Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GAHRAMANLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  Violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to free elections-general (Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 - Stand for election);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  GAHRAMANLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN and 5 other applications

  Art. 13, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 3 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (5)Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 02.03.1987 - 9267/81

  MATHIEU-MOHIN ET CLERFAYT c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2015 - 36503/11

  Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 enshrines a principle that is characteristic of an effective political democracy and is accordingly of prime importance in the Convention system (see Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v. Belgium, 2 March 1987, § 47, Series A no. 113).
• EGMR, 15.06.2006 - 33554/03

  LYKOUREZOS v. GREECE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2015 - 36503/11

  Furthermore, the object and purpose of the Convention, which is an instrument for the protection of human rights, requires its provisions to be interpreted and applied in such a way as to make their stipulations not theoretical or illusory but practical and effective (see, among many other authorities, United Communist Party of Turkey and Others v. Turkey, 30 January 1998, § 33, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, § 100, ECHR 1999-III; and Lykourezos v. Greece, no. 33554/03, § 56, ECHR 2006-VIII).
• EGMR, 29.04.1999 - 25088/94

  CHASSAGNOU ET AUTRES c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.10.2015 - 36503/11

  Furthermore, the object and purpose of the Convention, which is an instrument for the protection of human rights, requires its provisions to be interpreted and applied in such a way as to make their stipulations not theoretical or illusory but practical and effective (see, among many other authorities, United Communist Party of Turkey and Others v. Turkey, 30 January 1998, § 33, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, § 100, ECHR 1999-III; and Lykourezos v. Greece, no. 33554/03, § 56, ECHR 2006-VIII).

• EGMR, 16.04.2024 - 24159/22

  GU?MUNDUR GUNNARSSON AND MAGN?S DAV?? NOR?DAHL v. ICELAND

  However, it is for the Court to determine whether the requirements of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 have been observed and whether the respondent State has complied with its obligation to hold elections under free and fair conditions and has ensured that individual electoral rights were exercised effectively (see I.Z. v. Greece, no. 18997/91, Commission decision of 28 February 1994, Decisions and Reports 76-A, p. 65; Babenko v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 43476/98, 4 May 1999; and Gahramanli and Others v. Azerbaijan, no. 36503/11, § 72, 8 October 2015).
• EGMR, 21.03.2024 - 36497/20

  SADIGLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  The Court has established clear case-law concerning very similar complaints against Azerbaijan related to violations of the right to stand as a candidate in elections (see Namat Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, no. 18705/06, 8 April 2010, and Gahramanli and Others v. Azerbaijan, no. 36503/11, 8 October 2015).
• EGMR, 21.03.2024 - 38258/20

  MAMMADOV AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning very similar complaints against Azerbaijan related to violations of the right to stand as a candidate in elections (see Namat Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, no. 18705/06, 8 April 2010, and Gahramanli and Others v. Azerbaijan, no. 36503/11, 8 October 2015).
• EGMR, 24.05.2016 - 41683/06

  PAUNOVIC AND MILIVOJEVIC v. SERBIA

  The Court notes at the outset that in cases where a post-election dispute concerning electoral rights had been subject to review by a domestic court, it has chosen to examine the complaints solely under Article 3 of Protocol No.1 to the Convention (see Riza and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 48555/10 and 48377/10, § 95, 13 October 2015; Gahramanli and Others v. Azerbaijan, no. 36503/11, § 56, 8 October 2015; Kerimova v. Azerbaijan, no. 20799/06, §§ 31-32, 30 September 2010; and Kerimli and Alibeyli v. Azerbaijan, nos. 18475/06 and 22444/06, §§ 29-30, 10 January 2012).
• EGMR, 20.12.2016 - 14737/08

  USPASKICH v. LITHUANIA

  The Court considers that what is at stake in the present case is not the applicant's right to win the parliamentary election in the Dzukija single-member constituency, but his right to stand freely and effectively for it, this right being inherent in the concept of a truly democratic regime (see Gahramanli and Others v. Azerbaijan, no. 36503/11, § 68, 8 October 2015).