header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 July 2012 / Craig Barlow , Jason Hadden
Issue: 7523 / Categories: Opinion , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Vote of no confidence?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Craig Barlow & Jason Hadden consider the Scoppola controversy

When national newspapers and Tory MPs are jumping up and down about a decision on voting in Europe you appreciate that something must be stirring.

In our previous article “Bars & the ballot box” 161 NLJ 7470, p 828, we considered the legality of the UK’s blanket ban on prisoners’ right to vote. We argued that it was relatively easy for the UK to bring domestic law into compliance with Art 3, Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) by creating a tiered system of disenfranchisement.

In Scoppola v Italy (No 3) (App No 126/05), 17 judges of the grand chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) revisited the law. The court was being asked to consider a convoluted Italian system, whereby suffrage is removed from prisoners not merely during incarceration but for longer. If sentenced to periods of incarceration of between three to five years the right to vote is either suspended for five years

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
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll