Previous 12 / 28 Next

10 SITAROPOULOS AND GIAKOUMOPOULOS v. GREECE JUDGMENT 3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 26. The right to vote is enshrined in Article 25 of the Covenant, the relevant parts of which read as follows: “Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in Article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions: ... (b) To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors; ...” During the drafting of the General Comment on Article 25 of the Covenant, which was published on 12 July 1996 by the Human Rights Committee, a proposal was made calling on States to enable their nationals residing overseas to make use of absentee postal-voting systems where such systems were available. However, as the Human Rights Committee could not agree on the proposal, it was not included in the General Comment. 4. American Convention on Human Rights 27. Article 23 of the said Convention provides as follows: “1. Every citizen shall enjoy the following rights and opportunities: a. to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; b. to vote and to be elected in genuine periodic elections, which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and by secret ballot that guarantees the free expression of the will of the voters; and c. to have access, under general conditions of equality, to the public service of his country. 2. The law may regulate the exercise of the rights and opportunities referred to in the preceding paragraph only on the basis of age, nationality, residence, language, education, civil and mental capacity, or sentencing by a competent court in criminal proceedings.” 28. The right to vote under Article 23 is not absolute and may be subject to restrictions on the grounds expressly laid down in the second paragraph, which include “residence”. However, not every restriction of the right to vote based on residence is justified. 29. In the case of Statehood Solidarity Committee v. United States (Case 11.204, Report no. 98/03 of 29 December 2003), the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights held that the approach to the interpretation and application of the right guaranteed under Article 23 of the American Convention was consistent with the case-law of the other international systems of human rights protection whose treaties provided similar

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Sitaropoulos v. Greece

Resources

Preview

Legal Issue and/or Topic

Election Accessibility
Regional Jurisprudence

Description: The applicants filed suit alleging that their inability to vote from home infringed on the right to vote generally. The applicants were permenately residing in France and sought to exercise their right to vote during the September 16, 2007 elections. On September 10, 2007 the applicants faxed a letter to the Greek Ambassador expressing their wish to exercise the right to vote from their homes in France. On September 12, 2007 the Ambassador stated that the applicants would not be able to vote unless they were physically in Greece. The lower court determined that the application was admissible with regard to at least some of the applicants and that there was an violation in the right to vote. The court first look at the legislative history and determined the failed bill entitled “exercise of the right to vote in parliamentary election by Greek voters living abroad” was before Parliament in 2009. This legislative action served the purpose of ensuring vital rights to Greek citizens residing abroad — a right the legislation stated was already in existence. However, conflicting reports stated that voting abroad was an option presented to the legislature to permit, but not a duty to allow. The court stated that Article Three ensures that all elections are held under conditions that ensure free expression of political preferences. Exclusion of person from the right to vote must therefore, be reconcilable with Article Three. Thus, this case pertains to the ability to exercise the right to vote. The court determined that the nature of the right to vote was not infringed because there were not sufficient facts to call into question the existing legal framework in Greece. The court found not violation of Article Three of Protocol No. 1.

Language

English

Geolocation

Latitude: 38.061568849909236

Longitude: 23.74405129550924

: Geolocation

Author(s): European Court of Human Rights

Date: Mar 25, 2012

Primary Documents

CASE OF SITAROPOULOS AND GIAKOUMOPOULOS v. GREECE.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Sitaropoulos v. Greece

Primary Documents

Notifications