restricted one, depending upon the fulfillment of special conditions as regards evidentiary matters and the admissibility of complaints and appeals. 32. Both the preliminary and the final results should be subject to challenges. Therefore the electoral law should differentiate between the procedures, deadlines and time-limits applicable to each phase. The principles below are based on this assumption. 33. Where lower level electoral bodies are mandated to publish the preliminary results of the election, they should not be entitled to declare the results void but should be able to make non-binding recommendations to that purpose to the highest electoral body. 34. The final results should not be published before all challenges of the preliminary results have been decided upon by the highest body of the judiciary or the constitutional court. 35. Challenges pertaining to the preliminary results of the election within the mandate of lower level electoral bodies should be filed with the highest electoral body so as to secure a coherent and hierarchical procedure. The time-limit for filing and deciding upon such challenges should not exceed one month, so as to enable the publication of the final election results no later than this deadline (taking into account the deadline for publication of the preliminary results). 36. All complaints pertaining to the overall final results or the declaration of election results to be partially or fully void should be filed with the highest body of the judiciary, the Constitutional Court or with the court where the highest electoral body is located. In the latter case, the ruling delivered by the court may be further appealed to the highest body of the judiciary. 37. In accordance with the procedural time limits prescribed by law for publication of the preliminary and final results and for filing and deciding upon related challenges, all complaints and appeals should be determined once and for all within a maximum of two months. 38. The electoral law should clearly state the grounds upon which the election results may be partially or fully invalidated. A mere reference to the constitution should not be held as providing a sufficient basis for adjudicating such cases. Also, the law should specify the amount and type of evidence required for a review of the results. In the absence of clear and unambiguous standards of evidence, the determination of what evidence would satisfy these standards could vary on a scale that may undermine the whole process. 39. Where a polling-station-by-polling-station resolution mechanism applies, the invalidation of voting in a particular polling station should be considered by means of an evaluation of the way the alleged irregularities or violations have affected the outcome of the election. H. Admissibility of complaints and appeals 40. The electoral law should lay down the grounds upon which complaints and appeals are admissible. Any complainant should be duly notified in writing of the decision as to whether his/her petition was considered admissible or not, with reasons given. 13