Disfranchisement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Disenfranchisement or disfranchisement is the revocation of, or failure to grant, the right of suffrage (the right to vote) to a person or group of people. Disfranchisement may occur explicitly through law, or implicitly through means such as intimidation.

Contents 1 Disfranchisement due to criminal conviction 1.1 In the USA 1.2 In the UK 1.3 In Germany 1.4 In other countries 2 Disfranchisement of other groups 3 Notes 4 See also 5 References

[edit] Disfranchisement due to criminal conviction

[edit] In the USA

Many countries and many U.S. states intentionally disfranchise people based on criminal conviction by law. For many jurisdictions that do, usually a person is disfranchised after being sentenced to a penalty above some limit—for example, 6 months—for only as long as he or she is serving the sentence.

In 13 U.S. states, persons convicted of a felony—that is, a crime punishable with a year's imprisonment or more—are denied the vote only while serving sentence in a state prison. Texas has a similar law, but extends the disfranchisement period two years after release from custody.

One felony conviction results in perpetual disfranchisement in 13 other U.S. states, and in Arizona and Maryland two convictions have the same consequence. In addition to these 15 states and Texas, 13 others also disfranchise persons who are on probation for a felony but were not sentenced to prison time. All of these plus three more states (or 32 in all) disqualify those on parole from voting.

Some states consider dishonorable discharge a felony conviction and disfranchise those affected.

Two states—Maine and Vermont—allow prison inmates to vote unless disfranchisement is meted out as a separate punishment. ^[1]

Those affected are usually prohibited from voting in federal elections as well, even though their convictions were at the state level for state crimes, not federal crimes. This means that states with permanent disfranchisement prevent ex-convicts from ever voting in federal elections, even though ex-convicts in other states convicted of identical crimes may be allowed to vote in such elections.

As of 2005 there were at least two cases in the U.S. courts challenging disfranchisement of felons: Locke v. Farrakhan in Washington State and Hayden v. Pataki in New York. The NAACP LDF was involved in both cases.

[edit] In the UK

In the United Kingdom, all convicts are denied the right to vote while in prison. This is, however, under review, following an October 2005 ruling of the European Court of Human Rights that a blanket ban is disproportionate. The review is still underway, but Lord Falconer of Thoroton, the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs has stated that it may result in some, but not all, prisoners being able to vote. ^[2]

[edit] In Germany

In Germany, all convicts are allowed to vote while in prison unless the loss of the right to vote is part of the sentence; courts can only hand out this sentence for specific "political" crimes (treason, high treason, electoral fraud, intimidation of voters etc) and for a duration of two to five years.^[3] All convicts sentenced to at least one year in prison also automatically lose the right to be elected in public elections for a duration of five years, and lose all positions they held as a result of such elections.

[edit] In other countries

In some countries, such as China, Portugal and Israel, disfranchisement due to criminal conviction is an exception, meted out separately or alone. This is usually imposed on a person convicted of a crime against the state (see civil death) or one related to election or public office.

Disfranchisement due to criminal conviction (otherwise than for electoral offences) is discussed extensively in the website of the Sentencing Project,^[4] an organization concerned with reducing prison sentences and ameliorating some of the negative effects of incarceration. Although the information provided by this organization is biased against various practices, the website provides a wealth of statistical data that reflects data available from organizations with opposing views, and from the United States government and various state governments.

[edit] Disfranchisement of other groups

Another example is the disfranchisement of entire groups of people, such as women, various racial, ethnic or religious minorities depending on the country, or members of some political groups. This has led to warfare, as in the case of the American Revolutionary War (the cry "No taxation without representation" conveys this message). This is a good example of the intentional disfranchisement of a group of people (British colonists in America) by the government in Britain. Similarly, the US citizens of Puerto Rico are subjected to many U.S. laws and in the past, have been conscripted to fight in US wars, but they have no Congressional representation or vote in presidential elections, although they are not subject to U.S. income tax laws.

Voters in the District of Columbia, the U.S. capital, are subject to a partial disfranchisement: they are not represented in Congress. Until the passage of the Twenty-Third Amendment in 1961, they did not get to vote in presidential elections. Prior to the District of Columbia Home Rule Act in 1973, they did not elect their own mayor.

An example of unintentional disfranchisement of a group of people is expounded by supporters of the U.S. Electoral College. Briefly, electoral college supporters feel that strict majority vote would disfranchise the mostly rural American West, by denying them the ability to ever influence an election due to their small numbers. This would be unintentional disfranchisement as it is an effect of the change, not a direct goal of the change in voting law.

In proportional representation systems which use election thresholds, parties which fail to meet the specified thresholds often claim that their supporters have been disfranchised since their votes do not translate into any legislative seats, and thus effectively do not count.

[edit] Notes

1. ^ "Election Readiness…"
2. ^ Convicts 'will not all get vote', BBC News, October 6, 2005, accessed December 9 2005
3. ^ (German) §45 StGB, accessed July 28, 2006
4. ^ SentencingProject.org

[edit] See also

• Lishenets (disfranchised in Soviet Union)

[edit] References

• "Election Readiness: It Is Never Too Late for Transparency", October 2004, from Fair Election International (FEI), a project of Global Exchange, quoted in part in AfricaFocus Bulletin Oct 26, 2004