scholarly journals Right to Stand for Elections, Nomination of Candidates and Judicial protection of the Right to Vote

Author(s):  
Jadranka Sovdat
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (4 (2)) ◽  
pp. 43-54
Author(s):  
Csaba Erdös

This paper gives an overview of the jurisprudence of the Hungarian Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court regarding the right to take part in a referendum. This is a fundamental right of political participation, not unlike the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in parliamentary elections. It being a genuine fundamental right, the Constitutional Court interpreted its authentic meaning and stipulated the most important constitutional requirements related to this right. One of the most important requirements was the establishment of a system of remedies, where the final decision on the certification of a question proposed for a referendum must be taken by the Constitutional Court. Parliament fulfilled this legislative requirement and since 1998 the Constitutional Court has controlled the constitutionality of the decisions taken by the National Election Committee on the certification of the referendum questions proposed. The 2013 Act on referendum transferred this competence to the Supreme Court. Since then, the Constitutional Court shall only decide referendum-cases which were submitted with the so-called ‘direct constitutional complaint’, an extraordinary type of constitutional remedy. The present paper compares these two remedy systems introduced for the protection of the right to take part in a referendum.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-90
Author(s):  
VLADIMIR TROYAN ◽  

The relevance of the interpretation of constitutional and legal guarantees of the right to vote is mediated by isolated scientific research in this area, as well as the lack of a universal approach to legal guarantees. In this regard, the purpose of the article is to argue and disclose the author’s definitive aspect of the claimed guarantees. In the work, the author named and characterized the normative (based exclusively on legal means) with the perspective of a branch of legal and technical; regulatory and institutional (combines the formal aspect with the activities of authorized entities) and associated legal (including a set of legal and other aspects) approaches to the definition of legal guarantees. Based on the second approach, as well as combining the guarantees of the right to vote directly guarantees of the subjective right itself and guarantees of its implementation, the author offers a definition of constitutional and legal guarantees of the right to vote.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Samovich

The manual is devoted to making individual complaints to the European Court of human rights: peculiarities of realization of the right to appeal, conditions of admissibility and the judicial procedure of the European Court of Human Rights. The author analyses some “autonomous concepts” used in the court's case law and touches upon the possibility of limiting the right to judicial protection. The article deals with the formation and development of the individual's rights to international judicial protection, as well as the protection of human rights in universal quasi-judicial international bodies and regional judicial institutions of the European Union and the Organization of American States. This publication includes a material containing an analysis of recent changes in the legal regulation of the Institute of individual complaints. The manual is recommended for students of educational organizations of higher education, studying in the areas of bachelor's and master's degree “Jurisprudence”.


Author(s):  
Stephan Tontrup ◽  
Rebecca Morton
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth G. Patterson ◽  
Julia Bradshaw ◽  
Chelsea Evans ◽  
Ryan Nash ◽  
William Neinast ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Shai Dothan

There is a consensus about the existence of an international right to vote in democratic elections. Yet states disagree about the limits of this right when it comes to the case of prisoners’ disenfranchisement. Some states allow all prisoners to vote, some disenfranchise all prisoners, and others allow only some prisoners to vote. This chapter argues that national courts view the international right to vote in three fundamentally different ways: some view it as an inalienable right that cannot be taken away, some view it merely as a privilege that doesn’t belong to the citizens, and others view it as a revocable right that can be taken away under certain conditions. The differences in the way states conceive the right to vote imply that attempts by the European Court of Human Rights to follow the policies of the majority of European states by using the Emerging Consensus doctrine are problematic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document