EDRIElection Dispute Resolution Index
How robust are mechanisms to resolve election disputes?
Dimensions
Contest
0.0% · 0/5| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| CONT.EDRI.1Standing enumeratedAre the parties with standing to contest an election (candidate, party, qualified voters of the precinct, AG, etc.) enumerated in statute? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-18 |
| CONT.EDRI.2Venue & jurisdictionIs the court of original jurisdiction for election contests specified by statute? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-18 |
| CONT.EDRI.3Filing deadlineIs the deadline for filing an election contest (days after certification, or after a defined event) specified by statute? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-18 |
| CONT.EDRI.4Standard of proof & evidenceAre the standard of proof and admissibility rules for election-contest evidence codified in statute? | 0/20.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-18 |
Recount
0.0% · 0/4| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| RECT.1Statutory recount procedureAre recount procedures (who counts, how, with what evidence) defined in statute, not regulation or administrative directive? | 0/10.0% | Article 13 codifies transparency in preparation and conduct of elections (observer presence at counting). Article 141 covers recall-voting procedure including counting. Neither codifies an enumerated recount procedure (who recounts, what evidence, what standard) — recounts in Belarus operate via Article 79 protocol-amendment by higher commissions but a formal statutory recount mechanic is not established. | § view source 2026-05-18 |
| RECT.2Recount triggers enumeratedAre the triggers for an automatic or petition-based recount enumerated in statute (margin thresholds, sworn challenge, etc.)? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-18 |
| RECT.3Recount cost allocationIs the cost of a petition-based recount allocated by statute (who pays under what outcome)? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 13 (transparency) is the only candidate surfaced; cost allocation for petition-based recount is not codified. Belarus has no statutory petition-based recount mechanism at the citizen level. | § view source 2026-05-18 |
| RECT.4Recount-finding effectAre the legal effects of a recount finding (binding, advisory, mandatory amendment) codified in statute? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-18 |
Timing
25.0% · 1/2| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| TIME.1Certification deadline in statuteIs the certification deadline (when the result becomes 'official') set by statute, not by administrative discretion? | 0.5/150.0% | Article 108 codifies publication of Council of the Republic election results. Article 101 codifies registration of candidates by the Central Commission with timing. Article 41 codifies powers of local commissions including establishment of results within statutory periods. Article 135 codifies timing for signature collection. Certification timing is codified in pieces across instrument articles though not as a single 'certification deadline' clause. | § view source 2026-05-18 |
| TIME.2Pre-certification stayDoes statute provide a mechanism to stay certification while a recount or contest is pending? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 88 (replacement of retired deputies), Article 110 (Council member replacement), Article 81 (repeat elections) all codify post-certification procedural triggers — but none codify a pre-certification stay mechanism while a contest is pending. Article 155 defines terms; Article 48 covers expenses. No stay-pending-contest mechanic surfaced within the Electoral Code. | § view source 2026-05-18 |