International Foundation for Electoral Systems and Democracy International 1 For instance, in the United States, filing a frivolous claim can result in sanctions for the filing attorney, FED. R.CIV. P. 11(b), available at https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11. 2 E.g., VA. CODE ANN. § 24.2-800 (2009); WASH. REV. CODE § 29A.64.021 (2013). 3 OSCE, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF AFGHANISTAN: PRESIDENTIAL AND PROVINCIAL COUNCIL ELECTIONS 33 (2014), available at http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/afghanistan/129761?download=true; EUEAT, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF AFGHANISTAN: FINAL REPORT 30 (2014), available at http://www.eueom.eu/files/dmfile/FINAL-REPORT-EUEAT-AFGHANISTAN2014-c_en.pdf. 4 Jørgen Elklit and Palle Svensson, What Makes Elections Free and Fair?, 8 J. DEMOCRACY 32 (1997). 5 In Virginia, the contesting candidate is given the discretion to file for a recount when the vote difference meets a specified threshold. VA. CODE ANN. § 24.2-800 (2009). In contrast, in Washington, a recount is automatically triggered when the vote difference meets a specified threshold. WASH. REV. CODE § 29A.64.021 (2013). 6 STAFFAN DARNOLF, IFES, ASSESSING ELECTORAL FRAUD IN NEW DEMOCRACIES: A NEW STRATEGIC APPROACH 15 (2011), available at http://www.ifes.org/~/media/Files/Publications/White%20PaperReport/2011/Assessing_Electoral_Fraud_Series_Darnolf.pdf. 7 VENICE COMMISSION, CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE IN ELECTORAL MATTERS: GUIDELINES AND EXPLANATORY REPORT, ¶ 63, 52nd Sess., Op. No. 190/2002 (May 23, 2003), available at http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD%282002%29023rev-e. 8 IFES, Electronic Counting of Ballots in Kosovo: IFES Guidelines for a Feasibility Study (2011) (on file with IFES) [hereinafter Feasibility Study]. 9 Inter-Parliamentary Council, DECLARATION ON CRITERIA FOR FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS, art. 4, ¶ 2 (Mar. 26, 1994) available at http://www.ipu.org/cnl-e/154-free.htm.; see also INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION, WHAT IS THE IPU?, http://www.ipu.org/english/whatipu.htm (last visited Feb. 20, 2015). 10 FEASIBILITY STUDY, supra note 8. 11 U.N. High Comm’r on Human Rights, Human Rights Standards and Practice for the Police: Expanded Pocket Book on Human Rights for the Police, at 12, U.N. Doc HR/P/PT/5/Add.3, U.N. Sales No. E.03.XIV.7 (2004) available at http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/training5Add3en.pdf. 12 Material in this section has been drawn from a forthcoming IFES publication on investigative standards in election disputes, supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). 13 Rep. of the Joint Inspection Unit, Investigations Function in the United Nations System ¶ 59, U.N. Doc. A/67/140 (Jul. 13, 2012) (describing the duties of an investigator as opposed to an auditor). 14 An example of when search and seizure policies would apply in the elections context would be if a poll worker took a results form home. The police should follow proper search and seizure policies to avoid an unlawful invasion of privacy and to ensure they are not improperly conducting raids in the name of collecting evidence. 15 El-Masri v. Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, App. No. 39630/09, 2012-VI Eur. Ct. H.R. 263, available at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-115621. 16 Atakishi v. Azerbaijan, App. No. 18469/06, 2012 Eur. Ct. H.R. at ¶ 34 available at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-109292. 17 Id. at ¶ 47. 18 Id. at ¶¶ 43, 44, 45. 19 Id. at ¶ 45. 20 Namat Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, App. No. 18705/06, 2010 Eur. Ct. H.R. at ¶ 90 available at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-98187. 21 COMM’R OF CANADA ELECTIONS, Ch. 8 Access to Records, Books and Documents, in INVESTIGATORS’ MANUAL 11 (Appendix I) (2000) [hereinafter CANADIAN INVESTIGATORS’ MANUAL CH. 8]. 19