Summary
No substantial change to the electoral law should be made within the six months prior to the election without the consent of a majority of political actors.
Obligations
Election Parts
Quotes
- No substantial modification shall be made to the electoral laws in the last six (6) months before the elections, except with the consent of a majority of Political actors.
- It is to be recalled that, for the purposes of applying Article 3 of Protocol No. 1, any electoral legislation must be assessed in the light of the political evolution of the country concerned, so that features that would be unacceptable in the context of one system may be justified in the context of another (see, among other authorities, Py v. France, no. 66289/01, § 46, ECHR 2005-I). As was noted above, in the present case, the electoral authorities had the challenge of remedying manifest shortcomings in the electoral rolls within very tight deadlines, in a “post-revolutionary” political situation (see paragraphs 11-13 and 19-23 above). Consequently, the Court concludes that the unexpected change in the rules on voter registration one month before the repeat parliamentary election of 28 March 2004 was, in the very specific circumstances of the situation, a solution devoid of criticism under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1.
- Referring to the applicant party’s argument that the sudden change in the registration system was unexpected for voters, the Court considers that, as a matter of policy, it would indeed be preferable to maintain the stability of electoral law (see also the Venice Commission’s recommendation in this respect, paragraph 47 above). Fundamental electoral rules, such as those concerning voter registration, should not normally be amended too often and especially on the eve of an election, otherwise the State risks undermining respect for and confidence in the existence of the guarantees of a free election.
- Democracy is incompatible with any substantial change in the electoral system introduced arbitrarily or surreptitiously, and there must be a reasonable interval between the adoption of any amendment and its entry into force.
- Democracy is incompatible with any substantial change in the electoral system introduced arbitrarily or surreptitiously, and there must be a reasonable interval between the adoption of any amendment and its entry into force.
- The Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD(2002)023rev, item II.2.B) states : “The fundamental elements of electoral law, in particular the electoral system proper, membership of electoral commissions and the drawing of constituency boundaries, should not be open to amendment less than one year before an election, or should be written in the constitution or at a level higher than ordinary law.” II. The Venice Commission interprets this text as follows: 4. In particular, the following are considered fundamental rules : - the electoral system proper, i.e. rules relating to the transformation of votes into seats; - rules relating to the membership of electoral commissions or another body which organizes the ballot; - the drawing of constituency boundaries and rules relating to the distribution of seats between the constituencies.
- Experience also demonstrates that it is inappropriate to make major or significant modifications of electoral related laws too close to an election date.
- The Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD(2002)023rev, item II.2.B) states : “The fundamental elements of electoral law, in particular the electoral system proper, membership of electoral commissions and the drawing of constituency boundaries, should not be open to amendment less than one year before an election, or should be written in the constitution or at a level higher than ordinary law.” II. The Venice Commission interprets this text as follows: 1. The principle according to which the fundamental elements of electoral law should not be open to amendment less than one year prior to an election does not take precedence over the other principles of the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters.
- The legislation should be enacted sufficiently in advance of elections to give voters and all participants in the process – including authorities, contestants and media – enough time to become informed of the rules. The late adoption of campaign finance legislation can undermine trust in the process and reduce the opportunity for contestants and other stakeholders to become familiar with and prepare for implementation of the rules.
- The legislation should be enacted sufficiently in advance of elections to give voters and all participants in the process – including authorities, contestants and media – enough time to become informed of the rules. The late adoption of campaign finance legislation can undermine trust in the process and reduce the opportunity for contestants and other stakeholders to become familiar with and prepare for implementation of the rules.
- The legal framework should, therefore, be drafted in an open and inclusive manner in order to secure broad confidence among competing political parties and candidates, and voters. It is good practice that significant changes in the legal framework are not introduced shortly before an election, except under exceptional circumstances and when the amendments have broad political support.
- It is not so much changing voting systems which is a bad thing – they can always be changed for the better – as changing them frequently or just before (within one year of) elections. Even when no manipulation is intended, changes will seem to be dictated by immediate party political interests.
- Electoral legislation should be enacted sufficiently in advance of elections to enable voters and all participants in the process – including election-administration bodies, candidates, parties and the media – to become informed of the rules. Electoral legislation enacted at the “last minute” has the potential to undermine trust in the process and diminish the opportunity for political participants and voters to become familiar with the rules of the electoral process in a timely manner.
- The Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD(2002)023rev, item II.2.B) states : “The fundamental elements of electoral law, in particular the electoral system proper, membership of electoral commissions and the drawing of constituency boundaries, should not be open to amendment less than one year before an election, or should be written in the constitution or at a level higher than ordinary law.” II. The Venice Commission interprets this text as follows: 5. In general any reform of electoral legislation to be applied during an election should occur early enough for it to be really applicable to the election.
- The Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD(2002)023rev, item II.2.B) states : “The fundamental elements of electoral law, in particular the electoral system proper, membership of electoral commissions and the drawing of constituency boundaries, should not be open to amendment less than one year before an election, or should be written in the constitution or at a level higher than ordinary law.” II. The Venice Commission interprets this text as follow 2. It should not be invoked to maintain a situation contrary to the standards of the European electoral heritage, or to prevent the implementation of recommendations by international organisations.
- The fundamental aspects of referendum law should not be open to amendment less than one year before a referendum, or should be written in the Constitution or at a level superior to ordinary law.
- The Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD(2002)023rev, item II.2.B) states: “The fundamental elements of electoral law, in particular the electoral system proper, membership of electoral commissions and the drawing of constituency boundaries, should not be open to amendment less than one year before an election, or should be written in the constitution or at a level higher than ordinary law.” II. The Venice Commission interprets this text as follows: 3. This principle only concerns the fundamental rules of electoral law, when they appear in ordinary law.