The Right of Prisoners to Vote - Assignment

Name
Institution
Date
THE RIGHT OF PRISONERS TO VOTE
1

Speech on Prisoners’ Right to Vote
Mr. /Madam Speaker and honorable members, I thank you for this opportunity to
contribute to this debate on whether prisoners ought to vote. In my speech below I seek to draw
your attention to the following basic constitutional principles in our jurisdiction: democracy;
parliamentary supremacy; social contract theory; and the rule of law. As legislators, we ought to
consider these principles in every bill that come before us. I will demonstrate to us how the
above constitutional principles will be greatly breached if this bill that seeks to disenfranchise
prisoners from voting is passed.
To begin with, allow me to mention the principle of democracy in relation to the subject
matter at hand. I understand our country to be a democratic one since we represent the citizens
who elected us to be here in parliament. The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act provides that every
Citizen above the age of 18 years is vested with the right to vote both the members of parliament
and those in the house of representative.1 The act clearly provides that every citizen is entitled to
this right of representation which to my understanding includes prisoners irrespective of the
length of their sentence. Toohey J in the case McGinty v Western Australia reiterates the
importance of every qualified citizen being allowed to vote without disenfranchisement.2 Toohey
J argues that if some set of citizens are not allowed to vote then their constitutional right stands
infringed. According to the learned judge, representative democracy ought to extend to every
adult failure of which would also constitute a violation of a universal requirement of
representative democracy. Prisoners, who are adults above the age of 18 years, serving short or
long sentences, are New Zealand citizens and they ought not to be denied this fundamental right.
Furthermore, Mill, who is a proponent of representative democracy in Australia, argues that
1 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 12.
2 McKinlay v The Commonwealth (1975) 135 CLR 1.
2

every individual maintains a right to be heard which is usually exercised through casting a
ballot.3 He continues to state that if such a right is taken away then it would result in personal
injustice. This, therefore, means that participation is a pillar of democracy wherein individuals
ought to be included not only in the affairs of governance but also in an election of a leader who
will govern them.4 I am of the opinion that prisoners should be enjoying this right of
participation in an election of leaders of their choice. Though their freedom and right to
movement among other rights are restricted, we ought to remember that prisoners remain to be
citizens of a country who as well ought to contribute in the affairs of their nation. I believe no
civilized democracy should disqualify prisoners from this personal and universal right of
suffrage.
In the case of Richard Sauvé v The Attorney General of Canada, the question of whether
prisoners should vote was addressed. Previously, all prisoners were not allowed to vote in
Canada irrespective of the length of the sentence by section 51 (e) of Canada Elections Act.5
However, a turnaround came in the aforementioned case. The Supreme Court of Canada held
that the right to vote is a fundamental right in a democracy and it cannot be derogated from,
hence section 51 of the Election’s Act of Canada was subsequently struck out.6 Moreover, the
Supreme Court of Canada in dismissing section 51 of Elections Act was of the view that
disenfranchisement of prisoners would demean any political system in a civilised democracy
such as theirs. Disenfranchisement is, therefore, a big blow to democracy and also an
infringement on prisoners’ right to vote.
3 Urbinati Nadia “Mill on democracy: from the Athenian polis to representative government” (2002)
University of Chicago Press
4 “Some Basic Principles of Democracy” (14 September 2017)
<https://web.stanford.edu/~ldiamond/iraq/DemocracyEducation0204.htm>
5 Elections Act of Canada 2000 s 51.
6 Richard Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) (2002) 3 S.C.R. 519.
3