In analysing the relationship between criminal proceedings and right to stand for election, this paper aims to deliver answers to questions such as may the criminal proceedings influence passive suffrage, how and why. Several international standards provide for legal basis for restriction of the right to stand for election, as well as the conditions under which the restrictions may be imposed by the written legislative norm. Form of restrictions include the ineligibility to be elected and loss of mandate and are implemented into the electoral system in different ways and under various criteria such as nature of the offence, nature of the sentence etc. However, there are several electoral systems which do not impose restrictions i.e., do not recognize ineligibility to be elected nor the loss of mandate. Emphasis is placed on the Croatian regulatory framework which recognizes restrictions to the right to stand for election through Local Election Act and Act on the Election of MPs to the Croatian Parliament. Conditions under which electoral candidates lose their mandate or are ineligible to be elected are generally correspondent with the conditions put in place by other legislations, especially the ones in Europe. In the analysis of the validity of the implementation of restrictive measures to the right to stand for election, arguments for and against of the implementation are put forward. On one hand, protection of democracy, anti-corruption efforts and forcing political responsibility upon the electoral candidates are arguments in favour of the restriction. On the other hand, however, indirect restriction of the right to vote and tackling political adversaries point to arguments on why one should be cautious when regulating the restrictions. It is important to note that, for the reasons stated above, legislator is the one required to enact quality election laws and consistently apply them in order to regain the trust of voters in public officeholders.