Proceeding contribution from Chris Bryant (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 10 February 2011. It occurred during Backbench debate on Voting by Prisoners.
Voting by Prisoners
Fine; I am glad that the Attorney-General has clarified that. Can he clarify one other point, too? The one element on which he has not given us any advice today—and if he has any legal advice, I would be grateful if he published it—is his interpretation of the wriggle room or margin of appreciation that is genuinely available to us. He seems to have suggested today that one area that was insisted on in Frodl v. Austria—namely that judges should have to be able to make an individual decision on each person for that to be valid—is no longer necessary for us, although that was in the ministerial statement issued by the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, on the day before we broke for Christmas. [Interruption.] The Attorney-General appears to be disagreeing with that, but it was in that ministerial statement. I also want to know whether the Attorney-General has had legal advice on whether four years is necessary, or whether one could get away with less than that. Those of us who want to be able to do everything we can are keen to know the absolute minimum that the Government would have to do to comply.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 523 c524-5
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Human rights Judgements European Court of Human Rights Prisoners Voting rights
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 14:51:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_714644
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_714644
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_714644