Angry voters may be able to sue for compensation after being denied the right to vote at polling stations across the UK during the 2010 general election.
The Electoral Commission says results in some constituencies could be challenged in court – and has launched an inquiry into the farcical situations which saw angry scenes in major UK cities: Manchester, London, Sheffield, Leeds, Newcastle, Birmingham and Bristol.
Police were called to several polling stations to quell dissatisfied groups of people turned away from the polling stations, angry at being denied their democratic right to vote.
While increased turnout was being blamed in some quarters and in some cases surges in numbers turning up at polling stations left officials somehow struggling to cope – in fact the increase in turnout was modest on the 2005 general election leaving some voters questioning why so few election staff were at some of the stations and why after they turned up at the station before the 10pm deadline they were turned away.
Some voters have described over zealous and panicking officials, perhaps suffering from a lack of training for situations like this and a surprising lack of staff for major UK city centre populations.
Human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson QC has been among the biggest voices to add his views to what is a complex situation legally and politically, saying that people denied the right to vote could sue for compensation.
“These people have a right to sue, he says. “They will get at least £750 in my view. Under the European Convention you have a right to vote. ”They were terribly disappointed. They should all sue and get money from the Election Commission, which seems to have incompetently overseen it.”
While other commentators feel the compensation figure could be higher than that so serious is the charge of vote denial. Civil liberties group Liberty is asking anyone who was unable to cast their vote to contact its organisation, which offers free advice about human rights and civil liberty matters. ”Liberty will use all legal and campaigning means to ensure that this disgrace is never repeated,” says director Shami Chakrabarti.
Many of the legal commentators are speculating whether voters can sue for compensation under European human rights legislation after being denied the right to vote in UK polling stations. The Human Rights Act legislation may impact on existing voting legislation allowing voters denied the right to vote, in some cases, to claim compensation following an infringement of their human rights, a serious offence.
It is also worth noting that the scenes were in some ways ironic, seeing as much of the build up to the 2010 general election was focused on the hope that increasing numbers of people, especially younger people, would exercise their democratic right to vote this year, after falling voting turnout percentages in recent elections.
When faced with enthusiasm from voters and an upward trend, possibly encouraged by the introduction of the televised leaders’ debates in this election, the system appears to have collapsed in some parts of the UK under only mild strain. All the main politicians as part of their campaign regularly returned to the theme of encouraging a higher turnout and participation and encouraging people to exercise their democratic rights.
Thousands of people were denied the right to vote last Wednesday due to polling centres being unable to process queues forming at the end of the day. Although the law is clear that voting booths should shut at 10pm; some centres reportedly allowed those in the queue to enter the station and vote while others did not.
The scenes of angry voters being denied access to voting stations has been described as reminiscent of scenes in countries which lack democracy not a major democratic country like the UK.
Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty, speaking on the BBC said Liberty were assessing the situation and may consider bringing legal action against the authorities. “Shameful scenes of hundreds of voters turned away from polling stations are unworthy of a mature democracy like ours,” she added.
The situation also throws up the question as whether an enquiry is needed to reform voting procedures in the UK, perhaps using technology to speed up the process. Returning officers at some polling stations have also been identified as allegedly allowing some people to vote after the 10pm deadline – essentially breaking the law. Electoral law states the doors must be shut at 10pm and anyone issued with a ballot paper before 10pm must be allowed to vote.
Returning officers who have broken the law could lead to disappointed candidates entitled to petition the returning officers in question if they feel the true outcome of the vote was compromised in some way, constituting some form of election offence. Lawyers are already reportedly being consulted on the specific cases that have been thrown up across the country.
In a completely separate farcical episode a 14-year-old boy in the North West voted in the general election after being sent a polling card by mistake. The case was discovered when he told his teacher at school.
Last 5 posts by admin
- Oil and Gas Industry Warned Over Injury Record - August 25th, 2010
- US Legal Firm Criticises BP Compensation Package - August 23rd, 2010
- Miners Fighting For Vibration White Finger Compensation - August 20th, 2010
- Drink Driving Deaths Falling In UK - August 16th, 2010
- Major Injury Compensation Payout For Haulage Worker - August 12th, 2010
