UK accused of dithering over prisoners' voting rights

UK accused of dithering over prisoners' voting rights


Europe human rights commissioner says coalition painted itself into corner as supreme court confirms fresh challenge over ban

The government has to announce by November how it intends to implement a requirement by the European court of human rights that, at least, certain categories of prisoners should be allowed to vote. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images

The government has "painted itself into a corner" over its refusal to grant prisoners' voting rights, according to Europe's most senior human rights official.

The criticism came as a fresh legal challenge was being mounted at the supreme court opposing the blanket ban on inmates participating in elections. The government has to announce by November how it intends to implement a requirement by the European court of human rights (ECHR) that, at least, certain categories of prisoners should be allowed to vote.

The new legal challenge comes from George McGeoch, 40, who is serving a life sentence for murder. In 2010, he tried, unsuccessfully, to add his name to the electoral register.

McGeoch's lawyers maintain his rights as an EU citizen to take part in elections are being denied, a different legal approach from previous challenges that led to ECHR judgments concluding that a blanket ban breached inmates' human rights.

Officials in Strasbourg are frustrated by the UK letting the issue fester. Nils Muižnieks, the new human rights commissioner at the Council of Europe, told the Guardian: "A blanket and indiscriminate ban is not in line with the European convention on human rights. The UK government seems to have painted itself into a corner through the last few years.

"The ruling does not require states to give all prisoners voting rights but [depriving prisoners of the vote] has to be linked to the nature of their crime."

Britain has repeatedly argued for what is called a '"margin of appreciation", allowing states some leeway in interpreting ECHR judgments. "Now they have it and the deadline to make the changes ends in November," Muiznieks said. "If they don't it will weaken the whole system and set a very bad example for other states.

"In general the UK has been a good citizen within the human rights system. It would be a huge shame and weaken the UK's influence if they delayed [the decision].

Aidan O'Neill QC, who appeared for McGeoch at earlier hearings, told a Commons select committee investigation into prisoners' voting rights, recently: "This is not about giving the prisoners the right to vote. It is setting out circumstances in which that right may lawfully be taken away. It is not giving enough respect for the importance of the right to vote simply to say: 'You are in prison for four years and automatically you lose the right to vote for four years'. There has to be an element of individual decision-making."

The attorney general, Dominic Grieve, has argued that a complete ban on prisoners voting is accepted by other Council of Europe states and is an issue to be determined by national parliaments.

The Cabinet Office, which is co-ordinating the government's response to the ECHR ruling, said that it was considering the implications of the Strasbourg decision.