CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 14 septembre 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } Communicated on 14 September 2020 Published on 5 October 2020   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 17313/13 Rimma Mykolayivna BILOTSERKIVSKA against Ukraine lodged on 22 February 2013 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the refusal of the Central Election Commission (“the CEC”) to register the applicant as a self-nominated candidate in a single-seat constituency on the grounds that her autobiography did not contain information about her citizenship, even though the applicant had indicated in the mentioned document that she was Ukrainian and had submitted a copy of her passport. The courts of two levels of jurisdiction rejected the applicant’s claim against the CEC without responding to her argument that the CEC’s decision had been based on inaccurate interpretation of facts and was contrary to law. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a breach of the applicant’s right under Article   3 of Protocol No.   1 to stand as a candidate in free elections which ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature?   2.     Did the applicant have at her disposal an effective domestic remedy for the above complaint, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?