EAdIElection Administration Index

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses incompatibilities for European Parliament members under Czech law (§ 53 of Act 62/2003) and does not establish conflict-of-interest disclosure requirements for election commissioners or senior election staff. It contains no structural provisions governing election administration integrity, financial disclosure obligations, or accountability mechanisms for electoral officials.

The statute establishes that the Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic has jurisdiction over proceedings related to election administration matters (specifically regarding candidate registration and mandate termination). This codifies judicial review as a statutory right with defined venue (the highest administrative court), creating a clear accountability mechanism for election-authority decisions.

“K řízení podle § 57 je příslušný Nejvyšší správní soud České republiky.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses only the procedural mechanics of result certification by the State Electoral Commission (Státní volební komise) and the Czech Statistical Office, not the statutory grounding or constitutional establishment of the commission itself. The section presupposes the commission's existence but provides no information about whether its establishment, mandate, or authority derive from the constitution or statute. To evaluate COMM.1, one would need to examine the section(s) that explicitly create and authorize the State Electoral Commission — likely elsewhere in Law 275/2012 or in the Czech Constitution — which are not provided here.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 42 of Law 247/1995 establishes procedural requirements for election record-keeping and vote tabulation by district electoral commissions (okrskové volební komise), specifying what information must be recorded and how votes are counted. It contains no provisions regarding the appointment, composition, or multi-branch oversight of any electoral commission. The section addresses administrative procedures for documenting election conduct and results, not institutional governance or appointment structure.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 57 of Czech election law addresses post-election judicial review of candidate validity and mandate termination, not the statutory structure of commissioner appointments, terms, or removal grounds. The section provides no framework for defining, staggering, or protecting the tenure of any election commission members.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 20 addresses the definition and eligibility of electoral candidates (political parties, coalitions, independent candidates), not the composition or structure of any election commission. It contains no provisions regarding commission appointment, political balance requirements, supermajority confirmation, or judicial independence mechanisms. The section is substantively irrelevant to COMM.4.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses procedural rules for cancellation and conduct of supplementary elections in Czech municipalities (specifically, conditions under which supplementary elections are not held and when new elections are declared). It contains no provisions establishing election authority budget structure, funding lines, budget allocation mechanisms, or protection against mid-cycle executive reallocation. The section does mention that certain election administration expenses are covered from the state budget (§ 58b(6)), but this is a cost-allocation rule, not a funding independence framework. FUND.1 requires statutory grounding of a separate, protected budget line; this section provides neither.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section amends the Czech Administrative Code (§88-90a of Act 275/2012) to establish judicial review procedures for presidential election challenges and campaign finance violations. It does not address election infrastructure budgets, funding cycles, or multi-year appropriations. The text concerns only dispute resolution mechanisms and sanctions for campaign finance breaches, not the structural or financial foundation for election administration.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 17a addresses financial accounts and reporting requirements for political parties and movements, not election authorities. It does not establish any statutory prohibition on foreign funding of election administration bodies or their vendors. The section is about party finance transparency, not election authority independence from foreign sources.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section of Zákon č. 275/2012 Sb. § 83 amends health insurance law (Zákon č. 48/1997 Sb.) to clarify exemptions for election commission members from certain public health insurance requirements. It does not address the statutory protection of career election staff, civil-service merit-based employment, or any personnel framework for election administrators. The section is purely technical/administrative regarding health insurance coverage and provides no institutional structure for professional election staff protections.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses incompatibility of functions for Members of the European Parliament under Czech law (Zákon č. 62/2003 Sb., § 53). It establishes conflict-of-interest prohibitions but contains no codified whistleblower protections for election staff reporting irregularities. The section is entirely outside the institutional framework for election administration and staff safeguards.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section § 28 of Law 62/2003 addresses EU citizen voter registration for European Parliament elections. It contains no provisions whatsoever regarding voting-equipment certification, evaluators, certification criteria, timelines, or public-comment procedures. The section is procedurally focused on how non-Czech EU citizens register to vote, not on election administration infrastructure or equipment oversight.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses the termination and creation of mandates (elected office) for regional council members in Czech Republic, covering grounds for loss of office (death, incapacity, incompatibility, criminal conviction) and procedural mechanisms for their adjudication. It contains no provisions whatsoever regarding recertification triggers, vendor oversight, material updates to election systems, discovery of defects, or fixed-schedule recertification of any election administration infrastructure or equipment. The criterion CERT.2 concerns election system certification and recertification; this section concerns only mandate termination procedures.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses mandate termination for regional council members under Czech electoral law, not election administration certification or vendor oversight. It contains no statutory grounds or procedures for revoking certification of election administrators, officials, or electoral service providers. CERT.3 requires decertification grounds and procedures for election officials or vendors; this statute addresses only individual politician mandate loss.