In several country-specific opinions, the Venice Commission has taken a positive view on limiting the mandates of presidents. In Belarus, the limitation was eliminated after a referendum held on 17 October 2004. In its opinion on the referendum (CDL-AD(2004)029), the Venice Commission adopted a critical view of the removal of the limitation. The commission appealed, first, to international practice:

In those democracies where the president exercises important functions of State, a system of constitutional checks and balances ensures that he or she cannot exercise arbitrary power while in office, and in any event the term of office is limited. The constitutions of democratic countries with presidential systems of government, as are to be found in particular in Latin America, generally either prohibit the immediate re-election of an incumbent President or at least limit it to one further term, as is the case inthe Constitution presently in force in Belarus. Even democracies where the President’s functions are largely ceremonial tend to limit the possibility of continuous terms of office. The undesirability of unlimited terms for the president is recognised in new (e.g. the Republics of Albania, Armenia, South Africa, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Ukraine, etc. etc.) as well as in old democracies. (Para 12)