You are here:   Blogs >Joshua Rozenberg > Britain Still in Contempt of Court
Standpoint Blogs
 
 
Joshua Rozenberg
Monday 8th March 2010
Britain Still in Contempt of Court

Britain was "strongly urged" today to allow prisoners to vote at the general election. Officials at the Council of Europe "reiterated their serious concern" that the government's failure to implement a judgment by the European Court of Human Rights would lead to large numbers of claims by disenfranchised prisoners.

Ministers' deputies - the ambassadors to the Council of Europe who supervise the execution by member states of judgments by the Human Rights court - adopted a strongly worded resolution today.

Referring to a judgment delivered as long ago as October 2005, the deputies noted that the court's grand chamber had found that the "general, automatic and indiscriminate restriction on the right of convicted prisoners in custody to vote fell outside any acceptable margin of appreciation and was incompatible with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the convention".

The deputies recalled a motion adopted last December in which the Committee of Ministers had "expressed serious concern that the substantial delay in implementing the judgment has given rise to a significant risk that the next United Kingdom general election... will be performed in a way that fails to comply with the Convention". The ministers had urged the United Kingdom to "rapidly adopt measures to implement the judgment".

Despite that, they noted today, the "automatic and indiscriminate restriction remains in force".

The deputies 

  • reiterated their serious concern that a failure to implement the court's judgment before the general election and the increasing number of persons potentially affected by the restriction could result in similar violations affecting a significant category of persons, giving rise to a substantial risk of repetitive applications to the European Court; and
  • strongly urged the authorities to rapidly adopt measures, of even an interim nature, to ensure the execution of the court's judgment before the forthcoming general election.

Ultimately, though, there is little more they can do. The forthcoming election will not be invalid or illegal. But it doesn't exactly make you be proud of a country that not only denies its citizens their human rights but chooses not to do anything about it. 

So much for the government's promise that it always implements the court's rulings.

 
Like this article? Share, save or print using the icons below
Delicious   Digg   StumbleUpon   Propeller   Reddit   Magnoliacom   Newsvine   Furl   Facebook   Google   Yahoo   Technorati   Icerocket   Print   Mail   Twitter   
Share/Save
 
 
 
David Radlett
March 9th, 2010
6:03 PM
The government's error is stringing out the alleged consultation process rather than informing the Council of Europe that they cannot agree to the implementation of this decision. Frankly, the Court of Human Rights got it wrong: a prisoner forfeits more than his/her physical liberty when s/he contrives to get sent to prison. According to the information available to the Court, some eighteen countries out of the forty-five Contracting States have no restrictions on prisoners’ right to vote, so 27 countries DO impose restrictions. In thirteen States prisoners are not able to vote either because of a ban in their legislation or de facto because appropriate arrangements have not been made, and in at least four of those States disenfranchisement has its basis in a recently adopted Constitution (Russia, Armenia, Hungary and Georgia). In at least thirteen other countries more or less far-reaching restrictions on prisoners’ right to vote are prescribed in domestic legislation, and in four of those States the restrictions have a constitutional basis (Luxembourg, Austria, Turkey and Malta). The dissenting judges (who provided the statistical information used here) got it right.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
 
About Joshua Rozenberg

Joshua Rozenberg is an independent legal commentator who presents Law in Action on BBC Radio 4.

Recent Blog Posts
Blog List
More Posts
Popular Standpoint topics