Latest news with #ElectionsAct2022

The National
22-07-2025
- Politics
- The National
‘No breach' by UK Government of human rights on Russia probe
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found there was no breach of measures aimed at ensuring free and fair elections after a long-running legal action backed by three former MPs. The Strasbourg court acknowledged there was evidence of a 'significant and ongoing threat' to the UK's democratic processes from Vladimir Putin's country, but said Westminster had taken action to respond to the danger. The case was lodged at the ECtHR in 2022 by three then-MPs, Labour's Ben Bradshaw, the Green Party's Caroline Lucas and the SNP's Alyn Smith (below), after applications for a judicial review of Boris Johnson's decision not to order an investigation into Russian activities were declined by domestic courts. In a judgment published yesterday, the court ruled that the UK Government's response did not violate the right to free elections. The judgment said: 'While the Court does not underestimate the threat posed by the spreading of disinformation and the running of 'influence campaigns', their nature is nevertheless such that it is difficult to assess accurately the impact that they may have on individual voters and, by extension, on the outcome of a given election.' There was also a risk to freedom of expression if there were 'knee-jerk reactions' to debate during an election contest. 'There is a very fine line between addressing the dangers of disinformation and outright censorship,' the judgment said. READ MORE: 'Wake up, America!': Alan Cumming hits out at Donald Trump over trans attacks Any actions taken by states 'to counter the risk of foreign election interference through the dissemination of disinformation and the running of influence campaigns' would have to be balanced against the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 'Therefore, while states should not remain passive when faced with evidence that their democratic processes are under threat they must be accorded a wide margin of appreciation in the choice of means to be adopted in order to counter such threats,' the judgment said. 'In the court's view, the United Kingdom's response to the threat of Russian election interference did not fall outside the wide margin of appreciation afforded to it in this area.' The case followed reports from the Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee and the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) which looked at alleged Russian disinformation campaigns, including during the 2016 Brexit referendum. The court noted that 'there were undoubtedly shortcomings in the Government's initial response' to the Russian threat but there were 'thorough and independent investigations' by the ISC and the DCMS committee. The judgment also noted that following the publication of the ISC report in 2020 there had been new laws passed to help address the risk: the Elections Act 2022, the National Security Act 2023 ('the NSA 2023') and the Online Safety Act 2023. Following the judgment, Lucas said: 'It's hugely significant that the court has found in favour of our case that foreign interference is a threat to our right to free and fair elections and that they recognise there will be cases when states do have a duty to investigate. And while it's clearly disappointing that they found that the Government had done enough, I've no doubt that this will continue to be contested. 'The bottom line is that we still cannot be assured that our democratic system is robust against foreign interference – and for as long as that is the case, we will continue to explore all possible avenues for remedy.' READ MORE: Broadcast watchdog called in over Labour's 'misleading' Scottish water claim Tessa Gregory, a partner at Leigh Day, the law firm which represented the three former MPs, said: 'In an important judgment, which will have far-reaching implications, the court has accepted, contrary to the UK's submissions, that in order to safeguard citizens' right to free and fair elections, states will in certain circumstances have to take positive action against foreign interference in electoral processes including by investigating credible allegations. 'Our clients continue to think the UK has fallen short of protecting our democracy and are considering next steps in relation to the court's conclusion that there has been no violation of their right to free and fair elections.' A UK Government spokesman said: 'We note today's judgment, which found no violation. 'We are committed to safeguarding our electoral processes, which is why we recently announced tougher new rules on political donations to protect our elections from the growing danger of foreign interference. 'These changes will boost transparency and accountability in politics by closing loopholes that would allow foreign donors to influence elections. 'More broadly, national security is our first responsibility, and we have taken action to harden and sharpen our approach to threats – whether standing with Ukraine against Russia's illegal invasion, placing Russia on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme, and working with allies to monitor and counter Russian submarines and ships in UK waters.'


The Herald Scotland
22-07-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Human rights ‘not breached over election interference probe refusal'
The Strasbourg court acknowledged there was evidence of a 'significant and ongoing threat' to the UK's democratic processes from Vladimir Putin's country, but said Westminster had taken action to respond to the danger. Judgment Bradshaw and Others v. the United Kingdom – Alleged interference by Russia in UK elections – the UK Government's response did not violate the right to free electionshttps:// #CEDH #ECHRpress — ECHR CEDH (@ECHR_CEDH) July 22, 2025 The case was lodged at the ECtHR in 2022 by three then-MPs, Labour's Sir Ben Bradshaw, the Green Party's Caroline Lucas and the SNP's Alyn Smith, after applications for a judicial review of Boris Johnson's decision not to order an investigation into Russian activities were declined by domestic courts. In a judgment published on Tuesday, the court ruled that the UK government's response did not violate the right to free elections. The judgment said: 'While the Court does not underestimate the threat posed by the spreading of disinformation and the running of 'influence campaigns', their nature is nevertheless such that it is difficult to assess accurately the impact that they may have on individual voters and, by extension, on the outcome of a given election.' There was also a risk to freedom of expression if there were 'knee-jerk reactions' to debate during an election contest. 'There is a very fine line between addressing the dangers of disinformation and outright censorship,' the judgment said. Any actions taken by states 'to counter the risk of foreign election interference through the dissemination of disinformation and the running of influence campaigns' would have to be balanced against the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 'Therefore, while states should not remain passive when faced with evidence that their democratic processes are under threat they must be accorded a wide margin of appreciation in the choice of means to be adopted in order to counter such threats,' the judgment said. 'In the court's view, the United Kingdom's response to the threat of Russian election interference did not fall outside the wide margin of appreciation afforded to it in this area.' The case followed reports from the Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee and the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) which looked at alleged Russian disinformation campaigns, including during the 2016 Brexit referendum. The court noted that 'there were undoubtedly shortcomings in the Government's initial response' to the Russian threat but there were 'thorough and independent investigations' by the ISC and the DCMS committee.. The judgment also noted that following the publication of the ISC report in 2020 there had been new laws passed to help address the risk: the Elections Act 2022, the National Security Act 2023 ('the NSA 2023') and the Online Safety Act 2023. Following the judgment, Ms Lucas said: 'It's hugely significant that the court has found in favour of our case that foreign interference is a threat to our right to free and fair elections and that they recognise there will be cases when states do have a duty to investigate. 'And while it's clearly disappointing that they found that the Government had done enough, I've no doubt that this will continue to be contested. 'The bottom line is that we still cannot be assured that our democratic system is robust against foreign interference – and for as long as that is the case, we will continue to explore all possible avenues for remedy.' Tessa Gregory, a partner at Leigh Day – the law firm which represented the three former MPs, said: 'In an important judgment, which will have far-reaching implications, the court has accepted, contrary to the UK's submissions, that in order to safeguard citizens' right to free and fair elections, states will in certain circumstances have to take positive action against foreign interference in electoral processes including by investigating credible allegations. 'Our clients continue to think the UK has fallen short of protecting our democracy and are considering next steps in relation to the court's conclusion that there has been no violation of their right to free and fair elections.'

Western Telegraph
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Western Telegraph
Pembrokeshire: Changes to postal voting arrangements
The new rules, introduced by the Elections Act 2022, mean that those who want to vote by post in UK Parliamentary and Police and Crime Commissioner elections must reapply every three years. The application process can be started on the government website and requires a clear photo of your signature. These changes do not apply to Senedd or local elections. There will be no local elections in Wales this year, with the next scheduled election being the Senedd election in May 2026. The Council's website has more information about renewing postal voting arrangements. People can also contact Electoral Services by email at electoralservices@ or by phone on 01437 775844.
Yahoo
03-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Man questions rejection of bus pass as voter ID
A man has questioned why he was unable to vote in local elections after his bus pass was not accepted as a valid form of ID. Mike Frost from Bristol tried to use his West of England Combined Authority (WECA) bus pass to vote at St Martins Lane polling station, but was turned away. A total of 12 types of travel passes from around the UK are considered valid forms of ID, but the WECA pass is not among them. The Electoral Commission told the BBC polling station staff cannot allow people to vote if they carry a form of ID that has not been formally approved. Mr Frost had been trying to cast his vote in the WECA mayoral election on Thursday. He said the polling station "refused to let me vote, despite agreeing that, yes, I was who I said I was and that I had proved this". "This is absurd" he added. "This is petty bureaucracy gone mad. It is the rot of our democracy." In total, more than 20 types of document are accepted, including passports, driving licences, older or Disabled Person's bus passes, as well as Oyster 60+ cards. The WECA pass carries a photo of the user and permits them to use Bristol buses for free during the month of their birthday, but does not carry a date of birth. More news stories for Bristol Watch the latest Points West Listen to the latest news for Bristol The BBC approached the Electoral Commission, the independent body that oversees UK elections, about Mr Frost's concerns. Its response confirmed "the Elections Act 2022 specifies the types of documents that are accepted forms of ID". It added: "Under the legislation, polling station staff can not give voters a ballot paper unless they are able to show one of those forms. "The list has been passed by parliament and cannot be amended by the Commission." Follow BBC Bristol on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to us on email or via WhatsApp on 0800 313 4630. Labour mayor 'thrilled' to win close Reform race Lib Dems win in Gloucestershire as Tories lose seats Liberal Democrats become biggest Wiltshire party The Electoral Commission


BBC News
03-05-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Bristol man furious as bus pass turned down as voting ID
A man has questioned why he was unable to vote in local elections after his bus pass was not accepted as a valid form of Frost from Bristol tried to use his West of England Combined Authority (WECA) bus pass to vote at St Martins Lane polling station, but was turned away.A total of 12 types of travel passes from around the UK are considered valid forms of ID, but the WECA pass is not among Electoral Commission told the BBC polling station staff cannot allow people to vote if they carry a form of ID that has not been formally approved. Mr Frost had been trying to cast his vote in the WECA mayoral election on said the polling station "refused to let me vote, despite agreeing that, yes, I was who I said I was and that I had proved this". "This is absurd" he added."This is petty bureaucracy gone mad. It is the rot of our democracy."In total, more than 20 types of document are accepted, including passports, driving licences, older or Disabled Person's bus passes, as well as Oyster 60+ WECA pass carries a photo of the user and permits them to use Bristol buses for free during the month of their birthday, but does not carry a date of birth. The BBC approached the Electoral Commission, the independent body that oversees UK elections, about Mr Frost's response confirmed "the Elections Act 2022 specifies the types of documents that are accepted forms of ID". It added: "Under the legislation, polling station staff can not give voters a ballot paper unless they are able to show one of those forms."The list has been passed by parliament and cannot be amended by the Commission."