Jack Straw and David Davis announced yesterday that they were joining forces to oppose the move to enfranchise prisoners. It comes after a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that killers like John Hirst could not be legally denied the right to vote in prison.
The opposition from some Tory backbenchers, possibly up to 40 rebels, is unjustified. They oppose the reversal of the blanket ban on prisoner's voting rights, not because of the merits of their case but in order to make a political statement. They see this as a tussle of authority between the British Parliament and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). According to Jack Straw, this debate is the perfect opportunity for the government to "strengthen [their] hand for dealing with Strasbourg."
No, this should not be seen as a political tussle. This is a debate about human rights - and our policy on prisoner's voting rights should be decided on that basis, not used as a means for standing up to ECHR power. That is an entirely legitimate concern but its place lies in a separate debate.
The opposition from some Tory backbenchers, possibly up to 40 rebels, is unjustified. They oppose the reversal of the blanket ban on prisoner's voting rights, not because of the merits of their case but in order to make a political statement. They see this as a tussle of authority between the British Parliament and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). According to Jack Straw, this debate is the perfect opportunity for the government to "strengthen [their] hand for dealing with Strasbourg."
No, this should not be seen as a political tussle. This is a debate about human rights - and our policy on prisoner's voting rights should be decided on that basis, not used as a means for standing up to ECHR power. That is an entirely legitimate concern but its place lies in a separate debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment