The European Court of Human Rights has published the latest in a growing list of judgments against the UK, criticising the blanket ban on prisoner voting. The UK has repeatedly been found to be in violation of the right to free elections because of their rules on prisoner voting. In this week’s judgment of McHugh and Others v United Kingdom, the Committee repeated the call for revision of the primary legislation which automatically removes voting rights from incarcerated individuals.
The Court received over a thousand applications from incarcerated individuals who as an automatic consequence of their convictions and detention were unable to vote between 2009 and 2011 in European Parliament elections, UK parliamentary elections, and elections to the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly or the Northern Irish Assembly. These cases were joined and the Court found that there was a violation of Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, because this case was identical to other prisoner voting cases in which a breach of the right had been found and the legislation had not yet been amended. The Court rejected the applicants’ claim for compensation or legal costs, refusing even the cost of a postage stamp for the applications.
Since the Grand Chamber judgment Hirst (No. 2) v United Kingdom in 2005, it has been held that a general, automatic and indiscriminate disenfranchisement of all serving prisoners, irrespective of the nature or gravity of their offences is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Last August, the Court reiterated the need for legislative reform to bring the UK in conformity with Convention obligations.
Click here to read the judgment McHugh and others v United Kingdom.
Click here for a factsheet on Prisoners’ Right to Vote under the ECHR.