Previous 3 / 28 Next

SITAROPOULOS AND GIAKOUMOPOULOS v. GREECE JUDGMENT 1 In the case of Sitaropoulos and Giakoumopoulos v. Greece, The European Court of Human Rights, sitting as a Grand Chamber composed of: Nicolas Bratza, President, Jean-Paul Costa, Françoise Tulkens, Josep Casadevall, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Lech Garlicki, Egbert Myjer, Davíd Thór Björgvinsson, Ján Šikuta, Ineta Ziemele, Luis López Guerra, Nona Tsotsoria, Ann Power-Forde, Zdravka Kalaydjieva, Vincent A. De Gaetano, Angelika Nußberger, judges, Spyridon Flogaitis, ad hoc judge, and Johan Callewaert, Deputy Grand Chamber Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 4 May 2011 and 18 January 2012, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on the lastmentioned date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in an application (no. 42202/07) against the Hellenic Republic lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by three Greek nationals, Mr Nikolaos Sitaropoulos, Mr Stephanos Stavros and Mr Christos Giakoumopoulos (“the applicants”), on 20 September 2007. 2. The applicants were represented by Mr I. Ktistakis, a member of the Athens Bar. The Greek Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent’s delegates, Ms K. Paraskevopoulou, Adviser at the State Legal Council, and Ms Z. Hatzipavlou, Legal Assistant at the State Legal Council. 3. The applicants alleged that their inability to vote from their place of residence amounted to disproportionate interference with the exercise of their right to vote in parliamentary elections enshrined in Article 3 of Protocol No. 1.

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