Previous 7 / 43 Next

YUMAK AND SADAK v. TURKEY JUDGMENT 5 In the normal course of events, these elections should have been held on 4 November 2007. 23. Fourteen political parties took part in the elections, which were marked by two characteristics. Firstly, a strong mobilisation of the electorate was observed following the presidential crisis, since the participation rate rose to 84%. Secondly, political parties used two preelectoral strategies to circumvent the national 10% threshold. The Party of the Democratic Left (DSP) took part in the poll under the banner of the CHP, a rival party, and by that means managed to win thirteen seats. The Party for a Democratic Society (DTP, pro-Kurdish, left-leaning) presented its candidates as independents using the slogan “A thousand hopes”; it also supported certain left-wing Turkish candidates. This movement was backed by other small left-wing groups such as the EMEP, the SDP and the ÖDP (the Liberty and Solidarity Party, socialist). More than sixty independent candidates stood for election in about forty provincial constituencies. 24. In the elections the AKP, the CHP and the MHP managed to get over the 10% threshold. With 46.58% of the votes cast, the AKP won 341 seats, 62% of the total. The CHP, with 20.88% of the votes, won 112 seats, 20.36% of the total; however, the thirteen MPs mentioned in paragraph 23 above subsequently resigned from the CHP and went back to the DSP, their original party. The MHP, which polled 14.27% of the votes, won seventy-one seats, or 12.9% of the total. 25. The strong showing by independent candidates was one of the main features of the elections of 22 July 2007. There were none in the National Assembly in 1980 but 1999 saw them return, when there were three. In 2002 nine independent MPs were elected from a national total of 260 independent candidates. In the elections of 22 July 2007, twenty-seven independent MPs were elected. In particular, more than twenty “thousand hopes” candidates were elected, after obtaining approximately 2.23% of the votes cast, and joined the DTP after the elections. The DTP, which had twenty MPs, the minimum number to be able to form a parliamentary group, was thus able to do so. The independents also included a socialist MP (the former president of the ÖDP), a nationalist MP (the former president of the Great Union Party – BBP, nationalist) and a centrist MP (the former president of ANAP). 26. A government was formed by the AKP, which again secured an absolute majority in Parliament.

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Yumak & Sadak v. Turkey

Resources

Preview

Legal Issue and/or Topic

Legal Frameworks
Regional Jurisprudence

Description: The applicants in this case allege that the ten percent threshold for entering Parliament directly interferes with the freedom of expression guaranteed in Article 3 of Protocol 1. Both applicants sought election as members of the People’s Democratic Party during the 2002 parliamentary elections. Neither applicants was successfully elected. The People’s Democratic Party was a newly formed political block in September of 2002. All other political blocks existed since before 1991. In Sirnak, the People’s Democratic Party received 45.95% percent of the vote, but failed to meet the national ten percent requirement. The Sirnak seats then went to a member of the Justice and Development Party that polled 14.05% and an independent who polled 9.69%. The imposition of the ten percent threshold disqualified all but two political parties from gaining seats in the legislature. A similar fact pattern occurred during the 2007 elections. The first hearing on the merits of the case was held on September 5, 2006 and found no violation of Article 3 of Protocol 1. On April 21, 2007 the applicants asked the Grand Chamber to hear the case. The court determined that the domestic legislative framework sought to set forth a scheme of obtaining office through elections. That scheme, however, must be arbitrary and serves the proportionality goal it seeks to accomplish. First, the court stated that the law was not arbitrary because all political parties that fail to meet the ten percent threshold are prohibited from obtaining political office and many political parties were prohibited from doing so since its enactment. Second, although thresholds are common across Europe, Turkey remains among the three highest. The court ultimately stated that the ten percent threshold should be lowered because it is a high level but the court was not persuaded that in this political context the threshold resulted in freedom of expression or impaired rights of candidates and political parties. The court founds no violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1.

Language

English
French

Geolocation

Latitude: 39.889866476023506

Longitude: 32.77150759681381

: Geolocation

Author(s): European Court of Human Rights

Date: Jul 8, 2018

Primary Documents

CASE OF YUMAK AND SADAK v. TURKEY.pdf
English
Download View
AFFAIRE YUMAK ET SADAK c. TURQUIE.pdf
French
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Yumak & Sadak v. Turkey

Primary Documents

Notifications