United Nations A /68/299

General Assembly Distr.: General
7 August 2013

Original: English

13-42309 (E) 120913
*1342309*

Sixty-eighth session
Item 69 (b) of the provisional agenda*
Promotion and protection of human rights: human rights
questions, including alternative approaches for improving the
effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms

Rights to freedom of peacef ul assembly and of association

Note by the Secretary-General

The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the members of the
General Assembly the report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of
peaceful assembly and of association, Maina Kiai, submitted in accordance with
Human Rights Council resolution
21/16 .

* A/68/150 .

A/68/299

13-42309 2/21
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom
of peaceful assembly and of association

Summary
The present report constitutes the first report to the General Assembly of the
Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association.
It addresses concerns about the exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful
assembly and of association in the context of elections. The Special Rapporteur is
deeply concerned about increasing human rights violations and abuses, which are
being committed in several parts of the worl d against those who exercise or seek to
exercise such rights in the context of elections and which indelibly mar such elections.

A/68/299

3/21 13-42309

I. Introduction

1. The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful
assembly and of association was established by the Human Rights Council in its
resolution
15/21
for an initial period of three years. The Council appointed Maina
Kiai as Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and
of association in March 2011, with a starting date of 1 May 2011. The present
report is the first report submitted to the General Assembly by the Special
Rapporteur, in response to the reques t by the Council, in its resolution
21/16,
that an annual report be presented to the General Assembly. The report addresses
concerns about the exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of
association in the context of elections, and should be read in conjunction with the
Special Rapporteur’s thematic reports to the Human Rights Council (
A/HRC/20/27
and
A/HRC/23/39 ).
2. Every year, elections, plebiscites and referendums are conducted at various
levels, including at the presidential, legislative and local levels in many countries.
The high-stakes competition that characteri zes most elections has seen widespread
violations of human rights, including the right to life, freedom of expression,
freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association. From the perspective of
the Special Rapporteur, the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of
association have increasingly come under attack as incumbent or incoming regimes
seek to retain or gain power at all costs. The Special Rapporteur is convinced that
the context of elections deserves special focus because the ability of individuals and
associations to form and operate freely is particularly at risk during those periods.
The Special Rapporteur is persuaded to draw this conclusion as a result of the
increasing complaints he has received c oncerning harassment, intimidation and the
undue restrictions placed on individuals, as sociations and their members in the run-up
to or following contested elections.
3. In writing the present report, the Special Rapporteur benefited greatly from
participating in a one-day expert meeting held in Geneva on 1 June 2013. The
Special Rapporteur would like to thank all those who were involved in organizing
the meeting, and all those who shared their experiences to inform the report, both at
that meeting and in other forums.. The Special Rapporteur also took into account
relevant elements of work available within the Council.
1 The country situations
mentioned in the present report have been the subject of communications sent to
Governments, as well as press releases and reports issued by special procedures
mandate holders and high-level United Nations officials.

II. Rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association as
integral part to free and fair elections

A. Democracy and free dom of peaceful assembly and of association

4. Democracy, as a system through which the people participate directly or
indirectly in the conduct of public affairs, has broad appeal across the globe.
__________________
1 This includes the report of the Special Rapporte ur on the situation of human rights in Belarus,
with a focus on human rights in th e electoral processes (A/68/276).

A/68/299

13-42309 4/21
Elections, referendums and plebiscites, in which people choose their representatives
and express their choice of laws or policies, are held in the majority of countries in
the world. As stipulated in article 21 (3) of the Universal Declaration of Human
rights, democracy is a process in which “[t]he will of the people [is] to be the basis
of the authority of government”. It is commonly thought of as a process with regular
periodic, free and competitive elections to decide on policies directly or indirectly
through chosen representatives that must be accountable to their electorate. In other
words, democracy, as reflected in the electoral process, generally involves the use of
clear predictable processes with uncertain outcomes, while a non-democracy can be
identified by the fact that the whole electoral process is characterized by unclear and
uncertain processes but with predictabl e outcomes. Nevertheless, the quality of
elections is increasingly coming under scrutiny in order to ensure that election
outcomes are representative of the will of the people. Elections confer legitimacy on
Governments; if those elections are not considered to reflect the will of the people,
therefore, a sense of discontent and dise nfranchisement may result and sometimes
cause violent conflict. In order to sustain the democratic ideal, it is necessary for
regimes to uphold the rule of law, respect and protect human rights and remain
vigilant and responsive to peoples’ views and opinions at all times.
5. The right to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are pertinent to
the democratic process, both during the election period and between elections. The
Special Rapporteur reiterates that these rights are essential components of
democracy since they empower women, men and youth to “express their political
opinions, engage in literary and artistic pursuits and other cultural, economic and
social activities, engage in religious observances or other beliefs, form and join
trade unions and cooperatives, and elect lead ers to represent their interests and hold
them accountable” (Council resolution
15/21 , preamble).
6. More specifically, the rights to fr eedom of peaceful assembly and of
association are a critical means for individuals and groups of individuals to
participate in public affairs. The exercise of such rights provides avenues through
which people can aggregate and voice their concerns and interests and endeavour to
fashion governance that responds to their issues. For example, such rights are
essential in order to campaign and participate in public rallies, form political parties,
participate in voter education activities, cast votes, observe and monitor elections
and hold candidates and elected officials accountable.
7. International law contains principles and standards by which the electoral
process and outcomes can be measured. Approaching assessments by recognizing
that States have accepted certain legal commitments and that the elections they
conduct should meet those commitments provides uniformity and objectivity to
election observation. The universality, in terrelatedness and interdependence of
human rights are also reinforced by States having the responsibility to ensure the
exercise of all rights during the electoral process in order to achieve positive
outcomes. Such an approach recognizes th at a successful electoral process goes
beyond the events on the day that votes are cast. The legal framework, political
environment and institutional capacities be fore, during and after polling day, have
an impact on how rights are enjoyed. In addition, the Special Rapporteur believes
that an electoral process, in which widespread barriers are systematically placed on
the exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, cannot
be said to be either free or fair and, as such, the outcome should not be considered
to be the result of “genuine” elections, as required under international law.

A/68/299

5/21 13-42309

8. The maintenance of peace during the voting process is necessary for the
electorate to turn out and exercise their right to vote. Nevertheless, although
important, it should not provide a justifica
tion for continuing electoral malpractices
and unjustifiable restrictions on the rights to peaceful assembly and of association or
other rights, for example, unlimited and uncontrolled bans on protests or
demonstrations against election results. Where such rights are violated at any point
during the electoral process, prompt and effective remedies should be available and
accessible, presided over by impartial arbiters.
9. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur focuses on the role of associations
broadly, including political parties, as central vehicles through which individuals
can take part in the conduct of peaceful affairs through chosen representatives.
Political parties have an esse ntial role to play “in ensuring pluralism and the proper
functioning of democracy”.
2 The present report adopts the definition of a political
party as “a free association of persons, one of the aims of which is to participate in
the management of public affairs, including through the presentation of candidates
to free and democratic elections”.
3 Of significance is the fact that a political party is
an “association” (
A/HRC/20/27 , paras. 51-52), albeit a specialized one that may be
regulated by separate legislation and that is subject to rules different from those of
other associations. The Special Rapporteur considers the key difference between
political parties and other associations to be the ability of political parties to present
candidates for elections and to subsequently form governments, should those
candidates win in genuine elections. Hence, he stresses that the engagement of civil
society organizations in the electoral pr ocess should not lead to their being
involuntary labelled or treated as political parties simply as a result of their having
participated in public life in th e way in which they have chosen.
10. The Special Rapporteur also acknowledges that, while only a segment of civil
society organizations can work directly on election-related issues, such as voter
education, election observation, the reform of electoral institutions and the
accountability of candidates and elected officials, the election period provides a
prime opportunity for a broader range of civil society organizations to engage with
would-be elected representatives, highlight th eir concerns and interests, with a view
to getting policy responses, and in general exercise their rights to participate in
public affairs. For that reason, any discu ssion of the rights to freedom of peaceful
assembly and of association in the context of elections must be inclusive of all civil
society organizations, regardless of their areas of focus.
11. The term “elections” as used in the present report includes those held to
choose presidential, legislative and local administrative representatives, plebiscites
and referendums. The electoral period doe s not always fit into a neat temporal
delineation. Indeed, it is arguable that the end of one election period — to the extent
that this is determinable — signals the be ginning of the next. Some events in the
election process may be capable of a definite time allocation, for example, voter
education, campaign period, voting day(s) and vote counting. However, other
activities that are relevant to the process ma y be ongoing, continuing long after voting
__________________
2 European Court of Human Rights, United Communist Party of Turkey and Others v. Turkey ,
Application No. 20/1997/804/1007, 25 May 1998, para. 41.

3 Organization for Security and Cooperation in Eu rope (OSCE)/Office for Democratic Institutions
and Human Rights and the Venice Commission,
Guidelines on Politi cal Party Regulation ,
(Warsaw/Strasbourg, 2011), para. 9.

A/68/299

13-42309 6/21
has been done, such as legislative reform and institution strengthening. By
describing the scope of the present report as covering the period before, during and
after elections, the Special Rapporteur seeks to convey that the context of elections is
not about a specific event or a particular time period, for example, voting day —
although casting one’s vote is a pivotal mome nt in elections. The Special Rapporteur
notes that elections are often highly charged contests at which much lies at stake for
authorities and the electorate. In that contex t, States have an obligation to respect and
facilitate the rights to freedom of peacefu l assembly and of association throughout the
entire process.

B. International legal framework re lated to the rights to freedom of
peaceful assembly and of association in the context of elections

12. In its resolution 15/21 , the Human Rights Council calls upon States to respect
and fully protect the rights of all indivi duals to assemble peacefully and associate
freely, including in the contex t of elections. In addition to the notion of democracy,
the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are implicit in the right
to take part in the Government of one’s country, as affirmed in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, which states in article 21 (3) that “[t]he will of the
people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in
periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and
shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures”. Similarly, article
25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights affirms every citizen’s
right without prohibited distinctions and unreasonable restrictions: (a) to take part in
the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; (b) to
vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and
equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of
the will of the electors; and (c) to have access, on general terms of equality, to public
service in his country.
4 The Human Rights Committ ee recognizes that the full
enjoyment of those rights depends on th e free communication of information and
ideas about public and political issues between citizens, candidates and elected
representatives, which requires the free exercise of the rights to peaceful assembly and
association, among other rights (general comment No. 25, para. 25). The General
Assembly, in its resolution
59/201 declared that freedom of association and peaceful
assembly were essential elements of democracy, together with the right to vote and to
be elected at genuine periodic free elections, and encouraged the strengthening of
political party systems and civil society organizations.
13. The centrality of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association
in the context of elections is affirmed in various other international and regional
human rights treaties
5 and other bodies. 6 Member States of the African Union in the
__________________
4 See also article 7 of the Convention on th e Elimination of Discrimination against Women;
article 29 of the Convention on the Rights of Pers ons with Disabilities; article 23 (1) (b) of the
American Convention on Human Rights; article 13 of the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights; article 33 of the Arab Charte r on Human Rights; and para. 25 of the Human
Rights Declaration of the Associa tion of Southeast Asian Nations.

5 See, for example, article 7 (b) of the Conve ntion on the Elimination of Discrimination against
Women and article 29 (b) (i) of the Conventi on on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

6 Declaration on free and fair elections, adopted by the Inter- Parliamentary Council at its
154th session (Paris, 26 March 1994).

A/68/299

7/21 13-42309

Declaration on the Principles Governing Demo
cratic Elections in Africa (sect. III (d))
explicitly commit themselves to safeguardi ng the human and civil liberties of all
citizens, including the freedom of movement , assembly, association, expression, and
campaigning, as well as access to the media on the part of all stakeholders, during
electoral processes. The Organization fo r Security and Cooperation in Europe
Copenhagen Document,
7 which outlines the commitment of member States in the
field of elections, explicitly guarantees the rights of peaceful assembly and of
association (paras. 9.2 and 9.3). Although other regional instruments on democracy
do not explicitly refer to the right to free dom of association, they recognize that
political parties and other forms of associations are vital components for the
strengthening of democracy.
8
14. The variety of instruments that explicitly or implicitly recognize the ability of
political parties and other forms of associ ations to form and operate within the
context of elections or, more generally, democracy, is an indicator of consensus at
least at the standard-setting level around the centrality of those rights. The Special
Rapporteur’s experience on the implementation of those rights is less optimistic. He
notes that, in the context of elections, rights are more susceptible to restriction, and
therefore urges strict adherence to international human rights standards. Although
freedom must be the rule and restrictions the exception (
A/HRC/20/27 , para. 16,
A/HRC/23/39 para. 18), the Special Rapporteur de plores the fact that, in too many
instances, restrictions aim to stifle critics and do not comply with international law,
that is: to be prescribed by law, and to be necessary in a democratic society in the
interests described in articles 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights.
9
15. The significance of equal protection of the rights to peaceful assembly and
association in the context of elections for everyone is heightened in the context of
elections because of the potential for the exacerbation of vulnerabilities during this
period. The Special Rapporteur notes the inclination of actors in the electoral contest
to exploit racial, ethnic, religious, political , national or social origin, among other
distinctions explicitly prohib ited in article 2 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, with a view to excluding opponents. He emphasizes that these
rights are guaranteed for everyone on the ba sis of equality (
A/HRC/20/27, para. 13),
and that States therefore have the obligation to offer effective protection against
discrimination. In the context of elections, any temporary measures designed to
enhance the ability of marginalized groups or groups most at risk to exercise their
rights, such as women, victims of discrimination because of their sexual orientation
and gender identity, youth, persons belonging to minorities, indigenous peoples,
non-nationals, including stateless persons, refugees or migrants, and members of
religious groups, as well as activists advocating economic, social, and cultural rights,
and used as a mechanism to level the play ing field, do not constitute discrimination.

__________________
7 Available at www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14304.
8 African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance, articles 3, 12; Inter-American
Democratic Charter, articles 5, 27.

9 For an analysis of permissible restrictions, see, inter alia, A/HRC/20/27, para. 15-17.

A/68/299

13-42309 8/21
III. Freedom of peaceful assembly

16. The right to freedom of peaceful assembly, that is, to both organize and
participate in indoor and outdoor peaceful assemblies, has long proven to be a key
one in the context of elections. This righ t enables candidates to such elections to
mobilize their supporters and give resonance and visibility to their political messages.
Elections are also a unique opportunity for women, men and youth from all parts of
society, to express their views and aspirations, either for status quo or for change, that
is to say, to voice support for the Government and ruling party, or dissent. Dissent is a
legitimate part of the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, especially
in the context of elections, as it is a unique opportunity for pluralist expression
through peaceful means.
17. In this regard, as mentioned during the Human Rights Council panel discussion
on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of peaceful protests,
the Special Rapporteur is of the opinion that participating in peaceful protests is an
alternative to violence and armed force as a means of expression and change which we
should support. It must thus be protected, and protected robustly (see
A/HRC/19/40 ,
para. 13). The Council shares this approach and stressed in its resolution
22/10 that
peaceful protests should not be viewed as a threat, and therefore encouraged all States
to engage in an open, inclusive and meaningful dialogue when dealing with peaceful
protests and their causes. The Council furthe r stressed that everyone must be able to
express their grievances or aspirations in a peaceful manner, including through public
protests without fear of reprisals or of be ing intimidated, harassed, injured, sexually
assaulted, beaten, arbitrarily arrested and detained, tortured, killed or subjected to
enforced disappearance. This is all the more true in the context of elections when
tension is at its highest with considerable political, economic and social interests at
stake.
18. However, in many countries, elections have been marred by human rights
violations and abuses. For instance, in September 2009, in Guinea, some 50,000
peaceful demonstrators gathered in a stadium to protest against the possible candidacy
of Capitain Moussa Dadis Camara for the presidential elections of January 2010.
Security forces opened fire and used bayonets and knives to disperse the crowd. More
than 150 persons were killed, and over a thousand injured. Many individuals were
arrested on the scene, at their home or in hosp itals. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, in
June 2009, following the declaration of victory for President Ahmadinejad, security
forces killed several protestors when they peacefully took to the streets to contest the
election results. Security forces opened fi re during the demonstrations and used batons
and pepper spray to disperse the crowds. Several hundred people were arrested during
the protests following the presidential elections of 2009. In the Russian Federation,
peaceful protests against alleged fraudulent elections in the context of parliamentary
elections held in December 2011 were met with excessive use of force, with over a
thousand persons detained in various cities . Various acts of harassment, intimidation,
arbitrary detention of several activists and members of the opposition also occurred in
the context of the presidential protests on 6 May 2012. In the Bolivarian Republic of
Venezuela, in the wake of the presidential elections of April 2013, peaceful
demonstrations held in front of the offices of the national electoral commission in
several states were met with brute force by security forces, along with arbitrary
arrests. In Malaysia, security forces used indiscriminate force to repress a peaceful

A/68/299

9/21 13-42309

protest organized by the Coalition for Fa
ir and Free Elections (Bersih), which
advocates for the reform of the el ectoral process in that country.
19. Apart from using excessive force against peaceful protesters, in some
instances, States have criminalized the pa rticipation in and organization of peaceful
assemblies during election time, with a view to sanctioning or deterring those willing
or intending to do so. In Et hiopia, several peaceful dem onstrators and human rights
defenders were charged with “crimes of outrage against the constitutional order”, and
sentenced to life imprisonment for having participated in a demonstration against
alleged fraud in the general elections of May 2005, in which over 190 protestors were
reportedly killed by law enfo rcement authorities. After signing a statement admitting
that their activities had been unconstitutional, they received a pardon and were freed.
In the run-up to the legislative elections in Bahrain in September 2011, numerous
human rights defenders and their relatives were arrested, dismissed from their jobs
and subjected to intimidation and harassment for various politically motivated
offences, including “participating in illega l gatherings”. Following the presidential
elections in December 2010 in Belarus, hundreds of persons protesting on election
night were detained, including civil society activists, journalists, and opposition
leaders, including presidential candidates. A peaceful protestor was subsequently
sentenced to three years and six months in a labour colony on charges of mass
disorder, for his participation in peaceful pr otests. He was initially detained for an
administrative offence, but was later charged with a criminal offence, despite the fact
that the police officer who had filed his arrest warrant stated in court that he had not
actually seen him during the protest. Simila rly, in the Russian Federation, charges of
“mass disorder” have been pressed against peaceful protestors during election time.
Many demonstrators were arrested and accused, inter alia, of “public intimidation”
and “public incitation”. Pea ceful demonstrators in Azerbaijan have increasingly been
targeted in the context of the forthcoming elections of October 2013, with several of
them being arrested and/or fined. In Nepal in January 2006, four human rights
defenders were arrested because of their involvement in the organization of large-
scale peaceful demonstrations calling for a boycott of municipal elections scheduled
for the following month.
20. The Special Rapporteur warns against th e detention of peaceful demonstrators,
with a view to preventing their participa tion in assemblies which are critical of the
Government or ruling party. He is sim ilarly concerned about restriction orders
prohibiting demonstrators and defenders monitoring assemblies from remaining in,
entering, or passing through a city, as occurre d, for instance, in Malaysia in July 2011.
21. Fundamentally, the Special Rapporteur believes that all peaceful assemblies
held during the electoral process, whether or not in support of the ruling party or the
incumbent Government, should be entitled to equal treatment. Such assemblies should
receive equal protection and facilitation fro m the State, in fulfilment of its positive
obligation in this regard, irrespective of which category or group the demonstrators
belong to. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur warns against the increased
vulnerability of the aforementioned marginalized groups or groups most at risk from
attacks, derogatory comments, stigmatization, and undue restrictions, with a view to
serving political agendas, often from differen t parties. Some of them may also face the
revocation of passports and work permits for having taken part in solidarity protests.
As a consequence, peaceful assemblies orga nized by such groups, which may want to
seize the opportunity of elections to draw attention to their respective plights, are
adversely impacted. The Special Rapporteur is horrified by the aforementioned

A/68/299

13-42309 10/21
incidents in Guinea in September 2009, where many women participating in the
demonstration or present in the area we re stripped naked and sexually assaulted,
including by gang rape, both at the stadium and in detention. In Zimbabwe,
demonstrators peacefully advocating women ri ghts were brutalized in the context of
elections. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, five students were among those killed by
security forces in June 2009.
22. General Assembly laws, which are c onducive to the enjoyment of the right
to freedom of peaceful assembly, in comp liance with international human rights
law, should be applied to events related to the electoral process. In particular, these
laws should allow and facilitate spontaneous assemblies, bearing in mind that
greater tolerance is needed in times of elections, where diverse views and opinions
are expressed.
23. A central part of the positive State oblig ation to protect those exercising the right
to freedom of peaceful assembly is to ensu re protection against agents provocateurs
and counterdemonstrators, whose aim is to di srupt or disperse such assemblies. Such
individuals include those belonging to the State apparatus or working on its behalf.
The Special Rapporteur is concerned about th e State’s use of agents provocateurs to
disrupt assemblies, as was reportedly the case in Senegal in January 2012, prior to the
first round of the presidential elections. Similarly, greater efforts should be made to
allow, protect and facilitate peaceful simultaneous assemblies, and peaceful
counterdemonstrations, whenever possible. In sum, all forms of peaceful assemblies
should receive greater protection and facilitation from the authorities.
24. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur recalls that the right to freedom of
peaceful assembly does not require the issu ance of a permit to hold an assembly. If
necessary, a mere prior notification, intended for large assemblies or for assemblies at
which some degree of disruption is anticipated, may be required. Spontaneous
peaceful assemblies, which usually occur in re action to a specific event — such as the
announcement of results — and which by definition cannot be subject to prior
notification, should be more tolerated in the context of elections. In addition, the
Special Rapporteur considers la ws establishing authorization procedures to be even
more problematic in the context of elections, as authorization may be arbitrarily
denied, especially when demonstrators intend to criticize Government policies. In the
Sudan, a peaceful demonstration organized by an independent gubernatorial candidate
for the April 2010 elections was curbed by po lice forces invoking the failure of the
organizers to seek permission. Several protestors were arrested and/or injured by
security forces.
25. On the contrary, elections should never be seen as a pretext for States to
unduly restrict the right to freedom of peaceful assembly. As previously mentioned,
blanket bans, which are intrinsically disproportionate and discriminatory, should be
prohibited, and restrictions on a peaceful assembly in relation to its “time, place and
manner” should be limited to the extent that such restrictions meet the aforementioned
strict test of necessity and proportionality (see
A/HRC/23/39 , para. 59). In fact, given
the importance of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in the
context of elections, the threshold for imposing such restrictions should be higher than
usual: the criteria of “necessity in a democrat ic society” and “proportionality” should
be more difficult to meet during election time. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur is
dismayed that blanket bans have been us ed during election time, with a view to
muzzling dissenting voices. In Kenya, in March 2013, following the results of the

A/68/299

11/21 13-42309

presidential elections, the police chief re
portedly banned all public gatherings,
including “illegal groupings” around the S upreme Court, prayer meetings, political
meetings and rallies, until a petition challe nging the presidential poll results was
heard and decided upon. That decision was reportedly based on the fact that
demonstrations may have triggered animosity and violence. When justified, “time,
place and manner’” restrictions which comply with international human rights
norms and standards should be applied e qually, once again, whether the peaceful
assembly is in favour of or against the Government and the ruling party.
26. The Special Rapporteur further warns against imposing a state of emergency
during election time, in order to temporarily suspend the rights to freedom of
peaceful assembly. Should this nevertheless occur, he recalls that, according to the
Human Rights Committee, during a state of emergency, the rights to freedom of
peaceful assembly and of association should not be derogated since the possibility
of restricting certain Covenant rights under the terms of, for instance, freedom of
assembly, is generally sufficient during su ch situations and no derogation from the
provisions in question would be justified by the exigencies of the situation.
10
27. The Special Rapporteur recalls that organizers of peaceful protests should not
bear responsibility for the unlawful behaviour of others, including in times of
elections. In Malaysia, in May 2012, the federal Government announced that it would
sue the organizers of the Bersih 3.0 rally of 28 April 2012 calling for free and fair
elections, in relation to property which wa s allegedly destroyed during the said rally.
28. It is also important to allow the unimp eded access to and use of the Internet, in
particular social media, and other in formation and communication technology,
which are essential tools, es pecially in times of elections, by which the right to
freedom of peaceful assembly can be exer cised, but also monitored and reported
upon in relation to human rights violations and abuses. In the Islamic Republic of
Iran, in the context of the presidential elections of 2009, access to social media was
temporarily blocked across the country, si nce many bloggers reported on violations
against peaceful protestors and foreign me dia were denied access. In Nepal, in
relation to the aforementioned demonstra tion, telephone lines and mobile phones
were cut off in Kathmandu and other major cities by the Nepalese authorities.
29. The Special Rapporteur finally emphasizes again the crucial role played by
human rights defenders, including journa lists, who monitor assemblies and who
have been targeted in the context of elections. In Belarus, in December 2010, the
Chair of the Belarusian Helsinki Committee, among other activists, was arrested and
detained by security forces while observing a demonstration organized by an
opposition candidate, which was held in front of the Government headquarters. He
was taken to pre-trial detention facility before being placed in police custody. In
Malaysia, media personnel covering a prot est organized by Bersih were allegedly
targeted by security forces, while docu menting police brutality, despite clearly
identifying themselves as media personnel.

__________________
10 General comment No. 29 (2001) on derogations from provisions of the Covenant during a state
of emergency, para. 5.

A/68/299

13-42309 12/21
IV. Freedom of association

A. Political parties

30. Everyone has the right to form or join a political party and conversely, no one
should be compelled to belong to a political party. The Human Rights Committee, in
its general comment No. 25 (para. 26), has stated that political parties and
membership in parties play a significant role in the conduct of public affairs and the
election process. Political parties are indeed the primary vehicles through which
people can participate in the conduct of public affairs. The Special Rapporteur
recognises political parties as a subset of associations included in the right to freedom
of association enshrined in article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. As such, the principles and minimum standards elaborated by the
Special Rapporteur in his thematic report on best practices (
A/HRC/20/27 ) generally
apply to the regulation of political parties. Nevertheless, political parties are
organizations formed to carry out particular objectives, that is, presenting candidates
for elections in order to be represented in po litical institutions and to exercise political
power on any level, national or local,
11 and may therefore be subject to specific
requirements not neces sary for other civil society or ganizations. According to the
European Court of Human Rights, it is in the nature of the role they play that political
parties, the only bodies which can come to power, also have the capacity to influence
the whole of the regime in their countries. By the proposals for an overall societal
model which they put before the electorate and by their capacity to implement those
proposals once they come to power, political parties differ from other organizations
which intervene in the political arena.
12
31. The Special Rapporteur agrees with the Human Rights Committee, in
paragraph 19 of general comment No. 25, that freedom of expression, assembly and
association are essential conditions for the ef fective exercise of the right to vote and
must be fully protected and that States should ensure that, in their internal
management, political parties respect the applicable provisions of article 25 in order to
enable citizens to exercise their rights thereunder. As the Special Rapporteur noted
previously, a minimum number of individuals may be required to establish a political
party, but this number should not be set at a level that would discourage people from
engaging in associations (
A/HRC/20/27 , para. 54). Other requirements might be in
force, such as concerning geographic or ethnic representation, but the Special
Rapporteur warns against this type of measure that is ultimately discriminatory to the
formation of any political party. A regist ration regime is not necessary for the
formation or operation of political parties, but where it is in place, it should never be
subject to authorities’ prior approval.
32. In the light of the fact that political parties have a decision-making role in
ensuring pluralism and the proper functioning of democracy, a presumption in favour
of formation of political parties means that adverse decisions should be strictly
justified in accordance with the standards es tablished by article 22 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in relation to proportionality and necessity in a
democratic society. As for the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, the Special
__________________
11 European Commission for De mocracy through Law, Venice Co mmission, Code of conduct of
good practice in the field of political parties, 2009, CDL-AD(2009)021.

12 European Court of Human Rights, Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey ,
Application Nos. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98, 41344/98, 13 February 2003, para. 87.

A/68/299

13/21 13-42309

Rapporteur believes that the proportionality and necessity test should be stricter in
times of elections. In 2011, concerns were expressed about the case of a few Saudi
citizens who submitted a request for recognition of what could have been Saudi
Arabia’s first political party, and who were a few days later arrested and requested to
sign an undertaking that they would renounce their activities with the party. Those
who refused to do so were placed in detention. The Special Rapporteur considers this
to be an example of a blatant violation of
the right to freedom of association. By all
means, political parties whose applications have been rejected should be provided
the opportunity to seek remedy before an independent and impartial court
(
A/HRC/20/27 , paras. 60-61).
33. Political parties are entitled to a level playing field in order to compete fairly
in the electoral contest. A level playing field does not mean that all parties should
have the same treatment in every case; rather, they should receive equitable treatment
based on reasonable and objective criteria. All parties complying with international
human rights norms and standards are entitled to equality of opportunity. As such, at a
minimum, no political party should be discriminated against, unfairly advantaged or
disadvantaged by the State. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur emphasizes
equality of opportunity for political parties in respect of their ability to access funding
and to exercise their rights to freedom of expression, including through peaceful
demonstrations.
34. In his second thematic report (
A/HRC/23/39 ), the Special Rapporteur identified
the ability of associations to access financial resources as an integral element of the
right to freedom of association. The question of funding has far-reaching
consequences on the right to freedom of association for political parties in the context
of elections. Funding ensures that political parties are able to function on a day-to-day
basis, to participate in the political arena, to represent a plurality of views, interests
and perspectives, thus strengthening democracy. Funding may also have perverse
effects on democratic potential, requiring certain regulation. The Special Rapporteur
shares the view of the Human Rights Committee, in general comment No. 25 (para.
19) that reasonable limitations on campaign expenditure may be justified where this is
necessary to ensure that the free choice of voters is not undermined or the democratic
process distorted by the disproportionate e xpenditure on behalf of any candidate or
party.
35. Some overarching principles could be drawn upon to guide the development
and operation of political party financing rule s. Public financing of political parties is
often used as an avenue to provide equality of opportunity to all parties and guarantee
competitive participation of diverse ideas and views. Public funding principally
benefits parties that are unable to otherw ise raise private funds for any number of
reasons, including because they are smaller parties, or their ideology does not appeal
to a majority of would-be donors, or those that represent marginalized groups, such as
women and youth. Hence, public funding should not be used to interfere with a
party’s independence and further or create overdependency on State resources.
13
36. More broadly, party resources should be differentiated from public resources.
Public resources should not be used to tilt the electoral playing field in a party’s
favour and in particular the incumbent party or its candidates. This principle extends
__________________
13 OSCE/Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and the Venice Commission,
Guidelines on Political Party Regulation , 2010, paras. 176-177.

A/68/299

13-42309 14/21
to the use of State institutions, such as police forces, the judiciary, the prosecutorial
authority, law enforcement agencies and others, which should be impartial when
controlling or limiting the activities of po litical parties, such as by initiating
politically motivated court cases against rival candidates, in effect, preventing them
from engaging in campaign activities.
37. Pluralism is a hallmark of democracy with political parties as catalysts for
debate and dialogue in democratic societies, such debate forming the basis of the
voter’s choice of representatives. The European Court of Human Rights considers that
there can be no democracy without pluralism. It is for that reason that freedom of
expression is applicable not only to “inf ormation” or “ideas” that are favourably
received or regarded as inoffensive or as a ma tter of indifference, but also to those that
offend, shock or disturb.
14 In another landmark decision, the Court found a violation
of freedom of association stating that mention of the consciousness of belonging to a
minority and the preservation and developmen t of a minority’s culture cannot be said
to constitute a threat to “democratic society”, even though it may provoke tensions. It
further stated that the emergence of tensions is one of the unavoidable consequences
of pluralism, that is to say the free discussion of all political ideas.
15
38. Political parties thus, have the freedom to choose and pursue ideologies, even
if these are unpopular with the authorities or the public in general, including the
ability to call for a boycott of elections, wi thout fearing retaliation for doing so. The
freedom of political parties to expression and opinion, particularly through electoral
campaigns, including the right to seek, receive and impart information, is as such,
essential to the integrity of elections. The Special Rapporteur recalls that, in its
resolution
12/16 , the Human Rights Council made clear that, in principle, no
restriction is permissible with regard, inter alia, to: discussion of Government policies
and political debate; reporting on human rights, Government activities and corruption
in Government; engaging in election campai gns, peaceful demonstrations or political
activities, including for peace or democr acy; and expression of opinion and dissent,
religion or belief, including by persons belonging to minorities or vulnerable groups.
The Special Rapporteur emphasizes that, only when a political party or any of its
candidates uses violence or advocates for violence or national, racial or religious
hatred constituting incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (art. 20,
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, also reflected in art. 5 of the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination),
16 or when it carries out activities or acts aimed at the destruction of
the rights and freedoms enshrined in international human rights law (art. 5,
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), can it be lawfully prohibited.
39. Central to the freedom of expression of political parties is the opportunity for
them to have equal access to the media, particularly where the latter is State-owned
or controlled. Legislation should provide a clear framework for the implementation
of equal access to media, including during the campaign period. For example, all
parties presenting candidates for elections are entitled to coverage by public media,
and in this regard, the allocation of free me dia time ensures that all political parties,
__________________
14 European Court of Human Rights, Handyside v. United Kingdom , para. 49.
15 European Court of Human Rights, Ouranio Toxo v. Greece , Application No. 74989/01,
20 October 2005, para. 40.

16 See https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvent s/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=13584&
LangID=E.

A/68/299

15/21 13-42309

including small parties, are able disseminate their views and ideas. 17 The allocation
of media time before an election should be equal, on the basis of the principles on
equality before the law and non-discrimination. Denying specific parties’ access to
public media or providing biased coverage based on, for example, the unacceptability
of the party or candidate’s views is incompatible with the rights to freedom of
association and expression. Attention should be paid to the distinction between access
to the media as a political party and acces s to media as State officials due to the
potential for unfair advantage that arises out of incumbent political parties using
media coverage of official duties as a campaign platform.
40. Since the inception of his mandate, the Special Rapporteur has received
numerous allegations to the effect that, during electoral periods, political leaders
and supporters, particularly from the opposition, face heightened risks. Prior to,
during and after an election, those who voice or have voiced dissent are in many
countries subject to, inter alia, harassment, in timidation, corruption attempts, reprisals,
arbitrary arrests and imprisonment, solely on account of their political opinions or
beliefs. In this respect, the Special Rap porteur is disturbed about the case of an
opposition leader from Belarus who was subject, in 2011, to a harsh sentencing, after
he participated in a rally protesting the ou tcome of the presidential elections on 19
December 2011. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, concern was expressed in relation to
former presidential candidates who staged a rally in solidarity with protesters in
Egypt, for which they had sought permission from the authorities, and who have been
kept largely “incommunicado” in their homes since February 2011.
41. Political parties and their members unduly restricted from exercising their
right to free association should have recour se to prompt and effective remedies. The
Special Rapporteur again stresses that States have an obligation to provide
independent and impartial institutions, including electoral management bodies and
media regulatory authorities, in addition to an independent judiciary, to ensure that
electoral processes are not exploited, there by creating an uneven playing field for any
political party. In order to be effectiv e, the regulatory body should be independent
from executive powers, be empowered and ha ve adequate capacity to formulate,
monitor and enforce regulations. These are the key conditions for ensuring the
respect of the right to freedom of association in the context of elections.

B. Civil society organizations

42. Civil society organizations have also an important role to play in the context of
elections. The role of civil society in co ntributing to and sustaining a robust
democracy cannot be underestimated. In different capacities, organizations undertake
various activities to advocate for the concer ns and interests of their beneficiaries, to
contribute to ensuring the integr ity of the electoral process, to further contribute to the
achievement, protection and strengthening of democratic goals and standards, and to
keeping authorities accountable to the electorate. Among other things, civil society
organizations promote political participation, undertake voter education, campaign for
good governance reforms, provide vehicles for the expression of different interests,
but also act as platforms that cut across tr ibal, ethnic, linguistic and other barriers,
and catalyse public debate on issues that affect them.
__________________
17 OSCE/Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and the Venice Commission,
Guidelines on Political Party Regulation , 2011, para. 147.

A/68/299

13-42309 16/21
43. The Special Rapporteur stresses that the right to freedom of association
necessarily entails the freedom of associations to decide and engage in activities of
their own choosing and this extends to those wishing to engage in election-related
activities. Thus, among other liberties, associations have the freedom to advocate for
electoral and broader policy reforms; to discuss issues of public concern and
contribute to public debate; to monitor and observe election processes; to report on
human rights violations and electoral fraud; to initiate polls and surveys, such as those
conducted during the voting process; to freely access the media, including new media,
such as the Internet; to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds,
regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or online; to build coalitions and
networks with other organizations, including from abroad; to engage in fundraising
activities; to engage in election observa tion, voter education and the inspection of
voters’ rolls; to interact with international and regional human rights bodies; and to
provide any forms of technical assist ance and international cooperation.
44. Civil society organizations are inherent ly different from political parties, the
ultimate objective of which is to promote candidates who will run for elections with
the aim to govern. Thus, different regulations and restrictions are applicable to the
former. In line with this, associations should not be compelled to register as political
parties and conversely, they should not be denied registration as associations because
they carry out what the authorities consider to be “political” activities. It is a source of
serious concern that the term “political” has been interpreted in many countries in
such a broad manner as to cover all sorts of advocacy activities; civic education;
research; and more generally, activities ai med at influencing public policy or public
opinion. It is clear that this interpretation is solely motivated by the need to deter any
forms of criticism. In this regard, concern was expressed about the situation in the
Russian Federation, where a human rights organization was the subject of an
inspection from the Prosecutor’s General Offi ce, which claimed that the organization
had engaged in “political activity” by “ purposefully influencing the image of the
electoral commissions and other State organs, through participation in the electoral
process”, after some members of the organization alleged irregularities during the
December 2011 elections. The Special Rappor teur recalls that the right to freedom of
association is itself a civil and political righ t facilitating the participation of all in
decision-making of public affairs. Freedom of association provides individuals with
unique opportunities to express their political opinions and to engage in cultural,
economic and social activities. In fact, associ ations accused of engaging in “political”
activities are often those that seek to keep Governments accountable, through good
governance and rule of law initiatives, such as anti-corruption measures, human rights
campaigns, institutional reforms and similar measures designed to strengthen
democracy. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that labelling associations as
“political”, and on that basis associating th em with opposition parties or preventing
them from operating, is largely intended to silence voices that are critical of
Government policies and practices.
45. Although civil society organizations play an essential role during election
time, freedom of association is, in many countries, restricted before, during and after
elections. As noted by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights
defenders, acts of intimidation against civic activists often start long before the
beginning of election campaigns (
A/HRC/13/22 para. 56). Restrictions placed on
unregistered associations preventing them from taking part in activities related to
the electoral process is one way of obstructing the work of independent voices. As the

A/68/299

17/21 13-42309

Special Rapporteur has stated in
previous reports, the right to freedom of association
applies equally to associations that are not registered (
A/HRC/20/27 , para. 56).
Because of their marginalization, women, youth, minorities, indigenous groups or
persons with disabilities may form or join unregist ered associations for the
advancement of their interests. States should play an active role in removing barriers
that keep these marginalized and disempowered groups from participating in public
life and exercising their rights in the context of elections. This is vital to ensure that
their voices are heard and their causes take n into account in the policies of the next
Government.
46. The freedom of associations to engage in activities related to the electoral
process should therefore be guaranteed to all associations, whether they are
apolitical in their means and operations, partially or totally supportive of the
Government or express criticism of Govern ment policies. Hence, no associations
should be compelled to express support for any electoral candidate. Nevertheless, it
is important for any organization which voluntarily supports a particular candidate
or a party in an election to be transparent in declaring its motivation, as its support
may impact on elections’ results. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that the
strength of a democracy can be gauged by the extent to which diverse views and
differing opinions are accommodated and even encouraged in public debate.
47. The right to freedom of association is an essential component of democracy
that empowers men and women and is therefore particularly important where
individuals may espouse minority or dissenting religious or political beliefs
(Council resolution
15/21 , preamble). As such, no restrictions should be placed on
associations, solely because they do not share the same views as those in authority.
48. Governments in many countries are increasingly imposing restrictions on civil
society’s ability to engage in the establishment of transparent, accountable and fair
democratic machinery and also from undertaking activities such as election
monitoring and voter mobilization. Barriers include the prohibition for certain
groups to register as associations; the prohibition from carrying out some activities
where a restrictive list of authorized activities is not provided by the legal
framework; the obligation to adopt negative labels; the denial of accreditations to
associations to observe and monitor electi ons; or even the imposition of sanctions or
threats of sanctions for engaging in activities related to the electoral process. In the
Russian Federation, the implementation of the 2012 Introducing Amendments to
Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation Regarding the Regulation of
Activities of Non-commercial Organizati ons Performing the Function of Foreign
Agents, the compliance of which with interna tional standards is analysed in depth in
the Special Rapporteur’s second thematic report to the Human Rights Council
(
A/HRC/23/39 ), has led to audits and inspection campaigns against numerous civic
organizations that have conducted “political activities” and have failed to register as
a “foreign agent”. One of them, Golos Association for the defence of the rights of
voters, whose Internet website was hacked in the run-up to the parliamentary
elections, was, in April 2013, the first orga nization to be penalized under the new law.
49. As described in previous reports by the Special Rapporteur, any restrictions
must be permitted by international law, an d thus meet the strict requirements of
international human rights law. In the c ontext of elections, the Special Rapporteur
believes that the test threshold should be raised to a higher level. It is therefore, not
sufficient for a State to inv oke the protection of the integrity of the election process,

A/68/299

13-42309 18/21
the need to ensure non-partisan and impartial elections, the need to preserve peace
or security to limit th ese rights, insofar as the context of elections is a critical time
when individuals have a say about the fate of their country. In this regard, the
Human Rights Committee stated that the reference to “democratic society” in the
context of article 22, indicates in the Committee’s opinion, that the existence and
operation of associations, including thos e which peacefully promote ideas not
necessarily favourably viewed by the Government or the majority of the population,
is a cornerstone of a democratic society.
18
50. In some cases, State interference does not occur when an association is formed,
but while an association is carrying out its activities. Often, restrictions occur when
authorities are faced with minority or dissenting views, or even when authorities
fear being held accountable for their failure to respect human rights. In Zimbabwe,
the offices of the Election Support Network, a coalition of 31 non-governmental
organizations formed in 2000 to promote free and fair elections, were arbitrarily
searched, on the grounds that the organization allegedly had “subversive material,
documents, gadgets or recordings and had contravened the Immigration Act”. These
searches have been perceived by civil society actors as an attempt to intimidate and
silence their voices in the context of the 2013 referendum and elections.
51. It is disturbing that in the context of elections, some States resort to
intimidation, harassment, civil and crim inal defamation, or threats against
associations’ leaders who aim to express their opinions, grievances and aspirations.
The Special Rapporteur expresses grave concerns about the following situations
where international human rights norms and standards related to freedom of
association were violated. In Malaysia, one of the leaders of the Coalition for Fair
and Free Elections who has monitored the 2013 elections in the country, had been,
on various occasions, the target of seve re and sustained acts of harassment,
intimidation and smear campaign describing her as “an enemy who tried to smear
the nation’s name”. In Nicaragua, human rights defenders active in associations,
who expressed concerns over a decision of the Constitutional Court allowing for the
re-election of the President we re reportedly subjected to death threats, assaults and
acts of intimidation. In Rwanda, a regional umbrella organization working on
human rights issues in the country reporte dly experienced threats and intimidation
after it published a controversial report on legislative elections.
52. In other cases, civic activists faced arbitrary detention and long prison terms
after unfair trials. In Belarus, where multiple home and office raids, arrests, trials and
detention of numerous human rights defenders active in civic associations took place
as a result of their legitimate human rights activities during the presidential elections
in December 2010, including the sentencing of the Chairperson of the Human Rights
Centre “Viasna” to four and one-half years in detention. In the Islamic Republic of
Iran, a prominent lawyer was sentenced in 2011 to 11 years of imprisonment, which
was later reduced to a six-year prison te rm, and a 10-year ban on practising as a
lawyer for “propaganda against the State”, “collusion and gathering with the aim of
acting against national security” and “membership of the Defenders of Human Rights
Centre”. The accusations brought against th e human rights lawyer were allegedly
based on interviews she had had with media in relation to her clients, who had been
imprisoned after the June 2009 presidential election in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
__________________
18 Human Rights Committee, Boris Zvozskov et al v. Belarus (2001), CCPR/C/88/D/1039/2001,
para. 7.2.

A/68/299

19/21 13-42309

53. Activities that involve monitoring and observation of the conduct of election
processes by international groups may also be subject to undue restrictions. In this
context, it is worth
recalling that the protection of State sovereignty against external
interferences is not listed as a legitimate interest in article 22 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Special Rapporteur underscores the fact
that States cannot refer to additional grounds, even those provided by domestic
legislation, to restrict the right to freedom of association. Hence, restrictive measures
imposed under this guise unduly limit as sociations in their free operations.
Governments that exclude independent international observers from electoral
processes by enacting legislation to this effect, by making the process of registering as
an election monitor burdensome, or by inviting only friendly observation groups that
will not be critical in their monitoring, thus diluting or countering any criticism by
independent impartial groups, do not guarant ee the right to freedom of association.
The Special Rapporteur recognizes that elections constitute a significant event in the
life of a nation and should be protected from foreign interference. Nevertheless, he
also recognizes the need to establish clear, specific and objective criteria that would
enable independent and impartial election observation by all monitors, including from
abroad. In this regard, blanket restrictions on international election observers groups
are inherently disproportionate and thus incompatible with international law
standards.
54. In the run-up to elections or following contested elections, there may also be
instances of Governments’ blocking funding for civil society organizations, including
those with mandates that are closely related to the conduct of elections. For instance,
in the run-up to the 2013 elections, the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of
Venezuela adopted the law against organized crime and terrorist financing, which
restricts funding of “foundations, civic associ ations, non-profit associations, as well as
associations having political ends or groups of individuals who run for elections”. The
Special Rapporteur, in his second thematic report (
A/HRC/23/39 ), established access
to funding for civil society organizations as an integral part of the right to freedom of
association. He stated that any constraints on associat ions’ ability to access foreign
funding should be necessary in a democratic society and that common justifications
offered by States, such as counter-terrorism measures, protection of State sovereignty,
enhancement of aid effectiveness, and the improvement of transparency and
accountability of civil society, often do not meet this strict standard.
55. Cases of arbitrary termination, suspension or closure of associations as a result
of activities carried out in the context of elections are another source of concerns. In
early April 2012, the Government of Swaziland deregistered the Trade Union
Congress of Swaziland and declared it illegal, after some leaders of the organization
called for the boycott of the 2013 elections. Such a drastic decision does not comply
with international norms and standards pert aining to freedom of association, which
make clear that termination, suspension or closure of associations are only possible
by a court judgement based on clear and imminent danger when an association
resorts to violence, or aims at the attainment of its objective by violence or by
instigating discrimination, hostility or violence , or is aimed at the destruction of the
rights and freedoms enshrined in international human rights law.

A/68/299

13-42309 20/21
V. Conclusions and recommendations

56. The Special Rapporteur wishes to underscore the fact that electoral periods
are a unique moment in the life of a nation to confirm, and even strengthen,
democratic principles, such as non-discri mination, gender equality, pluralism of
views and parity. Democracy is a singular way of allowing for effective popular
participation in decision-making processes at both national and local levels. He
stresses that electoral periods are such an important time to build democratic,
responsive and accountable institutions and that very strict and clear safeguards
should be put in place by States to prevent undue interference in public
freedoms, in particular in the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of
association. Further, in times of elections, States should make greater efforts to
facilitate and protect the exercise of thes e core rights, which should be enjoyed by
everyone, especially by members of groups at risk. In effect, genuine elections
cannot be achieved if the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of
association are curtailed.
57. The Special Rapporteur is deeply concerned about the increase in human
rights violations and abuses in several parts of the world, committed against
those who exercise or seek to exercise th e rights to freedom of peaceful assembly
and of association in the context of elections, which indelibly stain such elections.
In the light of this, he wishes to make the following recommendations, which
should be read in conjunction with thos e already formulated in his two thematic
reports presented at the Huma n Rights Council in 2012 (
A/HRC/20/27, para. 84-
100) and 2013 (
A/HRC/23/39 , para. 81-83), some of which are reiterated here.
58. The Special Rapporteur calls upon States in times of elections:
(a) To recognize that the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of
association play a decisive role in th e emergence and existence of effective
democratic systems, as they allow fo r dialogue, pluralism, tolerance and
broadmindedness, where minority or dissenting views or beliefs are respected;
(b) To ensure that the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of
association are enjoyed by everyone, any registered or unregistered entities,
including women, those victims of discrimination because of their sexual
orientation and gender identity, youth, persons belonging to minorities,
indigenous peoples, non-nationals, incl uding stateless persons, refugees or
migrants, and members of religious groups, as well as activists advocating
economic, social, and cultural rights;
(c) To ensure that no one is criminalized for exercising the rights to
freedom of peaceful assembly and of associ ation, nor is subject to threats or use
of violence, harassment, persecution, intimidation or reprisals;
(d) To greater facilitate and protect the exercise of the rights to freedom
of peaceful assembly and of association, and in this regard, be particularly
vigilant in relation to the specific needs of the aforementioned groups which are
at greater risk of attacks and stigmatization of all types;
(e) To ensure that an enabling framework is provided for political parties
to be formed — regardless of their political ideology — and to enjoy the level
playing field, in particular in relation to their ability to access funding, and to
exercise their rights to freedom of expression, including through peaceful
demonstrations and access to the media;

A/68/299

21/21 13-42309

(f) To increase the threshold for imposing legitimate restrictions on the
rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, that is, to ensure that
the strict test of necessity and proport ionality in a democratic society, coupled
with the principle of non-discrimination, is made particularly difficult to meet;
(g) To ensure that a well detailed and timely written explanation for the
imposition of any restriction is provided, and that such restrictions can
promptly be the subject of an indepe ndent and impartial judicial review;
(h) To provide individuals exercising their rights to freedom of peaceful
assembly and of association with the prot ection offered by the right to freedom
of expression;
(i) To allow unimpeded access to and use of information and
communication technology through which the right to freedom of peaceful
assembly and of association can be exercised;
(j) To ensure that those who violate and/or abuse the rights of individuals
to freedom of association and of peaceful assembly are held fully accountable by
an independent and democratic oversight body and by the courts of law;
(k) To ensure that victims of violations and abuses of the rights to
freedom of peaceful assembly and of asso ciation have the right to a timely and
effective remedy and obtain redress.
59. The Special Rapporteur calls upon national human rights institutions
complying with the Paris Principles to pl ay a key role in monitoring and publicly
reporting on the fulfilment by the States of the abovementioned
recommendations.
60. The Special Rapporteur calls upon election observers to place particular
emphasis on the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of
association when determining whet her an election was genuine.
61. The Special Rapporteur calls upon international and regional human
rights mechanisms, including special procedures, treaty bodies and the
universal periodic review, to pay specific attention to the issue of elections as a
context where the rights of freedom of peaceful assembly and association are
more likely to be curtailed.
62. The Special Rapporteur again encourage s the Human Rights Committee
to consider developing general comme nts on articles 21 and 22 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, with a particular focus on
the enjoyment of both rights in the context of elections.
63. The Special Rapporteur calls upon th e General Assembly and the Human
Rights Council to address thoroughly the issue of human rights violations and
abuses in the context of elections.
64. The Special Rapporteur ca lls upon the diplomatic community and other
relevant stakeholders to publicly denounce violations and abuses committed
against those exercising or seeking to exercise their rights to freedom of peaceful
assembly and of association in the context of elections, and to provide support
to these victims.