Directly related to the above is the view of the Administrative Court35 that, in the event of less serious infractions (ones the law envisages no legal consequences for), the REC can reject an appeal even if it finds omissions had occurred in the course of the election, provided that those did not materially affect decision-making. These are infringements that do not require the polling board to be dismissed and order the poll to be repeated at the particular polling place, which could affect the overall outcome of the election. The Administrative Court also held that the principle of expediency ought to be applied when assessing whether an infringement should have legal consequences. By contrast, Article 58 of the LEMP provides an exhaustive list of five serious violations, where the electoral commission is required, following the filing of an objection by a voter, to consider whether to order the poll to be repeated at the polling station in question if: → not all members of the polling board (or their substitutes) are present at the polling station whilst it is open and voting is taking place; → a separate room is not provided to serve as the polling place that can guarantee ballot secrecy; → more voters are present in the room in which voting is taking place than there are voting positions; → persons with no rights or duties in connection with administration of the election remain present at the polling station; and → if law enforcement officers enter the polling station without having been invited to do so by the president of the polling board or where public order has not been violated. In addition, serious violations are usually taken to include: voting instead of another person; infringing ballot secrecy; voting more than once (where one voter is given two or more ballot papers); presence of election advertising at a place closer than 50 meters to the polling station; voting away from a polling station without a certificate allowing the voter to do so; voting without a personal identity document; preventing a registered voter from voting; failing to circle the voter’s name in the electoral register or circling the name of a different voter; members of the polling board or third parties seeking to influence a voter’s choice; absence of the verification ballot in the ballot box; presence of excess ballot papers in the ballot box (in relation to voters who cast their votes); amending the electoral register on Election Day; and the like.36 In each case, the REC is required to review the electoral materials submitted by the polling board before ruling on any objection. According to the Administrative Court,37 reviewing an amended/initialled set of polling board minutes that do not indicate the legal grounds for such amendment cannot be deemed to be a complete finding of fact; the REC’s comprehensive fact-finding requirement (including circumstances not indicated in the Judgment of the Administrative Court No. Už 512/12 of 18 May 2012. Vučetić Dejan, Zaštita izbornog prava na lokalnim izborima, u: Priručnik za sprovođenje lokalnih izbora, ur. Milan Jovanović, SKGO, Beograd, 2016, p. 213. 37 Judgment of the Administrative Court No. Už 21/17 of 10 April 2017. 35 36 29