ACE

Encyclopaedia   Electoral Integrity   Enforcement of Electoral Integrity   Investigations  
Decision to Investigate

When a complaint is received or an alleged offence reported, a decision must be made whether to investigate. Important integrity issues are raised by the possibility of an investigation launched in response to a complaint that might be unsubstantiated or pursued for political ends.

To ensure integrity in the complaint review process and in the decision on whether to investigate, complaints would need to be reviewed in a professional and timely manner. Reviewing means examining whether a complaint is credible, whether there are grounds to think that a law has been broken and whether an investigation is likely to identify the offender.

Many countries have adopted standard procedures and criteria for determining whether a complaint is valid and should be investigated.

Valid Complaint

The following are some of the factors used to determine whether a complaint is valid and which agency has jurisdiction over the investigation.

  • Substance. Does the substance of the complaint suggest that an offence has been committed and that it is serious enough to warrant an investigation?
  • Violation. Has a law been broken and, if so, which one? Is it an administrative, civil or criminal matter? Has a national law been broken, warranting a central (or federal) investigation, or is it a regional or local issue?
  • Scope. Is the violation an isolated act or is it the outcome of an organized effort to subvert the electoral process? Widespread systemic problems often fall under national jurisdiction.[1] Could the irregularity, if proven, have an impact on the election results?
  • Evidence. Is there enough factual information in the complaint to provide leads for investigators to pursue? Is it reasonable to think that these facts could be verified through an investigation? Are the witnesses credible and willing to cooperate?

Most systems have developed detailed procedures for evaluating a complaint, including a timeline for responding to the complainant.

Reasons for Dismissing a Complaint

In most systems, complaints may be dismissed for one or more of the following reasons:

  • The allegations are anonymous and the matter is not serious enough to warrant investigation.
  • The allegations are vague or frivolous, and further investigation appears unlikely to provide more conclusive information.
  • No laws or regulations appear to have been broken.
  • The allegations appear to be well-founded but an investigation would not help to identify the offenders, or there is not enough evidence.
  • The evidence indicates that there was no intent to violate the law.
  • The complaint was filed after the stipulated deadline.

Instead of being prosecuted, mistakes or “ministerial” errors (i.e., ones which affect purely administrative tasks and do not involve policy discretion) are usually handled through the oversight procedures of the electoral management body. An error that had a significant impact on the outcome of an election is usually challenged by a losing candidate through the complaints and appeals process.

Determining Case Priority

Policy also determines the priorities for investigation. It takes much time and effort to investigate allegations of voter fraud. Some investigative agencies do not have the human or financial resources to investigate every substantive complaint. Integrity issues may arise if there are no objective criteria by which to set priorities for investigation, with the task left to the discretion of individual investigators or officials responsible for enforcement. These may be suspected of “burying” cases likely to have political ramifications or of giving priority to cases that are relatively unimportant.

These types of integrity issues can be addressed effectively through monitoring and oversight of the enforcement process, as discussed in the subsection on Monitoring of Enforcement.



[1] Donsanto, Craig, “The Federal Crime of Election Fraud,” Proceedings of the Third Annual Trilateral Conference on Electoral Systems, IFES, op. cit.