Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (ratione materiae);Preliminary objections dismissed (victim, non-exhaustion of domestic remedies);Violation of P1-3

Corneliu Bîrsan;Dean Spielmann;Elisabeth Steiner;Françoise Tulkens;George Nicolaou;Giovanni Bonello;Ireneu Cabral Barreto;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Ján Šikuta;Jean-Paul Costa;Josep Casadevall;Lech Garlicki;Ledi Bianku;Mihai Poalelungi;Nicolas Bratza;Päivi Hirvelä;Peer Lorenzen;Rait Maruste;Sverre Erik Jebens;Vladimiro Zagrebelsky;Zdravka Kalaydjieva

The applicant was born in DATE and lives in PERSON . He is ethnically NORP and is a NORP politician .

The Principality of PERSON first emerged as an independent ORG in CARDINAL . Its territory covered the area between LOC , LOC and LOC ; DATE , this area encompasses GPE , part of GPE and part of GPE . Its population spoke the same language and was of the same descent as the populations of GPE and GPE ( both part of DATE GPE ) .

NORP In DATE , PERSON accepted the suzerainty of GPE .

Following the Russo - Turkish war of DATE , the eastern part of the Principality of GPE , bounded by LOC on the east and LOC on the west , was annexed by the NORP empire . It was renamed ORG .

In DATE , the western part of LOC united with PERSON and formed a new ORG . From DATE , the new ORG was known as GPE . In DATE , GPE gained independence from GPE .

NORP In DATE , Bessarabia declared its independence from GPE and , on DATE , united with GPE . The population of GPE became NORP citizens .

GPE did not recognise the unification of GPE and GPE . On DATE , following ORG with NORP GPE , GPE re - annexed the territory of Bessarabia .

Following the conclusion of the Second World War , PERCENT of the territory of ORG , inhabited by PERCENT of its population , became ORG ( changed to GPE in DATE ) . The remaining territory of ORG became part of the NORP GPE . Those residing in ORG lost their NORP nationality and became NORP citizens . GPE became a GPE satellite ORG .

Following the collapse of GPE , in LAW DATE , ORG condemned , inter alia , the NORP annexation of the territory from LOC in DATE and the NORP annexation of the territory from GPE in DATE and proclaimed the independence of the country within the boundaries of the former NORP Soviet GPE . Shortly thereafter , GPE joined ORG and was recognised by the international community .

In DATE the ORG of GPE adopted a PERSON on citizenship and proclaimed as its citizens , inter alios , all persons who had lived in the territory of the former NORP Soviet GPE before the NORP annexation and their descendants .

The applicant obtained NORP nationality as a descendant of persons living on the territory of GPE before DATE .

Also in DATE , ORG adopted a new PERSON on citizenship , making it possible for persons who had lost their NORP nationality before DATE , for reasons not imputable to them , and their descendants to reacquire NORP nationality .

Initially , under LAW adopted on DATE , which entered into force on DATE , nationals of GPE were not permitted to hold the nationality of any other ORG other than in exceptional cases . However , the prohibition was ineffective in practice as many NORP of NORP descent used the provisions of NORP law to reacquire their lost NORP nationality . At the same time , many NORP of other ethnic backgrounds acquired other nationalities such as NORP , NORP , NORP and NORP .

In DATE the NORP constitutional provisions prohibiting multiple nationalities were repealed .

On DATE , following the repeal of the constitutional prohibition on multiple nationalities , ORG amended the PERSON on citizenship , repealing the restriction preventing NORP nationals from holding other nationalities ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . The new provisions provided that the holders of multiple nationalities had equal rights to those holding only NORP nationality , without exception ( see paragraph QUANTITY below ) .

On an unspecified date the applicant obtained NORP nationality . His current NORP passport was issued in DATE . Subsequently , he made public his holding of NORP nationality .

The total number of ORG who have obtained NORP citizenship DATE is unknown as the NORP government have never made this information public . However , it has been estimated that CARDINAL NORP obtained NORP nationality DATE . On DATE the President of GPE stated in an interview that there were CARDINAL NORP with pending applications for NORP nationality and that his government expected the number to reach CARDINAL , of the total of CARDINAL NORP citizens , before DATE .

As to the number of Moldovans holding a second nationality other than NORP , this figure is also unknown . However , it appears to be considerable and it seems that NORP nationality is the second most popular , after NORP . On DATE the NORP Ambassador to GPE stated in a televised interview that there were CARDINAL NORP with NORP passports on both banks of LOC ( i.e. in the whole of GPE ) .

ORG indicated in their observations before the ORG that CARDINAL of the population of GPE had dual nationality , while a NORP member of parliament ( MP ) , PERSON , advanced during ORG ’s debates concerning PERSON no . CARDINAL ( see paragraphs CARDINAL below ) the number of CARDINAL as an approximate total number of Moldovans with dual nationality .

During DATE and prior to the elections of DATE , ORG of GPE was the dominant political party in the country with the largest representation in ORG .

Besides ORG , there were over CARDINAL other political parties in the country with considerably less influence . Their exact number was difficult to ascertain because of constant fluctuation . Because of their weaker position , very few of them managed to clear the PERCENT electoral threshold required in past legislative elections to enter ORG .

In the DATE elections ORG was the only party aside from ORG , from the CARDINAL parties participating in the elections , which succeeded in clearing the electoral threshold alone by obtaining PERCENT of the vote . CARDINAL other parties merged into an electoral bloc ( a common list ) and in this way were able to obtain PERCENT of the vote . ORG obtained PERCENT of the vote and , after the proportional distribution of the wasted votes , obtained CARDINAL of the CARDINAL seats in ORG .

In DATE the electoral legislation was amended . The PERCENT electoral threshold for a single party was retained but a new PERCENT threshold was introduced for electoral blocs composed of CARDINAL parties , rising to PERCENT for CARDINAL or more parties .

In the DATE elections , out of CARDINAL participating parties , ORG was again the only party , besides ORG , which managed to clear the electoral threshold by itself with PERCENT of the vote . CARDINAL other parties , united into an electoral bloc , obtained PERCENT of the vote , while ORG obtained PERCENT of the vote . After the proportional distribution of the wasted votes , ORG obtained CARDINAL of the CARDINAL seats in ORG .

In DATE , following persistent criticism by international observers and ORG , ORG again amended LAW , setting the electoral threshold for individual parties at PERCENT and for electoral blocs composed of any number of parties at PERCENT . ORG ( ORG ) and ORG OSCE ) praised the lowering of the electoral threshold for individual parties and suggested a similar threshold for electoral blocs , which , in their view , were to be encouraged in order to provide more cooperation and stable government .

In the local elections of DATE , ORG obtained PERCENT of the vote in the local legislative bodies . As there is no electoral threshold in local elections , it became an opposition party in the majority of the local councils . The applicant became a member of ORG following these elections .

The applicant was subsequently elected Vice - President of ORG , an opposition party created in DATE .

On DATE ORG passed a reform consisting of CARDINAL major amendments to the electoral legislation : an increase of the electoral threshold from PERCENT back to PERCENT ; a ban on all forms of electoral blocs and coalitions ; and a ban on persons with dual or multiple nationality becoming MPs .

The amendment banning those with dual or multiple nationalities becoming MPs was introduced by way of PERSON no . CARDINAL ( see paragraphs CARDINAL below ) . This PERSON was approved in its first reading by ORG on CARDINAL DATE . The draft , prepared by ORG , provided that only persons having exclusively NORP citizenship were entitled to work in senior positions in the government and in several public services and be candidates in legislative elections ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . It contained a specific provision relating to GPE ( see paragraphs CARDINAL below ) .

In an explanatory note to the draft law , the Deputy Minister of ORG stated :

“ Having analysed the current situation in the country in the field of citizenship , we observe that the tendency of Moldovans to obtain citizenships of other countries is explained by their desire to obtain privileges consisting of unrestrained travel in ORG , social privileges , family reunion , employment and studies .

At the same time , persons holding other nationalities have political and legal obligations towards those GPE . This fact could generate a conflict of interest in cases in which there are obligations both towards GPE and towards other GPE , whose national a particular person is .

In view of the above , and with a view to solving the situation created , we consider it reasonable to amend the legislation in force so as to ban holders of multiple nationalities from public functions ...

This will not mean , however , that those persons will not be able to work in GPE . They will be able to exercise their professional activities in fields which do not involve the exercise of ORG authority ... ”

During the debates in ORG numerous opposition members requested that the draft law be sent to ORG for a preliminary expertise . However , the majority voted against this proposal . Instead , the opposition was invited to challenge the new PERSON before ORG . No such challenge was made at that time ( but see paragraphs CARDINAL below ) . Numerous MPs from the opposition argued that the proposed amendment banning multiple nationals from sitting as MPs was contrary to LAW ( see paragraphs CARDINAL below ) but the Deputy Minister of ORG expressed a contrary view and argued that , in any event , it was open to ORG to denounce that ORG if there were any incompatibility .

On DATE the draft law was approved by ORG in a final reading ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) . Following its adoption by ORG , however , the President refused to promulgate the PERSON and returned it to ORG for re - examination .

The draft law was accordingly further amended and the list of positions in the government and in the public service closed to holders of multiple nationalities was reduced . The provisions concerning legislative elections were also amended to allow persons with dual or multiple nationality to be candidates in legislative elections ; however , they were obliged to inform ORG about their other nationalities before registering as candidates and to renounce them , or initiate a procedure to renounce them , before the validation of their MP mandates by ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .

On DATE the new draft law was again put before ORG by ORG . As noted above , it was adopted on DATE . In the light of the amendments made by PERSON no . CARDINAL , an exception was introduced to the provision in the PERSON on citizenship concerning equality of citizens to allow different treatment where provided for by law ( see paragraphs CARDINAL above and CARDINAL below )

On DATE the President promulgated the PERSON adopted by ORG on DATE . On DATE the PERSON was published in ORG , thus entering into force . The other CARDINAL amendments to the electoral legislation ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) were also enacted and entered into force in DATE .

On DATE ORG against Racism and Intolerance ( ECRI ) made public a report adopted on DATE . In its report , ORG expressed concern about the amendments concerning dual and multiple nationalities :

“ CARDINAL . ECRI notes with interest that section CARDINAL of the Law on citizenship , in full accordance with LAW , which has been ratified by GPE , provides that NORP citizens who are also citizens of another ORG and who have their lawful and habitual residence in GPE enjoy the same rights and duties as other NORP citizens . In this respect , ORG would like to express its concern about a draft law on the modification and completion of certain legislative acts adopted in its first reading by ORG on DATE . According to this draft law , only persons having exclusively GPE citizenship are entitled to work in senior positions in the government and in several public services . From the information it has received , ORG understands that if this draft law enters into force as it stands , NORP citizens with multiple citizenship would be seriously disadvantaged compared with other NORP citizens in access to public functions . It thus appears that , if the law enters into force as such , this could lead to discrimination , i.e. unjustified differential treatment on the grounds of citizenship . ECRI understands that a wide - ranging debate is occurring within GPE at the time of writing this report as far as this draft law is concerned and that many sources both at the national and international level have stressed the need to revise the text thoroughly before its final adoption in order to ensure its compatibility with national and international standards .

ECRI strongly recommends that the NORP authorities revise the draft law of CARDINAL DATE ... in order to ensure that it neither infringes the principle of non - discrimination on the grounds of citizenship nor undermines all benefits of the recent changes made to the PERSON on citizenship and allowing for multiple citizenship . ”

In a report dated DATE , entitled “ Honouring of obligations and commitments by GPE ” , ORG Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) noted the following :

“ CARDINAL . The ORG appreciates the efforts made by the NORP authorities in order to assess the degree of implementation of the recommendations made by ORG experts . However , all new draft legislation in areas relating to the commitments to ORG must be submitted to expertise and discussed with ORG experts prior to adoption . ”

In its subsequent report of DATE , entitled “ The state of democracy in LOC : the functioning of democratic institutions in LOC and progress of the ORG ’s monitoring procedure ” , ORG stated , inter alia , that :

“ CARDINAL . In their DATE report on the ‘ Honouring of obligations and commitments by Moldova’ ( Doc . DATE ) , the co - rapporteurs of ORG welcomed the changes made to LAW in DATE . In particular , the threshold for party lists was lowered to PERCENT for lists presented by individual political parties and PERCENT for coalitions of political parties ...

ORG was ... alarmed by the recent legislative developments with regard to LAW . In DATE , ORG amended LAW again to raise the threshold for party lists PERCENT . Moreover , the establishment of ‘ electoral ORG DATE joint lists submitted by a coalition of political parties – was prohibited . These measures have raised concern and ORG decided at short notice to hold an exchange of views with the NORP delegation on DATE ] . The electoral legislation should not be changed every DATE according to political imperatives . It should allow a wide spectrum of political forces to participate in the political process to help build genuinely pluralistic democratic institutions . The co - rapporteurs will closely examine the recent amendments as well as the reasons behind the recent legislative developments during the observation of the preparation of the forthcoming parliamentary election to be held in DATE . ”

Concern was also expressed by ORG in its LAW ( DATE ) on the state of democracy in LOC , adopted on DATE :

“ CARDINAL . ... [ T]he ORG ... regrets the recent decision of ORG to raise this threshold for party lists to PERCENT . ”

In DATE ( DATE ) on the functioning of democratic institutions in GPE , ORG expressed its serious concern :

“ CARDINAL . The ORG is seriously concerned about the Moldovan authorities’ partial compliance with its earlier recommendations regarding the improvement of the electoral process and the strengthening of the ORG ’s democratic institutions before the parliamentary elections of DATE . The amendments introduced to LAW in DATE raised the electoral threshold from PERCENT , did not provide for electoral coalitions of political parties and socio - political organisations and introduced a ban on the exercise of elevated public functions by NORP citizens holding multiple nationality . The combined effect of these amendments was to restrict the opportunities for a number of political forces to participate effectively in the political process , thus weakening pluralism . ”

It called on GPE to do the following :

“ CARDINAL . resume reform of the electoral legislation , in cooperation with ORG ) , in order to lower the electoral threshold for political parties , thus opening up the political process for more pluralism ; ...

suspend the application of ORG of the Electoral Code prohibiting people who hold multiple citizenship from exercising elevated public functions , while awaiting the judgment of ORG of ORG in the case of PERSON and PERSON v. GPE . ”

On DATE ORG made public a report adopted on DATE ( Opinion no . CARDINAL ) concerning the amendments to LAW made in DATE . The report expressed critical views in respect of all the aspects of the reform . As to the amendments concerning holders of multiple nationalities it stated the following :

“ CARDINAL . A new paragraph to LAW denies the right to ‘ be elected’ in parliamentary elections to ‘ persons who have , beside GPE nationality , another nationality for the position of deputy in the conditions of LAW . LAW states that a person may stand as a candidate with multiple citizenship , provided he / she upon election denounces other citizenships than the NORP . This must be considered as an incompatibility .

Beyond the mere question of the wording , restrictions of ORG rights should not be based on multiple citizenship . LAW quotes LAW , ratified by GPE in DATE , which unequivocally provides that ‘ Nationals of a ORG in possession of another nationality shall have , in the territory of that ORG in which they reside , the same rights and duties as other nationals of that ORG Party’ .

Moreover , this restriction could be a violation of ORG , Articles CARDINAL of [ Protocol No . CARDINAL ] and CARDINAL of the LAW . ”

On DATE , at a meeting of ORG in GPE , the NORP Minister for ORG , the then President of ORG and ORG , stated that it was important that GPE conduct its parliamentary elections in DATE in line with international standards and expressed concern at the latest amendments to the electoral law , which increased the electoral threshold to PERCENT .

Concerns about the electoral reform were also raised on DATE by the President of ORG of ORG in a speech to ORG :

“ ... I strongly encourage you to obtain the approval by ORG in respect of the recent amendments to the legislation which will apply in the next elections , namely in what concerns the electoral threshold , the electoral blocs and the dual nationality . These are delicate problems and it is necessary to find the right balance between the preoccupations which guided you to make these amendments and the concern of the international community that these amendments are compatible with the principles of ORG . ”

On DATE , Mr PERSON , President of ORG , addressed a complaint to ORG alleging that PERSON no . CARDINAL was unconstitutional .

On CARDINAL DATE the ORG delivered a judgment on the constitutionality of PERSON no . CARDINAL . It found the PERSON to be constitutional and valid in its entirety . It held that the provisions of the PERSON were clear and unambiguous , that they were accessible in that they were published in ORG and that they were foreseeable as they enabled , with sufficient precision , NORP citizens wishing to stand for ORG but holding another nationality to adopt appropriate social - minded conduct to ensure that their rights were not curtailed . It emphasised that PERSON no . CARDINAL did not prevent dual nationals from becoming MPs as it offered them the possibility of complying with the law . It further considered the provisions of the PERSON to be in conformity with norms of international law , concluding that the various international instruments permitted GPE to stipulate incompatibilities relating to the holding of multiple nationalities by public officials .

The court also found PERSON no . CARDINAL to be in pursuit of a legitimate aim , namely loyalty to ORG , in the light of the importance of ORG sovereignty and the need for a permanent political and legal link between an elector and the ORG . It considered that for NORP citizens holding the nationality of another ORG , the significance of NORP citizenship was substantially diminished as such a person might not be guided only by the constitutional requirements of GPE and the interests of the NORP people but also by the interests of a foreign State . Accordingly , allowing MPs to hold dual nationality was contrary to the constitutional principle of the independence of the mandate of MPs , State sovereignty , national security and the non - disclosure of confidential information . In this regard , the court insisted that ensuring national security and consolidating NORP statehood had become an urgent necessity in the light of movements to undermine the Moldovan State .

The court also considered the interference to be proportionate since it did not affect the substance of electoral rights but merely made the exercise of the right to be an MP conditional upon holding exclusive NORP citizenship . ORG could choose between holding a job which required single citizenship and retaining their multiple citizenships but working in a different post .

As regards the argument that PERSON no . CARDINAL resulted in unequal treatment of NORP citizens , the court considered that the principle of equality should not be confused with the principle of uniformity . Those holding multiple nationalities were not in the same position as those holding single NORP nationality and the QUANTITY cases were therefore not comparable .

On DATE legislative elections were held . ORG obtained CARDINAL seats in ORG . The CARDINAL opposition parties gained CARDINAL seats altogether : ORG and ORG obtained CARDINAL seats each ; and ORG obtained CARDINAL seats . Of the CARDINAL MPs elected , CARDINAL held CARDINAL nationality or had pending applications for a second nationality and were therefore affected by the provisions of PERSON no . CARDINAL . All CARDINAL MPs were members of opposition parties .

NORP In the DATE elections , the applicant was elected to ORG . In order to be able to take his seat , he was required to initiate a procedure to renounce his NORP nationality . He did this by way of a letter addressed to the NORP embassy in PERSON announcing that he was forced to initiate the renunciation of his NORP nationality , but indicating that he reserved his right to withdraw the letter after the judgment of ORG in the present case .

On DATE the ORG validated the applicant ’s mandate , taking into consideration his letter to the NORP embassy .

ORG subsequently sought to elect a president of the Republic . However , on CARDINAL separate occasions they failed to obtain the CARDINAL Parliamentary votes required for the election of the president . Accordingly , on DATE , ORG was dissolved . Fresh parliamentary elections were called for DATE .

Prior to the dissolution of ORG , it once again amended the electoral legislation , lowering the electoral threshold from PERCENT and lowering the mandatory rate of participation from PERCENT to CARDINAL of registered voters . The opposition expressed concern about the amendments , arguing that they were intended to help ORG , an ally of ORG in the previous ORG , clear the electoral threshold and enter ORG .

In the meantime , a prominent figure from ORG and Speaker of the previous ORG , Mr PERSON , quit ORG and became the leader of a small party , ORG , which had not cleared the electoral threshold in the DATE elections .

In the elections of CARDINAL DATE , CARDINAL parties cleared the electoral threshold : ORG obtained CARDINAL seats ; ORG obtained CARDINAL seats ; ORG obtained CARDINAL seats ; ORG obtained CARDINAL seats ; and ORG obtained CARDINAL seats . The latter CARDINAL parties formed a coalition called ORG . The coalition had CARDINAL seats in total and thus a majority in ORG .

The applicant was re - elected . His mandate was subsequently confirmed by ORG , upon production of the documents showing that he had initiated a procedure to renounce his NORP nationality ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) .

The majority elected Mr PERSON as Speaker on CARDINAL DATE . On DATE the President of GPE , PERSON , resigned . Under LAW , PERSON , in his capacity as Speaker , assumed the role of acting President until the election of a president in due course .

DATE . Since DATE GPE has been governed by ORG coalition . On DATE , Mr PERSON was formally appointed Prime Minister and a number of ministers were also formally appointed . The applicant was appointed Minister of ORG . Under NORP law , the applicant will retain his mandate as an MP for DATE following his appointment as Minister .

On DATE ORG made a first attempt to elect PERSON PERSON as President . PERSON was not elected as the required CARDINAL votes in favour were not obtained . ORG refused to participate in the vote . A second attempt to elect a president was made on DATE . Again , the attempt was unsuccessful as a result of the failure to obtain the CARDINAL votes required .

Under LAW , in the light of the failure of the coalition to elect a president , fresh parliamentary elections will have to be held .

DATE Republic of Moldova reads :

“ CARDINAL . Constitutional provisions for human rights and freedoms shall be understood and implemented in accordance with LAW , and with other conventions and treaties to which GPE is a party .

Wherever inconsistencies appear between human rights conventions and treaties signed by GPE and its own national laws , international regulations shall prevail . ”

DATE LAW provides that :

“ CARDINAL . GPE is obliged to respect LAW and the treaties to which it is a party ... ”

The relevant provisions of PERSON no . CARDINAL-XIV on international treaties of GPE read :

“ International treaties shall be complied with in good faith , in accordance with the principle pacta sunt servanda . GPE can not invoke the provisions of its internal legislation as a justification for non - compliance with an international treaty to which it is a party . ”

“ The provisions of the international treaties which , according to their wording , are susceptible to be applicable without there being need for enactment of special legislative acts , shall have an enforceable character and shall be directly applied in the NORP law system . For the realisation of other provisions of the treaties , special normative acts shall be adopted . ”

According to section CARDINAL of the Law on citizenship of GPE ( Law no . CARDINAL of DATE ) , as amended on DATE , multiple nationalities are permitted in GPE and the acquisition by a NORP national of another nationality does not entail loss of the NORP nationality .

Section CARDINAL provides that NORP citizens who reside lawfully and habitually in the territory of GPE and hold the nationality of another ORG shall enjoy the same rights and duties as the other citizens of GPE . Law no . CARDINAL inserted an exception to the principle in section CARDINAL of equal treatment of all citizens “ in cases provided for by law ” .

DATE . Section CARDINAL provides for an oath of allegiance to be sworn by those granted citizenship of GPE through naturalisation or reacquisition of nationality . The oath states :

“ I ( surname , first name ) , born ( time and place of birth ) , swear to be a faithful citizen of GPE , to respect its LAW and other laws and not to take any actions that would prejudice the interests and territorial integrity of the ORG . ”

On the right to vote and to be elected , the relevant parts of the LAW provide :

The right to be elected is guaranteed to NORP citizens who enjoy the right to vote , within the conditions of the law . ”

“ CARDINAL . NORP The citizens of GPE shall have the right to participate in the administration of public affairs in person or through their representatives .

Every citizen shall have access , in accordance with the law , to public functions . ”

Law no . CARDINAL set out amendments to the electoral legislation . Section CARDINAL of the draft law adopted by ORG on DATE but not promulgated by the President , proposed that LAW be amended to include the following :

“ Candidates for the office of MP shall be DATE on DATE of the elections , shall have exclusively GPE citizenship , shall live in the country and shall fulfil the conditions provided for in the present code . ”

Section CARDINAL of the final version of PERSON no . CARDINAL , which came into force on CARDINAL DATE , introduces the following provisions into LAW :

“ ( CARDINAL ) Candidates for the office of MP shall be DATE on DATE of the elections , shall have GPE citizenship , shall live in the country and shall fulfil the conditions provided for in the present code .

( CARDINAL ) At the moment of registering as a candidate , any person holding the citizenship of another country shall declare that he or she holds another citizenship or that he or she has applied for another citizenship .

( CARDINAL ) At the time of validation of the MP mandate , the person indicated in paragraph ( CARDINAL ) shall prove with documents that he or she has renounced or initiated the procedure of renunciation of the citizenship of other GPE or that he or she has withdrawn an application to obtain another citizenship .

( CARDINAL ) A failure to declare the fact of holding another citizenship at the moment of registering as a candidate for the office of MP or the fact of obtaining another citizenship during the exercise of an MP mandate , shall be sufficient grounds for ORG to annul the MP mandate at the request of ORG . ”

NORP The position of GPE is set out in section QUANTITY of the PERSON :

( CARDINAL ) The incompatibilities provided for in the present PERSON shall apply to persons living in GPE only in so far as they are stipulated in the legislation concerning the special legal status of GPE . ”

Limited parliamentary debate took place on this particular provision of the PERSON . The only relevant extract , from the plenary parliament debates on DATE , is as follows :

“ PERSON , MP :

The citizens who are citizens of GPE and live in GPE will continue to have double nationality and then the effectiveness of the PERSON is marginalised , or , to put it better , we reject the citizens from GPE , who are also citizens of GPE .

PERSON , MP :

Not at all . There is CARDINAL thing which has to be understood : firstly , this PERSON does not apply to all citizens . Secondly , it refers only to those who have positions in public authorities . Thirdly , we deliberately inserted here a clause in the final and transitional provisions : I draw your attention to the fact that the third paragraph refers to persons who live and work in the respective authorities of the left bank , in GPE , that this PERSON does not apply in this case to the said persons and that it will only be applied [ to them ] in so far as this is provided for in the PERSON concerning the special status of GPE . ”

According to LAW , ORG may be seized only by the President of the country , the government , the Minister of ORG , ORG , ORG , ORG , the MPs , the parliamentary factions and the ORG .

The Preamble to ORG ( “ the ORG ” ) , which came into force in general and in respect of GPE on DATE , explains the purpose of the ORG . The relevant parts of the Preamble provide :

“ Recognising that , in matters concerning nationality , account should be taken both of the legitimate interests of GPE and those of individuals ;

Noting the varied approach of GPE to the question of multiple nationality and recognising that each ORG is free to decide which consequences it attaches in its internal law to the fact that a national acquires or possesses another nationality ;

Article CARDINAL of the ORG sets out possible cases of multiple nationality other than those which arise where individuals acquire multiple nationalities automatically at birth or a second nationality automatically upon marriage . It provides as follows :

“ The provisions of this Convention shall not limit the right of a ORG to determine in its internal law whether :

a. its nationals who acquire or possess the nationality of another ORG retain its nationality or lose it ;

b. the acquisition or retention of its nationality is subject to the renunciation or loss of another nationality . ”

On the rights and duties related to multiple nationality , Article CARDINAL provides :

“ Nationals of a ORG in possession of another nationality shall have , in the territory of that ORG in which they reside , the same rights and duties as other nationals of that ORG .

The provisions of this chapter do not affect :

a. the rules of international law concerning diplomatic or consular protection by ORG in favour of CARDINAL of its nationals who simultaneously possesses another nationality ;

b. the application of the rules of private international law of ORG in cases of multiple nationality . ”

ORG has adopted LAW . The relevant parts of the explanatory report to this code read as follows :

“ CARDINAL . [ U]nder LAW persons holding dual nationality must have the same electoral rights as other nationals .

Stability of the law is crucial to credibility of the electoral process , which is itself vital to consolidating democracy . Rules which change frequently DATE and especially rules which are complicated DATE may confuse voters . Above all , voters may conclude , rightly or wrongly , that electoral law is simply a tool in the hands of the powerful , and that their own votes have little weight in deciding the results of elections .

In practice , however , it is not so much stability of the basic principles which needs protecting ( they are not likely to be seriously challenged ) as stability of some of the more specific rules of electoral law , especially those covering the electoral system per se , the composition of electoral commissions and the drawing of constituency boundaries . These CARDINAL elements are often , rightly or wrongly , regarded as decisive factors in the election results , and care must be taken to avoid not only manipulation to the advantage of the party in power , but even the mere semblance of manipulation .

It is not so much changing voting systems which is a bad thing – they can always be changed for the better – as changing them frequently or just before ( within DATE of ) elections . Even when no manipulation is intended , changes will seem to be dictated by immediate party political interests . ”

On the basis of the information available to the ORG , it would seem that , apart from GPE , CARDINAL countries ( GPE , GPE and GPE ) clearly ban dual nationals from being elected to ORG . In GPE and GPE , it is in any event prohibited to hold dual nationality ; in GPE , holding dual nationality is permitted . LAW of a fourth country , GPE , provides that a person shall not be qualified for election to ORG “ if he is a citizen of a country other than GPE having become such a citizen voluntarily or is under a declaration of allegiance to such a country ” ; it is not entirely clear whether the provision applies to non - nationals or to multiple nationals . In any case , there are no known examples of the provision being enforced and it is not clear whether it was intended that the limitation remain in force after the law was amended to permit dual nationality in GPE in DATE . GPE , which permits dual nationality , lifted its ban on dual nationals becoming MPs in DATE .

In GPE , there is no prohibition on MPs having dual nationality but a person with dual nationality can not be elected president . It should be noted that dual nationality is prohibited in principle under NORP law , although it is allowed in certain limited circumstances . GPE restricts citizens from becoming members of ORG if they hold public or elected office in another ORG . GPE prohibits non - resident dual nationals from becoming MPs for the constituency covering the territory of their other nationality .

In short , CARDINAL member ORG , GPE and GPE ( subject to the ambiguity outlined above ) DATE currently allow dual nationality but prohibit dual nationals from becoming MPs . In addition , GPE and GPE , which prohibit dual nationality , also prohibit dual nationals becoming MPs . Of these CARDINAL other countries , GPE and GPE have not signed the ORG ; GPE has lodged a reservation in respect of LAW ORG ; and GPE has signed , but not ratified , the ORG .

Twenty - seven States other than GPE allow dual nationality . In CARDINAL member GPE , dual citizenship is prohibited in principle . Dual nationality is prohibited in GPE .

GPE , GPE and GPE prohibit dual nationality . According to the census for DATE , there were around CARDINAL dual nationals in GPE . There are CARDINAL dual nationals in GPE . No figures are available for GPE . CARDINAL of the population of GPE and GPE is ethnically NORP .

In GPE of the former GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE and “ the former GPE ” allow dual citizenship , although GPE and GPE seek to exclude it for naturalised citizens . In GPE and GPE , dual nationality is permitted only in respect of GPE with which a bilateral agreement has been concluded . The populations of most of these GPE are ethnically mixed . GPE ( PERCENT FAC ; PERCENT NORP ; PERCENT Bosniak ; PERCENT other ) and GPE ( PERCENT Bosniak ; PERCENT NORP ; PERCENT NORP ; PERCENT other ) have the most ethnically mixed populations , followed by “ the former GPE ” ( PERCENT NORP ; PERCENT NORP ; PERCENT other ) . The numbers of dual nationals in these countries is not known . None of these GPE prohibit dual nationals from standing for ORG .

In the CARDINAL member GPE of ORG , CARDINAL allow dual nationality , CARDINAL prohibit it or allow it only in exceptional circumstances ( GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE and GPE ) and CARDINAL ( GPE , GPE , GPE , GPE , the GPE and GPE ) allow it in certain circumstances , to varying extents . CARDINAL States – GPE and GPE DATE prohibit the election of dual nationals to ORG . Further limitations exist in CARDINAL GPE ( GPE , GPE and GPE – see paragraphs CARDINAL above ) .