Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 98
June 2007
Basque Nationalist Party – Iparralde Regional Organisation v. France - 71251/01
Judgment 7.6.2007 [Section I]
Article 11
Article 11-1
Freedom of association
Statutory ban on financing of a French political party by a foreign political party: no violation
Facts: The applicant party is the French “branch” of the Spanish Basque Nationalist Party. In order to be able to receive funds, in particular financial contributions from the Spanish party, the applicant party formed a funding association in accordance with the 1988 Political Life (Financial Transparency) Act. However, authorisation of the association, a prerequisite for its operation, was refused on the ground that most of the applicant party's resources derived from the support it received from the Spanish party. The 1988 Act prohibits the funding of a political party by any foreign legal entity; accordingly, political parties' funding associations may not receive financial contributions from a foreign political party. Subsequent appeals by the applicant party were dismissed. It complained before the Court of the adverse effects on its funds and on its ability to pursue its political activities, particularly in the electoral sphere, and relied on Articles 11 and 10, taken together, and Article 3 of Protocol No. 1.
Law: The case was considered under Article 11. In view of the impact of the circumstances in issue on the applicant party's financial capacity to engage fully in its political activities, there had been “interference”, which had been “prescribed by law”. The Government had submitted that the prohibition on the funding of French political parties by foreign parties or governments had been intended to avoid creating a relationship of dependency which would be detrimental to the expression of national sovereignty; the aim pursued thus related, in their view, to the protection of the “institutional order”. The Court accepted that the concept of “order” (“ordre”) within the meaning of the French version of Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention also encompassed the “institutional order”.
As to whether the interference had been necessary in a democratic society, the fact that political parties were not permitted to receive funds from foreign parties was not in itself incompatible with Article 11. Furthermore, the choice of the French legislature not to exempt political parties established in other European Union member States from this prohibition was an eminently political decision, which accordingly fell within its residual margin of appreciation.
It remained to be determined what impact the prohibition had on the applicant party's ability to engage in political activities. The measure complained of did not call into question the applicant party's legality or amount to a legal impediment to its participation in political life or to censorship of the views it sought to expound in the political arena. Although the applicant party had to forgo financial assistance from the Spanish Basque Nationalist Party, it would still be able to fund its political activities through its members' contributions and donations from individuals, including non-French nationals.
There was nothing in law to prevent it either from receiving funds from other French political parties or from taking advantage of the French system of State funding of election campaigns. It was true that those sources of funding appeared hypothetical in the applicant party's particular case: in view of its political aims, it was unlikely to gain the support of another French party, while in view of its geographical sphere of activity, it was likely to take part in local rather than parliamentary elections, so that it scarcely appeared to be in a position to benefit from the State funding system (which was based on results in parliamentary elections). Its election candidates would nevertheless enjoy all the same benefits as those from other parties in terms of the funding of their election campaign. In conclusion, although the prohibition on receiving contributions from the Spanish Basque Nationalist Party had an impact on the applicant party's finances, the situation in which it found itself as a result was no different from that of any small political party faced with a shortage of funds.
Conclusion: no violation of Article 11, read separately or in conjunction with Article 10 (six votes to one).
© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.
Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy