CDL-AD(2020)025 - 20 - 67. It is normal that the vast majority of the countries allow voters to challenge inaccuracies on voter lists as they are primarily concerned by such potential inaccuracies. This is in line with the Code of good practice in electoral matters underlining that “there should be an administrative procedure – subject to judicial control – or a judicial procedure, allowing for the registration of a voter who was not registered”.97 The Code of good practice does not mention the candidates as a potential category entitled to challenge such inaccuracies. Nonetheless, a small number of countries also allow candidates to challenge potential mistakes, which is welcome, provided that these same countries also allow voters to challenge voter lists. The capacity for requesting such corrections may be restricted to electors registered in the same constituency or at the same polling station, as underlined by the Code of good practice in electoral matters.98 68. Candidate registration – In 44 countries, prospective candidates are competent to complain against the refusal of their registration.99 In 11 countries, voters are also competent to complain on this step of the electoral process.100 In three countries, no elements were found in the electoral legislation about the possibility to challenge decisions in this field.101 69. Refusals of candidate registration should be mostly challenged by prospective candidates. While they are directly impacted by a possible refusal of registration, this also impacts the freedom of voters to form an opinion and ultimately to express their wishes if candidates from some political colours are not present in the political arena. Therefore, it would be an improvement for the transparency and the pluralism of electoral processes to allow voters to challenge refusals of candidate registration in other countries than the 12 identified by the report. 70. Voting and counting/tabulation procedures – In 25 countries, voters are competent to complain on potential irregularities during the voting – during early voting, if any, or on election day, including concerning counting and tabulation procedures.102 In 33 countries, candidates are also competent to complain on these steps of the electoral process.103 In seven countries, observers are competent to complain on such steps.104 71. Voters and candidates should have standing when they are impacted, for example by biased election results, but also by potential irregularities in voting and counting procedures. It is therefore recommended that countries include on a broader scale in their electoral laws 97 Code of good practice in electoral matters, Guideline I. 1.2 iv. Guideline I. 1.2 v and Explanatory Report, para. 7. 99 Algeria, Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Belgium, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia (political party) Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary (political party), Iceland, Ireland, (spokesperson for the constituency nomination) Republic of Korea, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Mexico, Republic of Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, the Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway (candidate or registered political party) Peru, Poland, Romania (candidate or electoral competitors), Russian Federation, San Marino, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United States of America. 100 Azerbaijan, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Italy, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Serbia, United Kingdom. 101 Austria, Denmark, Finland. 102 Andorra, Brazil, Belgium, Chile, Costa Rica, Czech Republic (when challenging election results – further: “election results”), Denmark (election results), Germany (election results), Hungary (election results), Iceland (election results), Ireland (election results), Italy, Republic of Korea, Kosovo, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway (election results), Poland (election results), Portugal, Russian Federation (election results), San Marino, Ukraine (unlike other potential claimants, a voter has to prove that his or her rights or interests have been violated by an infringement during a voting, counting or tabulation operation). 103 Albania (election results), Algeria, Armenia, Austria (political parties), Azerbaijan (all electoral subjects), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia (election results) Estonia, Finland (election results), France, Georgia (representatives of electoral subjects), Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Republic of Moldova, Monaco, Morocco, North Macedonia (election result), Peru, Russian Federation (election results), Slovenia, Slovak Republic (election result), Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey (political party representatives), Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America (election results). 104 Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Tunisia, Ukraine. 98