Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

ePrints

Playing for Time: Prisoner Disenfranchisement under the ECHR after Hirst v United Kingdom

Lookup NU author(s): Colin Murray

Downloads

Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.


Abstract

Over five years ago, in Hirst v UK (No. 2), the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights found that the Representation of the People Act 1983 breached the right of prisoners to vote under Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Nonetheless, this often misunderstood decision did not require the United Kingdom to enfranchisement of all prisoners, but instead gave it the opportunity to reform its disproportionate blanket ban on prisoners voting. This article examines Hirst, assessing the reasons behind the Grand Chamber‟s cautious approach and the stalled reform process which it set in train. After Hirst, however, the Labour Government relied upon extended consultations to delay law reform for the remainder of its time in office. With the election of the Coalition Government a fresh opportunity arose to proceed with reform, although not one which the Conservative Party, as the senior Coalition partner, was eager to grasp. Conterminously, however, various sections of the Strasbourg Court finally lost patience with the vacillation of several countries, including the United Kingdom, over prisoner voting. In a series of decisions these sections sought to impose a broad measure of prisoner enfranchisement, although not always speaking with one voice as to the limits of the right to free and fair elections in this controversial context. This article considers the importance of these decisions both in terms of the divisions they indicate within the Strasbourg Court regarding the limits upon its supranational role and their implications for the ultimate shape of reform to the UK voting ban.


Publication metadata

Author(s): Murray C

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: King's Law Journal

Year: 2011

Volume: 22

Issue: 3

Pages: 309-334

Print publication date: 01/10/2011

ISSN (print): 0961-5768

ISSN (electronic): 1757-8442

Publisher: Hart Publishing Ltd.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5235/096157611798456771

DOI: 10.5235/096157611798456771


Altmetrics

Altmetrics provided by Altmetric


Actions

    Link to this publication


Share