Open Letter to the Supreme Court of Iceland
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Open letter to the Supreme Court of Iceland. I am very surprised at the Supreme Court’s Decision concerning the elections to the Constitutional Assembly. In the Court’s Decision it is stated that the Court’s conclusion follows on complaints about the elections that were filed with the Supreme Court by three individuals. It is stated therein that these complaints are based on Article 15 of Act No. 90/2010, on the Constitutional Assembly. In Paragraph 3 on p. 1 of the Supreme Court’s Decision the following conclusion by the Court is set forth: (Emphasis G.J.) “With the Supreme Court’s decision of 6 January 2011 the complainant’s cases were combined since all of them concern the general conduct of the elections and do not concern their individual interests under applicable laws .” In Article 15 of Act No. 90/2010, a direct complaint to the Supreme Court is authorized only in respect of the eligibility of a specific candidate. The relevant text of Article 15 of Act No. 90/2010 reads as follows: “If a voter considers that a member of the Constitutional Assembly lacks eligibility, his candidacy has not fulfilled legal requirements or his election is unlawful for other reasons, he can file a complaint against his election with the Supreme Court which will rule on its validity .” As this text makes clear, the Supreme Court is solely charged with considering the eligibility of specific representatives to the Constitutional Assembly . There is no authority under Act No. 90/2010 for the Supreme Court to consider directly, absent a previous court decision or District Court ruling, the Act itself or the conduct of elections to the Constitutional Assembly in any respect other than that of the eligibility issue. In several places Act No. 90/2010 refers to Act No. 24/2000, on Elections to Althing, being applicable as appropriate. Thus Paragraph 2 of Article 15 of Act No. 90/2010 refers to specific Articles and Chapters of Act No. 24/2000 as being applicable to the Act on the Constitutional Assembly. The Articles and Chapters of the Act on Elections to Althing referred to are the following. Article 114 in the Chapter – Elections postponed and repeat elections. Chapter XIX entitled – Reports of Statistics Iceland. Chapter XX entitled – Inadmissible election propaganda and election fraud. Chapter XXIV entitled – Costs. Chapter XXV entitled – Penalty clauses. It should be noted that in Act No. 90/2010 on the Constitutional Assembly, in the Chapter on Complaints etc., there are only Articles 15 and 15 (a). In neither of these Articles is there any mention of provisions other than those above regarding which complaints may be filed directly to the Supreme Court . In Act No. 24/2000, on Elections to Althing, Chapter XXI, on Election complaints , comprises Articles 118 and 119. This Chapter, or these Articles, are not mentioned in the Chapter on Complaints etc. in Act No. 90/2010. 1 Article 118 concerns eligibility. Anyone who wishes to file a complaint in respect of eligibility shall address his complaint to the Minister of Justice (now the Minister of the Interior), who shall give a copy of the complaint to the accused party, and the Minister shall submit the complaint to Althing at the beginning of its session. This Article is not germane to the Act No. 90/2000, according to which eligibility is the sole issue on which a complaint may be filed directly to the Supreme Court. Article 119 of the Act on Elections to Althing concerns violations of the Act. Therein it is stated that such complaints are to be submitted to the Chief of Police concerned, who shall handle them as criminal cases. As has been shown above, there existed no authorization in law for the Supreme Court to take the Decision that the elections to the Constitutional Assembly had been invalid. As a voter in these elections, I request that the Supreme Court accord the laws of the land the respect they deserve by withdrawing at once the Court‘s Decision from 25 January 2011 declaring the elections to the Constitutional Assembly to be invalid. Respectfully, Reykjavik, 27 January 2011 Gudbjorn Jonsson 2 .