Votes for prisoners?

Prisoners’ human rights were breached by the blanket ban on voting in the 2010 General Election, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled.

The court ruled there had been a breach of Art 3 of Protocol No 1, on the right to free elections, in McHugh and others v UK (App No 51987/08). However, the court did not award costs or compensation.

Sean Lumber of Leigh Day & Co, who acted for 554 of the 1,015 prisoners who brought the case, said: “Frankly, this judgment comes as no surprise given that the Court has already found this ban to be unlawful in a succession of judgments over the last decade.

“However, given the UK government’s stubborn refusal to take action to remedy the breach, as it is legally required to do, and as a consequence of which it is almost certain that prisoners be unable to vote in the forthcoming May 2015 General Election, we are disappointed that the Court has not seen fit to award our clients compensation for breaching their rights.”

The ECtHR first declared the blanket ban unlawful in 2005, in Hirst (No 2) v UK (App No 74025/01). It has confirmed this decision in further judgments, including Firth and others v UK (App No 47784/09) in August 2014.

The government has published a draft Bill exploring a range of options. In December 2013, a Parliamentary Select Committee recommended that the government introduce legislation to give prisoners serving sentences of 12 months or less the vote in the last six months of their sentence.  

However, the government has said it will take no action before the 2015 General Election since it is “clear that such legislation would not have a realistic prospect of passing through the current Parliament”. The Committee of Ministers, which oversees the ECtHR's judgments, has agreed to defer further discussion of the UK's implementation until September 2015.

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “The government has always been clear that it believes prisoner voting is an issue that should ultimately be decided in the UK. However we welcome the Court's decision to refuse convicted prisoners costs or damages.”