A Case regarding the Right of Associations of Electors to Submit Lists of Candidates in Municipality Election
On 10 January 2014 the 1st Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated a case “On the Compliance of Section 15(1) of The City Council and Municipality Election Law”, insofar it does not allow associations of electors to submit lists of candidates in municipalities where the number of residents exceeds 5,000 and in cities, with Article 91 and Article 101 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.”
Contested Norm
Section 15(1) of The City Council and Municipality Election law provides that in municipalities where the number of residents exceeds 5,000 on the day of announcement of the election, as well as in cities the lists of candidates for city councils and municipality councils may be submitted only by: 1) a registered political party; 2) a registered association of registered political parties; or 3) two or more registered political parties, which have not joined in a registered association of political parties.
Norm of Higher Legal Force
Article 91 of the Satversme: “All human beings in Latvia shall be equal before the law and courts. Human rights shall be realised without discrimination of any kind.”
Article 101 of the Satversme: “Every citizen of Latvia has the right, as provided for by law, to participate in the work of the State and of local government, and to hold a position in the civil service. Local governments shall be elected by Latvian citizens and citizens of the European Union who permanently reside in Latvia. Every citizen of the European Union who permanently resides in Latvia has the right, as provided by law, to participate in the work of local governments. The working language of local governments is the Latvian language.“
The Facts
The constitutional complaint regarding the contested norm was submitted by Rihards Pētersons, Jana Simanovska, Uldis Kronblūms and Kārlis Vilciņš. They had been the candidates of electors’ association “Jūrmalnieki” in Jūrmala City Council election in 2013; however, the list submitted by this association was not registered. The refusal to register was founded upon the contested norm.
The applicants hold that the contested norm limits their rights disproportionally. The right of all persons to run for election allegedly follows from Article 101 of the Satversme. The restrictions established by the contested norm are unnecessary in a democratic society; moreover, no benefit to society, justifying the existence of restrictions, can be discerned.
The norm, likewise, unfoundedly and disproportionally allows differential treatment of persons, depending upon the municipality they reside in.
Legal Proceedings
The Constitutional Court has asked the Saeima to provide a reply on the facts of the case and legal substantiation by 10 March 2014.
The term for preparing the case is 10 June 2014. The Court shall decide upon the procedure and the date for hearing the case after the case has been prepared.
Linked case: 2014-03-01