Invalid

3/2018. NEC Directive

on the amendment of NEC Directive 5/2014 concerning certain issues of checking recommendations[1]

The National Election Committee, acting within its competence as laid down in Section 51 (1) of Act XXXVI of 2013 on Electoral Procedure (hereinafter: Ve.) - on the initiative of the President of the National Election Office - with 5 votes in favour and 0 against, issues the following

directive

adja ki:

1. Point 1 of NEC Directive 5/2014, on certain issues of checking recommendations, is supplemented with the following point (h):

/During the checking of recommendations, in addition to enforcing the legal requirement of full agreement, to respect the will of the voter expressed in the recommendation given for the candidate or nominating organization, those recommendations that were collected in compliance with the recommendation rules, where the voter listed all their data on the recommendation sheet and can be clearly identified on that basis, but where a minor discrepancy in some of their data is found on the recommendation sheet compared to the central voter register data, shall be accepted as valid, as follows:/

„h) a non-relocation-related address change occurred in the personal data and address registry due to a change in address elements registered in the central address register, and the voter listed their previous address.”

2. The reasoning of NEC Directive 5/2014, on certain issues of checking recommendations, is supplemented with the following:

„The National Election Committee's position is that the process that ensures respect for and the enforcement of the will of the voters is one in which the election offices also accept as valid those recommendations where a non-relocation-related address change occurred for the voter due to a change in the address elements registered in the central address register, but the voter listed their previous address on the recommendation sheet.

However, these recommendations can only be accepted as valid if the other data of the voter listed on the recommendation sheet (name and personal identifier) are in full agreement with the data in the central voter registry, or if there is a minor discrepancy as listed in points 1(a)-(g) of the directive, the voter has the right to vote and has signed the sheet.

The Committee also considers it important to emphasize that the "previous address" that election bodies may take into account during the verification of recommendations means exclusively the address prior to the non-relocation-related address change caused by a change in the address elements registered in the central address register.”

The directive is intended to interpret the following provisions of the Ve.

„122. § (1) The voter who has the right to vote in the constituency in the election may recommend a candidate.

(2) The name, personal identifier, Hungarian address, and mother's name of the recommending voter must be entered on the recommendation sheet. The recommending voter shall sign the recommendation sheet by hand.

(3) A voter may recommend more than one candidate.”

„125. § (1) The election office shall check the recommendations.

(2) During the checking of recommendations, the requirements of Section 122 must be examined, the recommending voter must be identified, it must be determined whether they have the right to vote, and it must be determined whether the number of valid recommendations reaches the number required for candidacy.

(3) The identification of the recommending voter and the determination of their right to vote shall be performed by comparing their data on the recommendation sheet with the data in the central voter register and the register of polling districts and constituencies.”

„126. § A recommendation is valid if

a) the recommending voter was entitled to recommend a candidate in the constituency at any time between the forty-eighth day preceding the vote and the day the recommendation sheet was submitted,

b) the data of the recommending voter on the recommendation sheet fully match the data in the central voter register,

c) the recommendation complies with the requirements of Section 122.”

Reasoning

[1] Following the 2014 parliamentary elections, Government Decree 345/2014. (XII. 23.) on the central address register and address management (hereinafter: Decree) was enacted, which established the central address register (KCR) on January 1, 2015. The KCR is a unified register that combines address data previously held in parallel in different registers (e.g., land registry, address register) into one.

[2] The legislation required to start the operation of the KCR was created in several stages. Its legal basis was established by Act XCIII of 2014 on the creation of the central address register and the amendment of certain administrative laws (hereinafter: Act). The amending act modified a total of thirteen different laws in connection with the creation of the address register, including Act LXVI of 1992 on the registration of personal data and addresses of citizens (hereinafter: Nytv.) and the rules on the naming of public areas in Act CLXXXIX of 2011 on the local governments of Hungary (hereinafter: Mötv.). According to Section 2 (1) of the Decree, properties located in the territory of Hungary must have an address determined according to the procedure laid down in the Decree and registered in the central address register.

[3] Following the adoption of the Act by the Parliament on December 15, 2014, and the promulgation of the Decree on December 23, a process began in which the representative bodies of local governments, acting within their competence under Section 13 point 3 of the Mötv., in a decree created based on the authorization in Section 143 (3), as well as the municipal and district notaries, and in the case of Margaret Island, the chief notary, as the bodies responsible for address formation, ordered and carried out measures based on the provisions of Sections 15-18 of the Decree that resulted in changes to the address data of citizens. These changes resulted in the modification of public area names and house numbers.

[4] Based on the address management carried out according to the Decree and the municipal decrees, the address elements registered in the KCR were changed, and a change of address occurred, but this was not initiated by the citizen and did not involve their relocation.

[5] In the case of such address changes, the official certificate of personal identification and address corresponding to the address change is issued and delivered ex officio by the district office competent for the place of residence or stay according to the address change.

[6] According to the President of the National Election Office, there is a possibility that a part of the voters for whom a non-relocation-related address change occurred due to a change in the address elements registered in the KCR has not yet been delivered the official certificate containing the changed address, or it has been delivered, but it cannot be clearly determined whether the voter has received it.

[7] After the legislator has created the rules for the conditions for exercising the right to vote as a political right, one of the most important tasks of the election bodies that implement and enforce the electoral regulations and oversee the lawfulness of the elections is to facilitate the exercise and enforcement of the will of the voters.

[8] In the electoral procedure, the requirement of good faith and proper legal practice must be observed by all participants in the electoral procedure, including the election offices that check the recommendations and the election committees that decide on the registration of candidates and lists, when exercising their duties and powers prescribed in the Ve. The Committee's position is that the content of the procedural fundamental principle referred to in Section 2 (1) e) of the Ve. is fully met in the procedure of the election bodies if they, while observing the specific legal provisions, also take into account that the voter may, through no fault of their own, be in a situation where their legal practice does not fully comply with the legal requirements, despite the care and attention that can be expected from them. This may be the case if the voter, due to reasons beyond their control, is not informed in time about the change of their address, which was not initiated by them and did not involve their relocation. In the Committee's judgment, this change cannot result in the complete extinguishment of the voter's right to recommend.

[9] Point 1 f) of the 5/2014. NEC Directive currently provides assistance to the election bodies for the case when the name of the public area has changed and the voter listed the previous name of the public area in their address when giving the recommendation. Therefore, this case, in the event of the agreement of their other data, did not result in the invalidity of the recommendation according to the previous legal practice. The Committee considers it important to note that, based on the referred directive, not only the election bodies carried out the checking of recommendations, but the Curia also applied it in a specific case (decision no. Kvk.III.37.327/2014/5), accepting and confirming what was stated in it.

[10] However, the directive currently does not provide guidance on how election bodies should proceed when, as a result of the implementation of the provisions of the Decree or a municipal decree, an address element registered in the central address register, e.g., the house number, changes, either by a complete change, from "44" to "46", or by the designation changing, from "44" to "44 / B. building".

[11] The National Election Committee's position is that the process that ensures respect for and the enforcement of the will of the voters is one in which the election offices also accept as valid those recommendations where a non-relocation-related address change occurred for the voter due to a change in the address elements registered in the central address register, but the voter listed their previous address on the recommendation sheet.

[12] However, these recommendations can only be accepted as valid if the other data of the voter listed on the recommendation sheet (name and personal identifier) are in full agreement with the data in the central voter registry, or if there is a minor discrepancy as listed in points 1(a)-(g) of the 5/2014. NEC Directive, the voter has the right to vote and has signed the sheet.

[13] The Committee also considers it important to emphasize that the "previous address" that election bodies may take into account during the verification of recommendations means exclusively the address prior to the non-relocation-related address change caused by a change in the address elements registered in the central address register.

[14] Based on Section 23 a) of the Nytv., the election bodies are entitled to access the data of the register (hereinafter: register) containing the personal, address, and contact address data of citizens according to Section 17 (2) c) of the Nytv. for the purpose of carrying out their tasks specified in the Ve. This allows election offices, during the checking of recommendations, to verify in the register whether the reason for the discrepancy in the address data for recommendations that meet the other conditions is a non-relocation-related address change due to a change in the address elements registered in the central address register.

Budapest, February 6, 2018.

Prof. Dr. András Patyi

President of the National Election Committee

[1] Repealed by NEC Directive 1/2021, Effective: November 4, 2021