Is the Ban on Political Parties a Common Practice in Europe?

On September 5th, a Georgian Dream MP, Nino Tsilosani, published a post on her Facebook page about the banning of political parties in member states of the Council of Europe. According to Tsilosani, there have been around 150 such cases, with 22 in Ukraine, 13 in France, 9 in Romania, 4 in Spain, 3 in Italy, 3 in the Netherlands, and similar cases in Belgium, Germany, Austria, Estonia, Moldova, the United Kingdom, and other countries.

It is noteworthy that on August 21st, Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze spoke about the potential banning of opposition parties in Georgia. He emphasized several times that banning guilty parties is a common practice, especially in countries that are candidates for EU membership.

Nino Tsilosani’s statement about the ban on political parties is manipulative. She fails to clarify that the banned parties in these countries are predominantly Nazi, communist, separatist, or Islamist, and were prohibited due to violent, terrorist, hate-promoting, discriminatory, or separatist activities. This omission creates the false impression that banning opposition parties is a common practice in Council of Europe member states, which is not true. In reality, the issue of banning parties in these countries is regulated not only by domestic law but also by the European Convention on Human Rights. As the Venice Commission explains, banning a political party is an extreme measure that must be applied only in exceptional cases and with sufficient evidence, respecting principles of fair trial and proportionality. It applies only to parties that use violence or advocate for the violent overthrow of the democratic constitutional order, undermining constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms.

The numbers Nino Tsilosani refers to are from an article by Ukrainian researcher Bohdan Bernatsky, titled “Why and when democracies ban political parties: a classifcation of democratic state orientations to party bans,” published this year. The appendix of the article lists specific groups included in these figures:

It is important to note that not all groups listed are political parties. For example, in France, the last three associations mentioned were football fan groups.

This trend is also seen in a 2017 article that studied the practice of banning political parties in democratic European countries between 1945 and 2015. The article provides a table explaining the reasons for bans: anti-democratic ideology, non-democratic internal organization, violence, and the protection of the present order.

As for Romania, it is noteworthy that the Communist Party (Nepeceriști) was denied registration by the Bucharest court in 1996 due to unconstitutional communist doctrine. However, the European Court of Human Rights later ruled that this decision violated the European Convention on Human Rights, and the party was registered in 2006.

The European Convention on Human Rights is precisely the international treaty that should be considered alongside a country’s domestic laws when banning political parties. The Venice Commission’s guidelines on the dissolution and prohibition of political parties explain that such decisions by states must comply with the Convention. According to the guidelines, party activities are guaranteed by the right to freedom of assembly and may only be sanctioned if the parties do not respect certain rules. Moreover, it is emphasized that the dissolution or ban is justified only for parties that use violence to overthrow the democratic constitutional order and undermine constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms. Additionally, the ban or dissolution of a political party should be used as a last resort, and before applying to the courts for such a request, the government should assess the country’s situation to determine whether the party truly poses a threat to the free and democratic political order and the protection of individuals’ rights, and whether other, less radical measures could be taken to prevent the threat.

According to the Venice Commission, a decision to ban or dissolve a party should be made by the Constitutional Court, based on principles of an open and fair trial. Declaring a party unconstitutional should be an exceptional case, respecting the principle of proportionality and requiring sufficient evidence that the party as a whole, not just its individual members, is engaged in unconstitutional activities.

Regarding Ukraine and Moldova, manipulative claims about party bans have been repeatedly circulated. In reality, the bans in these countries affected parties linked to Russia, not undesirable opposition parties. You can read more on this topic in an article by Myth Detector:

• Were Undesirable Parties and Media Outlets Banned by the Governments in Moldova and Ukraine?

The article has been written in the framework of Facebook’s fact-checking program. You can read more about the restrictions that Facebook may impose based on this article via this link. You can find information about appealing or editing our assessment via this link.

Read detailed instructions for editing the article.
Read detailed appeal instructions.