Resulting from criminal conviction Disfranchisement

1 resulting criminal conviction

1.1 united states
1.2 united kingdom
1.3 ireland
1.4 germany
1.5 israel
1.6 others

resulting criminal conviction

united states

many states intentionally retract franchise convicted felons, differ when or if franchise can restored. in states, felons prohibited voting in federal elections, if convictions state crimes.

maine , vermont allow prison inmates probationers , parolees vote.

twenty states (alaska, arkansas, georgia, idaho, iowa, kansas, louisiana, maryland, minnesota, missouri, nebraska, new jersey, new mexico, north carolina, oklahoma, south carolina, texas, washington, west virginia, , wisconsin) not allow persons convicted of felony vote while serving sentence, automatically restore franchise person upon completion of sentence. in iowa, in july 2005, governor tom vilsack issued executive order restoring right vote persons have completed supervision, iowa supreme court upheld on october 31, 2005.

thirteen states (hawaii, illinois, indiana, massachusetts, michigan, montana, new hampshire, north dakota, ohio, oregon, pennsylvania, rhode island, , utah) plus district of columbia allow probationers , parolees vote, not inmates.

five states (california, colorado, connecticut, new york, , south dakota) allow probationers vote, not inmates or parolees.

eight states (alabama, arizona, delaware, kentucky, mississippi, nevada, tennessee, , wyoming) allow some, not all, persons felony convictions vote after having completed sentences. have qualifications of this: example, delaware not restore franchise until 5 years after release of person. similarly, kentucky requires person take action gain restoration of franchise.

two states (florida , virginia) permanently disfranchise persons felony convictions.

disfranchisement due criminal conviction, particularly after sentence served, has been opposed sentencing project, organization in united states working reduce arbitrary prison sentences minor crimes , ameliorate negative effects of incarceration enable persons rejoin society after completing sentences. website provides wealth of statistical data reflects opposing views on issue, , data united states government , various state governments practice of felony disfranchisement.

such disenfranchisement policy excludes 1 in 6 african-american males. example, in 1998 elections, @ least 10 states formally disenfranchised 20 percent of african-american voters due felony convictions (journal of blacks in higher education, 1999). excluding felons provided “a small clear advantage republican candidates in every presidential , senatorial election 1972 2000” (manza & uggen, 2006, p. 191). in addition, felon disenfranchisement may have changed course of history costing al gore 2000 presidential election (uggen & manza, 2002). similarly, if not felon disenfranchisement, democratic senatorial candidates have prevailed in texas (1978), kentucky (1984 , 1992), florida (1988 , 2004), , georgia (1992) (manza & uggen, 2006, p. 194).

united kingdom

the united kingdom suspends suffrage of not prisoners. example, civil prisoners sentenced nonpayment of fines can vote. prior judgment in hirst v united kingdom (no 2), convicted prisoners had right vote in law without assistance prison authorities, voting unavailable prisoners. in hirst, european court of human rights ruled first protocol article 3 requires member states proactively support voting authorized inmates. in uk, of 2009 policy under review in other european countries italy.

lord falconer of thoroton, former secretary of state constitutional affairs, stated ruling may result in some, not all, prisoners being able vote. consultation subject of judicial review proceedings in high court. separate challenges general secretary of association of prisoners, ben gunn, way of petition european union parliament, , john hirst committee of ministers underway.

ireland

to comply judgment in hirst v united kingdom (no 2), republic of ireland passed statute allowing convicted prisoners have postal votes.

germany

in germany, convicts allowed vote while in prison unless loss of right vote part of sentence; courts can apply sentence specific political crimes (treason, high treason, electoral fraud, intimidation of voters, etc.) , duration of 2 5 years. convicts sentenced @ least 1 year in prison automatically lose right elected in public elections duration of 5 years, , lose positions held result of such election.

israel

inmates allowed vote in israel. not suffer disfranchisement following release prison after serving sentence, parole, or probation. neither courts nor prison authorities have power disqualify person exercising right vote in national elections, whatever cause of imprisonment.

others

in countries, such china , portugal, disfranchisement due criminal conviction exception, meted out separately in particular sentence. losing voting rights imposed on person convicted of crime against state (see civil death) or 1 related election or public office.