Sentencia C-025/21
Document contents
vulnerabilidad se ve incrementada cuando las personas con
94 TEDH. A.N contra Lithuania. Sentencia del 31 de mayo de 2016.
95 OEA. CADH. “Artículo 3. Derecho
Judgment
Caamaño Valle v. Spain
Document contents
Member States are Belgium,
Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia. This exclusion is either
Judgment
Strøbye & Rosenlind v. Denmark
Document contents
Member States are Belgium,
Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania,
22
STRØBYE AND ROSENLIND v. DENMARK JUDGMENT
Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal
Judgment
Election Dispute Resolution Report 2020
Document contents
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy,
Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, the Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway,
18
-7-
CDL-AD(2020)025
- Preview
Resources
Communist Party of Russia v. Russia
Document contents
the subjective rights to vote and to
stand for election (see Paksas v. Lithuania [GC], no. 34932/04, § 96,
6 January 2011). This provision also expressly
- Preview
Resources
Gorzelik v. Poland-
Document contents
good neighbourliness and friendly cooperation it had entered into with
Germany, Lithuania, Ukraine and other neighbouring states. They were also
recognised in legal
- Preview
Resources
Zdanoka v. Latvia
Document contents
independent countries of central
and eastern Europe, including the three Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia
and Estonia. After Germany’s invasion of Poland on 1 September 1939 and
- Preview
Resources
Tanase v. Moldova
Document contents
three countries (Azerbaijan, Bulgaria and
Lithuania) clearly ban dual nationals from being elected to Parliament. In
Azerbaijan and Lithuania, it is in any event prohibited
- Preview
Resources
Guide to Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights
Document contents
used, however, and has not even
been mentioned in subsequent cases (Paksas v. Lithuania [GC], 2011; Anchugov and Gladkov
v. Russia, 2013, §§ 55-56).
7. The Court has
- Preview
Resources
Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors, and Lawyers
Document contents
p. 120, para. 7.2.
13 Eur. Court HR, Case of Daktaras v. Lithuania, judgment of 10 October 2000, para. 30; for the text see the
- Preview
Resources
Yumak & Sadak v. Turkey
Document contents
containing various combinations of the two types of ballot (in Germany,
Italy and Lithuania, for example).
16
YUMAK AND SADAK v. TURKEY JUDGMENT
63. In some
- Preview
Resources
In re Magyar Ketfarku Kutya Part v. Hungary
Document contents
platforms.
44. The existing legislation in nine countries (Austria, Georgia,
Germany, Lithuania, Moldova, North Macedonia, San Marino, Serbia and
Turkey) bans photography, cameras
- Preview
Resources
Sitaropoulos v. Greece
Document contents
Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Italy,
Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Republic of Moldova,
Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal
- Preview
Resources
Preserving Electoral Integrity During an Infodemic
Document contents
Organization (NATO)39 and Lithuania;40 experts believed the Russian authorities were behind false
information that a U.S. NATO soldier in Lithuania tested positive for COVID-19
- Preview
Resources
Legal Considerations When Delaying or Adapting Elections
Document contents
or indigenous communities.
Campaigning is also a challenge in the pandemic. In Lithuania, the campaign period for the October 2020
parliamentary elections started on
- Preview
Resources
Electoral Justice Regulations Around the World: Key findings from International IDEA's global research on electoral dispute-resolution systems
Document contents
Turkmenistan and Ukraine impose compulsory or correctional labour,
Latvia and Lithuania impose community service and Iran imposes up
to 50 lashes in addition to
- Preview
Resources
17 shown of 17 entities