CAAMAÑO VALLE v. SPAIN JUDGMENT
vote in the 2019 European Parliament elections? Developments in the right
to vote of people deprived of legal capacity in EU Member States”). It
seems that, apart from Spain (2018), also France (2019) and Germany
(2019) granted the right to vote to persons with mental disabilities.
Denmark (2016 and 2018) eased the restrictions on the right to vote for
persons with mental disabilities, and Belgium (2018) moved from a system
of automatic disenfranchisement to one of disenfranchisement upon an
individual assessment by a judge. The Supreme Court of Slovakia (2017)
struck down legal provisions tying the right to vote to legal capacity.
THE LAW
I.
ON THE REQUEST FOR THE APPLICATION TO BE STRUCK
OUT OF THE LIST
29. The Government argued that the application should be struck out, in
accordance with the provisions of Article 37 § (1) (a) and (b) of the
Convention, since the applicant’s daughter had been legally recognised as
having the right to vote and the judicial decisions that had given rise to that
procedure had been automatically annulled. The Government argued in
particular that Institutional Law 2/2018 of 5 December 2018 had modified
the LOREG, eliminating the provisions of the LOREG relating to the
possibility of depriving disabled people of the right to vote and guaranteeing
the right to vote to persons with a disability.
30. The Court notes that for a certain period of time the applicant’s
daughter was not permitted to vote. Various elections were held in Spain
and in Europe between 2014 and 2018 (namely, elections to the European
Parliament in May 2014, Spanish general elections in 2015 and 2016). In
none of these elections was the applicant’s daughter, despite being of legal
age, able to exercise her right to vote.
31. Therefore, the application does not fall under Article 37 § 1; it is true
that the relevant legislation was amended in 2018 and that since then, all
disabled persons have been allowed to vote, but the fact remains that the
applicant’s daughter was not able to vote in several elections held after she
had reached her majority until the amendment of the law in 2018.
32. The Court considers in any event that respect for human rights, as
defined by the Convention and the Protocols thereto, requires it to continue
the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine).
II. ON THE APPLICANT’S STANDING TO BRING THE PRESENT
APPLICATION
33. The Court notes that the application was brought by Ms Maria del
Mar Caamaño Valle in her own name, acting on behalf of her daughter, M.
13