CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 30 novembre 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s17E903BE { width:3.01pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s8D17D8A5 { width:127.42pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCC22C24E { font-family:Arial; color:#3e3e3e } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block }       FOURTH SECTION CASE OF BRĂNIȘTEANU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA (Application no. 10600/18 and 5 others – see appended list)           JUDGMENT         STRASBOURG 30 November 2023 This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Brănișteanu and Others v. Romania, The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Faris Vehabović , President ,   Anja Seibert-Fohr,   Anne Louise Bormann , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 9 November 2023, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in applications against Romania lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2.     The Romanian Government (“the   Government”) were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 3.     The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4.     The applicants, who are convicted prisoners, complained about their inability to vote in legislative elections despite their right to vote not being restricted by court order for the sole reason that, on the date of the elections, they were serving a sentence in a prison situated outside the electoral constituency of their place of residence. THE LAW JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   3 ProtOCOL nO. 1 OF THE CONVENTION 6.     The applicants complained about their inability to vote in elections. They relied on Article   3 of Protocol No.   1. 7.     The Court refers to the principles established in its case ‑ law regarding ineligibility to vote in elections (see, for instance, Ždanoka v. Latvia [GC], no.   58278/00, §§ 102-15, ECHR 2006-IV with further references, and Mironescu v. Romania, no. 17504/18, §§ 35-37, 30 November 2021). 8.     In the leading case of Mironescu (cited above, §§ 52-53), the Court has already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 9.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the inability of the applicants to vote in elections, because on the date of the elections, they were serving a sentence in a prison situated outside the electoral constituency of their place of residence, is incompatible with Article   3 of Protocol No.   1. 10.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   3 of Protocol No.   1. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 11.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Mironescu , cited above, § 57), the Court concludes that the finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants. At the same time, it considers it reasonable to award the applicant, Ms   Brănişteanu (application no. 10600/18), 560 euros (EUR) covering costs for the proceedings before the Court, plus any tax that may be chargeable to her. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications admissible; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   3 of Protocol No.   1 concerning the restriction on prisoners’ voting rights based on place of residence; Holds (a)   that the finding of a violation constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants; (b)   that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, Ms   Brănişteanu (application no.   10600/18), within three months, EUR   560 (five   hundred and sixty euros), to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable to her on that amount; (c)   that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 30 November 2023, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Faris Vehabović   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 Protocol No. 1 of the Convention (restriction on prisoners’ voting rights based on place of residence) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Electoral constituency of domicile   Electoral constituency of prison Election details     10600/18 24/04/2018 Gheorghiţa BRĂNIŞTEANU 1958 Gorj County Dolj County Legislative elections of 11/12/2016     2781/21 26/02/2021 Dezső ŐTVŐS 1966 Timiş County Arad County Legislative elections of 06/12/2020     3505/21 05/04/2021 Gheorghiţa BRĂNIŞTEANU 1958 Gorj County Arad County Legislative elections of 06/12/2020     8976/21 24/06/2021 Marian BĂLUI 1979 Argeş County Arad County Legislative elections of 06/12/2020     12445/21 16/04/2021 Florian Ovidiu GERGELY 1980 Harghita County Cluj County Legislative elections of 06/12/2020     15679/21 14/04/2021 Constantin NECHITA 1986 Neamţ County Harghita County Legislative elections of 06/12/2020