New Decision: Moohan & Anor v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2014]
25 Friday Jul 2014
Matrix Legal Support Service News Articles
Share it
On appeal from: [2014] CSIH 56
An appeal by two prisoners serving life sentences in a judicial review of the Scottish Independence Referendum (Franchise) Act 2013, which denies prisoners the right to vote in the upcoming Scottish Independence Referendum on 18 September 2014.
Despite cases in the ECtHR which have held on multiple occasions that it is illegal under human rights law for Britain to deny prisoners the right to vote, these decisions have not been implemented in Britain to date. Therefore, the appellants brought a claim for judicial review of the current law. They argued the law was incompatible with ECtHR jurisprudence, as well as with EHCR, A3P1 and art 10 and British common law. They also argued that the Scottish Parliament could uphold the ECtHR’s decisions themselves.
The Outer House of the Court of Session in Scotland had previously dismissed the case, as did the Inner House. The appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court. A panel of seven judges heard the case on Thursday 24 July 2014, and dismissed the appeal the same day. A full judgment will follow in due course.
For news articles on this case, please click here: The BBC; The Guardian; The Telegraph
For Court’s news summary, please download: Court’s News Summary
1 comment
Thomas Fairclough said:
25/07/2014 at 10:36
It’ll be interesting to see the full judgment; as far as i’m aware the courts have previously been influenced by “yes, a blanket ban is not ECHR compliant but (a) this is political and (b) the actual applicants in this case wouldn’t get the vote even if the blanket ban was removed”.
Seems like reason (a) should have less weight when this is far more important to the individual than a normal general election; the referendum in Scotland represents major constitutional change either way.