header-logo header-logo

03 November 2011 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7488 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

Man on a mission

HLE blogger Simon Hetherington anticipates the attorney general's address to the ECtHR on the question of prisoners' voting rights

"Dominic Grieve QC, the attorney general is, no doubt, a skilled advocate. The letters after his name suggest as much, and the position he has reached in public life endorses that suggestion. Such, presumably, is the skill he will take with him to address the European Court of Human Rights on the question of prisoners’ voting rights, arising in an Italian case.

This is an issue on which the government (or at least the dominant coalition partner) feels fairly strongly. In brief, the court has seemed to think that prisoners should have the right to vote; the government thinks not, and is looking for the least degree of compliance that it can get away with. In Grieve’s own words, “we need clarity”—though it is unclear quite what is unclear.

We know the gist of what Grieve will say, because he very helpfully outlined his argument in a speech reported in The Guardian last week. Presumably he does not mind that other participants in the proceedings may have the advantage provided by prior knowledge of his case. But would it be cynical to wonder whether the occasion is a platform for a home-facing speech rather than a full-on attempt to limit the direct power of the court? The government is just now a little sensitive on matters European and has the difficult task of trying to please everyone at the same time.

The attorney general will be talking about “subsidiarity”, and seeking to argue that the court should not spend time on matters which can be and have been fully explored at national level. This is a view that has been expressed recently by the justice secretary, Ken Clarke; and it is a main plank of the independent review commissioned by the government in advance of the UK’s presidency of the Council of Europe.

It is a powerful point and should be listened to. True, it is being urged by a government that wishes to repeal the Human Rights Act (which is for all its faults a means by which subsidiarity can be sustained so long as the court in Strasbourg gives it adequate notice). But that government has never said that it wishes to resile from the Convention…”

Continue reading at www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

Issue: 7488 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Charles Russell Speechlys—James Paterson

Charles Russell Speechlys—James Paterson

Charles Russell Speechlys further bolsters Private Equity expertise with the appointment of James Paterson

Ellisons—Samuel Flower

Ellisons—Samuel Flower

Ellisons strengthens Rural Affairs team with senior appointment

Sidley—Carl Hotton

Sidley—Carl Hotton

Sidley adds insurance mergers and acquisitions partner to London office

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll