The draft Law does not address the issues of allocation, including number and placement, of polling stations abroad. This was however a repeated subject in the discussions with the stakeholders in Moldova and a long standing ODIHR and Venice Commission recommendation. The Venice Commission and ODIHR also in this regard refer to the 2017 Joint Opinion on the amendments to the Electoral Code of Bulgaria, that states the following:

“The trend in recent decades has been for more European states to allow voting from abroad in national elections. While there is no European standard regulating the right for citizens residing abroad to vote in national elections, changes to such existing provisions should nonetheless be subject to the same stability requirements as other provisions on the right to vote. In its case law, the European Court of Human Rights has awarded states a wide margin of appreciation under Article 3 Protocol 1 and has accepted restrictions in voting rights for citizens residing abroad, in particular, with residence requirements. It appears from this case law that the test under Article 3 Protocol 1 concerning voting abroad is whether or not there has been an arbitrary or unreasonable restriction on the right to vote. PACE has also adopted the view that member states should not place “unnecessary obstacles in the path of the effective exercise of the voting rights of foreign nationals residing on their territories”. In other words, while the state is free to decide whether or not to allow voting from abroad, if voting from abroad is allowed, restrictions should be justified. Allowing citizens residing abroad to vote entails organisational challenges, which may justify certain restrictions in the exercise of the right to vote. Limiting the number of polling stations or restricting voting to embassies or consulates may be necessary due to the extra cost and resources required for organising elections abroad.”