MURDERERS MUST BE GIVEN THE VOTE STRASBOURG TELLS MPS – It started with the axe murder John Hirst who insisted that removing his right to vote was a violation against his human rights.
Paul Mahoney, the only UK judge on the Strasbourg panel also agreed with John Hirst, telling MPs in the UK that prisoners must be given the vote.
Once again the argument for the UK to pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) intensified as a backlash of anger and disbelief raged through the House of Commons.
It is interesting to note that Paul Mahoney is merely a bureaucrat who has never sat as a judge in the UK; but he feels the British Government must accept the ruling from Strasbourg and amend the law to allow all prisoners the right to vote.
Mr. Mahoney went on to tell MPs that such a move was not overly important and any defiance against the ruling would have serious consequences to Britain’s reputation within the European Union and indeed the world.
One Tory MP, Ian Liddell-Grainger told the House of Commons that this intervention would only strengthen the public’s resolve in pulling out of the ECHR and the EU.
The consensus has always been the same; that is if you commit a crime, are found guilty and imprisoned then your rights are forfeited.
This is a clear and unequivocal indication that Britain’s sovereign parliament is of no consequence over the importance of the Strasbourg court – it is time to close the door.
How many times must the British publish be subjected to Strasbourg’s meddling in our affairs? The Home Office spent years and millions of pounds trying to deport Abu Qatada; all in vein as Strasbourg upheld his human right.
Abu Qatada is not alone; there are literally thousands of cases where the Home Office cannot deport known criminals and terrorists, for doing so would violate ECHR laws.
It appears too many that the ECHR is all too willing to support the rights of criminals without the slightest thought for the victims and their family members; this is nothing short of a slap in the face for the victims and their families – but when did Europe really care about the British citizen?
This is not the first time that the ECHR have insisted on providing the vote for prisoners, however successive government has stood firm and refused to change the law – yes even David Cameron, who continues to champion the virtues of the EU, states that such a move would be in direct contravention of British law and morality.
In 2011, MPs were provided a vote on whether to maintain banning a prisoner from voting – the results were 234 to 22 in favour of maintaining that ban; it’s obvious they were fully aware that the public would not support or accept such a ban being lifted.
The Justice Secretary Chris Grayling did last year consider that some prisoners could be afforded the vote, such as those serving less than six month, however to date no plans have been presented to parliament.
It is likely that most of the British public feels that our laws are far too relaxed as it is; with the growing number of criminals being allowed multiple suspended sentences or community service orders before finally being imprisoned.
Yesterday we published an article on how our justice system has moved away from the concept of ‘punishment’ and installed ‘rehabilitation’ after one retiring magistrate gave his views on the failed justice system.
It is time that this Government found its spine to told Europe that enough is enough – let’s pull out of the ECHR and from the EU; this would allow us to exercise justice without interference and stop the taxpayer from being financially raped in order to prop up a system that is clearly devoid of any responsibility and bankrupt.