header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
02 December 2010
Issue: 7444 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Human rights—Prisoners—Right to vote

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Greens and another v United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 60041/08, [2010] All ER (D) 280 (Nov) European Court of Human Rights

Judge Garlicki (President), Judges Bratza, Mijovic, Bjorgvinsson, Bianku, Poalelungi and De Gaetano, and L Early (Section Registrar), 23 Nov 2010

The United Kingdom must remove the blanket ban on prisoner voting in s 3 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (RPA 1983) and s 8 of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002 (EPE 2002) within six months.
At the material times, the applicants were all serving prisoners. The Electoral Registration Officer refused their applications for registration to vote on the basis of their status as convicted persons detained in a penal institution.

Section 3 of RPA 1983 imposed a blanket restriction on all convicted prisoners in detention irrespective of the length of their sentence and irrespective of the nature or gravity of their offence and their individual circumstances. The blanket restriction introduced by s 3 of RPA 1983 was extended to elections to the European Parliament by s 8 of EPE 2002.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
NLJ this week: Diamond rings and broken promises

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: The battle over medical report fees intensifies
Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll