Published on 22 November 2021

THIRD SECTION

Applications nos. 18480/17 and 19983/17 Konstantin Ivanovich YELAYEV against Russia and Ivan Aleksandrovich YELAYEV against Russia lodged on 28 February 2017 communicated on 3 November 2021

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES

The applications concern allegedly discriminatory and excessive requirement of domestic law for registration of independent candidates in the elections to the Russian State Duma (“the Duma”). To stand for election, independent candidates must collect supporting signatures from three per cent of voters. Candidates supported by political parties which had seats in the Duma are not required to collect signatures.

In August 2016 the applicants were refused registration as independent candidates in the elections to the Duma because they had not collected enough signatures in their support. The applicants challenged the refusal before the Supreme Court of the Republic of Mordovia and then before the Supreme Court of Russia. The courts dismissed their challenge referring to the lawfulness of the contested refusals in registration.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Were there effective domestic remedies in respect of the applicants’ complaints which they had to exhaust to comply with Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? If so, did they exhaust those remedies? Did the applicants introduce their complaints within the time ‑ limit of six months as required by the aforementioned Article?

2. Has there been a breach of the applicants’ rights under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, did the requirement for collecting supporting signatures for registration of candidates pursue a legitimate aim? Was that requirement proportionate to the aim pursued?

3. Has there been a violation of Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 3 of Protocol no. 1? In particular, did the applicants’ status of independent candidates bring their situation within the term “other status” in Article 14 of the Convention? If so, were the applicants subjected to a difference in treatment regarding the exercise of their Convention rights? If so, did that difference in treatment pursue a legitimate aim and did have a reasonable justification?

APPENDIX

No.

Application no.

Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence

1.

18480/17

Konstantin Ivanovich YELAYEV 1986 Kochkurovo

2.

19983/17

Ivan Aleksandrovich YELAYEV 1959 Nikolayevka