A European Court of Human Rights ruling that prisoners should not automatically lose the right to vote is to be carefully studied by the Government, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has said.
In a decision released last week, the Strasbourg-based court found that the right of a United Kingdom prisoner, John Hirst, to participate in a free election had been interfered with.
Found guilty of manslaughter in 1980, Hirst was due for release in 1994 but he has been held in jail because he continues to represent a serious risk to the public.
The seven judges involved in the case ruled that they "could not accept that an absolute bar on voting by any serving prisoner in any circumstances fell within an acceptable margin of appreciation".
Legislatures should "strike a fair balance", tailoring the restrictions to sentences of "particular gravity", or leaving the issue to be decided by judges, the court went on.
Fine Gael MEP Ms Avril Doyle, who is running in the East constituency, last night called on the Government to allow prisoners to vote in local and European elections.
"Many of them may never have voted before, and participation in the democratic process may bring home to them the importance of rules and laws to secure freedom for all," said Ms Doyle.
The 3,200 people held currently in jails in the Republic are allowed to keep their names on the electoral roll, but they do not qualify for temporary release, or for the right to a postal ballot.
Ms Doyle noted that the Constitution declared that "All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law."
Moreover, she said, all rights of a citizen, apart from liberty, remain with a prisoner. "If this was the case, then Irish prisoners should have the ability to vote," said the Wexford-based MEP, who called on the Government to examine the situation urgently.
An Irish prisoner, Pat O'Doherty, has challenged the voting ban, although the High Court rejected his attempt to be allowed vote in three referendums that were held on a single day in 2001.
However, an appeal lodged by Mr O'Doherty, who has since been released, to the Supreme Court has not been pursued by him, nor has the court set any date for a hearing.
Thirteen European countries, including Ireland, bar prisoners from voting, while 18 allow them to vote as normal. The remainder restrict the right depending on the seriousness of the offence, or leave the matter up to the presiding judge.
The United Kingdom's restrictions were "less draconian" than those applied in some other countries, the human rights court found, since they do not apply to remand prisoners, fine defaulters or those jailed for contempt.
Nonetheless, the UK's laws are not "proportional" because they imposed "a blanket restriction" on 70,000 convicted people, regardless of the length of their sentence or the gravity of their offence.
"A prisoner sentenced to a week's imprisonment for a minor infraction might lose the right to vote if detained over election day, whereas one serving several years for a more serious crime might, by chance, avoid missing an election," the judges found.
The British government argued that voting restrictions are justified, and are designed to prevent crime and punish offenders and "to enhance civil responsibility and respect for the rule of law".
"Notwithstanding its doubts as to the validity of either aim in the modern day, the court decided to leave open the question of whether the aims behind the voting restrictions could be regarded as legitimate," the court found.
