FIRST SECTION
Application no. 16824/10
Aleksey Ivanovich BOLSUNOVSKIY
against Russia
lodged on 14 February 2010
STATEMENT OF FACTS
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Aleksey Ivanovich Bolsunovskiy, is a Russian national
who was born in 1982 and lives in Krasnoyarsk. He is currently serving a
sentence of imprisonment in Irkutsk. His application was lodged on
14 February 2010.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised
as follows.
1. The applicant’s criminal history
On 11 April 2006 the Tsentralny District Court of Krasnoyarsk convicted
the applicant of attempted drug trafficking and sentenced him to eight years
and three months’ imprisonment. It does not appear that this judgment was
appealed against.
2. The applicant’s attempts to participate in elections
On an unspecified date the applicant was transferred to a penitentiary
facility to serve his sentence of imprisonment. Since that date, as a
convicted prisoner, he has been barred from participating in any elections by
virtue of Article 32 § 3 of the Russian Constitution (“the Constitution”).
2
BOLSUNOVSKIY v. RUSSIA – STATEMENT OF FACTS AND QUESTIONS
In particular, according to the applicant, he was unable to participate in
parliamentary elections of 2 December 2007, presidential elections of
2 March 2008, and in elections of a regional legislature held on 8 March
2008 and 14 March 2010.
Thereafter the applicant complained about the provisions of Article 32
§ 3 of the Constitution to the Krasnoyarsk prosecutor’s office. The latter
replied in letters of 1 April, 26 May and 28 June 2010 that his complaint
was pointless and unfounded that the prosecutor’s office had no competence
to check the compatibility of constitutional provisions with rules of
international law.
In a letter of 13 December 2010 The Central Election Commission
confirmed that the applicant, being a convicted prisoner, was deprived the
right to vote by virtue of Article 32 § 3 of the Constitution, as reproduced in
section 4 (3) of the Federal Law of 12 June 2002 “On Fundamental
Guarantees of Electoral Rights and a Right to Take Part in a Referendum of
the Citizens of the Russian Federation”
B. Relevant domestic law
1. Constitution
Article 32 (Chapter 2) of the Russian Constitution of 12 December 1993
provides:
“...
2. Citizens of the Russian Federation shall have the right to elect and to be elected
to bodies of state governance and to organs of local self-government, as well as to
take part in a referendum.
3. ... citizens detained in institutions of confinement in pursuance of a court
sentence shall not have the right to elect or to be elected.
...”.
Article 135 (Chapter 9) of the Constitution provides:
“1. The provisions of Chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian
Federation may not be revised by the Federal Assembly.
2. If a proposal to revise any provisions in Chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of
the Russian Federation is supported by three-fifths of the total number of deputies of
the Federation Council and the State Duma, a Constitutional Assembly shall be
convened in accordance with a federal constitutional law.
3. The Constitutional Assembly may either confirm the inviolability of the
Constitution of the Russian Federation or work out a new draft of the Constitution of
the Russian Federation which shall be adopted by two-thirds of the total number of
deputies to the Constitutional Assembly or submitted to a nationwide vote. In the
event of a nationwide vote, the Constitution of the Russian Federation shall be
considered as adopted if more than half of those voting have voted for [the
Constitution], provided that more than half of the electorate have taken part in the
voting.”
2. Other legal acts
The provisions of Article 32 § 3 of the Constitution are reproduced in
section 4 (3) of the Federal Law of 12 June 2002 “On Fundamental
Guarantees of Electoral Rights and a Right to Take Part in a Referendum of
BOLSUNOVSKIY v. RUSSIA – STATEMENT OF FACTS AND QUESTIONS
3
the Citizens of the Russian Federation”, in section 3 (4) of the Federal Law
of 10 January 2003 “On Election of the President of the Russian
Federation”, and in section 5 (4) of the Federal Law of 18 May 2005 “On
Election of Deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the
Russia Federation”.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains about his disenfranchisement which, in his
view, violated his rights secured by Articles 3, 7, 10, 14 and 15 of the
Convention and Article 3 of Protocol No. 1.
He further complains under Article 13 of the Convention that he has no
effective remedies to challenge provisions of domestic law by virtue of
which he was disenfranchised.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Regard being had to the findings made in the judgment of Hirst v. the
United Kingdom (no. 2) ([GC], no. 74025/01, ECHR 2005-IX, see also
Frodl v. Austria, no. 20201/04, 8 April 2010 and Greens and M.T. v. the
United Kingdom, nos. 60041/08 and 60054/08, 23 November 2010), has the
restriction on the applicant’s right to vote imposed by Article 32 § 3 of the
Russian Constitution disclosed a violation of:
(a) Article 3 of Protocol No. 1;
(b) Article 10 of the Convention;
(c) Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 taken in conjunction with Article 14
of the Convention?
In particular, did the restriction in question pursue a legitimate aim? If
so, was it proportionate to that aim, given that it applied to all convicted
prisoners, irrespective of the length of their sentence and irrespective of the
nature or gravity of their offence and their individual circumstances (see
Hirst, cited above, § 82)?
2. Can the present case be distinguished from the case of Hirst, and tow
other cases cited above? If so, in what aspects?