Election Investigations Guidebook 14 of the European Convention proposes to further improve the efficiency of adjudicators by breaking complaints into two categories. The first category concerns cases that are unlikely to succeed due to lack of substance or failure to state a claim. While the process of filtering out complaints that have no basis or substance is important, it is not a justification for dismissing cases purely on formalistic grounds (e.g., dismissing complaints based on a mistake in filling out a complaint form). This issue is further discussed below. The second category captures cases that are similar to the cases brought previously against the same member state. Furthermore, the protocol also proposes that cases that are “manifestly ill-founded” or in which an applicant has not suffered a “significant disadvantage” should not be admitted.30 Elections Canada confers the authority to complete preliminary assessments of complaints to the Counsel to the Commissioner of Canada Elections with assistance from the Chief Investigator.31 In particular, the Counsel is responsible for assessing all relevant circumstances, culminating in a recommendation to the Commissioner to initiate, continue, or terminate an investigation.32 The Chief Investigator adds to the Counsel’s recommendation by reporting on any significant trends found across complaints and by evaluating the possible avenues of investigation and the likely outcomes for specific cases. The Commissioner is then authorized to determine whether or not to pursue investigation, taking into consideration the recommendations of the Counsel and the Chief Investigator.33 According to the process used in Canada, investigators should consider the following criteria when recommending a full investigation: ✓ Reasonable cause is shown for the commission of violations that have (or could have) impacted election processes and/or outcomes; ✓ Reasonable grounds exist to show facts that can be verified or corroborated through further investigation efforts, particularly evidence collection; 30 Protocol No. 14 to the Convention for Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Amending the Control System of the Convention art. 12, opened for signature May 13, 2004, C.E.T.S. No. 194 (effective June 1, 2010). 31 See Canadian Investigators’ Manual Ch. 3, supra note 21. 32 Id.; see also Comm’r of Canada Elections, Ch. 4 Investigation Policy, in Investigators’ Manual 1–33 (2004) [hereinafter Canadian Investigators’ Manual Ch. 4]. 33 30 Canadian Investigators’ Manual Ch. 4, supra note 21.