CoE logo
Venice Logo

 

 

References to the work of the Venice Commission

 

 

 

“We also see our work with Council of Europe bodies such as the Venice Commission ... as essential to reinforcing the rule of law and the fight against corruption both within the EU and in our neighbourhood.”

 

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, in her letter to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Marija Pejčinović Burić. 

17 February 2020 

I. REFERENCES WITHIN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

  1. Secretary General of the Council of Europe

  2. Parliamentary Assembly

  3. European Court of Human Rights

  4. Commissioner for Human Rights

  5. Congress of Local and Regional Authorities

 

II. REFERENCES BY THE EU

1. European Parliament

2. European Commission

3. European Council and Council of Ministers

4. EUEA

5. EC Delegations

 

III. REFERENCES BY OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS

  1. United Nations (UN)

  2. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

  3. OSCE and other organisations

  4. International NGOs


IV. REFERENCES BY INDIVIDUAL STATES

After being established in May 1990, the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe largely contributed to setting up democratic institutions and bringing in line with European human rights standards the legal systems of more than 50 countries worldwide. 
 

Today, being an internationally acknowledged advisory body of the Council of Europe, the Venice Commission’s opinions and studies are extensively referred by governmental and non-governmental, as well as international and national organisations worldwide.

The expertise of the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission should be swiftly used to good effect.”
 

Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany and François Hollande, President of France - joint declaration on Ukraine[1]

10 May 2014

 

 

I. REFERENCES WITHIN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

  1. Secretary General

 

Apart from exercising the right to request the opinions from the Venice Commission on various issues, Secretary Generals of the Council of Europe refer to the Venice Commission’s works in their speeches.
 

Curent Secretary General of the Council of Europe Ms Marija Pejčinović Burić, elected in summer 2019,  referred to the Commission's work in a number of statements and documents:

"I am both aware and supportive of the Venice Commission’s work, providing pivotal legal advice on important constitutional issues, and playing a key role in upholding the rule of law in Europe today."

Marija Pejčinović Burić,
Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Venice, October 2019

 

"... our Venice Commission which has become the world’s most respected group of constitutional experts and provides independent advice to more than 60 countries."

Marija Pejčinović Burić,
Secretary General of the Council of Europe,

19 October 2020, Moscow

The previous Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjørn Jagland (2013 – 2019) acclaimed the importance of the work of Venice Commission on many occasions:

 

​

2. Parliamentary Assembly

“16. Therefore, the Assembly invites the European Union, …to ensure compliance with the values ​​guaranteed in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, to:

16.1. support the effective application of benchmarks at European level, using the Council of Europe’s “rule of law standards”, including the case law of the ECtHR, relevant recommendations of the Committee of Ministers, standards and opinions of the Venice Commission (including the “Rule of Law Checklist”)…;”

“Establishment of a European Union mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights”, PACE Resolution 2273 (2019)
 

By March 2023 more than 130 Parliamentary Assembly documents referred to Venice Commission’s work. These documents call on the member States either to cooperate with the Venice Commission, or to implement its respective recommendations.

 

The main highlights of cooperation between the Parliamentary Assembly and the Venice Commission involve topical opinions and comprehensive reports/studies prepared by the latter upon the request of the Parliamentary Assembly.
 

Some of these reports referred to most topical contemporary issues of the beginning of the century ; considering their nature and significance, they have been published as the series of Council of Europe publications “Points of view - Points of Law”. These series of publications involved, on the one hand, Venice Commission reports/opinions – “Point of Law” and, on the other hand, Parliamentary Assembly studies on the same issues - “Points of view”. Relevant Venice Commission reports/opinions are:
 

In the years 2010 – 2023 hundreds of the Parliamentary Assembly documents - reports, recommendations and resolutions - cited Venice Commission’s respective work, such as:

“The Assembly shares the opinion of the Venice Commission on the Amendments
to the Federal Law on Defence of the RF
and considers that justifying the military action by a member state against another member State by the need to protect its
own citizens is not compatible with the Council of Europe standards.”

Resolution 1989 (2014) on the Access to nationality and the effective implementation of the European Convention on Nationality[4]

  General issues:

 

 


Country-specific issues:

  • Progress of the Assembly’s monitoring procedure (2022, 2021, 2020)

Albania:

Armenia

  • The functioning of democratic institutions in Armenia, 27/01/2022, Resolution 2427

Azerbaijan:

Belarus

Belgium

  • The progress of the Assembly’s monitoring procedure (October 2014-August 2015) Periodic review report of countries not under the monitoring procedure sensu stricto or engaged in a post-monitoring dialogue: Belgium (Report Doc. 13868 Part 3)

Bosnia and Herzegovina:


Bulgaria:

Egypt:

Georgia:

Hungary:

Jordan

Kazakhstan

Kosovo:

Kyrgyz Republic:

Malta


Republic of Moldova:

“ Je rends ici hommage à l’action du commissaire aux Droits de l’Homme, à la Commission de Venise, qui a joué un rôle très important depuis 1990 dans la transition constitutionnelle de l’Europe centrale et orientale, notamment dans les Balkans, et aujourd’hui en Ukraine .”

President of France François Hollande at the PACE session, Strasbourg

11 October 2016 (text of the speech)

Montenegro

Morocco:

Republic of North Macedonia:

Palestinian National Council:

  • Evaluation of the partnership for democracy in respect of the Palestinian National Council  - Resolution 2105 (2016))

Poland

  • Judges in Poland and in the Republic of Moldova must remain independent, Resolution 2359 (2021)
  • The functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, Report, Doc. 15025,  January 2020

Romania

  • The honouring of membership obligations to the Council of Europe by Romania, 13/10/2022, Resolution  2466

Russian Federation

  • The Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine: ensuring accountability for serious violations of international humanitarian law and other international crimes, 28/04/2022, Recommendation 2231
  • Challenge, on substantive grounds, of the still unratified credentials of the parliamentary delegation of the Russian Federation, 28/01/2021, Resolution 2363

 

Tunisia:

Türkiye:

Ukraine:

 

 

3. European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

In order to interpret the exact scope of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights and to support its reasoning, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) makes use, inter alia, of the Venice Commission’s work, by referring to the norms emanating from the Commission’s documents. 
 

Since 2001, when the ECtHR first referred to Venice Commission’s “Report on the Preferential Treatment of National Minorities by their Kin-States” (CDL-INF(2001)019) in Banković and others v. Belgium and others (no. 52297/99, § 60, decision of 12 December 2001) and to the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters in case of Hirst v. the United Kingdom (30 March 2004), the reference to Venice Commission documents became systematic. 

By January 2023  the ECtHR referred to the Venice Commission’s documents in 240 judgments and 50 decisions relating to 42 countries: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Türkiye, Ukraine and United Kingdom.


The Court has also requested amicus curiae briefs directly from the Commission:

"The 2011 report [on out-of-country voting] by the Venice Commission made an important contribution to the debate… "

 Schindler v UK[7]

 

"At the outset, the Court takes note of the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practices in Electoral Matters… " 

                                          Karimov v Azerbaijan[8]

 

 

The reasoning of many judgments is directly linked to the Venice Commission opinions/studies. Other judgments mention Venice Commission documents either as part of the judges’ dissenting/concurring opinions or as relevant international law and practice. Below you can find a detailed list of examples of the referrences by the Court (uptill year 2018) to Venice Commission documents as part of:

Court’s assessment:

MARIYA ALEKHINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (3 December 2018)

Reference to: 

  • Report on the Relationship between Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion: the Issue of Regulation and Prosecution of Blasphemy, Religious Insult and Incitement to Religious Hatred (CDL-AD(2008)026);

  • Opinion no. 660/2011 on the Federal Law on Combating Extremist Activity of the Russian Federation (CDL‑AD(2012)016);

 

BERLUSCONI v. ITALY [GC] (27 November 2018)

Reference to:

  • Report on exclusion of offenders from Parliament (CDL-AD(2015)036cor);

SELAHATTİN DEMİRTAŞ v. Türkiye  (No. 2) (20 November 2018)

Reference to:

  • Türkiye  – Opinion on the Suspension of the Second Paragraph of Article 83 of the Constitution (Parliamentary Inviolability) (CDL-AD(2016)027);

  • Türkiye  – Opinion on the Amendments to the Constitution adopted by the Grand National Assembly on 21 January 2017 and to be submitted to a National Referendum on 16 April 2017 (CDL-AD(2017)005);

 

E.S. v. AUSTRIA (25 October 2018)

Reference to:

  • Report on the relationship between Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion: the issue of regulation and prosecution of Blasphemy, Religious Insult and Incitement to Religious Hatred” (CDL-AD(2008)026);

 

BIG BROTHER WATCH AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM (13 September 2018)

Reference to: 

  • Report on the Democratic Oversight of Signals Intelligence Agencies (CDL-AD(2015)011);

 

IBRAGIM IBRAGIMOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (28 August 2018)

 Reference to: 

  • Report on the Relationship between Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion: the Issue of Regulation and Prosecution of Blasphemy, Religious Insult and Incitement to Religious Hatred (CDL-AD(2008)026);

  • Opinion on the Federal Law on Combating Extremist Activity (

 

CENTRUM FÖR RÄTTVISA v. SWEDEN (19 June 2018)

Reference to:  

  • Report on the Democratic Oversight of Signals Intelligence Agencies (CDL-AD(2015)011);

 

ABU ZUBAYDAH v. LITHUANIA (31 May 2018)

Reference to:

  • Opinion on the International legal Obligations of Council of Europe Member States in Respect of Secret Detention Facilities and Inter-State Transport of Prisoners (CDL-AD(2006)009);

 

AL NASHIRI v. ROMANIA (31 May 2018)

Reference to:

  • Opinion on the International legal Obligations of Council of Europe Member States in Respect of Secret Detention Facilities and Inter-State Transport of Prisoners (CDL-AD(2006)009);

 

MAMMADLI v. AZERBAIJAN (19 April 2018)

Reference to: 

  • Opinion on the compatibility with human rights standards of the legislation on non-governmental organisations of the Republic of Azerbaijan (CDL-AD(2011)035);

 

BEKTASHI COMMUNITY AND OTHERS v. THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA (12 April 2018)

Reference to:

  • Draft Opinion on the Draft Law on the Legal Status of a Church, Religious Community and a Religious Group of “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (CDL(2007)019);

 

SEKMADIENIS LTD. v. LITHUANIA (30 January 2018)

Reference to:

  • Report on the Relationship between Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion: the Issue of Regulation and Prosecution of Blasphemy, Religious Insult and Incitement to Religious Hatred (CDL-AD(2008)026);

 

DİNÇER v. Türkiye (16 January 2018)

Reference to: 

  • Compilation of Venice Commission Opinions concerning Freedom of Assembly (CDL-PI(2014)0003);

  • OSCE/ODIHR – Venice Commission Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly (CDL-AD(2010)020);

Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi v. Türkiye  (21 November 2017)
Reference to: Türkiye - Opinion on the amendments to the Constitution (CDL-AD(2017)005);

Işikirik v. Türkiye  (14 November 2017) 
Reference to: Opinion on articles 216, 299, 301 and 314 of the Penal Code of Türkiye (CDL-AD(2016)002);

Davydov and Others v. Russia (30 May 2017)
Reference to: The Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (CDL-AD (2002) 23 rev);

Yabloko Russian United Democratic Party and Others v. Russia (8 November 2016)

Reference to:

  • Code Of Good Practice in the Field of Political Parties (CDL-AD(2009)002);
  • Guidelines and Explanatory Report on Legislation on Political Parties: some specific issues (CDL-AD(2004)007rev);
  • Joint Guidelines on political party regulation by OSCE/ODIHR and Venice Commission (CDL-AD(2010)024);
  • Report on the Participation of Political Parties in Elections (CDL-AD(2006)025-e);
  • Report on the Method of Nomination of Candidates within Political Parties (CDL-AD(2015)020);

Baka v. Hungary (23 June 2016)

Reference to:

  • Opinion on the Fundamental Law of Hungary (CDL-AD(2011)016);
  • Opinion on the Legal Status and Remuneration of Judges Act and Act on the Organisation and Administration of the Courts in Hungary (CDL-AD(2012)001);
  • Opinion on the Cardinal Acts on the Judiciary (CDL-AD(2012)020);
  • Opinion on the draft law on introducing amendments and addenda to the Judicial Code of Armenia (CDL-AD(2014)021);
  • Joint Opinion of the Venice Commission and the Directorate of Human Rights (DHR) of the Directorate General of Human Rights and the Rule of Law (DGI) of the Council of Europe, on the draft law on amendments to the Organic Law on General Courts of Georgia (CDL-AD(2014)031);

Ramos Nunes de Carvalho E Sá v. Portugal (21 June 2016)

Reference to:

  • Report on Judicial Appointments (CDL-AD(2007)028);
  • Report on the Independence of the Judicial System Part I: The Independence of Judges (CDL-AD (2010)004);
  • Joint Opinion of the Venice Commission and the Directorate of Human Rights (DHR) of the Directorate General of Human Rights and the Rule of Law (DGI) of the Council of Europe, on the draft Law on making changes to the Law on disciplinary Liability and disciplinary Proceedings of Judges of General Courts of Georgia (CDL-AD(2014)032-e);
  • Opinion on the Laws on the Disciplinary Liability and Evaluation of Judges of “The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (CDL-AD(2015)042);
     

Pilav v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (9 June 2016)

Reference to:

  • Opinion on the Constitutional Situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Powers of the High Representative (CDL-AD(2005)004-e);
  • Opinion on different proposals for the election of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina (CDL-AD(2006)004);

Cumhueriyet Halk Partìsì v. Türkiye  (26 April 2016)

Reference to: The Guidelines on Legislation of Political Parties: Some Specific Issues (CDL-AD(2004)007rev);

Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France (10 November 2015)
Reference to: Opinion on the balance of powers in the Constitution and the legislation of the Principality of Monaco (CDL-AD(2013)018);

Güler and Uğur v. Türkiye  (2 December 2014)

Reference to:  Guidelines for legislative reviews of laws affecting religion or belief (CDL-AD(2004)061);

Karimov v. Azerbaijan (25 September 2014)

Reference to: Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (CDL-AD(2002)23 rev);

Oran v. Türkiye  (15 April 2014)

Reference to:

  • Explanatory report to the Code of Good Practice in Electoral matters(CDL-AD (2002));

  • Venice Commission and ODIHR/OSCE joint Opinion on the electoral law and the electoral administration in Armenia (CDL-AD (2003) 21);

  • Venice Commission report on out-of-country voting (CDL-AD (2011) 022)

Magyar Kereszteny Mennonita Egyhaz and others v. Hungary (8 April 2014)

Reference to:  Venice Commission Opinion on the Fourth Amendment to the Fundamental Law of Hungary (CDL-AD(2013)012);

Schindler v. UK (7 May 2013)

Reference to:

  • Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (CDL-AD (2002) 23 rev);
  • Venice Commission reports on the Abolition of Restrictions on the Right to Vote in General Elections (CDL-AD (2005) 012 and CDL-AD (2005) 011);
  • Venice Commission report on Electoral Law and Electoral Administration in Europe (CDL-AD (2006) 018);
  • Venice Commission report on Out‑of‑Country Voting (CDL-AD (2011) 022);

Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine (9 January 2013)

Reference to: Joint opinion by the Venice Commission and the Directorate of Co-operation within the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe on the law amending certain legislative acts of Ukraine in relation to the prevention of abuse of the right to appeal (CDL-AD(2010)029);

Communist Party of Russia and others v. Russia (19 June 2012)

Reference to: Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (CDL-AD(2002)023rev);

Tatar and Faber v Hungary (12 June 2012)

Reference: Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly (CDL-AD(2010)020);

Özgürlük ve Dayanışma Partisi (ÖDP) v. Türkiye  (10 May 2012)

Reference to: Guidelines on political party regulation by the OSCE/ODIHR and the Venice Commission (CDL‑AD(2010)024);

Sitaropoulos and Giakomopoulos v. Greece (15 March 2012)

Reference to: Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (CDL-AD(2002)023rev);

Republican Party of Russia v. Russia (12 April 2011)

Reference to:

  • Comments on the Draft Law on Political Parties of Moldova (CDL(2007)013);

  • Guidelines on prohibition and dissolution of political parties and analogous measures (Doc. CDL-INF(2000)1).

Hadep and Demir v. Türkiye  (14 December 2010)

Reference to: Guidelines on the prohibition and dissolution of political parties and analogous measures (CDL-INF (2000) 1);

Bulanov v. Ukraine (9 December 2010)

Reference to: Joint Opinion on the Law on the Judicial System and the Status of Judges of Ukraine (CDL-AD(2010)026);

McFarlane v. Ireland (10 October 2010)

Reference to: Report on the Effectiveness of National Remedies in respect of Excessive Length of Proceedings (CDL-AD(2006)036rev);

Sitaropoulos and others v. Greece (8 July 2010)

Reference to:

  • Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD (2002) 23 rev);

  • Report on the compatibility of remote voting and electronic voting with the standards of the Council of Europe (CDL-AD(2004)012);

  • Draft report on electoral law and electoral administration in Europe (CDL-EL(2006)023)

Tanase v. Moldova (27 April 2010)

Reference to: Draft joint opinion on the Election Code of Moldova (CDL(2008)094)

Grosaru v. Romania (2 March 2010)

Reference to: The Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters (CDL-AD (2002) 23 rev)

 

Concurring or dissenting opinion of a Judge:

RAMOS NUNES DE CARVALHO E SÁ v. PORTUGAL (6 November 2018)

Reference to:

  • Report on judicial appointments (CDL-AD(2007)028);

  • Opinion on the Laws on the Disciplinary Liability and Evaluation of Judges of “The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (CDL-AD(2015(042));

BIG BROTHER WATCH and OTHERS v. the UNITED KINGDOM (13 September 2018)

  • Reference to:  Report on the Democratic Oversight of Signals Intelligence Agencies (CDL- AD(2015)011)

Szabo and Vissy v. Hungary (12 January 2016)

  • Reference to: Update of the 2007 Report on the democratic oversight of the security services and report on the democratic oversight of signals intelligence agencies (CDL-AD(2015)006)

Pentikäinen v. Finland (20 October 2015)

           Reference to: OSCE/ODIHR – Venice Commission Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly (second edition) (CDL-AD(2010)020)

Kharlamov v. Russia (8 October 2015)

Reference to:  Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD(2002)23rev)

Sõro v. Estonia (3 September 2015)

Reference to:

  • Amicus Curie on the Law on the Cleanliness of the Figure of High Functionaries of the Public Administration and Elected Persons of Albania (CDL-AD(2009)044):

  • Amicus Curie Brief on Determining a Criterion for Limiting the Exercise of Public Office, Access to Documents and Publishing, the Co-operation with the Bodies of the State Security (“lustration law”) of “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia(CDL-AD(2012)028):

  • Final opinion on the law on government cleansing (lustration law) of Ukraine (CDL-AD(2015)012);

Navalny and Yashin v. Russia (4 December 2014)

Reference to:  Compilation of Venice Commission opinions concerning freedom of Assembly (CDL(2012)014rev3);

Firth and others . UK (12 August 2014)

Reference to:  n/a

Sitaropoulos and others v. Greece (8 July 2010)

Reference to:

  • Code of good practice in electoral matters (CDL-AD (2002) 23 rev);

  • Report on the compatibility of remote voting and electronic voting with the standards of the Council of Europe (CDL-AD(2004)012);

  • Draft report on electoral law and electoral administration in Europe (CDL-EL(2006)023)

     

Relevant international law and practice:

Reference to:  Opinion on the compatibility with human rights standards of the legislation on non-governmental organisations of the Republic of Azerbaijan CDL-AD(2011)035;

           Reference to: Guidelines on freedom of peaceful assembly (CDL-AD(2010)020);     

    Reference to: OSCE/ODIHR – Venice Commission Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly (second edition) (CDL-AD(2010)020);

Inadmissibility decision 

Aumatell I Arnau v. Spain

Reference to: Opinion on the Spanish Law of 16 October 2015 amending the Organic Law No. 2/1979 on the Constitutional Court

 

4. Commissioner for Human Rights

The work of the two institutions is complementary: based on the expertise of its members, the Venice Commission can provide an in-depth analysis while, on his/her side, the Commissioner analyses the broader context and reacts in a quick and flexible manner to emerging threats.

 

The Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Ms Dunja Mijatović, refers to the work of the Venice Commission, in 2022, for example, the references concerned freedom of assembly and the financing of NGOs, the Venice Principles for ombudsman institutions as well as Georgia, Kosovo and Spain.


Activity reports by Dunja  Mijatović with references:

 

Country visits reports

 

Other documents containing references to the Venice Commission work:

 

Documents by Nils Muižnieks:

Reports

  • Report by Nils Muižnieks, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, following his visit to Poland: CommDH(2016)23

  • Report by Nils Muižnieks, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, following his visit to Ukraine: CommDH(2015)23

  • Report by Nils Muižnieks, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, following his visit to Armenia: CommDH(2015)2

  • Report by Nils Muižnieks, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, following his visit to Hungary: CommDH(2014)21

  • Report by Nils Muižnieks, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, following his visit to Georgia: CommDH(2014)9

  • Report by Nils Muižnieks, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, following his visit to Albania: CommDH(2014)1

 

​Opinions

  • Opinion of the Commissioner for Human Rights on the legislation of the Russian Federation on non-commercial organisations in light of Council of Europe standards: CommDH(2015)17

 

Issue papers

  • Democratic and effective oversight of national security services. Issue paper published by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights: CommDH/IssuePaper(2015)2

  • The rule of law on the Internet and in the wider digital world. Issue Paper published by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights: CommDH/IssuePaper(2014)1

 

Third party interventions

  • Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights under Article 36, paragraph 3, of the European Convention on Human Rights, concerning 34 applications against Türkiye : CommDH(2017)3

  • Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights under Article 36, paragraph 3, of the European Convention on Human Rights. Application No. 30778/15 - Khadija ISMAYILOVA v. Azerbaijan: CommDH(2016)6

  • Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights under Article 36, paragraph 3, of the European Convention on Human Rights. Application No. 68817/14, Leyla YUNUSOVA and Arif YUNUSOV v. Azerbaijan: CommDH(2015)10

  • Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights under Article 36, paragraph 3, of the European Convention on Human Rights. Application no. 69981/14 - Rasul JAFAROV v. Azerbaijan: CommDH(2015)8

  • Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights under Article 36, paragraph 3, of the European Convention on Human Rights. Application no. 47145/14 - Anar MAMMADLI v. Azerbaijan: CommDH(2015)7

  • Third party intervention by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights under Article 36, paragraph 3, of the European Convention on Human Rights. Application No. 68762/14 - Intigam ALIYEV v. Azerbaijan: CommDH(2015)6

     

5. Congress of Local and Regional Authorities

The Congress is working in close co-operation with the Venice Commission, particularly in the field of election observation and the monitoring of the European Charter of Local Self-Government. The Congress systematically refers to the opinions and reports of the Commission in its documents, notably to the Codes of Good Practice in Electoral Matters and on Referendums, to the report on the Respect for Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law during States of Emergency, revised Guidelines on the holding of referendums.

 

Recently the Congress endorsed the Commission’s Revised Code of Good Practice on Referendums CDL-AD(2022)015. The Monitoring Committee of the Congress adopted inter alia Resolution 472(2021) on Local Referendums referring to the Commission's major documents in the relevant field and Resolution 455(2020) on Local and regional elections in major crisis situations. The Congress refers to hte Commission's texts in its documents concerning local elections, e.g. in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Republic of Moldova and in Türkiye. 

 

In 2020 the Venice Commission adopted an Opinion on the replacement of elected candidates and mayors upon the request of 17 December 2019 by the Secretary General of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe. This request concerned a number of decisions regarding elected candidates and mayors taken after the 31 March 2019 local elections in the south-east of Türkiye. These decisions denied a number of successful candidates a mayoral mandate and removed from office the mayors of the metropolitan cities of Diyarbakır, Mardin and Van and replaced them with Governors of each region as “trustees”. The opinion was strongly supported by the Congress rapporteurs on the matter. For more information on this opinion, please refer to the Chapter II.

 

Speeches

  • Speech by Leen Verbeek, Vice-president of the Congress and Chair of the Monitoring Committee (9 December 2016)

  • Speech by Breda PECAN, Vice-President of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities (25 October 2016)

  • Speech by Andreas Kiefer, Secretary General of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe (22 June 2016)

  • Speech by Andreas Kiefer, Secretary General of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe (12 May 2016)

  • Local Democracy Agency (LDA) Dnipropetrovsk - Inaugural event 18 May 2015 / Speech by Natalya Romanova, Vice-President of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe (19 May 2015)

  • Speech by Barbara Toce, Vice-President of the Congress (Italy, SOC) (9 May 2015)

  • Speech by Gianni Buquicchio, President of the Venice Commission (25 March 2015)

  • Local Democracy Agency (LDA) Dnipropetrovsk - Inaugural event 18 May 2015 / Speech by Natalya Romanova, Vice-President of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe (19 May 2015)

  • Speech by Barbara Toce, Vice-President of the Congress (9 May 2015)

 

Documents

​

 

 

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

© Conseil de l'Europe 2007-2024