Presidential Election Process | USAGov
Lots of people dream of becoming President of the United States. But to officially run for office, a person needs to meet three basic requirements established by the U.S. Constitution (Article 2, Section 1).
A Presidential candidate must be:
- A natural born citizen (U.S. citizen from birth)
- At least 35 years old and
- A U.S. resident (permanently lives in the U.S.) for at least 14 years
Step 1: Primaries and Caucuses
People with similar ideas usually belong to the same political party. The two main parties in the U.S. are Republican and Democrat.
Many people want to be President. They campaign around the country and compete to try to win their party’s nomination.
In caucuses, party members meet, discuss, and vote for who they think would be the best party candidate.
In primaries, party members vote in a state election for the candidate they want to represent them in the general election.
Step 2: National Conventions and General Election
After the primaries and caucuses, each major party, Democrat and Republican, holds a national convention to select a Presidential nominee.
The party’s Presidential nominee announces his or her choice for Vice President.
The Presidential candidates campaign throughout the country to win the support of the general population.
On election day, people in every state cast their vote .
Step 3: The Electoral College
When people cast their vote, they are actually voting for a group of people called electors.
The number of electors each state gets is equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress. A total of 538 electors form the Electoral College.
Each elector casts one vote following the general election. The candidate who gets 270 votes or more wins.
The newly elected President and Vice President are then inaugurated on January 20th.
Primaries and Conventions | U.S. Political Conventions and Campaigns
Primaries and Conventions
Tad Devine on national conventions.
Presidential primaries, where voters choose their nominees from various potential candidates, emerged quite recently. For most of the 20th century in the era of “party bosses,” local party leaders controlled delegates, whom they chose in private party meetings or state conventions. Delegates are people chosen to represent their states at national party conventions. They are often the earliest supporters of a presidential candidate and often include local leaders and active members of each party. Until the 1960s, presidential candidates sought party nominations at the national party convention. Those in attendance, including party leaders, arrived at the convention without knowing who would receive the nomination. They only learned the nominee after a roll call vote of state delegations, a process that often occurred multiple times to select a candidate with a majority of the delegations’ support.
By 1960, John F. Kennedy began to compete in primaries, something candidates had rarely done before. The 1968 Democratic Convention represented a huge turning point. The battle on the streets, and excessive police force, spilled into the convention. Fistfights broke out on the floor, organizers excluded rebellious delegates, and the convention spiraled out of control.
Explainer: What is the purpose of the U.S. presidential nominating conventions?
By John Whitesides, Trevor Hunnicutt
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States has held presidential nominating conventions for almost 200 years, and they have served in recent decades as an important televised introduction to each party’s candidate in the final months before the election.
FILE PHOTO: Balloons drop at the conclusion of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S. July 28, 2016. REUTERS/Scott Audette
Here is a look at the upcoming Democratic and Republican national conventions, which kick off on Monday and run back-to-back weeks. The presidential election is Nov. 3.
PICKING A NOMINEE
U.S. political conventions were once a place where presidential nominees were decided, often after multiple ballots and long fights, often among party elders in “smoke-filled rooms. ” But that has not happened in decades.
The last time a nomination was in much doubt as a convention opened was 1976, when Republican President Gerald Ford held off Ronald Reagan in Kansas City, Missouri. The last convention to go beyond a first ballot was in 1952 in Chicago, when Democrats chose Illinois Governor Adlai Stevenson.
Now, the nominees are chosen by voters in a state-by-state series of primary elections, with delegates from each state ratifying the choice at conventions that are designed to showcase the party’s candidate and message.
The Democratic convention runs Monday through Thursday. The Republican convention will be held from Aug. 24 to 27. Both will be mostly virtual this year, because of the coronavirus pandemic.
WHO WILL SPEAK?
Four nights of speeches at each convention are intended to excite a prime-time television audience to get behind the nominee and serve as the starting gun for the final sprint to the November election.
The parties will trot out heavyweight political names before presumptive nominees Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden and Republican President Donald Trump deliver their acceptance speeches on the respective final nights.
But the conventions also provide a chance for the parties to highlight people they view as up-and-coming political stars. Few have taken advantage of the opportunity as well as Barack Obama in 2004, when the relatively unknown Illinois Democratic state legislator delivered an indictment of political polarization. The keynote address helped propel him to the White House four years later.
This year, Democrats will spotlight 17 young politicians they consider “rising stars,” including onetime vice presidential hopeful Stacey Abrams, in a keynote address set for Tuesday.
THE POLL BOUNCE
Both party candidates usually benefit from a small bounce in opinion polls after their prolonged exposure at conventions, but the effect is often short-lived and the bounces have gotten smaller as U.S. politics become more polarized.
Polling averages compiled by the American Presidency Project at the University of California at Santa Barbara show Democrat Hillary Clinton received a 2-percentage-point bounce and Trump a 3-point bounce after the 2016 conventions.
The last time the difference in bounces between the two parties was more than 2 percentage points was in 1992, when Democrat Bill Clinton’s jump was 16 points and Republican President George H.W. Bush’s was 5 points. Clinton would go on to win the White House.
Reporting by John Whitesides in Washington and Trevor Hunnicutt in New York; Editing by Scott Malone and Peter Cooney
Conventions – Ballotpedia
Democrats, Republicans, Greens, and Libertarians held presidential nominating conventions in 2020. To learn more about the dates, venues, and nominating processes, click the following links:
- Democratic National Convention: August 17-20, 2020, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin
- Republican National Convention: August 24-27, 2020, location TBD
- Green National Convention: July 9-12, 2020, in Detroit, Michigan
- Libertarian National Convention: May 22-24, 2020, online
This page provides an overview of Ballotpedia’s 2016 and 2020 convention coverage.
2020 nominating conventions
- See also: Democratic presidential nomination, 2020
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) held its presidential nominating convention the week of August 17, 2020, across four stages in New York City, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, and Wilmington.
The convention was originally scheduled to take place July 13-16, 2020, in Milwaukee. Organizers postponed the event in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Most of the convention’s events took place remotely. The DNC announced in June 2020 that delegates should not plan to travel to Milwaukee to attend the convention. Instead, votes on reports from the Rules, Platform, and Credentials committees took place remotely from August 3-15, 2020.
The Democratic National Convention Committee announced on August 5, 2020, that former Vice President Joe Biden (D) and other speakers would not travel to Milwaukee.  Biden was formally nominated at the convention on August 18, 2020.
Biden announced U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris (D) as his running mate on August 11, 2020. Harris was the first Black woman to appear on a major party’s ticket in the United States.
- See also: Republican presidential nomination, 2020
The Republican Party held its national convention from August 24-27, 2020.
Limited in-person events took place in Charlotte, North Carolina. On July 23, 2020, President Donald Trump announced that high-profile convention events previously moved to Jacksonville, Florida, including his nomination acceptance speech, had been canceled for public health and safety reasons. Trump formally accepted the party’s nomination from the White House.
The convention was originally scheduled to take place entirely in Charlotte but statewide restrictions in response to the coronavirus pandemic led to the convention’s planned relocation to Jacksonville.  The Republican National Committee Executive Committee voted to downsize the convention in Charlotte, reducing the number of in-person delegates from 2,500 to 336. The committee also decided to adopt the 2016 platform again since the Platform Committee would not be meeting.
At the convention, party delegates typically select the Republican presidential nominee and vote to adopt a platform outlining the party’s policy priorities and values. According to presidential historian Tevi Troy, however, “conventions today remain largely party advertising opportunities rather than fora for real decision-making.”
- See also: Green Party presidential nomination, 2020
The Green Party selected Howie Hawkins as its presidential nominee at the 2020 Green National Convention on July 11, 2020. Angela Nicole Walker was named the Green Party vice presidential nominee. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the convention took place virtually. 
Prior to the national convention, state primaries and conventions were held to select the presidential nominating convention delegates. These delegates then selected a party nominee at the convention by majority vote.
“In the eyes of the nation, the Green Party nominee will be the principal voice of the party. The success of the nominee will determine ballot access in some states and will impact the fortunes of Green candidates in state and local races,” the party stated in official documentation.
Jill Stein, the 2012 and 2016 Green presidential nominee, did not run for a third presidential election.
- See also: Libertarian Party presidential nomination, 2020
The Libertarian Party selected Jo Jorgensen as its presidential nominee on May 23, 2020, during the Libertarian National Convention.Spike Cohen was selected as the party’s vice-presidential nominee the next day. 
The convention was originally scheduled to take place May 21-25, 2020, in Austin, Texas. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the nomination portion of the national convention was held online May 22-24.
Prior to the national convention, delegates were selected by state Libertarian affiliates. These delegates choose a party nominee at the convention by majority vote.
Gary Johnson, the 2012 and 2016 Libertarian presidential nominee, said in 2017 that he would not launch a third presidential bid. His running mate, Bill Weld, announced on April 15, 2019, that he was running in the Republican primary for president.
2016 nominating conventions
Democratic National Convention
- See also: Democratic National Convention, 2016
July 28, 2016:
July 27, 2016:
July 26, 2016:
July 25, 2016:
July 24, 2016:
In-depth look at the DNC
Republican National Convention
- See also: Republican National Convention, 2016
July 21, 2016:
July 20, 2016:
July 19, 2016:
July 18, 2016:
July 17, 2016:
In-depth look at the RNC
- See also: RNC Rules Committee, 2016
A recorded broadcast of Ballotpedia’s webinar on 2016 delegates and conventions, held on June 16, 2016, is available below.
- ↑ Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “2020 DNC in Milwaukee pushed back to week of August 17 in response to coronavirus pandemic,” April 2, 2020
- ↑ CNN, “5 things to know for August 17: USPS, coronavirus, DNC, Russia investigation, Belarus,” August 17, 2020
- ↑ The New York Times, “Milwaukee Picked as Site of 2020 Democratic National Convention,” March 11, 2019
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
no text was provided for refs named
- ↑ ABC News, “Democrats announce convention schedule, party officers for 2020 gathering transformed by coronavirus,” July 29, 2020
- ↑ ABC News, “Biden will no longer travel to Milwaukee for DNC amid coronavirus concerns,” August 5, 2020
- ↑ AP, “Biden formally clinches Democratic presidential nomination,” June 5, 2020
- ↑ Twitter, “Joe Biden,” August 11, 2020
- ↑ CNBC, “Joe Biden picks Sen. Kamala Harris to be his vice presidential running mate, making her the first black woman on a major ticket,” August 11, 2020
- ↑ Spectrum Local News, “RNC dates set for Aug. 24 – 27, 2020 in Charlotte,” October 1, 2018
- ↑ CNN, “In a reversal, Trump says he’ll accept GOP nomination in North Carolina,” July 28, 2020
- ↑ WSOC, “It’s official: Main event for RNC to be held in Florida instead of Charlotte,” June 11, 2020
- ↑ NPR, “President Trump Cancels Jacksonville Portion Of Republican National Convention,” July 23, 2020
- ↑ USA Today, “Trump cancels Jacksonville portion of Republican convention planned for August due to COVID-19,” July 23, 2020
- ↑ National Review, “Trump to Seek Alternate City to Host RNC after N.C. Gov. Says He Cannot Guarantee ‘Full Capacity’ Event,” June 3, 2020
- ↑ The Hill, “GOP votes to scale back Charlotte convention, move Trump acceptance speech,” June 11, 2020
- ↑ National Affairs, “The Evolution of Party Conventions,” accessed April 30, 2019
- ↑ 18. 018.1 Green Party, “Greenline August 2019,” August 28, 2019 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name “Con” defined multiple times with different content
- ↑ Green Party, “Media Advisory – Green Party of the U.S. Presidential Nominating Convention,” July 6, 2020
- ↑ Syracuse.com, “Syracuse’s Howie Hawkins is the Green Party’s presidential candidate,” July 11, 2020
- ↑ 21.021.1 Green Party, “How to Seek the 2020 Green Presidential Nomination,” accessed October 21, 2019
- ↑ The New York Times, “Green Party, Eyeing the 2020 Presidential Race, Prepares for the Midterms,” August 1, 2018
- ↑ YouTube, “LNC Convention Day 2,” May 23, 2020
- ↑ YouTube, “LNC Convention Webinar Day 3,” May 24, 2020
- ↑ 2020 Libertarian National Convention, “Where,” accessed May 21, 2020
- ↑ 2020 Libertarian National Convention, “Schedule,” accessed May 21, 2020
- ↑ Libertarian Party, “How the Libertarian Party selects its presidential, VP nominees,” May 12, 2016
- ↑ The Hill, “Gary Johnson ruling out 2020 bid: ‘It does boil down to two political parties,'” October 25, 2017
How Are Candidates Nominated? | The Presidential Election Process | Elections | Classroom Materials at the Library of Congress | Library of Congress
Article two, section one of the United States Constitution discusses the procedures to be followed when electing the president of the United States, but it does not provide guidance for how to nominate a presidential candidate. Currently, candidates go through a series of state primaries and caucuses where, based on the number of votes they receive from the electorate, they are assigned a certain number of delegates who will vote for them at their party’s convention.
Democratic National Convention, Los Angeles, California, July, 1960
Earlier party conventions were raucous events, and delegates did not necessarily represent the electorate. Mrs. J.J. McCarthy describes her convention experience:
I can picture … the great Democratic convention of 1894 at the old coliseum in Omaha… right now I can hear the Hallelluiahs of the assembled. Oh how I wish I had back the youth and the enthusiasm I felt that night, I jumped on a chair and ask[ed] that by a rising vote the nomination be made unanimous, how the people yelled, how the packed gallories [sic] applauded, it cheers an old man now to think about it.
Though these conventions were attended by delegates sent from their respective states, delegates were often chosen by state and party bosses with sway over the delegates’ loyalties, instead of using the results of the primary elections; party bosses were accused of trading convention floor votes for power, patronage, or even cash. The excitement and corruption of party politics was not limited to the national arenas and big party players. E. R. Kaiser paints a picture of local party politics in the late 1800s:
Politics played a big part in the life of this town years ago. Campaigns were hot, and there was always a big celebration afterwards. … Votes used to be bought — that is before the secret ballot was adopted. Some sold ’em pretty cheap. I remember one old fellow who sold out to one party for a dollar — then sold out to the other for the same price.
Many sought to reform conventions that uniformly ignored the will of individual voters in their selection of presidential candidates.
In the first decade of the 1900s, states began to hold primary elections to select the delegates who would attend national nominating conventions. The introduction of these primary elections mitigated the corrupt control of party and state bosses. But the widespread adoption of primary elections was not immediate and so they did not play as strong a role in determining a party’s candidate as they do today.
In 1912, the first year in which a presidential candidate, two-time President Theodore Roosevelt, tried to secure his nomination through primary elections, nine states elected delegates that supported Roosevelt. Incumbent William Howard Taft won only one primary election. Despite Roosevelt’s wholesale victory of the popular vote, Taft received the Republican nomination because only 42% of the delegates who attended the nominating convention had been selected through primary elections. The rest had been selected by party bosses who supported Taft and succeeded in granting him their party’s nomination.
Republican National Convention, September 1-4, 2008. Republicans raise “Country First” signs as their leaders speak, St. Paul, Minnesota
Failing to win the Republican nomination, Roosevelt and his supporters formed the Progressive Party, or Bull Moose Party, with Roosevelt as its presidential candidate. Roosevelt failed to win the Presidency that year, but with the help of the Progressive party, our country’s primary system began to change. Fed up with corrupt party politics, Americans demanded and won reforms that reduced the power of party bosses. The introduction of the secret ballot had led the way in 1888. By the 1920s, almost every state had loosened the grip of political bosses and placed candidate selection more firmly in the hands of citizen voters.
As primaries were universally adopted as the method for selecting delegates, they became a more consequential part of the election process. Early primaries have taken on added importance as setting precedence and influencing the elections that follow in other states. Today, state legislatures capitalize on the importance of primaries and jockey for influence by scheduling their states’ primaries and caucuses as early as possible, forcing presidential candidates to cater to their states.
Unlike the heated back-room nominations of the past, normally there are few surprises at today’s national party conventions. Today, in 48 states, individuals participate in primaries or caucuses to elect delegates who support their presidential candidate of choice. At national party conventions, the presidential contender with the most state delegate votes wins the party nomination. Our extensive news media ensures that state delegate vote counts (and the apparent nominees) are well known before national conventions begin. As a result, modern national conventions don’t select candidates. Instead, they launch nominees and election themes that carry through the race to the White House.
How do conventions actually work?
With the Republican and Democratic National Conventions right around the corner, Elaine Kamarck takes a few minutes to detail topics that everyone talks about but few people understand: convention rules and convention delegates.
In 2016, much has been discussed about what may happen on the convention floors in Cleveland (RNC) and Philadelphia (DNC). Will unhappy Republicans wage a coup in an effort to topple the Trump candidacy? Will disaffected Sanders supporters seek to disrupt proceedings and extract concessions? Will all of the speculation be for naught and the conventions go as smoothly as they did four years ago?
In these videos, Kamarck succinctly discusses what the agenda of party conventions look like day-by-day and what processes must occur in order for the convention to do its ultimate job: be “the legal authority that nominates a party’s candidate for President of the United States. ”
The conventions deal with the typically boring orders of business: approving credentials, approving the platform, and approving the rules. This year, some Republicans see the vote on rules as an opening to challenge Trump—a move that would turn the Republican National Convention upside down. The result would be a different type of convention—either contested or brokered, depending on how the process plays out, and Kamarck artfully describes the differences between the two.
One of the highlights of a convention is the actual roll call of delegates casting ballots for their party’s nominee(s) for president and vice president. The process that has led to that vote is quite complicated. Over the past six months, states have held 51 primaries and caucuses for each party, and selected delegates who actually attend the conventions using a variety of procedures. Some states allocate delegates according to a winner-take-all, some proportionally, some based on a combination of statewide and congressional district performances among candidates.
In a second video, Kamarck explains how delegates are selected, what their role is at the convention, and what role “superdelegates” play in the Democratic contest. In 2016, superdelegates have become a controversial part of the primary process, and Kamarck—who is a superdelegate herself—explains what the role of these unique party officials have played historically.
Throughout the election season, keep tuning into the Brookings YouTube channel and the FixGov blog for more explanatory videos like these.
|Democratic National Convention||1996||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Bill Clinton
San Diego — Bob Dole
|Democratic National Convention||1992||Republican National Convention|
New York — Bill Clinton
Houston — George Bush
Pro-Bush unity overshadows an ideological tug of war between moderates and conservatives.
|Democratic National Convention||1988||Republican National Convention|
Atlanta — Michael Dukakis
New Orleans — George Bush
|Democratic National Convention||1984||Republican National Convention|
San Francisco — Walter Mondale
Representative Geraldine Ferraro of New York is nominated as vice president, becoming the first woman ever placed on a national ticket by a major party.
Dallas — Ronald Reagan
|Democratic National Convention||1980||Republican National Convention|
New York — Jimmy Carter
Detroit — Ronald Reagan
Speculation over Reagan’s running mate — former President Ford or George Bush — provides suspense.
|Democratic National Convention||1976||Republican National Convention|
New York — Jimmy Carter
Kansas City, Mo. — Gerald R. Ford
|Democratic National Convention||1972||Republican National Convention|
Miami Beach — George McGovern
Miami Beach – Richard M. Nixon
|Democratic National Convention||1968||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Hubert H. Humphrey
A divided Democratic Party picks a presidential nominee as thousands of Vietnam War protestors and others clash with the police. The brutal confrontation is broadcast on television.
Miami Beach, Fla. — Richard M. Nixon
|Democratic National Convention||1964||Republican National Convention|
Atlantic City, N.J. — Lyndon B. Johnson
San Francisco — Barry Goldwater
For the first time, a woman is placed in nomination for president by a major party — Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine.
|Democratic National Convention||1960||Republican National Convention|
Los Angeles — John F. Kennedy
Chicago — Richard M. Nixon
|Democratic National Convention||1956||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Adlai E. Stevenson
San Francisco — Dwight D. Eisenhower
|Democratic National Convention||1952||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Adlai E. Stevenson
Chicago — Dwight D. Eisenhower
|Democratic National Convention||1948||Republican National Convention|
Philadelphia — Harry S. Truman
Northern and Midwestern delegates craft a civil-rights plank that calls for Congress to guarantee full and equal political participation, employment opportunity and treatment in the military
for African-Americans. The dispute prompts some Southern delegates to leave and form the Dixiecrats, nominating Strom Thurmond as president.
Philadelphia — Thomas E. Dewey
|Democratic National Convention||1944||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Franklin D. Roosevelt
Chicago — Thomas E. Dewey
Breaking with tradition, Gov. Dewey of New York becomes the first Republican to personally accept the nomination.
|Democratic National Convention||1940||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Franklin D. Roosevelt
Philadelphia — Wendell L. Wilkie
The convention is the first to be televised.
|Democratic National Convention||1936||Republican National Convention|
Philadelphia — Franklin D. Roosevelt
Cleveland — Alfred M. Landon
|Democratic National Convention||1932||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Franklin D. Roosevelt
Roosevelt is the first major-party candidate to accept the nomination in person, offering a “New Deal” for America.
Chicago — Herbert Hoover
|Democratic National Convention||1928||Republican National Convention|
Houston — Alfred E, Smith
Kansas City — Herbert Hoover
|Democratic National Convention||1924||Republican National Convention|
New York — John W. Davis
Davis is nominated on the 103rd ballot, a record.
Cleveland — Calvin Coolidge
For the first time, a convention is broadcast by radio.
|Democratic National Convention||1920||Republican National Convention|
San Francisco — James M. Cox
Chicago — Warren G. Harding
|Democratic National Convention||1916||Republican National Convention|
St. Louis — Woodrow Wilson
Chicago — Charles E. Hughes
|Democratic National Convention||1912||Republican National Convention|
Baltimore — Woodrow Wilson
Chicago — William H. Taft
One of the most contentious conventions. A battle takes place between Mr. Taft and former president Mr. Roosevelt. In the end, only two names are placed on the presidential ballot — Mr. Taft and
Sen. Robert M. La Follette of Wisconsin. Most of the Roosevelt delegates abstain from voting.
|Democratic National Convention||1908||Republican National Convention|
Denver — William Jennings Bryan
Chicago — William H. Taft
|Democratic National Convention||1904||Republican National Convention|
St. Louis — Alton B. Parker
Chicago — Theodore Roosevelt
|Democratic National Convention||1900||Republican National Convention|
Kansas City, Mo. — William Jennings Bryan
Philadelphia — William McKinley
|Democratic National Convention||1896||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — William Jennings Bryan
The issue of currency — maintenance of the gold standard versus unlimited coinage of silver — rules the convention. Bryan’s pro-silver speech makes him a major contender, and he eventually
wins the nomination.
St. Louis — William McKinley
The currency issue dominates the platform debate. The forces in favor of a gold standard, opposed to the free coinage of silver until an international agreement is reached, prevail.
|Democratic National Convention||1892||Republican National Convention|
Chicago — Grover Cleveland
Cleveland wins nomination, though he is opposed by his home state delegation. Noise and roof leaks from the weather interrupt the convention.
|Mineapolis — Benjamin Harrison|
|Democratic National Convention||1888||Republican National Convention|
|St. Louis — Grover Cleveland||Chicago — Benjamin Harrison|
|Democratic National Convention||1884||Republican National Convention|
|Chicago — Grover Cleveland||
Chicago — James G. Blaine
Representative John Roy Lynch of Mississippi becomes the first black ever elected temporary chairman of a national nominating convention.
|Democratic National Convention||1880||Republican National Convention|
|Cincinnati — Winfield S. Hancock||
Chicago — James A. Garfield
Garfield wins the nomination on the 36th ballot, the all-time record number of ballots for the party.
|Democratic National Convention||1876||Republican National Convention|
St. Louis — Samuel Tilden
For the first time, a national convention is held west of the Mississippi River.
|Cincinnati — Rutherford B. Hayes|
|Democratic National Convention||1872||Republican National Convention|
|Baltimore — Horace Greeley||Philadelphia — Ulysses S. Grant|
|Democratic National Convention||1868||Republican National Convention|
New York — Horatio Seymour
Susan B. Anthony urges support of women’s suffrage at the convention.
Chicago — Ulysses S. Grant
For the first time, a candidate garners 100 percent of the vote on the first ballot.
|Democratic National Convention||1864||Republican National Convention|
|Chicago — George B. McClellan||
Baltimore — Abraham Lincoln
Democrats who support Lincoln’s war policy are invited to attend.
|Democratic National Convention||1860||Republican National Convention|
Charleston, S.C., and Baltimore — Stephen Douglas
The wording of the slavery plank causes an explosive dispute between Northern and Southern delegations, with several dozen Southern delegates leaving. Democrats deadlock on
a presidential nominee and must reconsider in another city to finish work.
Chicago — Abraham Lincoln
The slavery question takes up about half of the platform. Lincoln becomes the first Republican to go on to win the presidency.
|Democratic National Convention||1856||Republican National Convention|
|Cincinnati — James Buchanan||
Philadelphia — John C. Fremont
Fremont is nominated under the slogan: “Free soil, free labor, free speech, free men, Fremont.” The Republicans are considered a third party, next to the Democrats and Whigs, but Freemont
goes on to receive 33 percent of the vote.
|Democratic National Convention||1852|
|Baltimore — Franklin Pierce|
|Democratic National Convention||1848|
|Baltimore — Lewis Cass|
|Democratic National Convention||1844|
Baltimore — James Polk
The first “dark horse” candidate garners the presidential nomination.
|Democratic National Convention||1836|
|Baltimore — Martin Van Buren|
|Democratic National Convention||1832|
Baltimore — Andrew Jackson
Representatives from 23 states attend.
90,000 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
European Convention on Human Rights
modified and supplemented by Protocols No. 11 and No. 14, which entered into force on June 1, 2010
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
The signatory governments of this Convention , which are members of the Council of Europe, Bearing in mind the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December 1948, Considering that this Declaration seeks to ensure the universal and effective recognition and implementation of its rights, believing that the aim of the Council of Europe is to achieve greater unity among its members and that one of the means of achieving this aim is the protection and development of human rights and fundamental freedoms, reaffirming our deep commitment to the fundamental freedoms, which are the basis of justice and peace in the world and the observance of which is best ensured, on the one hand, by a truly democratic political regime and, on the other hand, by a universal understanding and respect for the human rights to which they are committed, determined, as Governments of European States, driven by a common aspiration and Sharing a common legacy of political traditions, ideals, freedom and the rule of law, to take the first steps towards securing the collective realization of some of the rights set out in the Universal Declaration, have agreed as follows:
Obligation to Respect Human Rights The High Contracting Parties shall ensure to everyone under their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms as defined in Section I of this Convention.
SECTION I RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
Article 2 – Right to life
- Every person’s right to life is protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally except in the execution of a sentence of a court imposed for a crime for which such punishment is prescribed by law.
- Deprivation of life is not considered a violation of this section when it is the result of an absolutely necessary use of force:
(a) (a) to protect any person from unlawful violence;
(b) to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) for the suppression, in accordance with the law, of a riot or insurrection.
Article 3 – Prohibition of torture
No one should be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 4 – Prohibition of slavery and forced labor
- No one should be held in slavery or servitude.
- No one should be involved in forced or compulsory labor.
- For the purposes of this section, the term “forced or compulsory labor” does not include:
(a) any work normally required to be performed by a person who is imprisoned in accordance with the provisions of Article 5 of this Convention or has been conditionally released from such detention;
(b) any service of a military character or, in countries where conscientious objection to military service is recognized, service exacted in lieu of compulsory military service;
(c) any service required in the event of an emergency or calamity threatening the life or well-being of the public;
(d) any work or service that forms part of normal civic duties.
Article 5 – Right to liberty and security of person
- Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one may be deprived of his liberty except in the following cases and in the manner prescribed by law:
(a) the lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competent court;
(b) the lawful arrest or detention (arrest) of a person for failure to comply with a court order issued in accordance with the law or for the purpose of enforcing any obligation prescribed by law;
(c) the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him or her before the competent authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offense or when there are reasonable grounds to believe that it is necessary to prevent him from committing an offense or fleeing afterwards. committing;
(d) the detention of a minor by lawful order for educational supervision or his lawful detention for the purpose of bringing him before the competent authority;
(e) the lawful detention of persons for the purpose of preventing the spread of infectious diseases, as well as the lawful detention of the mentally ill, alcoholic, drug addict or vagabond;
(f) the lawful arrest or detention of a person in order to prevent his illegal entry into the country or a person against whom measures are being taken to expel or extradite him.
2. Everyone who is arrested shall be promptly informed, in a language he understands, of the reasons for his arrest and of any charge against him.
3. Everyone who is arrested or taken into custody in accordance with subparagraph “c” of paragraph 1 of this article shall be promptly brought before a judge or other official vested, in accordance with the law, with judicial power, and shall have the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditional on the provision of guarantees to appear in court.
4. Everyone who is deprived of his liberty as a result of arrest or detention shall have the right to a prompt review by a court of the lawfulness of his detention and to release if his detention is declared unlawful by a court.
5. Everyone who has been the victim of arrest or detention in violation of the provisions of this article shall be entitled to compensation.
Article 6 – Right to a fair trial
- Everyone, in the event of a dispute over his civil rights and obligations, or when any criminal charge is brought against him, has the right to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.The judgment is announced publicly, but the press and the public may not be allowed to attend court sessions during the whole or part of the trial for reasons of morality, public order or national security in a democratic society, or when the interests of minors so require or to protect the privacy of the parties, or – to the extent that, in the opinion of the court, it is strictly necessary – in special circumstances, when publicity would violate the interests of justice.
- Anyone charged with a criminal offense is presumed innocent until lawfully established as guilty.
- Everyone charged with a criminal offense has at least the following rights:
(a) to be promptly and in detail notified in a language he understands of the nature and basis of the charge against him;
(b) have adequate time and facilities to prepare his defense;
(c) defend himself personally or through legal assistance of his own choosing, or, if he lacks the means to pay for the services of a lawyer, use the services of his appointed lawyer free of charge when the interests of justice so require;
(d) to question witnesses testifying against him or have the right to have these witnesses questioned and have the right to summon and question witnesses in his favor under the same conditions as witnesses testifying against him;
(e) use the free assistance of an interpreter if he does not understand the language used in court, or does not speak this language.
Article 7 – Punishment exclusively on the basis of law
- No one may be convicted of any act or omission which, according to national or international law in force at the time of its commission, was not a criminal offense. Nor may a punishment be imposed that is more severe than that which was applicable at the time of the commission of the criminal offense.
- This article does not preclude the conviction and punishment of any person for the commission of any act or omission, which at the time of its commission was a criminal offense in accordance with the general principles of law recognized by civilized countries.
Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life
- Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
- Interference by public authorities in the exercise of this right is prohibited, except in cases where such interference is prescribed by law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security and public order, the economic well-being of the country, in order to prevent disorder or crime, to protect health or morality or protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
Article 9 – Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
- Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes the freedom to change one’s religion or belief, and the freedom to practice one’s religion or belief, both individually and in community with others, public or private, in worship, teaching, and worship.
- The freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief shall be subject only to those restrictions which are provided by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, to protect public order, health or morals, or to protect the rights and freedoms of others.
Article 10 – Freedom of expression
- Everyone has the right to freely express their opinion. This right includes the freedom to hold opinions and the freedom to receive and impart information and ideas without any interference from public authorities and regardless of state borders. This article does not prevent States from licensing broadcasting, television or cinematographic enterprises.
- The exercise of these freedoms, which imposes duties and responsibilities, may be subject to certain formalities, conditions, restrictions or sanctions that are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public order, in order to prevent disorder or crime, for protecting health and morals, protecting the reputation or rights of others, preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or ensuring the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Article 11 – Freedom of assembly and association
- Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions to protect their interests.
- The exercise of these rights is not subject to any restrictions other than those provided by law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security and public order, in order to prevent disorder and crime, to protect health and morals, or to protect the rights and freedoms of others.This article does not preclude the imposition of legal restrictions on the exercise of these rights by persons who are members of the armed forces, police or administrative organs of the State.
Article 12 – Right to marry
Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and found a family in accordance with the national legislation governing the exercise of this right.
Article 13 – Right to an effective remedy
Everyone whose rights and freedoms recognized in this Convention have been violated shall have the right to an effective remedy before a public authority, even if the violation was committed by persons acting in an official capacity.
Article 14 – Prohibition of discrimination
The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized in this Convention must be ensured without any discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, language, religion, political or other beliefs, national or social origin, membership of national minorities, property position, birth or for any other reason.
Article 15 – Derogation from compliance in emergency situations
- In the event of war or other emergency threatening the life of the nation, any of the High Contracting Parties may take measures derogating from its obligations under this Convention only to the extent that this is due to the exigencies of the circumstances, provided that such measures are not contradict its other obligations under international law.
- This provision cannot serve as a basis for any derogation from the provisions of article 2, except in cases of loss of life as a result of lawful hostilities, or from the provisions of articles 3, paragraph 1 of article 4 and article 7.
- Any of the High Contracting Parties exercising this right of derogation shall inform the Secretary General of the Council of Europe comprehensively of the measures it has introduced and the reasons for their adoption. It also informs the Secretary General of the Council of Europe of the date of termination of such measures and the resumption of the full implementation of the provisions of the Convention.
Article 16 – Restriction on political activities of foreigners
Nothing in Articles 10, 11 and 14 can be considered as an obstacle for the High Contracting Parties to impose restrictions on the political activities of foreigners.
Article 17 – Prohibition of abuse of rights
Nothing in this Convention shall be construed to mean that any State, any group of persons or any person has the right to engage in any activity or take any action aimed at the abolition of rights and freedoms, recognized in this Convention, or to limit them to a greater extent than provided for in the Convention.
Article 18 – Limits on the use of restrictions on rights
The restrictions allowed in this Convention in relation to the said rights and freedoms shall not be applied for purposes other than those for which they were provided.
HUMAN RIGHTS COURT
Article 19 – Establishment of the Court
In order to ensure compliance with the obligations assumed by the High Contracting Parties under this Convention and the Protocols thereto, the European Court of Human Rights, hereinafter referred to as the “Court”, is established.He works on an ongoing basis. Article 20 – Number of judges The number of judges serving on the Court is equal to the number of High Contracting Parties.
Article 21 – Requirements for judges
- Judges must be of the highest moral character and meet the requirements for appointment to high judicial office, or be jurists of recognized authority.
- Judges participate in the work of the Court in their personal capacity.
- Throughout their tenure, judges shall not engage in any activity incompatible with their independence, impartiality or requirements arising from the nature of their full-time employment. All questions arising in connection with the application of the provisions of this paragraph shall be decided by the Court.
Article 22 – Election of judges
A judge from each of the High Contracting Parties is elected by the Parliamentary Assembly by a majority of the votes cast for him from a list of three candidates nominated by that High Contracting Party.
Article 23 – Term of office and dismissal
- Judges are elected for a term of nine years. They cannot be re-elected.
- The terms of office of judges expire when they reach the age of seventy.
- The referees are in office until they are replaced. At the same time, even after the replacement, they continue to consider the cases already received by them.
- A judge can only be dismissed if the other judges, by a two-thirds majority, decide that the judge ceases to meet the requirements.
Article 24 – Secretariat and rapporteurs
- The Court has a Secretariat, the rights, duties and organization of which are determined by the Rules of the Court.
- When the Court is sitting with a single judge, the Court uses the services of rapporteurs, who exercise their functions under the direction of the President of the Court. They form a subdivision of the Registry of the Court.
Article 25 – Plenary sessions of the Court
(a) elect its own President and one or two Vice-Presidents for a term of three years; they can be re-elected;
(b) constitutes Chambers for a fixed term;
(c) elects the Presidents of the Chambers of the Court; they can be re-elected;
(d) adopts the Rules of Court;
(e) elect the Registrar-Chancellor of the Court and one or more of his deputies;
(f) submits any request under section 26, paragraph 2.
Article 26 – Single judges, committees, Chambers and Grand Chamber
- For the consideration of cases assigned to it, the Court sits with a single judge, committees of three judges, Chambers of seven judges and a Grand Chamber of seventeen judges. The chambers of the Court form committees for a specified period.
- At the request of the plenary session of the Court, the Committee of Ministers has the right, by its unanimous decision, to reduce the number of judges in the Chambers to five for a specified period.
- When sitting alone on a case, a judge may not hear any complaint filed against a High Contracting Party from which that judge was elected.
- A judge elected from a High Contracting Party to the dispute shall sit in the case as an ex officio member of the Chamber and the Grand Chamber. In the absence of such a judge or if he is unable to participate in the session, a person appointed by the President of the Court from a list provided by this Party in advance shall sit as a judge in the case.
- The Grand Chamber also includes the President of the Court, the Vice-Presidents of the Court, the Presidents of the Chambers and other members of the Court appointed in accordance with the Rules of Court. In cases where a case is referred to the Grand Chamber in accordance with the provisions of Article 43, none of the judges of the Chamber which rendered the order may participate in its proceedings, with the exception of the President of that Chamber and a judge elected from the High Contracting Party acting as a party to the dispute. …
Article 27 – Competence of single judges
- The Sole Judge may declare inadmissible a complaint filed under Article 34 or remove it from the list of cases pending before the Court, if such a decision can be made without further examination of the complaint.
- This decision is final.
- Unless a complaint is declared inadmissible or removed from the list of pending cases by a single judge, that judge will refer it to a committee or Chamber for further examination.
Article 28 – Competence of committees
1. With respect to a complaint filed under Article 34, the committee may, by unanimous decision:
(a) declare it inadmissible or remove it from the list of pending cases, if such a decision can be made without further examination of the complaint; or
(b) declare it admissible and at the same time rule on the merits of the application if the underlying question of the interpretation or application of the provisions of this Convention or the Protocols thereto is already the subject of well-established case-law of the Court.
2. Decisions and decisions taken in accordance with paragraph 1 are final.
3. If a judge elected from a High Contracting Party to the dispute is not a member of the committee, the latter may, at any stage of the proceedings, invite that judge to replace one of the committee members, taking into account all relevant factors, including the question of whether the Party has contested the application of the procedure provided for in subparagraph (b) of paragraph 1.
Article 29 – Chambers’ decisions on admissibility and merits
- If no judgment has been taken in accordance with the provisions of Articles 27 or 28, or no judgment has been rendered in accordance with the provisions of Article 28, the Chamber shall decide on the admissibility and merits of the individual complaints lodged in accordance with the provisions of Article 34. Decision on The admissibility of the complaint can be made separately.
- The Chamber decides on the admissibility of the State’s complaint under Article 33 and on the merits of the case.The admissibility of an application is decided separately, unless the Court decides otherwise in exceptional cases.
Article 30 – Assignment of jurisdiction to the Grand Chamber
If the case pending before the Chamber raises a serious question concerning the interpretation of the provisions of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, or if the decision on the question may conflict with a ruling previously rendered by the Court, the Chamber may, before making its order, cede jurisdiction to the Grand Chamber if neither side objects to this.
Article 31 – Powers of the Grand Chamber
(a) adjudicates on complaints filed under section 33 or section 34 when any of the Chambers has ceded jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of section 30 or when a case is referred to it in accordance with the provisions of section 43;
(b) decides on matters referred to the Court by the Committee of Ministers in accordance with article 46, paragraph 4; and
(c) deals with requests for advisory opinions made pursuant to the provisions of section 47.
Article 32 – Competence of the Court
- The Court is in charge of all matters relating to the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols, which may be referred to it in the cases provided for by the provisions of Articles 33, 34, 46 and 47.
- In the event of a dispute regarding the competence of the Court in a particular case, the issue shall be decided by the Court itself.
Article 33 – Interstate affairs
Any High Contracting Party may refer to the Court a question of any alleged violation of the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols by another High Contracting Party.
Article 34 – Individual complaints
The Court may accept applications from any individual, any non-governmental organization or any group of individuals who claim to be victims of a violation by one of the High Contracting Parties of their rights recognized in this Convention or in its Protocols. The High Contracting Parties undertake not to hinder in any way the effective exercise of this right.
Article 35 – Conditions of admissibility
- The court may only entertain a case after all domestic remedies have been exhausted, as provided for in generally accepted norms of international law, and within six months from the date on which the domestic authorities rendered the final decision on the case.
- The Court does not accept for examination any individual complaint lodged under Article 34 if it is:
(a) is anonymous; or
(b) is essentially the same as that which has already been examined by the Court, or is already the subject of another procedure of international investigation or settlement, and if it does not contain new relevant facts.
3. The Court declares inadmissible any individual application made under the provisions of Article 34 if it considers that:
(a) this complaint is incompatible with the provisions of this Convention or its Protocols, is manifestly ill-founded, or amounts to an abuse of the right to lodge an individual complaint; or
(b) the applicant has not suffered significant harm, unless the principle of respect for human rights, as defined in this Convention and its Protocols, requires an examination of the merits of the complaint, and provided that the examination cannot be refused on that basis a case that was not properly examined by the domestic court.
4. The Court shall reject any application referred to it which it considers inadmissible under this Article. He can do this at any stage of the proceedings.
Article 36 – Third party participation
- In any case pending before any of the Chambers or Grand Chamber, each High Contracting Party of which the applicant is a national may submit written observations and participate in hearings
- In the interests of the proper administration of justice, the President of the Court may invite any High Contracting Party not a party to the case, or any interested person other than the applicant, to submit written comments or to take part in hearings.
- In respect of any case pending before any of the Chambers or the Grand Chamber, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights may submit written comments and participate in hearings.
Article 37 – Termination of proceedings
- The court may at any stage of the proceedings decide to discontinue the proceedings if the circumstances allow it to conclude that:
(a) the applicant no longer intends to pursue his complaint; or
(b) the dispute has been resolved; or
(c) for any other reason established by the Court if further consideration of the application is unjustified.However, the Court continues to consider an application if it is required by the observance of the human rights guaranteed by this Convention and the Protocols thereto.
2. The court may decide to reinstate the complaint in the list of pending cases if it considers that this is justified by the circumstances.
Article 38 – Procedure for the consideration of the case
The Court considers the case with the participation of representatives of the parties and, if necessary, undertakes an investigation into the circumstances of the case, for the effective conduct of which the High Contracting Parties participating in it create all the necessary conditions.
Article 39 – Settlements
- At any stage of the proceedings, the Court may place itself at the disposal of the parties concerned with a view to concluding an amicable settlement in the case on the basis of respect for human rights as defined in this Convention and its Protocols.
- The procedure under paragraph 1 is confidential.
- In the event of an amicable agreement, the Court removes the case from its list by issuing a judgment in which only a summary of the facts and the resolution of the dispute reached is given.
- This decision is sent to the Committee of Ministers, which oversees the implementation of the terms of the settlement agreement, as set out in the decision.
Article 40 – Public hearings and access to documents
- Unless, due to exceptional circumstances, the Court decides otherwise, its hearings shall be public.
- Documents deposited with the Registry are open to the public, unless the President of the Court decides otherwise.
Section 41 – Just satisfaction 9004
If the Court declares that there has been a violation of the Convention or its Protocols, and the internal law of a High Contracting Party allows only partial elimination of the consequences of this violation, the Court, if necessary, awards just satisfaction to the injured party.
Article 42 – Decisions of the Chambers
The judgments of the Chambers become final in accordance with the provisions of article 44, paragraph 2.
Article 43 – Referral to the Grand Chamber
- Within three months from the date of the Chamber’s decision, in exceptional cases, it is possible for either of the parties to apply in the case to transfer it to the Grand Chamber.
- A panel of five members of the Grand Chamber shall accept the petition if the matter raises a serious question concerning the interpretation or application of the provisions of this Convention or the Protocols thereto, or another serious matter of a general nature.
- If the Panel accepts the appeal, the Grand Chamber will issue its ruling on the case.
Article 44 – Final Regulations
- The judgment of the Grand Chamber is final.
- A judgment of any of the Chambers becomes final if:
(a) the parties do not declare that they will request the referral of the case to the Grand Chamber; or
(b) no application has been received to refer the case to the Grand Chamber after three months from the date of the order; or
(c) The Jury of the Grand Chamber rejects the referral request under section 43.
3. The final decision is subject to publication.
Article 45 – Reasoning for judgments and decisions
- Judgments and decisions on admissibility or inadmissibility of complaints must be reasoned.
- If the decision, in whole or in part, does not express the unanimous opinion of the judges, then any judge has the right to present his dissenting opinion.
Article 46 – Binding force and execution of ordinances
- The High Contracting Parties undertake to comply with the final judgments of the Court in any case to which they are parties.
- The final judgment of the Court is forwarded to the Committee of Ministers, which oversees its execution.
- If the Committee of Ministers considers that a problem of interpretation of that judgment impedes the supervision of the execution of a final judgment, it may refer the matter to the Court for a judgment on the issue of interpretation. The decision to refer the matter to the Court requires a two-thirds majority of the representatives entitled to participate in the work of the Committee.
- If the Committee of Ministers considers that a High Contracting Party refuses to comply with a final judgment in a case to which it is a party, it may, after formal notification to that Party, and by a decision by a two-thirds majority vote of the number of representatives entitled to participate in work of the Committee, to refer to the Court the question of whether that Party has breached its obligation established in accordance with paragraph 1.
- If the Court finds that paragraph 1 has been violated, it refers the case to the Committee of Ministers for consideration of the measures to be taken. If the Court does not establish that paragraph 1 has been violated, it will refer the case to the Committee of Ministers, which closes the consideration of the case.
Article 47 – Advisory Opinions
- The Court may, at the request of the Committee of Ministers, issue advisory opinions on legal questions concerning the interpretation of the provisions of the Convention and the Protocols thereto.
- Such opinions should not affect matters relating to the content or scope of the rights or freedoms defined in Title I of the Convention and its Protocols, nor other matters that the Court or the Committee of Ministers might need to address when considering any application, provided by the Convention.
- A decision of the Committee of Ministers to request an advisory opinion from the Court shall be taken by a majority vote of representatives entitled to sit on the Committee.
Article 48 – Competence of the Court in respect of advisory opinions
Whether a request for an advisory opinion made by the Committee of Ministers falls within the competence of the Court, as defined in Article 47, shall be decided by the Court.
Article 49 – Reasoning for the advisory opinions
- The advisory opinions of the Court must be reasoned.
- If the advisory opinion, in whole or in part, does not express the unanimous opinion of the judges, then any judge may submit his dissenting opinion.
- The advisory opinion of the Court is forwarded to the Committee of Ministers.
Article 50 – Maintenance costs of the Court
The costs of the Court are borne by the Council of Europe.
Article 51 – Privileges and immunities of Judges
In the exercise of their functions, judges shall enjoy the privileges and immunities provided for in Article 40 of the Statute of the Council of Europe and in agreements concluded on its basis.
SECTION III VARIOUS PROVISIONS
Article 52 – Inquiries from the Secretary General
Upon receipt of a request from the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, each High Contracting Party shall provide an explanation of how its domestic law ensures the effective application of any of the provisions of this Convention.
Article 53 – Guarantees in respect of recognized human rights
Nothing in this Convention shall be construed as limiting or diminishing any of the human rights and fundamental freedoms that may be secured by the legislation of any High Contracting Party or by any other agreement to which it is party.
Article 54 – Powers of the Committee of Ministers
Nothing in this Convention shall diminish the powers of the Committee of Ministers vested in it by virtue of the Statute of the Council of Europe.
Article 55 – Waiver of other means of settling disputes
The High Contracting Parties agree, unless otherwise provided by a special agreement, not to resort to treaties, conventions or declarations in force between them when submitting for consideration, by sending a statement, a dispute over the interpretation or application of the provisions of this Convention, and not to use other means of settling the dispute, than those provided for in this Convention.
Article 56 – Territorial scope
- Any State, upon ratification or thereafter, may declare by notification to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe that this Convention, subject to paragraph 4 of this article, applies to all or any of the territories for whose external relations it is responsible.
- The Convention shall extend to the territory or territories specified in the notification from the thirtieth day after the receipt of the notification by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe.
- The provisions of this Convention shall apply in the said territories with due regard to local conditions.
- Any State which has made a declaration under paragraph 1 of this article may subsequently at any time declare, in respect of one or more of the territories named in that declaration, recognizing the competence of the Court to receive applications from individuals, non-governmental organizations or groups of individuals. as provided in Article 34 of the Convention.
Article 57 – Reservations
- Any State, when signing this Convention or when depositing its instrument of ratification, may make a reservation to any specific provision of the Convention to the effect that a law in force at that time in its territory is inconsistent with that provision. General reservations are not permitted under this article.
- Any reservation made under this section shall contain a summary of the relevant law.
Article 58 – Denunciation
- A High Contracting Party may denounce this Convention only after five years from the date on which it became a Party to the Convention and six months after the notification has been sent to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, who shall inform the other High Contracting Parties accordingly.
- Denunciation shall not relieve the High Contracting Party concerned from its obligations under this Convention in respect of any act that may have breached such obligations and may have been committed by it prior to the date on which the denunciation takes effect.
- Any High Contracting Party which ceases to be a member of the Council of Europe, under the same conditions, ceases to be a Party to this Convention.
- The Convention may be denounced in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraphs with respect to any territory to which it is subject to the provisions of Article 56.
Article 59 – Signature and Ratification
- This Convention is open for signature by the member States of the Council of Europe.It is subject to ratification. Instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary General of the Council of Europe.
- The European Union may accede to this Convention.
- This Convention shall enter into force upon the deposit of ten instruments of ratification.
- For those States that subsequently ratify the Convention, it enters into force on the date on which they deposited their instruments of ratification.
- The Secretary General of the Council of Europe notifies all Council of Europe member states of the entry into force of the Convention, of the High Contracting Parties that have ratified it, and of the delivery of the instruments of ratification that may subsequently be received.
DONE IN ROME, 4 NOVEMBER 1950, in the English and French languages, both texts being equally authentic, in a single copy which shall be deposited in the archives of the Council of Europe. The Secretary General shall transmit certified copies to all signatory States to the Convention.
90,000 US Democratic primaries: Biden left Sanders no chance
- Kirill Belyaninov
- BBC Washington
Photo author, Getty Images
Former Vice President Joe the title of leader of the presidential race for Democrats in the United States, winning a series of primaries in six states.His main rival, Bernie Sanders, has no chance of being nominated for the Democratic Party.
The first results of the primary elections held on Tuesday in six US states left independent Senator Bernie Sanders no hope of participating in the presidential race. Already at 20.00 East Coast time, immediately after the closure of the first polling stations in Missouri and Mississippi, the decisive victory of his main and only competitor, former Vice President Joe Biden, was announced.According to preliminary data, in Mississippi he received more than 80% of the vote, and almost 60% in Missouri.
Within an hour it became known that the ex-vice president had become a winner in the state of Michigan, which is considered one of the key in the struggle for the presidency in the United States. In 2016, by the way, it was this state that voted for Bernie Sanders, preferring Senator Hillary Clinton.
“I think Bernie Sanders no longer has a chance to become president,” Kevin Keith, campaign adviser to ex-runner Tom Steyer, told Politico.“Biden is winning almost everywhere, and TV channels have already announced that he will receive the [Democratic] nomination.” During the week, the former vice president of the United States unexpectedly took the lead in the main event of the election race – “Super Tuesday”, when the vote was held in 14 states. Joe Biden won 10 of them, not too far behind his main rival in the remaining four.
This “Mini Super Tuesday” vote took place in Missouri, Mississippi, Michigan, North Dakota, Idaho and Washington state. At stake are the votes of 352 delegates to the upcoming Democratic National Convention this summer, which will select a candidate for the presidency.
For this the applicant needs to collect 1990 votes from 3979 delegates. So far, in terms of the number of delegates already assembled in this competition, Joe Biden is noticeably ahead of Senator Sanders with a score of 664-573.After “mini-Super Tuesday” it will be known who will get the votes of 47% of all delegates to the future party congress.
The outbreak of the coronavirus has already made its own adjustments to the electoral race of the Democrats. Both Biden and Sanders were forced to cancel meetings with their supporters in Ohio, and in Washington state, where the first cases of the disease were reported in the United States, voters were asked not to come to the polls, but to vote by mail.
It seems true that the leaders and activists of the Democratic Party have already made their choice by nominating a former US Vice President.
“If Sanders does not win in any of the states today, Joe Biden will remain the only contender for the party nomination,” House Democratic leader Jim Cliburn told NPR on Tuesday evening. debates and primaries (in other states) because that would be a waste of time. ”
The head of the largest Super PAC of Political Activity (super PAC) Priorities USA Action, supporting the Democrats, Guy Cecil, also announced his support for Biden as the only candidate for the presidency from the Democratic Party.
“The math is now clear and understandable,” he tweeted. “Joe Biden will be the Democratic nominee for president and @prioritiesUSA will do whatever it takes to help him defeat Donald Trump in November. Hope others will support us in this struggle. ”
Supercommittees have the right to collect unlimited funds for the election campaign of candidates. In 2016, for example, Priorities USA Action spent $ 190 million on Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
This year, according to official reports, the group has pledged to raise at least $ 150 million to fight Donald Trump even before the Democratic National Convention opens in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in July.
Basic Provisions of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883)
The Paris Convention deals with industrial property issues in the broadest sense of the word, including patents, trademarks, industrial designs, utility models (a type of “small” patents provided for in the legislation of some countries), trade names (names used in the implementation of industrial or commercial activities ), geographical indications (indication of source of origin and appellations of origin) and the suppression of unfair competition.
The main provisions of the Convention are divided into three categories: national treatment, the right of priority, general rules.
1. The provisions of the Convention on national treatment provide that, with regard to the protection of industrial property, each of the Contracting States is obliged to grant to nationals of other Contracting States the same scope of protection as it grants to its citizens. The legal protection afforded by the Convention also extends to nationals of states not party to it if they have a domicile or a real and operating industrial or commercial establishment in a Contracting State.
2. The Convention provides for the priority right of in respect of patents (as well as utility models, where they exist), marks and industrial designs. This right means that on the basis of a correctly executed first application filed in by one of the Contracting States within a specified period (12 months for patents and utility models, 6 months for industrial designs and marks), the applicant can apply for protection in any of the the remaining 90,004 Contracting States.Such subsequent applications are deemed to have been filed on the same date as the first application. In other words, they have priority (hence the term “priority right”) over applications filed during the specified period for the same invention, utility model, mark or industrial design by others. In addition, such subsequent applications, by virtue of their being based on the first application, are not influenced by any event occurring during this period of time, such as the publication of an invention or the sale of articles in which the relevant industrial design is embodied or which are marked with the appropriate sign.One of the most important practical advantages of this rule is that applicants seeking protection in several countries are not required to file all of their applications at the same time, but have at their disposal a period of 6 or 12 months to decide in which countries they wish to obtain protection, and properly prepare their actions necessary to obtain protection.
3. The Convention establishes a number of general rules , which must be observed by all Contracting States.The most important of these are the following:
a. With regard to patents: patents granted in different Contracting States for the same invention, are independent of each other : the grant of a patent by one Contracting State does not oblige other Contracting States to grant a patent; a patent application cannot be rejected and a patent cannot be revoked in any Contracting State on the ground that the patent application has been rejected or the patent has been revoked in any other Contracting State.
The inventor has the right to be named in the patent as such.
The patent application cannot be rejected and the patent cannot be declared invalid on the ground that the sale of the patented product or a product manufactured in a patented manner is subject to prohibitions or restrictions arising from national law.
Each Contracting State adopting legislative measures concerning the issuance of compulsory licenses to prevent abuses that may arise from the exercise of the exclusive rights granted by the patent may only do so under certain conditions .A compulsory license (a license issued not by the patentee, but by a government agency of the relevant state), issued on the basis of non-use or insufficient use of a patented invention, can only be issued upon a request filed after three years from the date of issue of the patent or four years from the date of filing an application for the grant of a patent, and its issuance must be refused if the patent owner gives valid reasons to justify his inaction.
In addition, revocation of a patent may only be envisaged if the issuance of a compulsory license would have been insufficient to prevent abuse. In the latter case, the patent revocation procedure can only be started after two years from the date of issue of the first compulsory license.
b. With regard to marks: The Paris Convention does not govern the conditions for filing applications for registration and registration of marks, which are determined in each Contracting State by national law.Consequently, no application for the registration of a mark filed by a national of a Contracting State can be rejected and no registration can be invalidated on the ground that the filing, registration or renewal of was not made in the country of origin . Registration of a mark carried out in one of the Contracting States, does not depend on its possible registration in any other country, including the country of origin; therefore, termination or cancellation of the registration of a mark in one Contracting State does not affect the validity of its registration in the other Contracting States.
If the mark is duly registered in the country of origin , it must, upon request, be accepted for registration and protected in its original form in the other Contracting States. However, in some strictly defined cases, registration may be refused – for example, if the registration of a mark leads to a violation of rights acquired by third parties, if the mark does not have distinctive features, if it is contrary to morality or public order, or if its nature is capable of introducing the public is confused.
If the use of a registered mark is mandatory in a Contracting State, the registration can only be canceled after a reasonable period of time and only when the holder cannot provide evidence to justify his failure to act.
Each Contracting State shall refuse to register and prohibit the use of a mark that is a reproduction, imitation or translation of another mark, which is capable of being confused with a mark used to indicate identical or similar products, and is recognized by the competent authority of that State well known therein State and owned by a person entitled to protection in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.
Each Contracting State must also refuse to register and prohibit the use of marks that include, without appropriate permission, coats of arms, national emblems , official marks and hallmarks of Contracting States, unless they have been transmitted through the International Bureau of WIPO … The same provisions apply to coats of arms, flags, emblems, abbreviated and full names of some intergovernmental organizations.
Protection should extend to collective marks .
c. With regard to industrial designs: Industrial designs must be protected in each Contracting State, and such protection cannot be refused on the ground that the products in which the industrial designs are embodied are not manufactured in the State concerned.
d. With regard to trade names: Trade names must be protected in each Contracting State without any obligation to apply for registration or registration of names.
e. With regard to indications of origin of a product: Each Contracting State shall take appropriate measures against the direct or indirect use of false indications of origin of a product or the identity of a manufacturer, manufacturer or trader.
f. With regard to unfair competition: Each Contracting State shall provide effective protection against unfair competition.
The Paris Union, established by the Convention, has an Assembly and an Executive Committee.Each state that is a member of the Union and which has acceded to at least the administrative and final provisions of the Stockholm Act (1967) is a member of the Assembly. The members of the Executive Board are elected from among the members of the Union, with the exception of Switzerland, which is a member of the Executive Board ex officio . The task of the Assembly is to prepare a biennial program and budget for the WIPO Secretariat with regard to the Paris Union.
The Paris Convention was concluded in 1883., revised in Brussels in 1900, in Washington in 1911, in The Hague in 1925, in London in 1934, in Lisbon in 1958 and in Stockholm in 1967, and in 1979 in it was amended.
All states have the right to freely join the Convention. Instruments of ratification or accession must be deposited with the Director General of WIPO.
90,000 Russia initiated the revision of the Convention on Road Traffic
Russia, together with Belgium, Luxembourg, Portugal, France, Finland, Switzerland and Sweden, within the framework of the UN Economic and Social Council (ESS) initiated the revision of the Convention on Road Traffic, signed in 1968.in Vienna. This document actually prohibits the use of drones on the roads. The changes that are proposed to be made to it concern the admission of unmanned vehicles to public roads, follows from the materials of the UN ESS, which Vedomosti got acquainted with.
Convention on Road Traffic is a document that defines the norms for the functioning of road transport systems and standardizes traffic rules in the participating countries (now there are 91 of them). It says that a person controls the vehicle, the participation of robots is not provided there, says Kirill Zhanaydarov, head of the Skolkovo Foundation’s transport department.
“Modification of the Convention on Road Traffic is the first paragraph of the Avtonet roadmap approved by the Russian government,” a representative of Avtonet told Vedomosti. – Two years ago, together with the Ministry of Transport, we prepared and submitted an appropriate proposal at the UN site. We were then supported by France and Switzerland, but in general the idea was not implemented immediately – then the correction was considered premature. Now the process has resumed, the very idea of changing the convention has more supporters, respectively, the chances of success are higher. “
The rules for changing such documents are as follows: the UN ESS secretariat sends to the administrative bodies of the countries that have acceded to the convention, proposals for changing the document. The parties to the convention are given 12 months to formulate and submit objections. If during this time no more than a third of those opposed, the Secretary General of the Convention informs all countries of the entry into force of this decision in six months. Therefore, if the decision is made, then it will come into force in one and a half to two years, predicts in “Avtonet”.
Russia and European states propose to introduce into the convention the concept of “automated driving system”, ie, a software and hardware complex that dynamically controls a vehicle. By it, the authors of the amendments mean all the functions necessary for movement: road control, driving, planning and signaling about maneuvers. A clause is also proposed that an automated system can be recognized by a driver if the vehicle meets the technical and operational requirements of the states that have recognized the amendments.
“This article is limited to the territory of the contracting party in which the relevant national technical regulations and laws governing the operation apply,” the document says.
The fact that the convention is an obstacle to the massive introduction of unmanned vehicles has been repeatedly said by the developers of unmanned vehicle systems: as long as the Russian Federation is a party to it, it is impossible to adjust the traffic rules so that they include drones.
“For several years, at the site of the Global Forum on Road Safety at the UN, with the participation of representatives of the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, amendments to the convention allowing the operation of highly automated vehicles were being prepared,” the Ministry of Transport told Vedomosti. – Now the registration of the approved changes to it is underway. They will allow the use of unmanned vehicles on public roads. ”
It was also decided to form a group of experts to prepare a new convention to provide an international basis for transport automation, added the press service of the Ministry of Transport.At what stage the formation of this group and who will enter it – the ministry did not specify.
If many of the parties to the convention do not support the proposed changes, it will not be easy to bypass its provisions, say experts interviewed by Vedomosti.
“Russia either complies with the requirements common to all participating countries, or withdraws from the agreement,” says Yuri Fedyukin, managing partner of the law firm Enterprise Legal Solutions. – Partial deviation from the provisions established by the convention is allowed, but only in specified cases – for example, when establishing restrictions on the admission of heavy vehicles, if their weight, overall characteristics do not correspond to the parameters established at the level of local legislation.In cases where the derogation from the general provisions of the convention is not provided for by the document itself, it is not allowed.
According to Fedyukin, USA, Canada, almost all Asian countries, including China, India, Australia, Argentina have not joined the convention: “But this does not prevent them from bringing the rules related to road traffic in line with those adopted in the countries of the treaty.” …
“The main advantage of participating in the agreement is the admission to the international movement of vehicles registered in one member state, on the territory of other countries,” explains Fedyukin.- That is, the participants agree that if a vehicle is allowed to move in Germany, it is allowed in Ukraine, Belgium, Norway and Russia. The same applies to the recognition of driving licenses issued in countries that have acceded to the convention. ”
In theory, denunciation of the convention can lead to quite serious negative consequences – for example, when organizing the movement of freight transport, experts say. In most countries that have not joined it, there are legislative norms that allow both the movement of vehicles registered in other states and the use of driving licenses issued abroad.But for the parties to the convention, the recognition of registration certificates and driver’s licenses issued by its parties is an obligation. And in other cases, this is a matter at the discretion of the administration of a particular country.
For the introduction of unmanned vehicles in Russia, it is necessary to change not only international agreements, but also national legislation, lawyers say. To fully exploit unmanned vehicles, it is necessary to revise not only the traffic rules, to provide for the rules for obtaining the right to drive such a car and bringing to responsibility for violation of traffic rules, the lawyer of Forward Legal Lyudmila Lukyanova told Vedomosti earlier: , features of road accident recording and determination of insurance compensation ”.
In a global sense, customs and tax regulations may also change. “Given that an unmanned vehicle is technically more complex and expensive than a conventional car, the rules for calculating taxes and customs duties when importing drones to Russia are likely to change,” Lukyanova said.
The Ministry of Transport, together with other departments, submitted to the government a set of measures to create a regulatory and technical base for the operation of drones, said a representative of the department: “A draft law is envisaged to establish legal relations arising from implementation in the transport complex.It is also planned to develop draft decisions on amendments to interstate standards. ”
Head of the Secretariat of the WHO FCTC Convention Dr. Vera Luiza da Costa e Silva MD, MD
Dr da Costa e Silva holds a Medical Degree and a PhD in Public Health and Epidemiology, and an MBA in the Health Sector.
She was appointed Head of the Secretariat of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), the UN tobacco control treaty, in June 2014.She directs the support provided to the Parties in fulfilling their obligations under this agreement. She also leads the preparation of sessions of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention (COP) and translates its decisions into program activities
Under her leadership, the Secretariat oversaw the integration of the Convention into far-reaching global treaties, including strengthening the implementation of the WHO FCTC as a health goal of the UN Agenda 2030, and using the Convention as a vehicle to implement Financing for Development (DFD ).Dr da Costa e Silva has an “open door” policy for Parties seeking assistance to implement treaty provisions and actively promotes effective countermeasures to prevent tobacco industry interference at the national, regional and global levels. She also advocates greater representation among COP observers (both intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations) who assist the Secretariat in its work, and a fundraising strategy to consolidate the progress made in the implementation of this treaty.Over the past two decades, Dr. da Costa e Silva has worked around the world, working on tobacco control activities in many countries and publishing numerous scientific articles.
In the period from 2006 to 2014. Dr da Costa e Silva has served as Senior Public Health Consultant for WHO and the WHO FCTC Secretariat. She also served as a professor at the National School of Public Health (ENSP / FIOCRUZ) in Rio de Janeiro and as Team Leader for Tobacco Control and Consumer Health at the Pan American Health Organization in Washington DC.
In 2013, she became the founder and first coordinator of the Center for Tobacco and Health Research at the National School of Public Health of the Osvaldo Cruz Foundation in Brazil.
2001 to 2005 She was Director of the World Health Organization’s Tobacco Free Initiative in Geneva, overseeing the WHO global tobacco control agenda and the work of the Interim Secretariat of the WHO FCTC.
For 16 years, Dr da Costa e Silva has coordinated the Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention of the Brazilian National Cancer Institute, where she has dealt with legislation, economics and surveillance, as well as regulatory measures for cancer prevention, with a focus on tobacco control, the creation of a nationwide NCD control network, and the introduction of tobacco regulation as part of the health regulatory authority.
The independent National Anti-Doping Organization RUSADA was established in January 2008 at the initiative of the Federal Agency for Physical Culture and Sports in accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code and the International Convention against Doping in Sport, adopted by the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization on October 19 2005 and ratified by the Russian Federation on December 26, 2006.
On May 1, 2008, the National Anti-Doping Organization RUSADA began collecting and transporting doping samples.
On November 18, 2015, after the publication of the report of the Independent Commission led by Richard Pound, the Executive Committee of the World Anti-Doping Agency recognized RUSADA’s activities as non-compliant with the requirements of the World Anti-Doping Code. In December 2015, the planning and organization of testing was transferred to the UK Anti-Doping Agency (UCAD) under a trilateral agreement between RUSADA, WADA and UCAD, and a roadmap was developed to restore RUSADA’s compliance status.
Since April 2016, international experts recommended by WADA have been working in RUSADA, whose task is to reform the organization and create an effective anti-doping system in the Russian Federation. To date, RUSADA has resumed its activities on processing the results of anti-doping rule violations, investigating possible cases of anti-doping rule violations and implementing educational programs in the field of anti-doping, and has also received permission from WADA to plan testing and conduct doping samples under the supervision of UCAD.
WADA audited in September 2017.
The main activities of RUSADA are testing planning, sampling for doping control purposes, investigating possible cases of anti-doping rule violations and processing the results, as well as implementing educational programs, conducting information campaigns and promoting the ideals of healthy and fair sports.
In addition, RUSADA actively cooperates with national and international sports, educational and scientific organizations and takes part in the world’s largest forums dedicated to the fight against doping.
Planning and conducting testing
Planning and conducting testing
The main task of RUSADA is to protect the right of athletes to participate in sports …
RUSADA organizes seminars, conferences, webinars for athletes and staff…
Expression of results
Expression of results
Upon receipt of information about an Adverse Analytical Finding or other Anti-Doping Violation …
Investigation of the facts of possible anti-doping rule violations is one of the main directions…
In accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, an athlete is entitled to …
90,000 Somalia ratifies C190 and six more ILO conventions
The Federation of Somalia Trade Unions (FESTU) is confident that ratification will benefit workers during the Covid-19 pandemic and contribute to “sustainable economic and social recovery”.IndustriALL affiliate Somalia Oil and Gas Workers Union (SUPEGW), which is also affiliated to FESTU, has taken part in a campaign to support the ratification of ILO conventions.
FESTU Secretary General Omar Farouk Osman says:
“We fought for ratification following the ILO principles of tripartism, social dialogue and harmonious labor relations. We met with Prime Minister Mohamed Hussein Roble, representatives of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection and the Somali Chamber of Commerce and Industry.Having ratified these internationally recognized standards that provide legal safeguards for workers, the Somali government is now under an obligation to ensure that national laws and policies are in line with international norms and practice. ”
FESTU declares that C190 – the Convention on the Elimination of Violence and Harassment – will promote gender equality in the workplace and help end sexual and gender-based violence that negatively affects women workers.Once the convention is ratified, it will be easier for trade unions to campaign for a Sexual Offenses Bill before the federal parliament.
Convention No. 144 on Tripartite Consultation will help improve industrial relations and strengthen stakeholder engagement with government, employers and trade unions.
Conventions Nos. 187 and 155 on safety and health at work protect workers’ rights and contribute to the elimination of harmful and dangerous production factors that pose a risk to the health and life of workers.These conventions will also help create conditions for improving the well-being of workers.
According to FESTU, Convention No. 97 on Migrant Workers, Convention No. 143 on Abuses in the Field of Migration and Convention No. 181 on Private Employment Agencies aim to provide legal remedies and address the problems of abuse and exploitation faced by Somali workers. migrants in other countries. The ILO report states that most Somali migrant workers work as temporary and domestic workers in countries of the IGAD trading bloc, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, which includes Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, South Sudan, Sudan and Uganda, and also Somalia, and in the countries of the Middle East, especially in Yemen.Trade unions say the conventions lay the foundation upon which a country can build national labor migration policies.
On December 26, 2020, the federal parliament of the country approved the ratification of the conventions, after which the relevant documents were sent to the ILO. Unions attribute the campaign’s success to the willingness of social dialogue partners to work together and ensure that the country adheres to international labor standards.
Pole Frans Ndessomin, IndustriALL regional secretary for sub-Saharan Africa, says:
“FESTU’s successful campaign for the ratification of a number of conventions is commendable.