ECHR Condemns Cyprus Over Unfilled 'Solidarity' Seat in 2016 Elections

Once again, justice for Cypriot voters comes from Strasbourg

Header Image

POLITIS NEWS

It has become almost routine for Cypriot citizens to seek justice before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which has now condemned the Republic of Cyprus for its failure to fill a parliamentary seat won by the Solidarity Movement in the 2016 legislative elections.

In its judgment in Georgios Papadopoulos v. Cyprus, the Court found that Cyprus violated Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to free elections.

The case arose when Eleni Theoharous, elected MP for Limassol with the Solidarity Movement, chose before the start of the parliamentary term to retain her seat in the European Parliament instead. George Papadopoulos, the first runner-up of the party in the same constituency, was subsequently declared elected following her decision.

However, his election was annulled by the Electoral Court, which ruled that there was no clear legal provision for filling a seat that had not yet been formally taken. The legislative gap left the Limassol seat vacant.

In the years that followed, Parliament amended the Electoral Law in 2017 and later the Constitution in 2019 in attempts to resolve the issue, but the courts struck down both efforts as unconstitutional, keeping the seat unfilled for much of the 2016–2021 term.

The ECHR held that the situation was foreseeable and that the Cypriot authorities failed in their duty to provide an effective and timely legal solution. As a result, both the applicant and the voters were trapped in a legal impasse, and the people’s will as expressed in the 2016 elections was effectively nullified.

The Court found Cyprus in violation of its obligations under the Convention and ordered the state to pay €8,000 in non-pecuniary damages to Mr Papadopoulos.

 

 

 

 

Comments Posting Policy

The owners of the website www.politis.com.cy reserve the right to remove reader comments that are defamatory and/or offensive, or comments that could be interpreted as inciting hate/racism or that violate any other legislation. The authors of these comments are personally responsible for their publication. If a reader/commenter whose comment is removed believes that they have evidence proving the accuracy of its content, they can send it to the website address for review. We encourage our readers to report/flag comments that they believe violate the above rules. Comments that contain URLs/links to any site are not published automatically.