ARM-2000-2-001

a) Armenia / b) Constitutional Court / c)  / d) 20-06-2000 / e) DCC-236 / f) On the dispute on the results of the elections of the National Assembly in constituency no. 5 held on 21 May 2000 / g) Tegekagir (Official Gazette) / h) .

Keywords of the Systematic Thesaurus:

Keywords of the alphabetical index:

Election, parliamentary, partial / Inaccuracy, amount / Ballot paper, registration / Election, electoral commission, compulsory record, register.

Headnotes:

The requirement of the Electoral Code to allocate five percent more ballots than the number of the voters on the precinct voter list is a guarantee for the implementation of the right to universal suffrage, provided by [ENG-ARM-A-3] Article 3 of the Constitution.

While summarising the election results in the precinct electoral commissions, the number of the ballots submitted and registered by the Regional electoral commission will be admitted as a basis.

Summary:

Two candidates who participated in the National Assembly additional elections in constituency no. 5, held on 21 May 2000, appealed to the Constitutional Court requesting that the elections in that constituency be declared invalid. They argued that violations of the Electoral Code had taken place during the conduct of elections and the summary of its results to such an extent that they had influenced the elections' results.

In their appeals the two appellants particularly mentioned the following violations. According to the summary on the submission of the ballots, made by the Yerevan electoral commission, the number of ballots allocated to the precinct electoral commissions of the no. 5 constituency, attested to by the signatures of these commissions' chairmen in compliance with the requirements of the Electoral Code, was five percent more than the number of voters on the constituency voter list. However, according to the summary protocols of the precinct electoral commissions, the number of ballots precinct electoral commissions had at their disposal was 1,369 less than the number of ballots allocated by Yerevan electoral commission in compliance with the law. Accordingly, while deciding the amount of inaccuracies, the precinct electoral commissions used the number which is mentioned in the protocols on the registration of ballots in the precinct electoral commissions as the number of ballots allocated. The appellant party considers that if the precinct electoral commissions had used the number of the ballots mentioned in the summary on the submission of the ballots made by Yerevan electoral commission, the amount of inaccuracies would make it impossible to determine which candidate had been elected.

The appellant parties also based their request on the fact that according to the summary protocols of 11 precinct electoral commissions and Yerevan electoral commission's protocol on the preliminary results of elections in the relevant constituency the appellant candidate had been given 1,504 votes, the elected candidate 1,507, and the number of inaccuracies was 27. Following the complaint of the elected candidate's proxy, appropriate verification was carried out in two precincts of the constituency to examine the conformity of the precinct protocols with the factual results of the elections in these two precincts. As a result of the verification, the elected candidate had been given an additional 76 votes, which had had a decisive influence on him being elected deputy.

According to the Electoral Code, the election of deputies is recognised as invalid if the amount of inaccuracies influencing the number of votes makes it impossible to determine which candidate was elected or if in the course of preparation or conduct of elections such violations of the Code occurred that might affect the results of elections. The manner in which the amount of inaccuracies should be determined is precisely provided for by the Electoral Code. According to the Code, the precinct electoral commission compiles a protocol on the amount of inaccuracies on the basis of the data contained in the precinct summary protocol. The commission registers as a first amount of inaccuracies the difference between the number of ballots given to the precinct electoral commissions and the total number of ballots and cancelled ballots. The second amount of inaccuracies is the difference between the number of signatures in the voters' lists and the number of ballots in the ballot box. These two amounts of inaccuracies together form the total amount of inaccuracies in the precinct. According to the record of the ballots, forms and seals given to the precinct electoral commissions by Yerevan electoral commission, the latter submitted 30,050 ballots to the 11 precinct electoral commissions, while according to the precinct summary protocols the number of ballots submitted to the precinct electoral commissions was 28,681. Though the Yerevan electoral commission argued that the number of ballots mentioned in the summary protocols would be admitted as the number of ballots submitted to the precinct electoral commissions, the Constitutional Court considered that such an approach was not derived from the requirements of the Constitution and the Electoral Code. The requirement of the Electoral Code to allocate five percent more ballots than the number of voters on the precinct voter list, is a guarantee for the implementation of the right to universal suffrage, provided by [ENG-ARM-A-3] Article 3 of the Constitution.

Moreover, according to the Electoral Code the ballots must be registered. They are submitted and received by electoral commissions by making compulsory records in registers, with the signatures of the submitting and receiving persons and the issue of a receipt. Before the summary of the election results in precincts the ballots allocated to the precinct electoral commissions are counted only when the ballots are received from the Regional electoral commission by the precinct electoral commission's chairmen under their responsibility. There is no other provision in the Electoral Code which provides for counting the ballots before the summary of the election results. Thus, while summarising the election results in the precinct electoral commissions, the number of the ballots submitted to the precinct electoral commissions by the Regional electoral commission and registered by the Regional electoral commission will be admitted. On the basis of such an approach, the amount of inaccuracies in the constituency repeatedly surpassed the difference between the votes received by the two candidates who had received the highest number of votes.

With respect to the appellant party's second argument, the Constitutional Court held that the verification in two precincts had been carried out in violation of the Electoral Code. According to Article 62 of the Electoral Code, upon the written request of two members of the Regional electoral commission or the proxy of the candidate, the Regional electoral commission verifies the conformity of the precinct summary protocol of the relevant precinct with the factual results of the elections. The verification of the conformity of the precinct summary protocols with the factual election results presumes the verification of all data which are mentioned in the precinct summary protocol. According to Article 61 of the Electoral Code, the summary precinct protocols include the total number of voters according to voter lists, the number of registered voters who received ballots according to signatures, the number of ballots allocated to the precinct electoral commission, the number of cancelled ballots, the number of valid ballots in the ballot box, the number of invalid ballots, the total number of the ballots in the ballot box, the number of the ballots cast against candidates and the number of votes cast for each candidate. According to this Article, the verification of conformity of summary precinct protocols with the factual results of elections also demands a re-account of the cancelled ballots. However, the request of a member of the Yerevan electoral commission to verify the number of cancelled ballots was rejected and in the protocol formed as a result of verification only a few data were mentioned: the number of invalid ballots, the number of votes cast for each of the candidates and the number ballots cast against all candidates.

The Constitutional Court pronounced the elections in the constituency invalid and submitted the materials on the violations uncovered during the examination to the General Prosecutor for consideration.

Supplementary information:

As a result of the invalidation of elections in the no. 5 constituency the re-election was held. Yerevan electoral commission, while summarising the results of the elections in the precincts, adopted a decision recognising the elections invalid. A new appeal was lodged by the elected candidate, who requested that the Commission's decision be invalidated. Yerevan electoral commission had based its decision on the fact that, as a result of verification made by the commission in one of the precincts, the loss of 600 cancelled ballots had been discovered and the commission included this fact in the basis for counting the amount of inaccuracies. The Constitutional Court upheld the appeal and recognised the Commission's decision invalid. It found that the loss of the cancelled ballots after making the protocols according to the manner determined by law could not be considered as a basis to invalidate the elections.

Languages:

Armenian, Russian (translation by the Court)