Previous 28 / 28 Next

26 SITAROPOULOS AND GIAKOUMOPOULOS v. GREECE JUDGMENT Done in English and in French, and delivered at a public hearing in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 15 March 2012, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court. Johan Callewaert Deputy to the Registrar Nicolas Bratza President

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