Search Tips
60 shown of 357 entities
Gugum Ridho Putra v. Indonesia
- Question Presented
- Can Indonesian political candidates alter their "self-image" by posting and utilizing pictures and videos to substantively polish or change their political image? Does the Indonesian voter have a right to truthful information about candidates that is violated by excessive "self-image" manipulation done through AI technology?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Electoral Integrity
- Technology
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Indonesia
- Language of Decision
- Indonesian
- Date of decision
- Jan 2, 2025
- Date added
- Jul 28, 2026
Judgment
Călin Georgescu v. Romania
- Question Presented
- Did the Constitutional Court of Romania err in annulling the first round of elections or infringe upon Georgescu's right to a free election?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Integrity
- Improper Practices
- Social Media
- Technology
- Country
- Romania
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Mar 6, 2025
- Date added
- Jul 28, 2026
Judgment
Evandro Sá Barreto Leitão v. André Fernandes de Moura
- Question Presented
- Did defendant Leitao violate Brazilian Electoral Law when he posted and disseminated artificial intelligence generated videos of international celebrities including Barack Obama, Taylor Swift, Tom Cruise, and Cristiano Ronaldo endorsing his 2024 mayoral campaign on his TikTok profile?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Social Media
- Technology
- Country
- Brazil
- Language of Decision
- Portuguese
- Date of decision
- May 8, 2026
- Date added
- Jul 28, 2026
Judgment
Partido Liberal v. Ricardo Pereira
- Question Presented
- Was the defendant Pereira liable for generating and disseminating an AI deepfake image masquerading as a “leaked photo”, which falsely portrayed a group of Brazilian politicians meeting over brunch?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Social Media
- Technology
- Country
- Brazil
- Language of Decision
- Portuguese
- Date of decision
- Jun 8, 2026
- Date added
- Jul 28, 2026
Judgment
Allen v. Milligan
- Question Presented
- Whether Alabama's 2021 congressional redistricting plan (HB1) — which created only one majority-Black district out of seven in a state that is 27% Black — violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black voting strength.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 8, 2023
- Date added
- Jul 15, 2026
Judgment
Abbott v. Perez
- Question Presented
- Whether the 2013 Texas congressional and state House redistricting plans violated the Equal Protection Clause (racial gerrymandering), Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (vote dilution), and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments (intentional discrimination) — and specifically whether the district court erred by finding that the 2011 discriminatory intent "carried over" into the 2013 plans enacted by the Legislature; holding that certain districts were racial gerrymanders where race was the predominant factor; finding Section 2 vote dilution in certain districts where plaintiffs could not demonstrate that an additional compact minority opportunity district was possible; and applying the wrong legal standard in distinguishing between racial motivation and partisan motivation in redistricting.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 25, 2018
- Date added
- Jul 14, 2026
Judgment
McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission
- Question Presented
- Whether the Federal Election Campaign Act's (FECA) aggregate contribution limits — which cap the total amount an individual may contribute to all federal candidates and political committees combined in a two-year election cycle — violated the First Amendment by restricting political speech and association beyond what was necessary to prevent quid pro quo corruption. The specific question was whether the aggregate limits were "closely drawn" to the government's anti-circumvention interest, or whether they constituted an unconstitutional "outright ban" on further contributions to additional candidates and committees — particularly given that the base limits already prevented any single donor from giving more than the statutory maximum to any individual candidate or committee.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Campaign Finance
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Apr 2, 2014
- Date added
- Jul 14, 2026
Judgment
Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate
- Question Presented
- Whether Section 304 of BCRA — which limits the amount of post-election contributions that a campaign may use to repay a candidate's personal loans to the campaign — violated the First Amendment by burdening core political speech. The specific question was whether the Government could demonstrate that the loan-repayment limitation was "closely drawn" to a sufficiently important interest — namely, preventing quid pro quo corruption or its appearance — given that the limitation deters candidates from loaning money to their campaigns by increasing the risk that such loans will not be fully repaid.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Campaign Finance
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- May 16, 2022
- Date added
- Jul 14, 2026
Judgment
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
- Question Presented
- Whether the two principal features of Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) — (1) the soft-money ban on national, state, and local political parties (Title I), and (2) the regulation of electioneering communications by corporations and unions, including disclosure requirements (Title II) — violated the First Amendment's protections of free speech and association. Subsidiary issues included whether BCRA exceeded Congress's Elections Clause authority, violated principles of federalism, violated equal protection by treating political parties differently from interest groups, and whether specific provisions (including the ban on contributions by minors, the "choice" provision requiring parties to choose between coordinated and independent expenditures, and various disclosure requirements) were constitutional.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Campaign Finance
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Dec 10, 2003
- Date added
- Jul 14, 2026
Judgment
Federal Election Committee v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee
- Question Presented
- Whether FECA's limits on a political party's coordinated expenditures — spending made by a party in cooperation, consultation, or concert with a candidate — are constitutional under the First Amendment as a means of preventing circumvention of the base contribution limits. Specifically, whether a party's coordinated expenditures, which function like contributions to the candidate, may be restricted to prevent donors from funneling large contributions through a party to a candidate.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Campaign Finance
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 25, 2001
- Date added
- Jul 14, 2026
Judgment
Shaw v. Reno
- Question Presented
- Whether a plaintiff may state a cognizable claim under the Equal Protection Clause by alleging that a legislature, though race-neutral on its face, drew district boundaries so bizarrely irregular that they can only be understood as an effort to separate voters into different districts on the basis of race — and whether such a racial gerrymander, even without proof of vote dilution, triggers strict scrutiny as a racial classification.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 28, 1993
- Date added
- Jul 14, 2026
Judgment
Buckley v. Valeo
- Question Presented
- Whether the various provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) — including limits on contributions, limits on expenditures (both by candidates and independent spenders), disclosure requirements, the public financing of presidential campaigns, and the structure of the FEC — violated the First Amendment's protection of political speech and association, the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection, and the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. The central question was whether the government's interest in preventing corruption and the appearance of corruption in federal elections could justify restrictions on political spending, and if so, which restrictions.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Campaign Finance
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jan 30, 1976
- Date added
- Jul 12, 2026
Judgment
Baker v. Carr
- Question Presented
- Whether a claim alleging that a state's legislative apportionment scheme violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment — by diluting the voting power of citizens in overpopulated districts — presents a justiciable controversy or is a non-justiciable "political question" that federal courts lack authority to adjudicate. This issue required the Court to revisit and overturn the precedent of Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (1946), which had held that federal courts should not intervene in reapportionment disputes.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Mar 26, 1962
- Date added
- Jul 12, 2026
Judgment
Cooper v. Harris
- Question Presented
- Whether North Carolina's 2011 congressional redistricting plan used race as the predominant factor in drawing Districts 1 and 12, thereby triggering strict scrutiny — and, if so, whether the State's use of race was narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest (specifically, compliance with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act). A subsidiary issue was whether the legislature's pursuit of partisan advantage could explain the racial composition of the districts, thereby negating the claim that race predominated.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- May 22, 2017
- Date added
- Jul 12, 2026
Judgment
Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee
- Question Presented
- Whether Arizona's out-of-precinct ballot policy and ballot collection ban (HB 2023) violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and more broadly, what legal standard governs Section 2 challenges to "time, place, or manner" voting rules—specifically, whether the "totality of the circumstances" test from Thornburg v. Gingles and the Senate Factors applies to challenges to facially neutral voting procedures.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Administration Irregularities
- Electoral Integrity
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jul 1, 2021
- Date added
- Jul 10, 2026
Judgment
Shelby County v. Holder
- Question Presented
- Whether the coverage formula in Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act — which determined which jurisdictions were subject to the preclearance requirement of Section 5 — remained constitutionally valid after Congress reauthorized it in 2006 without updating the formula, given that the formula was based on decades-old data (voter registration and turnout from the 1960s and early 1970s) and practices (literacy tests) that had since been banned nationwide. More broadly, whether the formula violated the constitutional principle of equal sovereignty among the states by subjecting only certain jurisdictions to the extraordinary federal intrusion of preclearance.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Electoral Administration Irregularities
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 25, 2013
- Date added
- Jul 9, 2026
Judgment
Sentencia T-487/03
- Question Presented
- Whether the failure of the Registraduría to provide Braille electoral ballots to visually impaired voters violated their fundamental rights to political participation (Article 40 of the Constitution), equality (Article 13), and human dignity (Article 1) — and whether the provision of Braille ballots is a constitutionally mandated necessary consequence of the state's obligation to promote real and effective equality (igualdad real) for persons with disabilities.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Colombia
- Language of Decision
- Spanish
- Date of decision
- Jun 11, 2003
- Date added
- Jul 9, 2026
Judgment
Sentencia C-025/21
- Question Presented
- Whether Article 6 of Law 1996 of 2019, which establishes the presumption of full legal capacity for all persons with disabilities regardless of whether they use supports, is constitutional; whether Article 53 of Law 1996 of 2019, which repealed all provisions related to interdiction and inhabilitation in the Colombian legal system, is constitutional; and whether the shift from a substitute decision-making model (guardianship/interdiction) to a supported decision-making model is consistent with the Colombian Constitution and Colombia's international obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), ratified by Colombia via Act 1346 of 2009.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Colombia
- Language of Decision
- Spanish
- Date of decision
- Feb 4, 2021
- Date added
- Jul 9, 2026
Judgment
In the Matter of William Pughsley
- Question Presented
- Whether the circuit court erred in disqualifying William Pughsley from voting by applying an improper "base level understanding" standard—rather than the statutory standard of whether the individual can communicate, with or without accommodations, a desire to participate in the voting process—and whether the court erred in denying accommodations and the Supported Decision-Making Act petition.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date added
- Jul 9, 2026
Judgment
Kasozi & 3 Ors v Attorney General & 2 Ors
- Question Presented
- Whether forcing PWDs to be members of NUDIPU-affiliated associations to vote (as per Regulation 10) violated their constitutional rights, including the freedom of association (Article 29(1)(e)), the right to participate in public affairs (Article 38(1)), the right to redress (Article 50(1)), and the right to vote (Article 59(1)); Whether Parliament unconstitutionally abdicated its mandate under Article 78(4) of the Constitution by delegating the power to create electoral procedures to a Minister instead of prescribing them directly through legislation; and whether the legal framework for PWD elections, particularly after the 2013 legislative amendments, was constitutional.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Freedom of association and assembly
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Uganda
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Sep 29, 2015
- Date added
- Jul 9, 2026
Judgment
August v Electoral Commission of South Africa
- Question Presented
- Whether prisoners retained their constitutional right to vote under the 1996 Constitution, and, if so, whether the IEC was obligated to take active steps to facilitate their registration and voting, particularly in the absence of any parliamentary legislation that explicitly disenfranchised them.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Voter Registration
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- South Africa
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Apr 1, 1999
- Date added
- Jul 9, 2026
Judgment
Emily's List v. FEC
- Question Presented
- Whether the FEC's regulations requiring non-profit political committees to use federally regulated ("hard money") funds for at least 50% of their administrative, voter drive, and public communications costs—and restricting how such groups may solicit contributions—violate the First Amendment's protection of political speech and association, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's intervening decisions in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life (2007) and Davis v. FEC (2008).
- Legal Issue(s)
- Campaign Finance
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Sep 18, 2009
- Date added
- Jul 8, 2026
Judgment
Gomillion v. Lightfoot
- Question Presented
- Whether a state legislature's redefinition of municipal boundaries—designed to exclude African American voters from a city—violates the Fifteenth Amendment, and whether such a legislative act is subject to federal judicial review despite the legislature's general authority to define municipal boundaries.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Nov 14, 1960
- Date added
- Jul 8, 2026
Judgment
National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission
- Question Presented
- Whether FECA's limits on political parties' coordinated expenditures with candidates violate the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech, and specifically whether Colorado II—which upheld those limits under a deferential standard of review—remains good law in light of the Court's subsequent, more demanding campaign finance jurisprudence requiring that restrictions be "necessary," "narrowly tailored," and not "disproportionate" to the government's interest in preventing quid pro quo corruption.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Campaign Finance
- Conflict of Interests
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 30, 2026
- Date added
- Jul 8, 2026
Judgment
Moore v. Harper
- Question Presented
- Whether the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article I, § 4, cl. 1)—which provides that "[t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof"—vests exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules for federal elections, insulating them from review by state courts applying state constitutional constraints.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Judicial Independence
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 27, 2023
- Date added
- Jul 8, 2026
Judgment
Louisiana v. Callais
- Question Presented
- Whether compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 provides a compelling reason that may justify the intentional use of race in drawing legislative districts.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Apr 29, 2026
- Date added
- Jul 8, 2026
Judgment
Richter v. Minister of Home Affairs
- Question Presented
- Whether Section 33(1)(b) and Section 33(1)(e) of the Electoral Act 73 of 1998 — which limited the "special vote" to South African citizens absent from the Republic only if they were on "government service" (or members of the household of such persons), while effectively excluding all other citizens living or working abroad — unjustifiably limited the constitutional right to vote under Section 19(3)(a) of the Constitution, read with the rights to equality (Section 9(1)), human dignity (Section 10), and equal citizenship (Section 3(2)(a)).
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Country
- South Africa
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Feb 9, 2009
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Brotherton N.O. v. Electoral Commission of Zambia
- Question Presented
- Did the Electoral Commission of Zambia violate the fundamental voting rights of disabled voters by failing to provide adequate facilites?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Zambia
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Sep 18, 2011
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
San Antonio Acha v. García Vélez
- Question Presented
- Whether the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission (CEE) violated the due process rights of voters with mobility impairments by denying their early voting applications (voto adelantado) based on alleged deficiencies in their forms — including missing signatures, incomplete information, and suspected fraud (e.g., dozens of applications certified by the same physician on the same date) — while simultaneously failing to provide timely notice of those denials, thereby depriving the voters of any meaningful opportunity to cure the defects before the November 8, 2016 general election.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voter Registration
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Puerto Rico
- Language of Decision
- Spanish
- Date of decision
- Nov 4, 2016
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Merrill v. People First of Alabama
- Question Presented
- Whether the Alabama Secretary of State’s prohibition on curbside voting violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the First and Fourteenth Amendments by denying reasonable accommodations to voters with disabilities during the pandemic.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Oct 21, 2020
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Bujdoso v. Hungary
- Question Presented
- Whether Hungary's automatic disenfranchisement of persons with disabilities placed under guardianship—without individualized assessment of their capacity to vote and based solely on their disability status—violates articles 2, 12, and 29 of the CRPD.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Hungary
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Oct 16, 2013
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Purohit & Moore v. The Gambia
- Question Presented
- Did The Gambia violate the fundamental rights of disabled voters?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Criminal Procedure
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Electoral Violence and Intimidation
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Gambia
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- May 29, 2003
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Caamaño Valle v. Spain
- Question Presented
- Whether the rescission of voting rights for disabled person under guardianship based on individualized assessment is legal under Article 3, Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Country
- Spain
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Aug 11, 2021
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Molka v. Poland
- Question Presented
- Did Poland violate the European Charter of Human Rights by being indifferent to the inaccessibility of poll stations?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Country
- Poland
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Apr 11, 2006
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Strøbye & Rosenlind v. Denmark
- Question Presented
- Whether the automatic removal of persons contravened Article 3, Protocol No. 1 of European Convention on Human Rights and, consequently, constituted illegal discrimination under Article 14 under the same Convention.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Denmark
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Feb 2, 2021
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Anatoliy Marinov v. Bulgaria
- Question Presented
- Whether the automatic removal of a voter's rights under partial guardianship contravenes Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Furthermore, whether the blanket provision of removal is proportional to the state's legitimate aims and whether the absence of individualized judicial review deprives a voter's due process rights.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Bulgaria
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Feb 28, 2022
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Alajos Kiss v. Hungary
- Question Presented
- Whether Hungary's voting restriction was proportional and legitimate under Article 1, Protocol 3
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Hungary
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- May 20, 2010
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Tennessee v. Lane
- Question Presented
- Whether Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act validly abrogates state sovereign immunity under the 11th Amendment and whether people with disabilities have a right to access courts to lodge fundamental rights claims, including electoral disputes.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Criminal Procedure
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- May 17, 2004
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Watson v. Republican National Committee
- Question Presented
- Do federal election-day statutes preempt state laws allowing ballots cast by Election Day to be received and counted after that date?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Deadline(s)
- Election Date
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jun 29, 2026
- Date added
- Jul 7, 2026
Judgment
Shashi Tharoor v. Ashok Kumar & Ors
- Question Presented
- Did AI deepfake videos interfere with elections to a high enough degree to require an injunction?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Social Media
- Technology
- Country
- India
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- May 8, 2026
- Date added
- Jun 30, 2026
Judgment
Toplak & Mrak v. Slovenia
- Question Presented
- Whether Slovenia violated Arts. 3, 14 of Protocol No. 1 that guarentees free elections and non-discrimination
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Country
- Slovenia
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Oct 26, 2010
- Date added
- Jun 30, 2026
Judgment
CH-02
- Question Presented
- Are elements of the national electoral code that define allotment of legislative seats across the country's 10 districts (based off population patterns and anticipated growth in 1987) in conflict with the Constitution, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Convention of Human Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Country
- Suriname
- Language of Decision
- Dutch
- Date of decision
- Aug 5, 2022
- Date added
- Apr 30, 2025
Judgment
2018Hun-Ma551
- Question Presented
- Whether prohibiting elementary and secondary schoolteachers from establishing and joining political parties unreasonably infringes on their right to freedom of association. Whether the ban on elementary and secondary schoolteachers creating or being members of “other political organizations” as stated in Article 65(1) of the State Public Officials Act is clear and meets the balancing test set up by the court to justify a restriction on political rights.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Freedom of association and assembly
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- South Korea
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Apr 23, 2020
- Date added
- Nov 1, 2024
Judgment
Electoral Justice for All: A Practitioner's Guide to Increasing Women's Access to Electoral Justice
- Preview

- Legal Issue and/or Topic
- Election Accessibility
- Electoral Inclusion
- Electoral Inclusion
- Language
- English
- Date added
- Oct 1, 2024
Resources
Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij v. the Netherlands
- Question Presented
- Whether religiously affiliated parties can exclude women from running as candidates on the grounds that forcing the party to host women candidates violates its freedom of religious expression, as it believes women are unsuited for public office?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Gender
- Country
- Netherlands
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Jul 10, 2012
- Date added
- Aug 9, 2024
Judgment
Kitute v. Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
- Question Presented
- Is electronic evidence submitted in support of allegations of election fraud subject to the Evidence Act, which requires authentication or certification by an appropriate authority or expert?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Civil Procedure
- Disputing Results
- Electoral Administration Irregularities
- Electoral Integrity
- Electronic Voting
- Country
- Kenya
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Nov 6, 2017
- Date added
- Aug 9, 2024
Judgment
Odinga, et. al v. Ruto
- Question Presented
- Whether petitioners’ evidence of interference and election fraud satisfied the appropriate level of evidence as required by the Court and affected the election result, warranting the cancellation and rerun of the election?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Civil Procedure
- Disputing Results
- Electoral Administration Irregularities
- Electoral Integrity
- Electronic Voting
- EMB Operation
- Country
- Kenya
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Sep 5, 2022
- Date added
- Aug 9, 2024
Judgment
Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
- Question Presented
- Whether the South Carolina legislature “subordinated” race-neutral districting criteria to draw a Congressional district map in the state and overtly relied on racial considerations.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Maps and Districting
- Country
- United States of America
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- May 23, 2024
- Date added
- Aug 9, 2024
Judgment
Nmalamuwomu v. Shadrack
- Question Presented
- Whether the filing deadline for an election petition alleging vote buying made up to and on polling day runs for 21 days after the alleged payment,, or 21 days after the election result is released in the Official Gazette?.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Deadline(s)
- Disputing Results
- Electoral Integrity
- Country
- Vanuatu
- Date of decision
- Jun 24, 2020
- Date added
- Jan 31, 2024
Judgment
Barthelemy v. President of the Republic of Vanuatu
- Question Presented
- (1) Was the Council of Minister’s advice to the President to dissolve Parliament while there was a pending motion of no confidence by members of parliament a violation of the Constitution? (2) If so, was the dissolution of parliament by President void? (3) Does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction to hear constitutional writ petitions relating to the dissolution of parliament?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Conflict of Interests
- Country
- Vanuatu
- Date of decision
- Sep 9, 2022
- Date added
- Jan 31, 2024
Judgment
Wale v. Attorney-General
- Question Presented
- (1) Whether an unregistered party is considered a “non-contesting party” and is thus prohibited from forming a coalition with registered parties or independent groups in Parliament. (2) Whether the party registration requirement under the Political Party law to prove a certain number of registered voters support the formation of a party interferes with the voluntary nature of political parties and is a violation of the constitutional rights to freedom of association and assembly?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Freedom of association and assembly
- Party Registration
- Voters' Rights
- Country
- Solomon Islands
- Date of decision
- Nov 14, 2014
- Date added
- Jan 31, 2024
Judgment
Samuel v. Chief Electoral Officer et al.
- Question Presented
- (1) Whether Chief Electoral Officer (“CEO”) erred in rejecting a candidate’s request for a re-count due to a close mayoral race with 3,25% of vote difference and alleged violations? (2) Whether the refusal to add a name of a voter to the voter registry beyond the deadline for voter registration can be raised as a class action to protect the rights of voters?
- Legal Issue(s)
- Disputing Results
- EMB Operation
- Country
- Marshall Islands
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Aug 31, 2018
- Date added
- Jan 24, 2024
Judgment
Lessons on the Use of Technology in Elections
- Preview

- Legal Issue and/or Topic
- Election Dispute Resolution
- Legal Frameworks
- Regional Jurisprudence
- Language
- English
- Date added
- Nov 8, 2023
Resources
Lessons on Disinformation and Election Disputes
- Preview

- Legal Issue and/or Topic
- Election Dispute Resolution
- Judicial Independence
- Legal Frameworks
- Language
- English
- Date added
- Nov 7, 2023
Resources
Alternative Dispute Resolution in Elections: Practitioner Brief
- Preview

- Legal Issue and/or Topic
- Election Dispute Resolution
- Language
- English
- Date added
- May 5, 2023
Resources
Madhav Prasad Paudel and others vs Office of the PM, Local development Ministry, Election Commission Nepal et. al
- Question Presented
- Whether the failure to hold local elections due to the absence of the required legal framework violates the right to periodic elections during the interim constitutional period. Whether the conduct of local government affairs by non-elected government employees violates the Local Self Government Act.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Election Date
- Electoral Integrity
- Country
- Nepal
- Language of Decision
- Nepali
- Date of decision
- Nov 7, 2012
- Date added
- Jan 13, 2023
Judgment
Chaturman Beda vs Election Special Court and others
- Question Presented
- Whether the ineligibility of a winning candidate due to his age should result in declaring the runner-up candidate as the winner of the election or invalidating the entire election result.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Candidate Registration
- Disputing Results
- Electoral Integrity
- Country
- Nepal
- Language of Decision
- Nepali
- Date of decision
- Feb 14, 1990
- Date added
- Jan 13, 2023
Judgment
Advocate Prem Chandra Rai vs Government of Nepal
- Question Presented
- Whether Nepali citizens residing abroad should be given the opportunity to vote from the country in which they currently reside. Whether restricted voting rights on Nepali citizens living abroad violates the constitutional right to vote.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Accessibility
- Elections as a Fundamental Right
- Out of Country Voting
- Country
- Nepal
- Language of Decision
- Nepali
- Date of decision
- Mar 21, 2018
- Date added
- Jan 13, 2023
Judgment
City for All List, et. al v. Palestinian Central Election Commission, et. al
- Question Presented
- Whether the error in registration on the voter list of one candidate from an independent candidate list should result in rejecting the application of all the candidates on the list, and thus the entire list, from running for election.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Candidate Eligibility
- Candidate Registration
- Country
- Palestine
- Language of Decision
- Arabic
- Date of decision
- Apr 23, 2017
- Date added
- Jan 4, 2023
Judgment
Palmer v. Australian Electoral Commission (AEC)
- Question Presented
- Whether the practice of disclosing the indicative two-candidate preferred count (“Indicative TCP”) prior to the closing of all polling sites in the country by the Australian Election Commission (AEC) influenced the voters’ choice and undermined the impartiality or perception of impartiality of the Commission, therefore violating the election law and the Constitution.
- Legal Issue(s)
- Electoral Administration Irregularities
- EMB Operation
- Country
- Australia
- Language of Decision
- English
- Date of decision
- Aug 14, 2019
- Date added
- Oct 14, 2022
Judgment