003-6740172-8990155
WyrokETPCz2020-07-03
Analiza orzeczenia
Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.
Zagadnienie prawne
Czy odmowa ponownego przeliczenia kart do głosowania przez Parlament Waloński, który działał jako sędzia i strona w postępowaniu wyborczym, naruszyła prawo skarżącego do wolnych wyborów (art. 3 Protokołu nr 1) oraz prawo do skutecznego środka odwoławczego (art. 13 Konwencji)?Stan faktyczny
Skarżący, Germain Mugemangango, kandydował w wyborach do Parlamentu Regionu Walońskiego w dniu 25 maja 2014 r. Jego lista przekroczyła próg 5%, ale nie został wybrany. 6 czerwca 2014 r. złożył skargę do Parlamentu Walońskiego, żądając ponownego zbadania 21 385 kart do głosowania uznanych za nieważne lub sporne, powołując się na liczne nieprawidłowości. Komisja Mandatowa Parlamentu Walońskiego uznała skargę za dopuszczalną i zasadną, proponując ponowne przeliczenie głosów. Jednak 13 czerwca 2014 r. Parlament Waloński uznał skargę za dopuszczalną, ale bezzasadną, nie zarządzając ponownego przeliczenia kart.Pełny tekst orzeczenia
issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 203 (2020) 03.07.2020
Forthcoming Grand Chamber judgment in a case concerning a post-election dispute in Belgium
The European Court of Human Rights will be delivering a Grand Chamber judgment1 in the case of Mugemangango v. Belgium (application no. 310/15) at a public hearing on 10 July 2020 at 3 p.m. in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg.
The case concerns a post-election dispute following the elections held on 25 May 2014.
Mr Mugemangango complains about the procedure conducted by the Walloon Parliament after he had challenged the election results. He argues that the Walloon Parliament, as the only body with the power to decide on his complaint, acted as both judge and party in examining it.
Principal facts and complaints
The applicant, Germain Mugemangango, is a Belgian national who was born in 1973 and lives in Charleroi (Belgium).
On 25 May 2014 Mr Mugemangango stood in the elections to the Parliament of the Walloon Region ("the Walloon Parliament") as the top candidate on the PTB-GO! list, which exceeded the 5% threshold in the Charleroi constituency (Hainaut Province), obtaining 16,554 votes. Mr Mugemangango was not elected to the Walloon Parliament.
On 6 June 2014 Mr Mugemangango lodged a complaint with the Walloon Parliament, requesting a re-examination of the 21,385 ballot papers declared blank, spoiled or disputed in the Charleroi constituency. In support of his request he submitted that numerous problems had come to light during the vote-counting operations. The Walloon Parliament's Credentials Committee, which found that Mr Mugemangango's complaint was admissible and well-founded, proposed that the Walloon Parliament should not approve the credentials of the candidates elected in Hainaut Province and that there should be a recount of the ballot papers declared blank, spoiled and disputed in the Charleroi constituency.
On 13 June 2014, by 43 votes to 28 with four abstentions, the Walloon Parliament declared Mr Mugemangango's complaint admissible but ill-founded, concluding, among other things, that there was no compelling evidence of irregularities in the vote counting. Mr Mugemangango was notified of its decision on 24 June 2014. On 13 June 2014 the Walloon Parliament approved the credentials of its elected members without ordering a recount of the ballot papers.
Relying on Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (right to free elections) to the European Convention on Human Rights, Mr Mugemangango alleges that the refusal of the Walloon Parliament to recount the ballot papers declared blank, spoiled or disputed in the Charleroi constituency, after it had acted as both judge and party in the examination of his complaint, infringed his right to stand as a candidate in free elections.
Relying on Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) in conjunction with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1, Mr Mugemangango submits that his appeal to the Walloon Parliament did not constitute an effective remedy.
1. Grand Chamber judgments are final (Article 44 of the Convention).
All final judgments are transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of their execution. Further
information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution.
Procedure
The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 22 December 2014. On 11 June 2019 the Chamber relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber. A hearing was held on 4 December 2019. The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) and the Government of Denmark were granted leave to intervene in the written procedure. This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive the Court's press releases, please subscribe here: www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter @ECHR_CEDH. Press contacts [email protected] | tel.: +33 3 90 21 42 08 Inci Ertekin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 55 30) Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 30) Denis Lambert (tel: + 33 3 90 21 41 09) Patrick Lannin (tel: + 33 3 90 21 44 18) The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.
2
© Rada Europy / Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka, źródło: HUDOC (hudoc.echr.coe.int), pozyskano 15.07.2026. · Źródło