Election Investigations Guidebook offenses are administrative or criminal in nature (which naturally has implications as to what procedure might apply). In addition, many jurisdictions do not explicitly clarify the existence of concurrent civil/administrative, and criminal jurisdiction for certain types of acts (for example, vote buying) that would allow for both civil/administrative and criminal remedies to apply. This Guidebook does not go into detail on this distinction, given the need for brevity and the overarching goal of providing broad standards, but does note distinctions between administrative and criminal procedure (and how this impacts investigations) and give examples of each. Given the majority of election disputes and petitions are civil or administrative (versus criminal, which is generally reserved for serious election offenses), much of the discussion in this Guidebook focuses on civil and administrative procedure and practice. Perceived Structural Conflicts of Interest Because the gathering of evidence in election cases can be extremely difficult, the role of the EMB can be of critical importance. In some cases, the EMB will be the only party in a position to investigate irregularities or to determine the impact of the irregularity on an election result. In Australia, for example, the EMB has a formal and permanent role as a source of information and expertise for challenges to election results. In the United Kingdom, the Electoral Commission recommended that it be given an investigatory role in election petitions since in many cases it is difficult for individual plaintiffs to investigate effectively, and since election petitions raise issues of interest to the wider public, it is in the public interest that all relevant evidence comes before an adjudicator. IFES has previously noted that EMBs should generally play a role in election investigations because they are better equipped than police in terms of technical knowledge of election administration and access to the relevant evidence. However, this means that in many instances an EMB will be investigating allegations related to its own personnel and actions (or inactions), and this could result in an actual or perceived conflict of interest. Given the important role of an EMB in election investigations, for the purposes of this Guidebook our focus is on mechanisms to reduce or remove potential conflicts. For example, as long as EMBs process and investigate claims in an unbiased manner irrespective of their source, and as long as a right of appeal is in place, any actual or perceived conflict can be mitigated. 22