The European Court of Human Rights has clarified the criteria for restrictions in its case law. The Court held in the case Sidabras and Džiautas v. Lithuania that the applicants “were treated differently from other persons in Lithuania who had not worked for the KGB and who as a result had no restrictions imposed on them in their choice of professional activities”. The Court also observed that the applicants were treated in an inappropriate way as “the KGB Act was to
regulate the employment prospects of persons on the basis of their loyalty or lack of loyalty to the State”. In its judgment Thlimmenos v. Greece, the European Court of Human Rights “considered that the right not to be discriminated against in the enjoyment of the rights guaranteed under the Convention was violated not only when States treated differently persons in analogous situations without providing an objective and reasonable justification, but also when States, without an objective and reasonable justification, failed to treat differently persons whose situations were different”. In light of this case law, the restrictions imposed by Articles 65(3) and 80(3) should be carefully justified. The Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR are conscious that a change in these restrictions would imply a constitutional amendment.