Should prisoners have the right to vote?

This was begun by the legal challenges of John Hirst and, following the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Hirst v UK (2005), which declared that the blanket ban on all prisoners was a violation of their human rights.
Other groups, such as the Prison Reform Trust and Amnesty International have campaigned to put pressure on the government to recognise its legal obligations and give at least some prisoners the right to vote.

The denial of the right to vote removes a sense of civic responsibility which makes rehabilitation harder, there is no evidence that loss of the franchise acts as a deterrent, the right to vote is fundamental and cannot be removed.
Removal of the vote makes a prisoner a non-person and further alienates them from society, the ECtHR has ruled that the blanket ban on prisoners is a violation of the HRA.

Those who commit a custodial crime against society should lose the right to have a say in how that society is run, the threat of losing the right to vote prevents crime and enhances civic responsibility, giving convicted criminals the right to have a say in how laws are made would undermine the principle of justice.
Prisoners are concentrated in certain constituencies where they are unlikely to remain once free, so they should not be able to choose the local representatives for those communities.