This collection of original essays by leading scholars and advocates offers the first international examination of the nature, causes, and effects of laws regulating voting by people with criminal convictions. In deciding whether prisoners shall retain the right to vote, a country faces vital questions about democratic self-definition and constitutional values - and, increasingly, about the scope of judicial power. Yet in the rich and growing literature on comparative constitutionalism, relatively little attention has been paid to voting rights and election law. Democracy and Punishment begins to fill that gap, showing how constitutional courts in Israel, Canada, South Africa, and Australia, as well as the European Court of Human Rights, have grappled with these policies in the last decade, often citing one another along the way. Chapters analyze partisan politics, political theory, prison administration, and social values, showing that constitutional law is the fruit of political and historical contingency, not just constitutional texts and formal legal doctrine.
Author(s): Alec C. Ewald, Brandon Rottinghaus
Edition: 1
Year: 2009
Language: English
Pages: 302
Half-title......Page 3
Title......Page 5
Copyright......Page 6
Contents......Page 7
Contributors......Page 9
Foreword: Waves of Democracy and Criminal Disenfranchisement......Page 13
Acknowledgments......Page 17
Introduction......Page 19
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND CONSTITUTIONAL “MIGRATION”......Page 25
AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM?......Page 27
PUNITIVE OR REGULATORY?......Page 30
OUTLINE OF THE VOLUME......Page 31
Works Cited......Page 37
PART I CONTEMPORARY DISENFRANCHISEMENT LAW......Page 41
INTRODUCTION......Page 43
EUROPE......Page 44
CRIMINAL DISENFRANCHISEMENT LAW IN CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS......Page 51
Canada......Page 53
South Africa......Page 56
The United Kingdom......Page 59
Israel......Page 63
Implementation of Court Decisions......Page 64
MECHANISMS FOR PRISONER VOTING......Page 68
CONCLUSION......Page 72
2 Punishment and Social Exclusion: National Differences in Prisoner Disenfranchisement......Page 77
Measures......Page 78
Analytic Approach......Page 82
RESULTS......Page 83
DISCUSSION AND SELECTED CASE STUDIES......Page 88
CONCLUSIONS......Page 92
PART II DISENFRANCHISEMENT IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE: LEGAL AND POLITICAL APPROACHES......Page 95
3 U.S. Felon Disenfranchisement: Parting Ways with Western Europe......Page 97
DISENFRANCHISEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES......Page 100
DISENFRANCHISEMENT UNDER GERMAN LAW......Page 103
HISTORY AS DESTINY? RACE, FOREIGNNESS, AND CITIZENSHIP......Page 106
Notions of Democracy......Page 110
Constitutions and the Courts......Page 113
Proportionality......Page 115
Disenfranchisement as Punishment......Page 118
Disenfranchisement as Fraud Prevention......Page 121
Full Citizenship: A Reintegrative Tool......Page 122
CONCLUSION: MOVING FORWARD? FELON DISENFRANCHISEMENT AS A COMPONENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY: THE RE-ENTRY MOVEMENT......Page 125
4 The Right to Universal, Equal, and Nondiscriminatory Suffrage as a Norm of Customary International Law: Protecting the Prisoners Right to Vote......Page 127
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NORM OF CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW: DIRECT AND INDIRECT APPLICATION......Page 131
EVIDENCE SUPPORTS THE EXISTENCE OF A CUSTOMARY NORM REGARDING THE RIGHT TO UNIVERSAL AND EQUAL SUFFRAGE......Page 134
The Customary Norm to Be Established Is the Right to Universal and Equal Suffrage without Disproportionate Limitation......Page 135
The Factual Predicates for Establishment of the Norm......Page 138
The Survey Data......Page 139
Global Bodies and Their Jurisprudence......Page 140
Regional Bodies and Their Jurisprudence......Page 144
National Jurisprudence......Page 146
The Limitation on Racial Discrimination......Page 148
CONCLUSION......Page 150
Sources......Page 151
INTRODUCTION......Page 154
WHERES OUR DOPPELGANGER?......Page 156
HISTORY AND POLITICS......Page 161
WHAT CAUSES HIGH INCARCERATION RATES?......Page 166
THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT......Page 168
AMERICAN DEMOCRACY: TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING?......Page 173
CONCLUSION......Page 181
PART III VOTING RIGHTS AND PEOPLE WITH CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS: CASE STUDIES......Page 183
INTRODUCTION......Page 185
THE COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL ACT 1918......Page 186
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY......Page 188
CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES......Page 189
AUSTRALIA 2006: TOTAL PRISONER DISENFRANCHISEMENT IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS......Page 193
Promoting “Integrity”: A Rerun of “Purity v. Pollution”?......Page 195
Citizenship, Human Rights, Participation, and Democracy......Page 197
International and Comparative Law......Page 198
Rehabilitation?......Page 199
WHY DISENFRANCHISEMENT NOW?......Page 201
POTENTIAL CHALLENGES TO DISENFRANCHISEMENT......Page 204
COMPLAINING TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION......Page 206
FUTURE HIGH COURT CHALLENGE......Page 213
CONCLUSION......Page 219
POSTSCRIPT......Page 220
INTRODUCTION......Page 223
1870–1963: Disqualification......Page 224
1963–2001: Pragmatism over Principle?......Page 225
2001–2004: The Consolidation of Institutional Apathy......Page 228
HIRST V. UNITED KINGDOM AND THE RENEWED CAMPAIGN FOR VOTING RIGHTS......Page 231
CONCLUSION......Page 236
Bibliography......Page 238
INTRODUCTION......Page 239
THE HISTORY OF PRISONERS’ RIGHTS......Page 242
THE AUGUST AND NICRO CASES......Page 250
CONCLUSION......Page 257
INTRODUCTION......Page 262
OVERVIEW OF THE PRISON SYSTEM, PENALTIES, AND SENTENCING......Page 263
THE RULES GOVERNING PRISONERS’ RIGHT TO VOTE......Page 267
THE PRACTICE OF PRISONER VOTING......Page 270
ELECTIONS AND TASKS OF THE PRISONERS’ SPOKESMEN......Page 273
Legal and Statistical Sources......Page 275
Internet Links......Page 276
10 In Defense of Prisoner Disenfranchisement......Page 277
LITIGATING PRISONER DISENFRANCHISEMENT IN CANADA......Page 278
SAUV (NO. 2) AND THE LIMITS OF DIALOGUE......Page 281
IN DEFENSE OF PRISONER DISENFRANCHISEMENT......Page 286
CONCLUSION......Page 295
References......Page 296
Index......Page 299
