In previous opinions, the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR expressed concerns about restrictions on candidates’ freedom of expression to protect the honour and reputation of other candidates. Such limitations on the free expression of speech and political opinions may prevent the development of a free and vigorous campaign. Even though “the protection of the reputation or rights of others” may be a legitimate aim for restrictions on the freedom of expression under Article 10 (2) of the European Convention of Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights has consistently maintained that the limits of acceptable criticism are wider with regard to a politician acting in his or her public capacity than in relation to a private individual. Politicians have knowingly laid themselves open to scrutiny and critique by journalists, political opponents and the public, particularly during an election campaign. In such cases, the interest of politicians’ reputation and honour has to be balanced against the interests of open discussion of political issues and information, which is vital to any election campaign. In its Explanatory Report, the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters underlines that “European standards are violated by an electoral law which prohibits insulting or defamatory references to officials or other candidates in campaign documents, makes it an offence to circulate libellous information on candidates, and makes candidates themselves liable for certain offences committed by their supporters.”