Home > 1.1.1.3 Residence > MONTENEGRO- Opinion on the Compatibility of the Existing Legislation Concerning the Organisation of Referendums with Applicable International Standards
 
 
 
Download file    
 
 
Paragraph 62
 

As regards the requirement of a 24 months period of residence before being entitled to vote, this was regarded as excessive by the Commission in its Report of 2001. Since the Constitution of Montenegro confers the right to vote on every citizen aged over 18, it is arguable that, in the absence of strong justification, the legislation seems to go too far under Montenegrin constitutional law in disenfranchising for 24 months citizens who have returned to Montenegro after living elsewhere. Under the European Convention on Human Rights, the right to vote under Article 3 of the First Protocol is not absolute but may be subject to limitations. While a state has a margin of appreciation in stating the conditions for voting, such conditions must not curtail the right to vote to such an extent as to impair its very essence and deprive it of effectiveness; they must serve a legitimate aim and must not be disproportionate.[23] A residence test in itself is acceptable,[24] but is the length of the period justifiable?[25] The primary remedy for someone aggrieved by the 24 months requirement would be to seek a remedy in the national courts, on the basis that it conflicts with the right to vote guaranteed by the Constitution. However, so far as international standards are concerned, a lesser requirement (say of 6 months) would surely fall within the state’s margin of appreciation.[26] A limit of 12 months might also be acceptable at Strasbourg, depending on the reasons advanced for imposing the limit. Nevertheless, if in other respects the referendum is conducted in a satisfactory manner, it is doubtful whether maintenance of the 24 month rule would bring the legitimacy of the referendum into question.