What is the ratio in Hirst v UK (No 2)?

A blanket ban on prisoner voting violates Article 3 of Protocol No 1 to the ECHR as it is disproportionate. Any restrictions on voting rights must be proportionate to legitimate aims and not arbitrary.

What did the court decide in Hirst v UK (No 2)?

The ECtHR ruled that the UK's complete ban on prisoner voting was a violation of Convention rights and ordered reform of the law.

Why is Hirst v UK (No 2) important for human rights law?

It demonstrates the tension between national sovereignty and international human rights obligations, and shows how the ECtHR applies proportionality principles to democratic rights.

Premium Case

This case is available to Pro and Elite subscribers. Upgrade to access the full library of 500+ landmark cases.

Upgrade to Pro

← Back to Case Library

Premium Case

This case is available to Pro and Elite subscribers. Upgrade to access the full library of 500+ landmark cases.

Upgrade to Pro

← Back to Case Library