Against a retroactive right to participate in leasehold enfranchisement

There's much talk of letting existing leaseholders participate in the enfranchisement of partially enfranchised blocks of flats.

Such a thing has a lot of pratical and technical problems with it, not least that it can impfringes the human rights of other leaseholders who tried to do the right thing by buying out their freehold (in particular the right to freedom of association).

At least some of the discussion is motivated by outright leasehold abolitionism: unenfranchised leaseholders in partially enfranchised blocks have no effective statutory route out of leasehold. They do of course have the remedy of a section 24 court-appointed manager, but effectively no recourse to RTM.

In the patholigcal cases, where the enfranchised or unenfranchised leaseholders are toxic, this is going to be a big problem. A special case of that is where the unenfranchised leaseholders are connected the previous freeholder, who wishes to use his control of the flats to sabotage the enfranchised leaseholders. It's very unclear why rogue freeholders should be able to continue to extort leaseholders post enfranchisement, so a group of leaseholders in a block might well not wish to share control with their former tormentor.

(Obviously this applies both to enfranchisement and to involuntary "Option 2" commonhold conversion)