Coughlan, R (on the application of) v Minister for the Cabinet Office [2022] UKSC 11 (27 April 2022)

Citation: Coughlan, R (on the application of) v Minister for the Cabinet Office [2022] UKSC 11 (27 April 2022) .

Rule of thumb: Can Local Councils introduce additional security measures for voters to follow during elections in the UK? Can voters legally be required to provide photographic I.D., such as a passport or driving license, and told they are not allowed to vote if they do not provide this? Yes, Local Councils can introduce additional measures for voters to modernise the voting process. It is possible for a local authority to demand that people must show photographic identification, such as a passport or driving license, before going into vote, or else they are not allowed to vote. Coughlan objected to this, stating that providing his voting card was sufficient as there was no evidence of this system causing voting irregularities, but it was held that it was valid for Coughlan to be told if he did not provide this then he could not vote.

Background facts:

The case invoked the subjects of ‘Legislature’. It invoked the principles of ultra vires and modernised voting procedures to facilitate elections, namely asking voters for I.D. before they vote.

The material facts of this case were that Coughlan was going to vote in his local elections in Braintree, Essex, England. The local Braintree Council passed a regulation, called The Pendle Borough Council (Identification in Polling Stations) Pilot Order 2019, which required voters to provide their voting card as well as photographic identification, or else they were not allowed to vote.

This case invoked the principle of ultra vires, namely whether the Representation of the People Act 2000 gave local Council a statutory right to introduce a regulation such as this. Coughlan objected to this and argued that it was a breach of the Representation of the People Act 2000 – he argued that this Act did not give local Councils the right to introduce this, as there was no evidence of the voting card system ever having caused voting irregularities before, and it was just a hindrance to people like him exercising their democratic right to vote, meaning they were not allowed to do so. Braintree Council argued that it was within the ambit of the Representation of the People Act 2000 for them to pass regulations like this which enhanced the rigour and veracity of the voting process and made it more modern, and that this measure made it harder for voting manipulation to take place.

Judgment:

The Court upheld the arguments of Braintree Council. The Court affirmed that local Braintree Council passing this regulation was within the ambit of the Representation of the People Act, which allowed them to pass regulations to modernise the electoral process, and this was a valid measure to cut back on any potential voting irregularities. Local Councils requiring people to provide photographic I.D. is a new requirement which local Councils can introduce if they so choose.

centered image

Ratio-decidendi:

‘76. In conclusion I consider that the phrase “how voting at the elections is to take place” includes procedures for demonstrating an entitlement to vote. Accordingly, a scheme with a voter identification requirement is a scheme within section 10(2)(a) so that the respondent has the power under section 10(1) to make an order for or in connection with the implementation of such a scheme… 77. The second issue in this appeal is whether the pilot schemes were authorised for a lawful purpose under section 10(1) of the RPA 2000, consistent with the policy and objects of the Act… the purpose of section 10 is to facilitate pilot schemes to enable the gathering of information to assist in the modernisation of electoral procedures in the public interest. The ten Pilot Orders were made to promote that object and accordingly were authorised for a lawful purpose’, Lord Stephens

Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.