Prisoners Vote

Through different legal and criminological angles and perspectives, this book addresses the controversial question of whether prisoners should have the right to vote, as well as the optimal modalities for such a vote. By adopting a comparative approach to explore the legal systems of very different jurisdictions, such as the former Eastern Bloc, England, Ireland, the USA and France, the book reveals a recent trend in opening up the right to vote. It also looks at the recommendations of international and European institutions which, while relatively cautious, nevertheless support such progress. Examining the issue from a criminological viewpoint, the book investigates the role that prisoners’ votes could play in the social integration of these individuals into the community through political inclusion as citizens. Offering legal, theoretical and empirical bases, it blends a variety of perspectives to help readers establish an understanding of how prisoners' voting could contribute to improving their attachment to society and its values. Concise and direct, Prisoners' Vote will be of great interest to upper-level students and scholars of law, criminology, sociology, criminal justice, and political science. It should also appeal to practitioners working in the criminal justice system and policy makers reflecting on whether and how, to open the right to vote to prisoners.

This short report sets out a summary of evidence taken by the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee looking into the issue of voting by convicted prisioners, in advance of the debate taking place on 10 February 2011. Evidence was taken from legal experts, including the former Lord Chancellor, Lord Mackay of Clashfern. The main purpose is to gather expert evidence on how the United Kingdom law in this area relates to the European Convention on Human Rights as interpreted through the binding judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

Cet ouvrage couvre la période qui va de 1758 à nos jours.

"Should prisoners be allowed to vote?" This book is the first comprehensive evaluation of arguments on both sides of the debate.The author, Adam Godwin, gained a masters degree investigating this divisive political issue.This book examines the morality and usefulness of removing the voting rights of convicted prisoners in the U.K. It examines the arguments used to defend disenfranchisement and examines whether or not the practice is coherent with the traditional goals of our criminal justice system. It is centred around the British system, though arguments apply to any system of prisoner disenfranchisement.

The European Court of Human Rights has described the UK's current blanket ban on prisoner voting as 'general, automatic and indiscriminate' and found it to be in breach of article 3 of protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The ECHR requires the UK to bring forward legislative proposals to amend our current legislation to be compliant with the Convention. The Government is putting forward three options to a Committee of both Houses for full Parliamentary scrutiny. The three options are: a ban for prisoners sentenced to 4 years or more; a ban for prisoners sentenced to more than 6 months; a continued ban for all convicted prisoners. When the Joint Committee has finished its scrutiny the Government will reflect on its recommendations it will continue the legislative process by introducing a Bill.

The first comprehensive study of prisoners and the right to vote

Gives voice to a diverse range of viewpoints on the debate on prisoners' rights, with contributions from prisoners, human rights activists, academics, criminal justice policy makers and practitioners.

Essay from the year 2016 in the subject Law - Criminal process, Criminology, Law Enforcement, grade: 68%, 11 Punkte, , language: English, abstract: The aim of this essay is to work out and comment upon the treatment of prisoner voting rights by different instruments and the respective authorities on the basis of the parliamentary briefing paper dated from 11 February 2015 with particular consideration of the implementation of Llewellyn’s law jobs. First, this essay will present Llewellyn’s law job theory, then it will outline general provisions relating to voting rights. In the next section, the ECtHR’s and the UK government’s point of view on this debate will be critically examined, followed by an evaluation referring to the operation of the law jobs, especially emphasizing tensions regarding the resolution of trouble cases and the guiding of people’s conduct. Should prisoners in the United Kingdom be granted the right to vote? Several cases – Hirst v The United Kingdom (No 2) probably being the most popular example, where the convicted sought to challenge the current ban on prisoners’ voting – raised this issue in the recent years. A highly controversial debate was thereby initiated, especially against the backdrop of frequently arising tensions between the UK and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) as to the nature and extent of how some substantive rights operate. Since the Human Rights Act 1998 incorporates the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into the law of the UK, the national courts are generally obliged to interpret national law in a manner compatible with the ECHR and to consider the decisions of the ECtHR .