English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article analyzes the European Court of Humans Rights’ jurisprudence on right to vote (article 3 of Protocol n.o I ). For this purpose, it must be acknowledged a subjective dimension too which defines the legal status of citizen in its relations with the public authorities that can be specified in the principle of universal, equal and free suffrage, an objective dimension as an structural element of Democracy and what creates positive obligations to public authorities in order to implement the content of the right: «to ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature». However, the development of positive obligations on the basis of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 goes no further than this. So, the Court considers that this provision does not require the States to implement a specific electoral system or electoral rules because the State enjoys a wide margin of appreciation when assessing restrictions of these rights.

La delimitación del derecho de sufragio activo por el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos