26 THE GEORGIAN LABOUR PARTY v. GEORGIA JUDGMENT 69. In order to achieve an adequate balance between political representatives in the commission, there are some systems which provide specific rules. For instance, in Bulgaria and Serbia, no political party or coalition may have a majority within the commission. In Bulgaria, the chairman and the secretary must belong to different political parties. In the Czech Republic, the chairman and the vice-chairman of an electoral board may not be representatives of the same political party or coalition. THE LAW I. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF PROTOCOL NO. 1 70. The applicant party complained under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 about the system of voter registration as set out in CEC Decree no. 30/2004 of 27 February 2004. It further challenged the presidential control over electoral commissions at all levels at the time of the repeat parliamentary election of 28 March 2004. Lastly, the applicant party complained that the countrywide election had been finalised by the vote tally of 18 April 2004 without elections having been held in the Khulo and Kobuleti electoral districts. 71. Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 provides as follows: “The High Contracting Parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature.” A. The applicant party’s victim status 72. The Court reiterates that, under its case-law, the notion of “individual rights” (see Aziz v. Cyprus, no. 69949/01, § 25, ECHR 2004-V, and Ždanoka v. Latvia [GC], no. 58278/00, § 102, ECHR 2006-IV) or “subjective rights” (see Melnychenko v. Ukraine, no. 17707/02, § 54, ECHR 2004-X) to stand for election under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 have mostly been confined to physical persons. However, it has been recently accepted that, when electoral legislation or the measures taken by national authorities restrict individual candidates’ right to stand for election through a party list, the relevant party, as a corporate entity, could claim to be a victim under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 independently of its candidates (see Russian Conservative Party of Entrepreneurs and Others v. Russia, nos. 55066/00 and 55638/00, §§ 53-67, 11 January 2007.). 73. As to the circumstances of the present case, the Court observes that, pursuant to Article 106 § 7 of the EC, if an MP elected through a party list