CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 3 juillet 2008

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   501 3.7.2008   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING GRAND CHAMBER JUDGMENT   8 July 2008   The European Court of Human Rights will be holding a public hearing in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on Tuesday 8 July 2008 at 4 p.m. (local time) to deliver its Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Yumak and Sadak v. Turkey (application no. 10226/03).   The press release and the text of the judgment will be available after the hearing on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).     Yumak and Sadak v. Turkey   Mehmet Yumak and Resul Sadak are Turkish nationals who were born in 1962 and 1959 respectively and live in Şırnak (Turkey).   The application concerns the Turkish electoral legislation which requires a party to cross a threshold of 10% of the votes validly cast nationally in order to obtain seats in the National Assembly.   In the parliamentary elections of 3 November 2002 the applicants stood as candidates for the political party DEHAP (Democratic People’s Party) in the province of Şırnak.   As a result of the ballot, DEHAP obtained approximately 45.95   % of the vote (47,449 votes) in Şırnak province, but did not secure 10   % of the vote nationally. The applicants were not elected, in accordance with section 33 of the Election of Members of Parliament Act (Law No.   2839), which states that “parties may not win seats unless they obtain, nationally, more than 10% of the votes validly cast”. Consequently, of the three parliamentary seats allotted to Şırnak province, two were filled by the AKP (Justice and Development Party), which obtained 14.05   % of the vote (14,460   votes), and the third by an independent candidate, Mr   Tatar, who obtained 9.69   % of the vote (9,914   votes).   Relying on Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (right to free elections) to the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicants submit that setting a threshold of 10% of the vote in parliamentary elections interfered with the free expression of the opinion of the people in their choice of the legislature.   In its Chamber judgment of 30 January 2007, the Court held by five votes to two, that there had been no violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.   On 9 July 2007, the Grand Chamber panel accepted the applicants’ request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 [1] .     ***   Press contacts Adrien Meyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 33 37) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Sania Ivedi (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 59 45)   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. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 ‑ member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.