On June 12, 2026, a group of members of the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia introduced a draft law on amendments to the Electoral Code of the Republic of Armenia[1]. The draft proposes that the right to vote in nationwide elections and referendums be granted only to citizens who, as of the 48th day preceding the voting day—or, in the case of extraordinary elections to the National Assembly, as of the 28th day preceding the voting day—have been physically present in the Republic of Armenia for at least 183 days during the preceding 365-day period. The only exceptions would be citizens whose absence from Armenia was due to official duties performed abroad as part of public service for the Republic of Armenia or due to studies at higher education institutions abroad.
The draft law has not been subjected to any public consultation and has already been included on the agenda of the extraordinary session of the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia convened on July 2, 2026, as an urgent bill to be considered in both the first and second readings.
We, the undersigned civil society organizations and experts, strongly condemn the proposed draft Law on Amendments to the Electoral Code of the Republic of Armenia as unconstitutional and as an unlawful and disproportionate restriction of the principles of universal and equal suffrage, one that jeopardizes democratic principles and infringes upon the political rights of citizens of the Republic of Armenia.
Article 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia provides that elections to the National Assembly […] as well as referendums shall be conducted on the basis of universal, equal, free, and direct suffrage by secret ballot.
Pursuant to Article 48(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, citizens of the Republic of Armenia who have attained the age of eighteen by the day of the election to the National Assembly or the referendum have the right to vote and to participate in a referendum. Paragraph 4 of the same Article establishes the only permissible restrictions on the right to vote and to participate in referendums, providing that the right to vote may be denied only to persons who have been declared legally incapacitated by a final court judgment and to persons serving a sentence imposed by a final conviction for intentionally committed serious criminal offences.
The Constitution of the Republic of Armenia provides for no other restrictions on the right to vote, including any residency requirement applicable to citizens of the Republic of Armenia. Accordingly, any attempt to restrict the electoral rights of citizens of the Republic of Armenia through legislation is unlawful and arbitrary, as it is contrary to the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia.
Although the right to vote is not an absolute right and may be subject to certain conditions or restrictions, any such conditions or restrictions must be proportionate and necessary, and must not give rise to discrimination or arbitrariness.
In the case of Shindler v. the United Kingdom, the European Court of Human Rights held that, in order for measures imposed by a State to be compatible with the right to vote, they must not impair the very essence of the right or deprive it of its effectiveness, must pursue a legitimate aim, and must be proportionate. Furthermore, the right to vote is not a privilege, and in a democratic State in the twenty-first century the presumption should be in favour of inclusion. Any disenfranchisement of a group of the population must be compatible with the purposes underlying Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. Any general, automatic, and indiscriminate departure from the principle of universal suffrage risks undermining the democratic legitimacy of the elected legislature and the laws enacted by it.[2]:
The Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters of the Venice Commission provides that a requirement of permanent residence may be imposed; however, a residency duration requirement may be imposed on citizens only in relation to local or regional elections. It also provides that the right to vote and to stand for election may be granted to citizens residing abroad.[3]:
While States enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in setting residency requirements, this discretion is not unlimited. For example, the two-year residency requirement for participation in elections provided for by the Constitution and electoral legislation of Montenegro was assessed by the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR as an unjustified restriction, incompatible with international standards, including the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters, as well as the recommendations of OSCE/ODIHR and the Council of Europe.4]: Accordingly, Montenegro was recommended to remove the residency duration requirement from its Constitution and domestic legislation.[5]:
Furthermore, the Supreme Court of Canada has declared unconstitutional a provision of the Canada Elections Act that deprived Canadian citizens residing outside the country for more than five years of the right to vote.[6]։
In a number of countries, citizens who reside abroad for extended periods retain the right to vote if they have, at any point in the past, resided within the territory of the country or have been included in the national population register.[7]։
Accordingly, citizens of the Republic of Armenia residing abroad, by virtue of their citizenship alone, enjoy all the rights of citizens, including the right to vote. The concern expressed by the authors of the draft—that the participation of citizens residing abroad in elections may have a significant impact on the internal affairs of the Republic of Armenia—is unfounded, speculative, and unsupported by evidence. Therefore, policy-making should be guided by realistic assessments of impact rather than by public fears of a hypothetical “influx of voters from abroad.”՛՛[8] Moreover, the effective implementation of electoral reform requires the collection and assessment of issues in the post-electoral period, the conduct of consultations with stakeholders and broad public discussions, and the adoption of well-reasoned legislative regulations.
At the same time, although the draft has significant public importance and a substantial impact on the rights of citizens of the Republic of Armenia, it has not been discussed either with representatives of sectoral civil society organizations and experts, or with broader segments of the public. The draft has been hastily included, without any proper justification or impact assessment, in the extraordinary session of the outgoing National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia as legislation subject to urgent consideration, thereby undermining the principles of democratic governance.
Such an approach raises reasonable doubts that the legislative amendments are driven by political expediency, including with respect to the potential reduction, ahead of possible constitutional amendments, of the number of persons entitled to participate in a referendum through the restriction of the voting rights of citizens of the Republic of Armenia.
In light of the foregoing,
- We call upon the Members of Parliament who authored the draft to withdraw the draft law on amendments and additions to the Electoral Code of the Republic of Armenia (Constitutional Law).
- We call upon the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia to remove from its agenda the draft law on amendments and additions to the Electoral Code of the Republic of Armenia (Constitutional Law), as being contrary to the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia and international standards of electoral law.
- We call on the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia to ensure the proper conduct of public consultations on draft legislation concerning human rights and matters of public interest.
[1] http://www.parliament.am/drafts.php?sel=showdraft&DraftID=16474&Reading=0
[2] Շինդլերն ընդդեմ Միացյալ Թագավորության, դիմում 19840/09, վճիռ 07.05.2023թ., պարագրաֆ 99-103։
[3] CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE IN ELECTORAL MATTERS, 2002, https://docs-venice.coe.int/images/SITE%20IMAGES/Publications/Code_conduite_PREMS%20026115%20GBR.pdf
[4] Շինդլերն ընդդեմ Միացյալ Թագավորության, դիմում 19840/09, վճիռ 07.05.2023թ.:
[5] Joint urgent opinion on the draft Law on elections of members of the Parliament and councillors of Montenegro, 0989/2020, CDL-PI(2020)007, 3 July 2020, https://www.coe.int/en/web/venice-commission/-/opinion-989
[6] Frank v. Canada (Attorney General), the Supreme Court of Canada, https://www.scc-csc.ca/judgments-jugements/cb/2019/36645/
[7] Տե՛ս, օրինակ՝ Շվեդիայի Սահմանադրություն, Գլուխ 3, հոդված 4, https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Sweden_2012.pdf; Մեծ Բրիտանիայի Representation of the People Act 1985, Section 1A, as amended by Section 14 of the Elections Act 2022, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2022/37/section/14
[8] IDEA, Out-of-Country Voting, https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/out-of-country-voting.pdf
