Election Dispute Resolution Report 2020
Document contents
177 See for instance Estonia, Norway. Factual reasons are required in Albania, Algeria, Austria (disputes on the
registration of voters), Estonia, Norway and Slovak
- Preview
Resources
Grosaru v. Romania
Document contents
instance: Andorra (second instance), Armenia (first instance), Croatia
(first instance), Estonia (first instance, before the Supreme Court as the
Constitutional Court), France
- Preview
Resources
Iskra v. Russia
Document contents
hand and Internet-based media operations
on the other (see Delfi AS v. Estonia [GC], no. 64569/09, § 113, ECHR
2015).
ORLOVSKAYA ISKRA v. RUSSIA JUDGMENT
- Preview
Resources
Zdanoka v. Latvia
Document contents
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
the subsequent start
- Preview
Resources
Tanase v. Moldova
Document contents
91. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania prohibit dual nationality. According to
the census for the year 2000, there were around 200 dual nationals in
Estonia. There
- Preview
Resources
Equal Access: How to Include Persons with Disabilities in Elections and Political Processes
Document contents
process more accessible to persons with disabilities. Some European countries, such as Estonia, allow voting online and tout this process as being more accessible. However
- Preview
Resources
Cybersecurity in Elections: Developing a Holistic Exposure and Adaptation Testing (HEAT) Process for Election Management Bodies
Document contents
Mihkel Solvak and Kristjan Vassil, E-voting in Estonia: Technological Diffusion and
Other Developments Over Ten Years (Tartu, Estonia: Johan Skytte Institute of Political Studies
- Preview
Resources
Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors, and Lawyers
Document contents
observations on the initial, second, third and fourth periodic reports of Estonia, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination expressed “particular
- Preview
Resources
Yumak & Sadak v. Turkey
Document contents
used in Europe.
By way of example, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Norway, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Russia, Spain
- Preview
Resources
In re Magyar Ketfarku Kutya Part v. Hungary
Document contents
been upheld at various
levels.
43. Three member States (Portugal, Armenia and Estonia) impose
general restrictions on the disclosure by voters, by any means, of
- Preview
Resources
Sitaropoulos v. Greece
Document contents
Belgium,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark,
Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Italy,
Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania
- Preview
Resources
Raatsin for the Declaration of Invalidity of the Voting Results of the Riigikogu Elections of 2011
Judgment
Polluaas for Annulment of Electronic Votes Cast in the Riigikogu Elections 2011
Judgment
Review of the Constitutionality of Section Five of the Riigikogu Election Act
Judgment
Chester v. Secretary of State for Justice
Document contents
Sweden and Switzerland have no restrictions on voting by
prisoners. Bulgaria, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Japan, Liechtenstein, Russia and
the United States ban all
Judgment
Electoral Justice: The International IDEA Handbook
Document contents
European countries have this type of EDRS.
Examples are Bosnia and Herzegovina, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Russia and
Serbia, where the final decision on challenges
- Preview
Resources
17 shown of 17 entities