The Panel has assessed that complaints 344 and 354 dated 07.10.2019 are of the same content, by the nature of the same alleged violation, were submitted by the same complainant against the same political entity; therefore the Panel, pursuant to Article 8, paragraph 3 of the Rules and Procedures no. 02/2015 ECAP which provides that: ‘ In order to facilitate the examination of complaints, Chairperson of the decision-making panel may decide to join the appeals which constitute similar issues themselves and that those appeals are dealt with by a single decision’ so the panel joined the complaints and made a single decision as in the enacting clause of this decision. The Panel, after examining the parties' allegations in the proceedings and analyzing the case file, found that the complaints were partly grounded as follows: Article 94 of the LGE clearly states that the Chairperson, PSC members and the accredited observers present can make notes or remarks in the voting book (polling station book) in which the events taking place at the polling station are recorded. The Panel notes that the complainant's allegation of not taking notes on person or persons who took out the ballots from VC 2114B respectively VC no. 2114B / 01R, is credible because the police report dated 08.10.209 clearly shows that Chairperson of the polling station Alban Shala informed the police about irregularities during the election process - the loss of ballots. This case was also investigated by the police on the basis of a notification made by Chairperson of this polling station, and investigations revealed that the lost ballots were found filled in at the same VC on the upper floor of that polling station; and in this report are listed the names of persons engaged in the electoral process at this polling station, to whom the panel has imposed a sentence as in the enacting clause of this decision. Concerning the part of the enacting clause of this Decision by which the commissioners and observers of polling station no. 2114B/01R are prohibited for 5 years to participate on elections as a candidate and as an administrative part of any electoral body managed under the authority of the Central Election Commission (CEC), the ECAP decision is based on section 120.3 (d) which provides “If a violation of this law or an electoral rule, undermining the integrity of elections, has occurred, the ECAP may: (d) prohibit an individual from participating in an election held under the authority of the CEC, either as a candidate or a member of an electoral administrative body, for a period not exceeding six (6) years.”, because ECAP found that none of the commissioners, including Chairman of 2114B, had taken any action on voting day dated 06.10.2019 to avoid violations as alleged in the complaint. The Panel has not assessed the complainant's claims regarding the request for recount at CRC regarding the polling stations mentioned in the complaint, with number 2114B / 01R, 02R, 03R, 04D, as this request should be filed on announcement of the final result by the CEC and not at this stage of the electoral process. In the present case the CEC had not made the final decision on the announcement of the result, so the Panel decided to dismiss the complainant's complaint as premature in the second part of the enacting clause. Based on the above ECAP, in accordance with the legal provisions of Article 118 paragraph 1 and 5 in conjunction with Article 122 of the LGE, decided as in the enacting clause of this decision.