Lecture 12:Prisoners’ legal rights Flashcards
What are the key elements associated with a country being a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)?
the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) in 1950
the European Court of Human Rights
Recognition and application of the ‘Margin of Appreciation’
Empowerment of domestic courts to determine specific requirements under the ECHR
What are the key components related to domestic law concerning prisons?
Prison Act of 1952 and Prison Rules of 1999
Human Rights Act of 1998
Appellate courts
Explain the concept of ‘Minimum Interference’ as it pertains to prisoners’ rights.
The personal liberty of prisoners is limited by the imposition of a custodial sentence.
but - Administrative rights, are restricted by the prison service and are not an inevitable consequence of the sentence itself.
According to the case of Raymond v Honey (1983), a convicted prisoner retains all civil rights not expressly or necessarily taken away.
What are the key principles associated with the ‘Minimum Interference’ concept in the context of prisoners’ rights?
A convicted prisoner retains civil rights not expressly or necessarily taken away (Raymond v Honey, 1983).
Restrictions on rights must be the minimum necessary for the interests of prison regulations (ex parte Leech, no 2, 1994).
Operational judgment regarding these restrictions lies with the prison service, not the judiciary.
What was the ruling in the case of Pearson v Secretary of State (2001) regarding the right to vote for post-tariff discretionary lifers?
Post-tariff discretionary lifers, considered to be under preventive detention, were not permitted to vote.
They could vote if released on licence or if unconvicted and on remand.
According to the government’s position on prisoners’ voting rights, what is the rationale for restricting the right to vote?
The government argues that restricting the right to vote is necessary for the punishment of offenders and aims to enhance civic responsibility and respect for the rule of law.
Since 1983, prisoners are also prohibited from standing for election as Members of Parliament.
What was the key argument and outcome in the case of Hirst v UK (no 2) (2005) regarding prisoners’ right to vote?
The argument emphasized that there was no clear logical link between the loss of the vote and the imposition of a prison sentence.
The outcome was that the absolute bar on voting by any serving prisoner in any circumstances was deemed unacceptable, as confirmed by the Grand Chamber in Scoppola v Italy (2012).
How did the administrative amendment impact prisoners’ voting rights, particularly related to Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL)?
The administrative amendment allowed prisoners on Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) to exercise their right to vote, addressing some of the issues raised in the Hirst v UK case.
Can you provide an international comparison related to prisoner enfranchisement, specifically mentioning a country with high prisoner turnout and other regions that do not have a blanket ban on prisoner voting?
In Canada in 2015, the prisoner turnout was reported to be 51%.
No blanket ban on prisoner voting exists in Scotland (2019), along with 18 Western European countries and South Africa.
What were some of the concerns and challenges associated with the Electoral Amendment Act 2006 in Ireland regarding postal voting for prisoners in their home constituency?
Concerns included issues related to privacy and identification as postal voters.
The requirement to have a home address was seen as problematic.
The low prisoner turnout was attributed to prisoners’ lack of political engagement and exclusion from politicians’ campaigning.
