Prisoner's High Court battle for the right to vote
Convicted murderer says ban is a breach of his human rights
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A prisoner has launched a High Court battle for the right to vote in parliamentary and EU elections.
Convicted murderer Peter Chester, 54, is challenging the Government's failure to grant him the franchise.
Lawyers for Chester, whose case is publicly funded, argued that the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, was breaching the European Convention on Human Rights by denying him the vote.
Chester, who is currently held at Wakefield prison, West Yorkshire, was sentenced to life after raping and strangling his niece, Donna Marie Gillbanks, in Blackpool in 1977. He has now completed his 20-year minimum jail term, and is eligible to apply for parole. So far, he has been considered too dangerous to release.
In August last year, the Ministry of Justice refused to confirm whether he would be permitted to vote when legal restrictions on prisoners voting are amended in the wake of a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.
Hugh Southey, appearing for Chester at the High Court, argued the laws that prohibit serving prisoners voting must now be read by judges in a way that is compatible with the European Court decision. Mr Justice Burton said he was being asked to "amend the statute" in a way that would "allow each and every resident in HM Prisons to vote".
James Eadie QC, appearing for Mr Straw, said the case involved matters "of high social policy" and it was for Parliament, not the courts, to decide how far to extend the franchise. No one was suggesting every prisoner should be enfranchised, he said.
Chester has launched his appeal against the background of the case of John Hirst, who was jailed for manslaughter after killing his landlady with an axe. The European Court ruled in October 2005 that the UK's current ban on all serving prisoners from voting was a "blunt instrument" that contravened Article 3 of Protocol No 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Last April, it was announced that Mr Straw was considering allowing anyone sentenced to less than four years the right to cast a ballot.
Mr Southey said Chester had long ago completed his minimum jail term but remained in prison because the parole board did not consider him safe enough to release. Had he been freed on licence, he would have been able to vote.
Justice Burton will give his judgment on the case next Wednesday.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments