(gradually), due to their identical factual situation and rejected them all as unfounded. After this was appealed, the Administrative court adopted the appeals and repealed REC’s decisions94 due to inadequate legal explanation, i.e., the lack of the factual situation and clear arguments on which the decision was based, which was incorrectly interpreted in some parts of the public as reverting the vote and ‘taking down the forged elections’95. In the repeated ruling the Republic Electoral Commission confirmed its previous decisions (in joined procedures) and again, as in earlier election cycles, took the position that the election cannot be reverted in those polling stations where irregularities were not noted in the polling board minutes and/or if this form did not note that there were objections or that an event which may have affected voting happened. In addition, the Republic Electoral Commission determined that voting results in disputed polling stations were logical and accurate and that no objections were made against the results by any members of the extended polling board membership. The Administrative court made the last verdicts connected to this topic after a little under two months from the announcement of the results - rejecting the Sovereignists’ complaints and confirming the REC decisions. This manner of REC insisting on the polling board minutes as the only documents to be used as basis for assessments whether or not there were any irregularities in the polling stations somewhat limits the range of complaints expressed by voters and/or observers, with consideration to their capabilities and ‘authority’ at the polling stations. Therefore, if the polling board does not note a complaint or event of importance for voting in the polling board minutes, irregularities cannot be proved and therefore administration of justice cannot be fully achieved as well. The public attention in Serbia was greatly attracted to footage from a polling station in Ub, showing a female who is introducing a group of voters to the polling station and telling them who to vote for, assisting them with voting, checking ballots and inserting them into the ballot box. In addition to clearly violating the secrecy of the vote as one of the main principles of elections in Serbia, it is certain that the present case was about the crime of giving and receiving bribes in connection with voting and/or suffrage abuse. However, as the polling board minutes did not specify any irregularities occurring at polling stations, the elections were not reverted. All other complaints were denied or rejected in the same or similar way - as untimely or ungrounded, Of the approximately 6000 cases, the vote was repeated at a total of with the exception of three in total: the first concerned one polling station in the process a complaint in connection with the Zavetnici (Oathkeepers) of administration of justice per list and was adopted following a ruling of the Administrative complaint from voters. Court; the second adopted objection related to the Levijatan list and their registration and the third - final - was also the only one adopted due to irregularities in the work of the polling board. In fact, at a polling station in Belgrade a voter was denied the right to vote because another person had signed in their place in the 94 95 All verdicts available at: http://www.up.sud.rs/pages/view_cases_search/cirilica See: https://dostajebilo.rs/blog/2020/07/01/djb-sa-2700-prigovora-oborio-izbore-jos-samo-da-nateramo-rik-da-to-i-prizna/?0=cir 55