The Court has just issued its second Advisory Opinion ever, entitled ‘On certain legal questions concerning the lists of candidates submitted with a view to the election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights’. The questions at issue arose from the fact that Ukraine had withdrawn its list of three Court candidates, after one of the three had indicated to be no longer interested for personal reasons. The withdrawal of the whole list took place after the deadline set for submission by the Parliamentary Assembly (and after the two remaining candidates had already been interviewed).
In its Advisory Opinion the Court considered that such a withdrawal could take place as long as the deadline set by the Parliamentary Assembly had not yet passed, but not afterwards. Thus in the present situation this means that Ukraine will only be allowed to furnish a new candidate to replace the person that has withdrawn, but the other two names will remain the same ones as on the originally submitted list. The Court’s Opinion supports the stance taken by the Parliamentary Assembly itself in its dispute with Ukraine.
See the Advisory Opinion itself to trace the very peculiar sequence of events in this Ukranian nomination issue.
