Proceeding on the acceptance of a nomination as a candidate for the office of President

The Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic ruled for the first time in the proceeding on the acceptance of a nomination as a candidate for the office of President of the Slovak Republic. In its decision, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic found that the lawsuit was well-founded and therefore decided to accept the nomination of the claimant Róbert Švec as a candidate for the office of President of the Slovak Republic (Case No. 11 Svp 1/2024).

By a lawsuit filed on Monday last week with the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, the claimant sought a decision on the adoption of the proposal for a candidate for the office of the President of the Slovak Republic in view of the fact that the President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic had rejected his nomination as a candidate for President of the Slovak Republic in accordance with a special regulation.

The claimant saw the illegality of the procedure primarily in the fact that the decision to reject his presidential candidacy was signed by the Deputy President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic and not by its President. The applicant argued that the power of the President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic to sign the decision in question could not be delegated to the Deputy President of the Parliament. He also argued that he had submitted the necessary more than 15 000 signatures and thus fulfilled the conditions for candidacy for the presidency.

The defendant considered the applicant’s objections to be unfounded. With regard to the representation of the President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic by his deputy, it stated that the deputy presidents of the National Council of the Slovak Republic represent the President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic in the designated order and in the performance of his tasks, which he entrusts to them. The Constitution of the Slovak Republic does not insist on the President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic personally exercising the powers of the President and, given their nature, allows them to be exercised by the Vice-Presidents of the National Council of the Slovak Republic. With regard to the number of signatures, he stated that the 785 petition sheets received contained a total of 15 209 entries of citizens supporting the petition with their signatures and that, out of that number of entries, 183 entries were not recognised by the committee set up to examine the compliance of the petition sheets submitted with the relevant legal provisions on the grounds that the name, surname or permanent address of the citizen was illegible or incomplete, the date of birth was illegible or incomplete, or the signature of the citizen was missing. On the remaining records numbering 15,026, the commission stated that the signatures of citizens listed on at least 57 sheets attached to the proposal were evaluated as untrustworthy, as there was a reasonable doubt as to the relevance of the signatures of these citizens recorded on these sheets. The Commission expressed its conviction that the petition sheets in question did not bear the handwritten signature of the citizens in question, i.e. the petition sheets did not meet the legal requirement of a handwritten signature of a citizen eligible to vote in the National Council of the Slovak Republic supporting the petition. A total of 1 101 signatures were evaluated in this way.

Panel No. 11 of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, having considered all the circumstances, came to the conclusion that the lawsuit was well founded in so far as the claimant challenged the fulfilment of the condition arising from Article 101(3) of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic, i.e. that the petition was signed by more than 15 000 citizens of the Slovak Republic. In this respect, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic stated that the identification of the writer by means of an analysis of the handwriting (here, the signature) in order to determine the author of the writing, or to determine the authenticity or falsity of the written expression under consideration, belongs exclusively to the scientific field of handwriting science and not to a commission or advisory commission of the National Council of the Slovak Republic or even to a court. From the point of view of other persons or entities, the assessment of individual signatures remains in the plane of purely subjective, and unless it is clearly demonstrated beyond any doubt that it is not a handwritten signature of a particular person (which must be matched by a clear justification of how a particular signature does not correspond to the requirements of a handwritten signature), then in the opinion of the court it is necessary to accept such a signature, and especially if at the same time there are no doubts as to the existence of the person himself in relation to whom the signature is identified. That fact has not been established, nor has it been asserted by the defendant. Nor has the defendant proved the doubts which it alleges in any other relevant way, for example by securing a statement from the persons concerned that they did not personally sign the petition sheets in question. In so far as the defendant then, without further reasoning, itself assessed part of the signatures on the petition sheets in question as untrustworthy, without specifying how it had reached that conclusion, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic considered it necessary to grant the applicant judicial protection.

On the other hand, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic assessed the representation of the President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic by the Deputy President or Vice-Presidents as consistent not only with the constitutional rules, but also with the very purpose of the proper and efficient performance of the tasks that belong to the President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic.

Therefore, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, by its resolution, decided to accept the petition of the applicant Róbert Švec for the nomination as a candidate for the office of President of the Slovak Republic.

The Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic ruled in the case on Friday, 16 February 2024, i.e. within the statutory five-day time limit. The decision was adopted unanimously and is final. The written reasoning of the decision will be published within the statutory period.

In the case of Róbert Švec c/a President of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, the decision was rendered by panel No. 11 of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, composed of: the President of the Senate, JUDr. Jana Hatalová, PhD., LL.M.; the Judges, JUDr. Zdenka Reisenauerová; prof. JUDr. Juraj Vačok, PhD.; JUDr. Zuzana Šabová, PhD.; JUDr. Martin Tiso (Judge-Rapporteur)