Report comment

EDITOR : WHY HIDE THIS ARTICLE?
SEE 19 FEB 2015 Law Soc Gazette Article "Right to Vote".
BREACHED ARTICLE 3 RIGHTS ARE MASSIVE TO LEGAL AID FIGHT!
Criminal Defence Legal Aid Practitioners, et ses amis,
Could Article 3 voting rights be our shield?
Could these, amongst them, our imprisoned clients, be the long awaited cohort of party political votes necessary to persuade an incoming government to give electoral manifesto priority to Access to Justice & prevent the collapse of Legal Aid?

I've always argued that criminal justice & prison reform will inevitably suffer from the lack of voting rights and now we have the opportunity to compel cure... I hope.

Mr Patrick Allen, can your endowed Labour policy advisor not be tasked to urgently advise further, in this fight to the death of Legal Aid ?
Is there not a crying need for our own advisory parliamentary lobbyist, whether to, in opportunistic fashion, promote the vote of no confidence in Grayling for previous misrepresentation to Parliament or to force the issue of legislative amendment to immediately facilitate "prisoner voting" ?
Is there sufficient time to compel parliamentary cure of the
"impugned" legislation & remedy the violation within the next preelection 90days?

Applicants' lawyers, well done. Who are you?
Should the appeal, or next, within-90days ECHR application not argue that the validity of "the finding of a violation constituted sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants" has expired : the applicants, following the demolition of Criminal Legal Aid after the forthcoming election, will increasingly be unable to access justice, unless for significant private fees payment, the violation now representing a pecuniary violation, attracting financial compensation?

Was yesterdays' High Court JR ignorant of the MOJs"ultra vires" consideration, or political motivation, in seeking to rush the new proposed criminal contract tender, not just before the next election, but before proper remedy to this "impugned legislation", the MOJs real purpose seemingly to diffuse the proper, timely & legitimate exercise of Art 3 rights by this cohort of nonvoting prisoners? Can it be pleaded?
If it is accepted by Margaret Hodge's Public Scrutiny Committee, & increasingly by the Judiciary, that there has been an absence by the MOJ of proper consideration to the "fallout" costs, consequential to Legal Aid cuts & proposals, is the decision to swiftly timetable the Tender not "irrational"? Can it be pleaded?

Seems to me that the threat of financial penalty alone ignites remedial pace together with a lawyer's refusal to persist in arguing for justice.
I can headbutt or brainstorm creative argument which others may run. But I'm a mere lawyer, increasingly redundant at that -what do I know? Please advise Generation Y(+X years) criminal solicitors.
I'm for Justice, (or was),are you?