Acceso usuarios
Si en los inicios se interpretaba el art. 3-P1 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos (CEDH) como una garantía institucional de las elecciones libres, con el paso del tiempo su elucidación ha evolucionado hacia el reconocimiento de los derechos subjetivos de sufragio activo y pasivo. Con todo, el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) ha considerado conforme con el CEDH cualquier tipo de sistema electoral, recurriendo para ello a la doctrina del margen de apreciación nacional. Así, pese a que el sufragio igual se considera uno de los pilares del patrimonio electoral europeo, el TEDH no ha considerado contrarios al Convenio sistemas electorales que producen desigualdades evidentes en el valor del voto de los ciudadanos. Tampoco ha declarado contrarias al CEDH barreras electorales realmente elevadas a nivel comparado
If in the beginning art. 3-P1 from the European Convention of Human Rights (CEDH) was interpreted as an institutional guarantee of free elections, with the passing of time its elucidation has evolved towards the recognition of the subjective rights of active and passive suffrage. In all, the European Tribunal of Human Rights (TEDH) has considered in compliance with CEDH any type of electoral system, resorting, for this purpose, to the doctrine of the margin of national appreciation. Thus, in spite of the fact that suffrage is considered one of the pillars of the European electoral heritage, the TEDH has not considered electoral systems that bring about obvious inequalities in the value of the vote of the citizens to be contrary to the Convention. Neither has it declared contrary to CEDH really elevated electoral barriers at a comparative level
