newsitems ECHR checks Choice of EUParliament MEPs: ByElection Unnecessary if Big Cost+Abstention+Short Mandate
ECHR checks Choice of EUParliament MEPs: ByElection Unnecessary if Big Cost+Abstention+Short Mandate
*Strasbourg/Angelo Marcopolo/- The PanEuropean Court of Human Rights, (part of the Strasbourg-based, 47 Member States strong CoE), confirmed its Legal Competence to Judge MEPs' Elections to EU Parliament, and decided that a By-Election for a Few Seats is Not Necessary if its Cost is Excessive, and Risks for Abstention too Big, compared to a Shorter than usual Period of Time for the Duration of the concerned MEPs' mandate : In such cases, Member States could Legitimately Elect their European Representative(s) f.ex. through a Vote inside their National Parliament, EuroJudges found.
By a Timely Coincidence, this ECHR Judgement, on an Application lodged in France, was Published Today at the Eve of the Final Round of a By-Election to the French National Assembly, (the Last to occur before a Crucial Presidential Election scheduled in less than a Year : on April-May 2017), for Strasbourg City's main Constituency ("No 1", which extends to the area where are located the European Institutions, the Down-Town Center and some Western Popular Suburbs), where the Abstention observed at the 1st Round has already reached Excessive Proportions, (almost 78 % !), while the way that quasi-Monopolistic Local mainstream Media treated these Votes, added to the Refusal of any Public Debate by the Governing Socialist Party's Candidate, (who is also Deputy-Mayor of the City), with the Challenger from mainstream Opposition Republican Party, obviously Risk to provoke an even Worse Abstention at the 2nd Round scheduled for next Sunday, (See, f.ex.: http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/strasbourgmpelectionreservesforrightnoleft.html ).
ECHR practicaly Agreed with at least one Argument of the Applicant, (President of a "Humanist Party", who had participated 3 Times in EU Parliament's Elections as Candidate in the Past : "on 1999, 2004 and 2009", according to the Judgement), that even a Pending Case concerning Facts Previous to the Latest EU Parliament's Election, (here that of 2014), may have Not Only a purely "Historical" Interest, as the French Government claimed, (asking to "Strike that Case Out of the List", because it would be "No Longer Justified to Continue" its "Examination", according to Article 37 of the PanEuropean Convention on HR), but it also "Affects the Relations between the EU, the CoE, and a Member State of Both, while the EU aspires to become a (new) CoE's Member", as he noted.
The Present Case concerned EU's Transition from the Treaty of Nice to the Lisbon Treaty, starting from 2010,, as far as the Augmentation of the Number of MEPs allocated to some Member State was concerned, which occured After the May 2009 EU Parliament Elections, obliging several Countries, including France, to choose between Various Ways of Designation of their Supplementary MEPs for the Remaining Period of Time until the Next, May 2014 EU Elections : F.ex. an Direct Election by EU Citizens, or by Reference to the Results of the Latest EU Election of 2009, or by a procedure inside the National Parliament.
France had Chosen this 3rd Possibility, (which is also used for the Choice of MEPs send to CoE's PanEuropean Parfliamentary Assembly in Strasbourg : PACE), but the Applicant Complained that this "Excluded" him from his Right, as EU and French Citizen, to Participate in that Special, Exceptional Electoral process for Access to EU Parliament, which had taken place on 2011.
First of all, Strasbourg's PanEuropean Court clearly Confirmed the General Principle that it was Legaly Competent in order to Judge on Cases concerning also "the Elections of EU Parliament's Members".
This is Based mainly on the Human "Right to Free Elections", (recognized by the Protocol 1 to the PanEuropean Convention of Human Rights, already as early as since 1952), which Obliges all CoE's currently 47 Member States to "Hold Free Elections at Reasonable Intervals, by Secret Ballot, under Conditions which will Ensure the Free Expression of the Opinion of the People, in the Choice of the Legislature". (I.e., f.ex., Respecting Free Speech and/or Public Meetings by all willing Candidates, Citizens' Right to be sufficiently Informed, Public Debates, Media Pluralism, etc).
These are Basic Requirements for any Democratic Election, routinely screened both by CoE's Parliamentary assembly and the ECHR. But, moreover, in Theory, there are also Other Human Rights which might be concerned in such cases, as, f.ex., for "Non Discrimination", "Fair Trial", etc.
Nevertheless, "the Rights Guaranteed by that Article are Not Absolute", ECHR's Judgement reminds, noting that "Membe States have a Margin of Appreciation in this regard", submited to Strasbourg EuroJudges' Monitoring, as far as it concerns the "Pursuit of a Legitimate Aim" and "the Proportionality of Measures" eventualy taken by a National Government in order to impose some "Restrictions", which, however, "Must Not Hinder the <<Free Expression of the Opinion of the People, in the Choice of the Legislature>>", and should pursue a Target "Compatible with the Rule of Law and the General Aims of the (PanEuropean) Convention" on Human Rights.
In a Judgement adopted "Unanimously" on May 2016 by an ECHR's Chamber composed by 7 EuroJudges under the Presidency of German EuroJudge Mrs Angelika Nussberger, the PanEuropean Court found that the French Government's above mentioned Choice, Not to organise a Direct By-Election for those supplemnetary "Representatives to EU Parliament", on December 2011, was, in Fact, Legaly Justified, because "this Choice was made regarding the Problems" of "Risk of Low Participation, and High Cost, for Only 2 (MEPs') Seats", "out of 74 Seats reserved for French MEPs", and "was a Transitory Measure, which din't durate but just for one Half of the Legislature (i.e. 2,5 Years out of 5)", and "Ended with the (EU) Elections of 2014".
In consequence, "that Measure did Not Restrict the (Human) Right ... Guaranteed" by the PanEuropean Convention for Citizens' participation to "Free Elections", (Comp. Supra), "to the point to Affect its Substance and to make it InEffective, Neither was it otherwise DisProportionate in relation with the Legitimate Aim pursued" by the French Government, as ECHR's Judgement concludes.
Therefore, in a Judgement published Today in the Case "Dupré versus France", the PanEuropean Court of Human Rights Concluded that, by confining the Right to Stand for Election to EU Parliament, in these Exceptional Circumstances, (Comp. Supra), the French Government had pursued a Legitimate Aim, (to Avoid Excessively Costly By-Elections, which Risked to suffer from Big Abstention, only for 2 MEPs, and just for 2,5 Years : Comp. Supra), by a Measure which was "Proportional". So that ECHR could "Reject" that Application as "Inadmissible", because "Manifestly ill-Founded", (according to Article 35, §3, a of the Convention).
------------------------------------------
***
("DraftNews", as already send to "Eurofora's Subsribers/Donors. A more accurate, full Final Version, might be published asap).
Main Menu
Accueil Press Deontology/Ethics 2009 Innovation Year EU endorses EuroFora's idea Multi-Lingual FORUM Subscribers/Donors FAQs Le Elxis licence Recherche avancée EuroFora supports Seabird newsitems In Brief European Headquarters' MAPs CoE Journalists Protection Platform
BRIEF NEWS
- 00:00 - 02.06.2021
- 00:00 - 18.10.2020
- 00:00 - 19.06.2020
- 00:00 - 18.05.2020
- 00:00 - 20.04.2020
- 00:00 - 02.02.2020
- 00:00 - 09.12.2019
- 00:00 - 27.11.2019
- 00:00 - 16.11.2019
Popular
- Yes, we could have prevented Ferguson riots says World Democracy Forum's Young American NGO to ERFRA
- Spanish People Elect CenterRIGHT Majority with 1st Party and Total of 178 MPs (6 More than the Left)
- Pflimlin's vision
- The European Athletic "Dream Team", after Barcelona 2010 Sport Championship Results
- Source Conseil d'Europe à ERFRA: Debatre Liberté d'Opposants à Loi livrant Mariage+Enfants à Homos ?
- Head of BioEthics InterGroup, MEP Peter Liese : "Embryonic stem cell research reaching its END" !?
- Spain: Jailed Turkish Terror suspect with Explosive,Drones,Chechen accomplices stirs Merah+ Burgas ?
- UN Head Ban Ki Moon at CoE World Democracy Forum : - "Listen to the People !"
Latest News
- Test Photos (f.ex.+ Invit to EU + Korea Peace meeting)
- EUOmbudsmen Conference 2022: Digital Gaps affect People's Trust threaten EF Project on EU Future ?
- French Election : Black Out on Virus, but Obligation for Fake 'Vaccines" Challenged
- Both French Presidential Candidates point at "Humanism" in crucial times...
- France : Zemmour = Outsider may become Game Changer in Presidential + Parliamentary Elections 2022
Statistics
Visiteurrs: 59819510Archive
Login Form
Syndicate
Other Menu
Former "Green-Red" German government's Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer's job at the controversial Turkish pipeline "Nabucco" was denounced as "not proper", "very bad", and "incompatible with Democracy", by the new President of EU Parliament's EuroLeft Group, German Lothar Bisky, replying to an "EuroFora" question.
For once, criticism of Joschka Fischer's doings with Turkey affecting Europe, didn't come only from the Center-Right of the political spectrum, but even from his Left side : The experienced Bisky, who has been chairing all over 1993-2009 the PDS - Die Linke party :
- "Former Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer got involved in dealings with oil-gaz business in a foreign country, Turkey, and its controversial Nabucco pipeline. This raises questions about Democracy, also because of the well known problems of Human Rights violations in that country. Do you thing that this might be abused in order to cover up and close EU's eyes on Human Rights violations ?", "EuroFora" asked Bisky.
- "Nabucco pipeline is (only) at the planning stage". And "there are some difficulties", he observed from the start. But "'I don't want to get into the details of Nabucco pipeline, because I don't think that there is any point for it at the moment".
At any case, "we (EU Parliament's EuroLeft Group) strongly believe that Politicians should not get involved in the Energy Business, and all these commercial transactions", President Bisky declared on the Joschka Fiischer's affair.
- "We feel that it's something that shouldn't be done. It's not proper !"
- "We don't think that it's compatible with Democracy either, and it gets politics into a very Bad track", Bisky went on to denounce.
- "EuroLeft and "Die Linke" always spoke against that, saying that politicians should not get directly into the arms of private enterprises"
- "It is pretty bad if a former Minister takes a job f.ex. in a major Energy producer. So, it's an issue if a Minister who may have seen excellent opportunities, subsequently gets personally grasp of them, in very serious parts of the economy, once he has given up his (Government) job."
- "It doesn't really make politics in general look any better'", Bisky concluded.
Earlier, this week in Strasbourg, other Journalists had also raised critical questions on former Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer's involvement in the conroversial Turkish Nabucco pipeline to the President of his own EuroParty : Kohn-Bendit of the "Greens", who, contrary to Bisky, tried to find excuses for Fischer, while criticizing his long-time partner, Schroeder for having done a similar move :
- "Shroeder was chancellor", and he "negociated" with "Russians", who gave him a job only "3 Months" after he resigned from the Government. While "Joschka Fischer", on the contrary, got a job with the controversial Turkish Nabucco pipeline only "4 Years after" he left the Government. "He didn't negociate Nabucco", so I have "no objection", Kohn Bendit claimed.
But, many Facts indicate the contrary :
Joschka Fischer was Foreign Minister in Germany from 1999 up to 2005 : I.e. from the year that EU took the controversial decision to give Turkey a "Candidate" status, until he year it started controversial "accession negotiations, (later declared "open-ended" after Sarkozy-Merkel's arrival from 2005-2007).
During that period was prepared the controversial so-called "Annan" Plan (in fact, drafted by others and attributed afterwards to the former UN SG) on Cyprus, which failed after a Popular Referendum said "No" on 2004 with a large Majoriy of 3/4 : 75%. Mainly because it was criticized for making too much concessions to the Turkish side : Particularly by restricting Greek Cypriot Refugees' Human Right to return to their ancestral Land and/or get restitution of their Familiy Homes and private properties, usurpated by Ankara's Army since the 1974 militay invasion and continuing occupation of the northern part of Cyprus. And by weakening the Central Government, leaving to 2 "constituent States" so much powers and separate interests that more conflicts appeared inevitable, provoking the danger of a break-down in the foreseable future, with more crisis, troubles, perhaps bloodshed, etc., instead of creating an harmoniously integrated, really one federal State.
The controversial Plan was finalized on March-April 2004 at Burgenstock (Switzerland), curiously in the presence of an Envoy by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany, then governed by Joschka Fischer, but in the absence of a French and not even an European Union's Envoy, contrary to what was usually practiced on similar occasions in Switzerland (fex. in 1997 at Montreux, in 2000 at Geneva, etc).
Turkey notoriously exploited the failure of the "Annan" Plan in order to convince the EU to decide to start accession Negotiations on December 2004. This provoked an unprecedented series of Institutional Crisis inside the EU, shortly afterwards, when French and Dutch People rejected, 2 popular EuroReferenda by a majority "'No" vote to the EU Constitutional Treaty on 2005, aggraveted in 2004 a Majority Abstention to EU Elections, etc., followed by the recent Irish "No", etc.
"Nabucco" Gas pipeline was notoriously planned since ..2002. It follows an even earlier idea, for an Oil pipeline Baku-Ceyhun, which started to be prepared on 1999-2001 and was meanwhile recently completed.
So, facts indicate that what is now at stake is based on decisions made during Joschka Fischer's term as former Foreign Minister, closely interested in Turkey's controversial EU-bid.
To the point that he now practically ...switched jobs with a poliician from Turkey, (the State which pays today openly Joschka Fischer), Mr. Ozdemir, who came earlier in Germany, got fast the nationality, and became EiuroMP in a few years, continuing now as head of the "Greens" in Germany, i.e. in Joschka's former job !...
Such astonishing facts risk, unfotunately, to give to German politician Lothar Bisky's criticism of representative Democracy a topical meaning :
- "We (EuroLeft Group) think that what is really at stake is Democracy. It's not only about Gas Pipelines or Energy sources", President Lothar Bisky went on to add in his reply to "EuroFora"'s question on Joscka Fischer's personal interests in the controversial Turkish "Nabuco" pipeline.
Such facts, "make People get more distance from Politics. ...People had had enough, and they are fed up !".
- "That's why we (EuroParliament's "EuroLeft" Group) want to strengthen Direct Democracy in Europe. Citizens should be involved in the (EU) Decision-making. In the end of the day, it's not going to help anyone if Politicians are always taking decisions, without involving Citizens. We want to give a voice to the People of Europe. They've got to have their say in the decisions that are taken. That's one of our absolutely fixed and steadfast views. We want more Direct Democracy in Europe. That's how it can become more effective and stronger", he concluded.
-