Representation and Stability in Postwar Lebanon

Freedom of expression, the right to vote, and proportionality at the European Court of Human Rights: An internal critique

“…43 There is more agreement on the structural implications of consensus observation, namely that generally 'a lack of consensus established a presumption in favour of diversity and justifies a broader margin of appreciation'. 44 This last point is of particular relevance to the Court's approach to P1-3, as we have 39 Ibid., at para. 94 40 Ibid., at para.…”

“…34 Lykourezos v. Greece 'since the Convention is first and foremost a system for the protection of human rights, the Court must have regard to the changing conditions within the respondent State and within Contracting States generally and respond, for example, to any evolving convergence as to the standards to be achieved'. 39 In that respect, the Court observed that: 'Only nineteen of the States examined impose no restrictions on the voting rights of convicted prisoners. Of the remaining twenty-four States, which do apply restrictions to varying degrees, eleven require a decision of the criminal court on a case-by-case basis (with some exceptions where the most serious sentences are concerned -as in Greece and Luxembourg)'.…”

“…In the words of Barak, necessity 'examines the question of whether alternative means can fulfil the law's purpose at the level of intensity and efficiency as the means determined by the limiting law'. 39 This is most famously the case in Hirst v. United Kingdom (no.2) where the Court found that the United Kingdom's measure -depriving all convicted felons from voting rights -was indiscriminate and therefore excessive: 'such a general, automatic and indiscriminate restriction on a vitally important Convention right must be seen as falling outside any acceptable margin of appreciation, however wide that margin might be, and as being incompatible with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1'.…”