Footnotes (41)



Faking Democracy with Prisoners' Voting Rights

Peter Ramsay

London School of Economics - Law Department

February 11, 2013

LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 7/2013

In the dispute between Strasbourg and Westminster over prisoners’ voting rights, the arguments of both sides help to consolidate the emerging ‘post-democratic’ political regime in Europe. The UK government’s position in Hirst v UK, and the judgments of the Strasbourg courts in Hirst, Frodl v Austria and Scoppola v Italy, all assume that democracy is no more than a matter of voter-consumers choosing between competing alternatives in the political market place. This minimalist conception of democracy also underlies the argument that enfranchising convicted prisoners will contribute to their rehabilitation. If, by contrast, democracy is thought of as a regime that seeks to achieve the collective self-government of the people, then one of its principles is that only those who enjoy civil liberties and formal independence of the executive can be self-governing citizens. Enfranchising prisoners subverts that democratic principle.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: February 24, 2013  

Suggested Citation

Ramsay, Peter, Faking Democracy with Prisoners' Voting Rights (February 11, 2013). LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 7/2013. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2214813 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2214813

Contact Information

Peter Ramsay (Contact Author)
London School of Economics - Law Department ( email )
Houghton Street
London, WC2A 2AE
United Kingdom
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,441
Downloads: 267
Download Rank: 78,313
Footnotes:  41

© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.235 seconds