Principle 3: Effective Investigation General Comment No. 32, clarified that the right to a fair trial applies to certain administrative proceedings that affect the rights of individuals under law.373 In other words, where an individual’s right under the law is at stake—such as in disciplinary actions that involve penal sanctions—the state must ensure that the dispute is resolved through a fair process. While there are no guidelines specific to election investigators, it is possible to extend international due process principles for assessing the conduct of judges, prosecutors, and lawyers to this investigatory context.374 Specifically, the United Nations’ Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, and Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide guidance for developing a state’s liability framework for election investigator misconduct. For example, fair notice requires that rules be determined in accordance with a state’s legal framework, including laws and regulations, applicable codes of professional conduct, and established standards and ethics.375 This ensures that all persons have knowledge of what is and is not punishable, thus preventing arbitrary enforcement of laws and regulations. As an investigation of electoral fraud or other claims would be highly politicized, states must provide for appropriate procedures to ensure that investigators are given due process, as outlined in domestic and international human rights law.376 States should process charges or complaints against investigators within a reasonable timeframe according to procedures established in the law.377 373 H.R.C. General Comment No. 32, ¶ 16, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GC/32 (Aug. 23, 2007) [hereinafter General Comment No. 32]. 374 See generally Office of the High Comm’r for Human Rights, Independence and Impartiality of Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers, in Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers 113–154 (2003) [hereinafter OHCHR Manual]. 375 See Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, supra note 112 (“all disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings shall be determined in accordance with established standards of judicial conduct”); U.N. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, supra note 320, § 21 (“disciplinary offenses of prosecutors shall be based on law or lawful regulations”); Eighth U.N. Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers ¶ 29, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.144/28/Rev.1, at 119 (1990) [hereinafter Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers] (all disciplinary proceedings “shall be determined in accordance with the code of professional conduct and other recognized standards and ethics of the legal profession and in the light of these principles”). 376 See Eur. Consult. Ass., Rec. No. R(94) 12 of the Comm. of Ministers to Member States on the Independence, Efficiency, and Role of Judges, Principle (VI.3), 518th Sess. (Oct. 13, 1994). 377 Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, supra note 112 (“[A] charge or complaint made against a judge in his/her judicial and professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under an appropriate procedure. The Judge shall have the right to a fair hearing.”); U.N. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, supra note 320, § 21 (complaints against prosecutors which allege that they “acted in a manner clearly out of the range of professional standards shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under appropriate procedures”); Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, supra note 376, ¶ 27 (“Charges or complaints made against lawyers in their professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under appropriate procedures.”) . 111