Election law

Election law is a discipline falling at the juncture of constitutional law and political science. It researches "the politics of law and the law of politics".

Issues

Some of the questions that are addressed by election law are:

American election law experts and academics are connected in the academic network coordinated by Daniel H. Lowenstein of UCLA Law School and Richard L. Hasen of UC Irvine Law School. Lowenstein and Hasen also edit the Election Law Journal and the election law mailing list.......

Regimes in comparative law

France

The French electoral code addresses most of the elections. However, other texts frame this material for special elections. Thus the Constitution but fixed some general basic provisions concerning the presidential election, the legislative and senatorial elections.

For litigation election, the court depends on the concerned election. The Constitutional Council is responsible for the most important elections: presidential elections and senatorial elections or referendums. In contrast, to the municipal or district elections the administrative tribunal has jurisdiction, then the appeal is to the State Council. Finally, for the regional and European elections, the Council of State which has jurisdiction at first and last resort.

In decisions on electoral matters, the law takes into account the results: if an essential principle is violated, the election is canceled but if fraud is "classic" (ballot stuffing, failure to register as voters, vote the dead ...) but the election was won (after counting of ballots invalidated) with a large or very large lead, the judge then cancels rarely the result.[1]

Italy

The Italian Constitution fixes some general basic provisions concerning the legislative elections. Electoral disputes in Italy are complex because they are divided between several court orders. For example, with regard to the dispute concerning registration of candidates for ballots or litigation election, the administrative court has jurisdiction. For elegibility and disfranchisement, the judge is the ordinary tribunal.[2]

If a fraud is proven by the judge, it does not cancel necessarily the elections,[3] but only when he thinks that the result of election without the fraud would not have been identical. The survival of the acts already performed by the elected organs would seem solved by abundant case law that protects innocent trust of third parties.[4]

See also

References

  1. ↑ On the other side, opposite judgement comes when the participation of the lists has resulted in an imbalance, also because the deviation of the votes between the two clusters is less than one thousand ballotts: Buonomo, Giampiero (2001). "La partecipazione (viziata) delle liste produce uno squilibrio nel voto". Diritto&Giustizia edizione online.  – via Questia (subscription required)
  2. ↑ "A principle of separation of powers ( ... ) is the rationale of the law ( ... ) which ousts the administrative courts from ineligibility dispute": Buonomo, Giampiero (2000). "Il giudicato civile in materia elettorale preclude l'azione popolare davanti al Tar". Diritto&Giustizia edizione online.  – via Questia (subscription required)
  3. ↑ The faults, as null and void, cannot justify a reversal "by forfeit" of the electoral outcome: Buonomo, Giampiero (2000). "Elezioni Molise: gestione incerta fino all'annullamento definitivo". Diritto&Giustizia edizione online.  – via Questia (subscription required)
  4. ↑ Buonomo, Giampiero (2002). "L'incandidabilità di un eletto travolge il consiglio regionale abruzzese (e ripropone gli interrogativi molisani)". Diritto&Giustizia edizione online.  – via Questia (subscription required)

Further reading

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/8/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.