CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 1 juillet 1997

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law July 1997 Gitonas and Others v. Greece - 18747/91, 19376/92, 19379/92 et al. Judgment 1.7.1997 Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 Choice of the legislature Free expression of the opinion of the people Annulment of election of five members of parliament because, for more than three months during the three years preceding the elections, they had held posts in public office disqualifying them from standing for election: no violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.] States given considerable latitude to establish in their constitutional order rules governing status of parliamentarians, including criteria for disqualification - diversity of possible choice on the subject. Disqualification under Article 56 § 3 of Constitution served a dual purpose that was essential for proper functioning and upholding of democratic regimes, namely ensuring that candidates of different political persuasions enjoyed equal means of influence and protecting electorate from pressure from holders of public office. System introduced by Article 56 was somewhat complex but could not be described as incoherent, still less arbitrary. Positions held by applicants were not among those expressly referred to in Article 56 § 3 - however, that did not guarantee them a right to be elected. The Special Supreme Court, which had sole jurisdiction to decide disputes over disqualification, had analysed nature of posts held by applicants and applicable legislation and found that disqualifying conditions relating to when position was held, and duration and extent of duties, had been met in case of each of applicants - Court could not reach any other conclusion - annulments not contrary to Greek legislation, arbitrary or disproportionate. Conclusion : no violation (unanimously).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes