the Government chose to ignore a Strasbourg ruling there would be "nothing objectionable" in British law.

Comment: I think it is a bit rich to claim that the ECtHR is snubbing the views of the UK Parliament. For over 5 years the UK has snubbed the highest court in Europe. Parliament has not expressed a view on this issue since 1870, and time has moved on. It is disingenuous of Tom Whitehead to claim that the views expressed by a handful of backbenchers in the Commons on 10 February to be the views of Parliament.

It is shocking that the arrogant Dominic Raab has been campaigning against human beings human rights. In my view, he should be campaigning against expenses fiddling MPs demanding that they be exempt from taxes! He is lying through his teeth when he claims that the Court is dismissing the UK's arguments without listening to them. Over 5 years ago the Court listened to the UK's arguments in the Chamber, and then listened again on the UK's appeal in the Grand Chamber. The UK is not listening. The Court is stating that its decision is final.