Ustavnosodna prepoved delovanja politične stranke - v imenu demokracije

slovenian

2004

IUS SOFTWARE d.o.o.
(Obvezni izvod spletne publikacije)

The European Court of Human Rights held in the cases Rehaf and Gorzelik that when protecting democracy (and considering a balance between democracy and the rule of law) a State may apply radical or even drastic measures, such as immediate and permanent dissolution of an organization, and therefore roughly interfere with the freedom of association as set in Article 11 of the European Convention. A State's interference is in conformity with the Convention only if (i) it is prescribed by law, (ii) it is pursuing a legitimate aim and (iii) if there is a pressing social need to apply the measure. A State may reasonably apply such a measure as soon as the presence of such a danger has been established, thus even before an attempt has been made. In the case Refah the danger was created by a political party, which was planning to set up a plurality of legal systems and a regime based on Sharia (Islamic law), while in the case of Gorzelik the registration of a controversial union, which proclaimed itself a national minority without the consent of society, would unjustifiably entitle it to some privileges, laid down by law.

26.01.2021