Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: Right to Free Elections

  • Guest Blogger

Mugemangango v. Belgium: finally a Grand Chamber judgment on post-election disputes.

August 06, 2020

By Mathieu Leloup Post-election disputes and the type of body that should handle them is a topic that comes up before the Court every now and again. In 2010, in the case of Grosaru v. Romania, the Court had indicated that a parliamentary body could not be seen as sufficiently impartial when it had to […]

  • Guest Blogger

Partei Die Friesen v. Germany: Federalism trumps uniform protection of national minority rights

February 16, 2016

By Pieter Cannoot, academic assistant and doctoral researcher of constitutional law (Ghent University) On 28 January 2016 the European Court of Human Rights declared the complaint by the regional Frisian political party “Die Friesen” against Germany unfounded. The party argued that the electoral system of the German Land of Lower Saxony (Niedersachsen) was discriminatory in […]

  • Guest Blogger

Scoppola v. Italy (no. 3): The Grand Chamber faces the “constitutional justice vs. individual justice” dilemma (but it doesn’t tell)

June 20, 2012

This guest post was written by Cesare Pitea, Researcher in International Law (Faculty of Law) and Assistant Professor of Interational Law (Faculty of Political Science), University of Parma (Italy). 1.       Judging in a Heated Political Context In the Scoppola  v. Italy (no. 3) judgment ([GC], no. 126/05, 22 May 2012),  the third chapter of the […]

  • Maris Burbergs

Hirst Strongly Resonates in Greens … and in Latvia

November 26, 2010

In what some have considered a “blunt ultimatum”, the Court has just given the United Kingdom a six-month deadline to introduce legislative proposals to amend its laws banning prisoners from voting. At the basis of the Court’s decision, is the government’s 5-year failure to execute the Grand Chamber judgment in Hirst (No. 2), the case […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

A Strasbourg victory for the mentally disabled

May 21, 2010

The Strasbourg Court (Second Section) came out with a landmark judgment yesterday; Kiss v. Hungary. The applicant, Mr. Kiss, suffers from manic depression. Due to this condition he was placed under partial guardianship in 2005. In 2006, with the elections coming up, he realized that the Hungarian law forbade him to vote, as all persons […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Tănase v. Moldova: multiple readings of a case concerning multiple nationality

May 12, 2010

To be honest, our team’s first reaction when discussing the recent Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Tănase v. Moldova was rather dismissive.  We had the feeling that the Court was teaching Moldova the basics of what it means to be a democracy; a thing they would hardly do in a case concerning, say, […]

  • Lourdes Peroni

Prisoners’ voting rights and the rule of law

April 25, 2010

Once again, the Court has been called upon to decide on a case regarding prisoners’ disenfranchisement. In Frodl v. Austria, the applicant, convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, was denied inclusion in the electoral register on the basis of Section 22 of the National Assembly Election Act which provides that ‘anyone who has […]