Republican News · Thursday 13 March 2003

Idiots and lunatics

BY ÁINE NÍ BHRIAN

Voters who have special needs - those with physical or mental disabilities - have been able to vote in the past. But this year, people with learning disabilities or their carers are being asked to provide confirmation that they have "sufficient mental capacity" to exercise that right before they can be placed on the register.

In an outrageous official document issued by the Electoral Commission outlining "guidelines" to the voting process for people with learning disabilities and patients suffering from mental illness, those affected are actually referred to as "idiots" and "lunatics".

The paper reads: "The eligibility of someone who has a profound learning disability might, however, in certain cases be called into question because under the common law so-called 'idiots' cannot vote. So-called 'lunatics', on the other hand, can vote, though only in their lucid intervals, and so could not be excluded from the register on this ground."

Although the paper tries to qualify its use of language as the terminology of common law, it is a telling indictment of the British government with respect to this issue. Even though the Commission is quoting common law statutes in serious need of a rewrite to bring them into the 21st century, the same point could have been made without resorting to language that would obviously be offensive. The law may have been written centuries ago, but the Electoral Office appendix was not.

In the same paper, the Commission states that this "guidance" was originally drawn up by the Government after consultation with the Association of Electoral Administrators, the Department of Health, the Law Society, the Mental Health Act Commission, and the charities MENCAP and MIND.

But did these contributors approve of the content detailed in this final draft of the paper, or is the Commission misleading the public as to the level of participation involved? Just because someone was consulted does not mean their recommendations were taken on board.

The 1995 Disability Discrimination Act makes it unlawful for those who provide services to the public to discriminate against disabled people. Although a London-based spokesperson for the Electoral Commission recently stated that "our view is that those who are responsible for compiling the register should err on the side of inclusion rather than omission", the lack of appropriate state provisions seems to imply otherwise.

The Code of Practice for electoral officers, issued by the British Home Office in August 1993, advises that the onus should be on people to object to inclusion of a name, rather than having a person with learning disabilities prove their rightful position on it.

However, in the past month, several people have received letters from the Electoral Office requesting additional clarification regarding the mental capacity of those voters who have had the required forms filled out on their behalf. This request means those filling out the forms are being asked to make a clinical judgement that they may not be trained or qualified to make.

The practice of having a second party fill out the electoral registration form is, as is clearly stated on the form itself, perfectly acceptable - provided there is an accompanying explanation. This means the Electoral Office is taking these explanations into account when deciding whether or not to allow a person to vote and may be breaching an individual's civil rights in doing so.

"People with a learning disability have the same right to vote as other people and as such they should have the opportunity to express their opinions and to make a difference in the political system that effects their lives," says Maureen Piggot, the Six-County director of MENCAP.

"Having a learning disability does not automatically mean that a person does not understand the choices available to them and the role of politicians.

"It is essential that everyone with an interest in the electoral process; the Electoral Office, political parties, community and voluntary groups and carers and familes, do all they can to encourage and support people with a learning disability who wish to exercise their right to vote."

dersontown mother Monica Digney was furious after she received a letter from the Electoral Office asking her for "advice" as to whether her 26-year-old son Eamonn, who has learning disabilities, was capable of personally making a decision on whom he wished to vote for without the assistance of another person.

"My son has had a vote for eight years," said Digney, "And what's more, he has used it. I have been with him on each occasion and we have never once been challenged. Yet now we're being told he could lose his vote. It's outrageous.

"This is the only real right that my son ever had, and now they are trying to take it away from him. This is an equality issue, a human rights issue, and if I have to, I will go to the highest courts in the land to defend my son's rights."

Digney's son's case is not an isolated one. The Belfast-based Falls Community Council says that several examples have come to their attention of individuals who have discovered their names have been taken off the electoral register, and say that the new legislation may indeed breach the civil rights of people with special learning needs.

The West Belfast Community group announced it would lobby the 'Northern Ireland Affairs' Select Committee over the flaws in the electoral registration process.

"There is increasing concern at community level about the effect of this new electoral process upon the democratic rights of the most marginalised in our community," a spokesperson said.

There is no official training or formal guidelines offered to electoral officers in this area, and in spite of being clearly unqualified to do so, those same officers are also being asked to make determinations on a voter's competency.

Yet according to the Electoral Commission, a presiding officer in a polling station can challenge a person's vote only on the grounds of identity. They can ask a person for identification and their national insurance number, but they cannot challenge someone's vote on the grounds of intelligence.

There is a lack of accessible information and polling boths available to those with learning disabilities and an absence of transport and appropriate support in helping people mark their ballots. MENCAP is concerned that those assisting voters with special needs may be prevented from aiding them at the polling station.

"Carers of people with learning difficulties are put in charge of every other aspect of that person's life, so why make an exception to an assisted vote?" asks MENCAP. The group has been in touch with the Human Rights Commission about the matter, but althought the Commission is interested, it has issued no formal response.

The charity then contacted the Equality Commission, which has told them it would require an organization or individual to make a formal complaint before it could act.

MENCAP is also concerned that assumptions are being made about people with learning difficulties and points out that under equality legislation there is a duty on public bodies such as the Electoral Office to promote equality of opportunity, not limit it.

Sinn Féin is seeking a top-level meeting with Chief Electoral Officer Denis Stanley to express concern about the manner in which this issue is being addressed. The party has called for an immediate review of the guidelines and laws regarding access to the voting process for the learning disabled and others who may be denied their vote simply because they required assistance in filling out the electoral registration forms.

"The people we are aware of who have been victimised in this manner have voted before," said Bairbre de Brún. "It is, therefore, a matter of grave concern that they should now be told that because of a learning diability or for no reason other than they are unable to read and write, they will be denied the right to vote come election day.

"If, as it would appear, the competency of people entitled to a vote is being called into question and decided by the Electoral Office, we are dealing with a problem of potentially huge proportions that cannot go unchallenged."