constrains its ability to administer electoral justice. This provision ought to be reassessed in any future review of electoral law to consider allowing the REC to independently examine violations without having to rely on objections.27 The REC and the courts have weighed in on the extent of voters’ rights to object in the electoral process. Here, the Supreme Court of Serbia has held that all entities proposing electoral lists may object, rather than only entities whose electoral lists have been accepted with legal finality.28 Local units of a political party that has proposed an electoral list may not object except unless explicitly empowered to do so by the entity proposing the electoral list.29 Time limits for filing objections In parliamentary and presidential elections, the 24-hour time limit for filing objections begins to run immediately after the adoption of a decision, performance of an action, or failure to act deemed by the complainant to be an infringement of the rules. The Administrative Court has held that the time of learning about an alleged infringement that gives rise to an objection has no bearing on the limit for objecting (of 24 hours).30 By contrast, the Local Elections Law adopts a different approach: according to this piece of legislation, an objection due to an infringement in connection with the nomination of candidates, administration of an election, and determination and publication of election results, must be filed within 24 hours of the day on which the decision was taken or the action performed or omitted. This means that the period begins to run at the end of the calendar day on which the infringement takes place.31 Lastly, the Decision on the Election of Members of the Legislature of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina stipulates that objections are to be filed within 24 hours of the adoption of the decision or performance or omission of an action deemed by the complainant to be an infringement, and this provision is interpreted in the same way as the wording of the LEMP. Consideration should be given to aligning the LEMP, the Local Elections Law, and the Decision on the Election of Members of the Legislature of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina to ensure time limits in electoral disputes are identical. This issue is particularly important when elections at multiple levels are held at the same time. The primary problem with such short statutory time limits for exercising remedies could be that the brief time allotted makes it difficult to fully grasp the nature of the infringement and nearly impossible to secure evidence to substantiate the alleged infringement or omission. Hence, subjective time limits for objecting could be considered, such as 24 hours from learning of Consider introducing subjective time limits, such as 24 hours from learning of an infringement or omission. In the interests of efficiency, objective, preclusive time limits could also be contemplated. This issue will be discussed in greater detail below. Legal opinion adopted by the Administrative Division of the Supreme Court of Serbia on 17 September 2020. 29 Judgment of the Administrative Court Už 230/16 of 22 April 2016. 30 Judgment of the Administrative Court Už 35/17 of 13 April 2017. 31 Legal opinion adopted by a meeting of all judges of the Administrative Court on 29 February 2016. 27 28 26