Five Percent Electoral Threshold Case
Czech Republic Constitutional Court
Pl. ÚS 25/96 (Sb.) (1996)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
In 1993, the government of the Czech Republic enacted a new constitution following the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Article 18 of the constitution required that elections for the senate be based on universal, free, and equal suffrage, with a secret ballot available for all voters. Article 20 of the constitution limited the scope of Article 18 by requiring that the organization of elections and the scope of judicial review over elections be set by law. The Government of the Czech Republic (defendant) enacted the Electoral Act, which required political parties to earn at least 5 percent of the popular vote before being awarded seats in the senate. In 1996, the political party DU (plaintiff) did not receive any parliamentary seats under the Electoral Act despite receiving 170,000 votes. DU filed a constitutional complaint challenging the validity of the Electoral Act. DU argued that the barrier clause contained in the Electoral Act violated the principle of universal, equal, and direct right to vote by secret ballot on the basis of proportional representation, and the equal right of all Czech citizens over age 21 to stand for election and to participate in the administration of public affairs directly or through the free election of representatives.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.