With regard to specific aspects of conducting referendums,
the Assembly invites the Venice Commission to consider including
in the revised code the following elements:
4.1 it should not be possible for the executive to call a
referendum on a constitutional proposal, except where the decision
to hold a referendum has already been endorsed by the legislature
or where the proposal that is put to a referendum has been passed
by the legislature;
4.2 in order to allow voters to make well-informed decisions
while casting their votes, it should not be possible to hold referendums
at the same time as other elections;
4.3 where possible, referendums should be post-legislative;
where this is not possible, a process should be set out requiring
two referendums if the first referendum does not allow voters to
choose between the options that are ultimately available;
4.4 to avoid the danger of low participation while maintaining
the principle that referendum results should not be subject to turnout
thresholds, referendums should, as far as possible, be called only
on subjects that are likely to attract significant public interest;
4.5 it should not be possible to put to referendum a proposal
which would run counter to Council of Europe membership conditions,
such as a proposal to reintroduce the death penalty;
4.6 questions requiring replies other than “Yes” or “No”,
including multi-option questions, should be allowed if they give
voters a clearer choice;
4.7 an impartial body should check all proposed referendum
questions to ensure that they are clear, comprehensible and unbiased.
Where a fixed format for referendum questions is used, this should
be reviewed periodically to ensure that it provides for a ballot
paper which fulfils these criteria;
4.8 in the case of citizen-initiated referendums, the number
of signatures required to trigger a referendum should be high enough
to ensure that the proposal has genuinely wide support; the development
of procedures whereby a citizens’ petition would not lead directly
to a referendum, but rather to a citizens’ assembly which would
recommend follow-up action, could be encouraged;
4.9 there should be sufficient time for all sides to develop
and express their points of view and for voters to hear the arguments
and form an opinion. While a considerably longer period of preparation
is desirable, particularly if the topic has not already been subject
to widespread public discussion, the absolute minimum time between
calling a referendum and polling day could be set at four weeks;
4.10 the prohibition for the authorities to use public funds
for campaigning purposes should last throughout the campaign period;
4.11 in the case of public funding, the principle of equality
between the sides should take precedence over that of proportional
distribution of resources;
4.12 the principle of transparency should apply both to the
sources of campaign funding and to how those funds are spent; spending
and/or donation limits should be encouraged and foreign donations prohibited;
4.13 new rules on the transparency of campaign materials should
be introduced, including clear labelling with the names of the producers
of all advertising; rigorous independent press regulation and impartial
fact-checking should be encouraged for the purpose of tackling misinformation;
4.14 the responsibility to provide official information should
be entrusted to an independent body, rather than the authorities;
information should include, as a minimum, the referendum question
and details of when and how to vote and, where possible, explanations
and analysis of the proposals;
4.15 sanctioning powers should cover all aspects of campaign
regulation, including breaches of the campaign finance rules; fines
should be commensurate with the scale of campaign funding.
