Last updated on December 17, 2013

For Implementing Bodies

• Does the legal framework clearly define who can lodge a challenge against the results, to which body the challenge should be lodged, in what circumstances an investigation will be conducted and in what situation a recount of the results will occur?
• Do deadlines for responding to challenges reflect the fact that counting and tabulation processes are likely to be much faster using electronic voting and counting equipment?
• Does a voter verified audit trail exist as the basis for a recount?
• Is there a process in place for adjudicating blank ballots or ballots that cannot be read by scanners?
• Are clear legal guidelines in place for what steps should be taken if the original and recounted results do not match or are not within a certain margin of error?

For Oversight Actors

• Does the legal framework clearly define who can lodge challenges against results, to which body the challenge should be lodged, in what circumstances and investigation will be conducted, and in what situation a recount of the results will occur?
• Is there a voter verified paper audit trail in place that can serve as the basis for a recount?
• If relevant, is there a clear process for adjudicating ballots that cannot be read by scanners, and are stakeholders allowed and encouraged to oversee this process?
• Do the legal guidelines clearly establish what must take place in instances where recounted and original results do not match sufficiently?
• Are audit reports made publicly available?
• Does the court or adjudicating body have sufficient IT capacity to effectively rule on election technology-related cases?