20. As to the claim of inadmissibility of the matter before the Court, regarding
the right at stake – the right to participate in elections and in the
management of public affairs – that it is a personal right and not a right of
a political party, the Court must first of all recall that it is not seised in the
instant matter by political parties only, but equally by citizens of Burkina
Faso. But even if it were seised by associations of a political nature, the
Court is of the view that nothing would prevent it from sitting on the case,
for the reason that such restriction on the enjoyment of such right may
breach the rights of a political party, which is a body whose mission
consists precisely of insisting on citizens’ right to vote in political elections
and to participate in the management of public affairs. Not only that the
texts governing the Court do not exclude legal entities from bringing cases
before the Court – on condition that they come before the Court as victims
(Article 10 (d) of the 2005 Protocol on the Court), but it would be purely
artificial and unreasonable for the Court to deny political parties the right
to bring their cases before it, once the rights relating to their assigned
mission of participating in the electoral race are violated.
21. Hence, the claim in respect of inadmissibility of the Application, as
maintained by Burkina Faso, is hereby dismissed.
22. As to the merits of the case,
The issue submitted before the Court is relatively simple. Essentially, it is
a matter of determining whether the amendment of the Burkina Faso
electoral law, in regard to how it was applied, disregarded the right of
certain political parties and citizens to compete in a voting process and to
participate in elections.
23. To answer this question, the Court must first of all recall a number of
principles deriving from the texts governing it, and from its case law.
24. The first of these principles, which assumes a particular significance in the
case submitted before the Court, is the Court’s refusal to assume the role of
a judge over the domestic law of the Member States. The Court has indeed
9