an infringement or omission. In the interests of efficiency, and to ensure the electoral process is not unduly protracted, objective, preclusive time limits could also be contemplated. Ruling on objections Both the REC and local electoral commissions have 48 hours to rule on objections from the time they receive them, and the rulings are then served on all parties. Upholding an objection has the legal consequence of annulling the contested decision or action; if a commission does not adopt a ruling, the objection is deemed to be upheld. Practice has revealed that the REC reviews infringements of regulations from a purely formal perspective and often takes highly restrictive views. In this context, infringements are examined and considered only if they have been included in the polling board’s minutes. The Administrative Court shares the same view: in one judgment, the Court held that ‘if an objection alleges irregularities in the administration of an election at a polling station or in its vicinity on Election Day, and the minutes of the polling board contain no such allegations of irregularities or protests, it is justified to reject such objection as unfounded’.32 This judgment was made following an objection that alleged votes were being bought The REC’s ability to administer electoral justice is constrained by its lack of power to outside polling places in one municipality in a soact sua sponte, without a formal objection called ‘Bulgarian train’ arrangement, where pre-filled having been filed. Consideration should be given to allowing the REC to act on its own ballots are distributed to willing voters. The voters initiative in the event of infringements or cast these ballot papers and take out blank ones inability to formally determine the results of obtained at the polling station to give to the ‘buyers’ a vote, especially in cases of serious violations noted in polling board minutes and collect their fee. The blank ballots are then used but not formally subject to objections by for the next round of the process. The reasoning authorised persons. for the judgment stated that ‘inspection of polling board minutes for all 30 polling stations in this municipality found no objections to the actions of the polling boards or any reports of irregularities at any polling station in the municipality’. The case law adopted in parliamentary elections, whereby an objection filed for infringements at a polling station should be rejected if the infringements are not substantiated in the minutes of the polling board, has also been applied to presidential polls. Here, for instance, on 5 April 2017 the REC considered an objection filed by R.N., of B., which alleged infringements of the electoral process and determination of results at Polling Station No. 6 in the Municipality of Krupanj. The REC found that ‘minutes of the polling board detailing the electoral process and determination of results of voting in the presidential election at Polling Station No. 6 in the Municipality of Krupanj contain no protests about the administration of the voting at that polling station.’ As such, the REC ruled that ‘there were no grounds to uphold the objection, as the complainant has not proven beyond any doubt, reasonable or otherwise, the allegations of the objection, especially given the absence of any protests in the minutes of the polling board’.33 32 33 Judgment of the Administrative Court No. Už 318/16 of 30 April 2016. Judgment of the Administrative Court No. 14 Už 18/17 of 9 April 2017. 27