6/10/2020 Sinnott -v- The Minister for The Environment [2017] IEHC 214 (30 March 2017) litigation while declarations should be easily interpreted by the officer who will be most affected by the declarations. 74. In view of the concerns described earlier about delay and the lack of transparency as to what is proposed on behalf of the defendants the Court invites further submissions if the parties are unclear about the import of the following type of declarations:(i) the defendant Minister has a duty to outline publicly details of planned studies and regulations for the provision of arrangements to facilitate voters with visual impairments to mark their ballot papers without assistance as envisaged by s. 94(5)(i) of the 1992 Act; (ii) the defendant Minister has a duty to provide the said arrangements under s. 94(5)(i) of the 1992 Act where there are no disclosed reasonably practicable economic or effective reasons not to vindicate the right to mark ballot papers without assistance. Other reliefs 75. Counsel for the plaintiff explained that the plaintiff did not abandon his claim for damages and that there were details in the NDA report which need to be addressed in any further studies. There is no necessity for this Court to award damages because the principal grievance of the plaintiff has been addressed. It would to devalue the sincerity of the plaintiff’s motives in prosecuting these proceedings for the Court to embark on a tangent which was never actively pursued. As for the perceived lack of understanding of the NDA report, the Court repeats that it has no role in assessing the minutiae which the defendant Minister may need to consider. European Union law 76. The conduct of European elections is governed by European Union law - Council Decision 76\787\EEC (as amended by Council Decisions 93\81\EC and 2002\772\EC) and Council Directive 93\109\EC. 77. Article 14.3 of the Treaty on European Union (“the TEU”) provides:“The members of the European Parliament shall be elected for a term of five years by direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot”. 78. Article 39.2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union also provides:“Members of the European Parliament shall be elected by direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot”. 79. The Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights provide in respect of Article 39:“Article 39 applies under the conditions laid down in the Treaties, in accordance with Article 52(2) of the Charter. Article 39(1) corresponds to the right guaranteed in Article 20(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to Article 14(3) of the Treaty on European Union. Article 39(2) takes over the basic principles of the electoral system in a democratic state.” 80. The procedures for European Parliament elections are set out in this State by the European Parliament Elections Act 1997, read in conjunction with the Electoral Acts 1992 and 1997. Despite the provisions for “a free and secret ballot” and the provision in Article 223(1) TFEU which provides a legal basis for the adoption of a uniform procedure for elections to the European Parliament, the European Union has not yet introduced legislation for a uniform procedure. In the absence of legislation for a common procedure, the arrangements to be put in place for VIPs are matters within the competence of the State. 81. I agree with the submission of the defendants that there is no basis for suggesting that the right to a secret ballot as it applies to European elections is any greater than it is under the Constitution and as provided by the 1992 Act (as amended). www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2017/H214.html 13/15