Illiteracy assistance

The section establishes a clear statutory procedure for voters who cannot read, codified directly in the Commonwealth Electoral Act. It enumerates the conditions (inability to read or disability preventing voting without assistance), the mechanism (person chosen by voter), the location of assistance (unoccupied compartment), and the specific permitted acts (marking and depositing the ballot). Ballot secrecy is protected by requiring use of an unoccupied compartment and limiting the assistant's role to following voter directions. The procedure is exhaustive and administratively bounded, not left to discretion.

Cal. Elec. Code § 18573 makes it a felony (16 months to 3 years) to mislead a voter who cannot read by furnishing or representing a ballot's contents falsely. This is criminal-protection of the illiterate-assistance procedure (assistance itself is codified in Div 14 §§ 14282-14283 which wasn't ingested for this dataset).

The section codifies assistance for voters unable to read in statute, with a clear triggering condition (request by elector), designated responsible party (election officer at polling station), enumerated procedural requirement (presence of another election officer), and explicit safeguard for ballot secrecy (assistance rendered in presence of witness officer). Both the requirement and its procedural constraints are statutorily grounded and unambiguous.

“On request by an elector who is unable to read or because of a disability is unable to vote in the manner described by this Act, an election officer who is assigned to the polling station shall assist the elector in the presence of another election officer who is assigned to the polling station.”

The statute explicitly codifies assistance for illiterate voters ("nepismen"), specifying that such a voter may bring a literate person to mark the ballot on their authority and instruction. The procedure includes ballot-secrecy protections through the requirement that the voter fold the ballot themselves, place it in a sealed envelope, and have the ballot officer deposit it in the box—ensuring the assistant does not control the final submission. The mechanism is set in statute with enumerated procedural steps, not left to administrative discretion.

“Birač koji zbog kakve tjelesne mane ili zbog toga što je nepismen ne bi mogao glasovati na način predviđen ovim Zakonom, može doći na biračko mjesto s drugom osobom koja je pismena i koja će po njegovoj ovlasti i uputi zaokružiti odgovor.”

§ 97.061 codifies special registration for electors unable to read or write — explicit illiteracy-assistance procedure.

§ 21-2-409 codifies assistance for electors who cannot read English (illiteracy assistance). § 21-2-402 codifies voter-certificate preparation including for illiterate voters. § 21-2-381 / § 21-2-385 codify absentee-ballot procedures with assistance.

The statute codifies assistance for illiterate voters at the statutory level with enumerated procedural safeguards: (a) the voter explicitly designates an assistant and informs the election board; (b) assistance is limited to technical aid only, excluding coercive influence or misuse of discretion; (c) ballot secrecy is protected by mandating the assistant enter the voting booth only as needed and imposing a confidentiality duty. This satisfies the criterion's requirement for codified, procedurally-protected literacy assistance.

“Ein Wähler, der des Lesens unkundig ist oder der wegen einer Behinderung gehindert ist, den Stimmzettel zu kennzeichnen, zu falten oder selbst in die Wahlurne zu werfen, bestimmt eine andere Person, deren Hilfe er sich bei der Stimmabgabe bedienen will, und gibt dies dem Wahlvorstand bekannt. Hilfsperson kann auch ein vom Wähler bestimmtes Mitglied des Wahlvorstandes sein. (2) Die Hilfeleistung ist auf technische Hilfe bei der Kundgabe einer vom Wahlberechtigten selbst getroffenen Wahlentscheidung beschränkt. Unzulässig ist eine Hilfeleistung, die unter missbräuchlicher Einflussnahme erfolgt, die selbstbestimmte Willensbildung oder Entscheidung des Wahlberechtigten ersetzt oder verändert oder wenn ein Interessenkonflikt der Hilfsperson besteht. (3) Die Hilfsperson darf gemeinsam mit dem Wähler die Wahlkabine aufsuchen, soweit das zur Hilfeleistung erforderlich ist. Die Hilfsperson ist zur Geheimhaltung der Kenntnisse verpflichtet, die sie bei der Hilfeleistung von der Wahl eines anderen erlangt hat.”

§44, Stk. 10 establishes a clear statutory procedure for assistance to voters unable to complete the ballot independently, including explicit protections for ballot secrecy: blind or visually impaired voters may designate a trusted person to assist them. The duty to provide assistance is mandatory ("skal yde"), the procedure is enumerated in statute rather than left to administrative discretion, and ballot secrecy is protected by allowing voters to choose their own assistant.

10 ILCS 5/17-14 expressly includes 'inability to read, write or speak the English language' as a basis for in-poll voter assistance.

“requires assistance to vote by reason of blindness, physical disability or inability to read, write or speak the English language”

Indiana Code § 3-11-9-2 provides clear statutory codification of assistance for voters unable to read or write English. The procedure is enumerated: the voter may designate an assistant (with specified exclusions), the assistant must execute a sworn affidavit on a prescribed form, and the assistant may accompany the voter into the voting booth to assist in marking the ballot or registering the vote. The statute protects ballot secrecy implicitly through the voting-booth requirement and the sworn affidavit mechanism that establishes the voter's actual need.

The statute explicitly codifies assistance for voters who cannot read, identifying them by category (blind, cannot read, physical disability) and establishing a defined procedure: the voter may select any person to assist. The preceding subsection establishes the ballot-secrecy protection requirement (marking so no other person will know how the ballot is marked), which applies to the assistance context as an implicit safeguard. The procedure is statutorily grounded, enumerated (assistance available upon the voter's selection), and ballot secrecy is protected by the general marking rule.

The statute codifies assistance for illiterate voters in explicit statutory language, not administrative discretion. It enumerates the eligibility criteria (subsection 1), defines the authentication mechanism (oath/affirmation in subsection 2), specifies the procedure for marking ballots (subsection 5), and establishes ballot secrecy protections by limiting who may be present and requiring the presiding officer to mark the ballot in private with only the elector and agents present. The cure and appeal paths are implicit in the personation agent oversight and the formalized oath requirement.

“Where this section applies and— ( a ) the Dáil elector is unable to read or write, or ( b ) the Dáil elector does not request that his ballot paper shall be marked for him by a companion, or ( c ) the Dáil elector having so requested, the marking of his ballot paper by the companion would be in contravention of subsection (4) , the presiding officer shall, in the presence of the elector and the personation agents and no other person, mark a ballot paper as instructed by such elector and shall then fold it and place it in the ballot box.”

La. R.S. 18:564 provides clear statutory codification of illiteracy assistance eligibility (§A), explicitly enumerates the classes of persons prohibited from assisting (§B), defines the core assistance procedure including booth entry with the voter (§C), and establishes ballot secrecy protections by prohibiting the assistant from revealing voting details (§C). The statute further codifies documentation procedures (§D) and requires a voter assistance form (§B(5)(b)). All key procedural elements—eligibility, permissible assistants, secrecy safeguards, and documentation—are set by statute rather than administrative discretion.

The statute explicitly codifies assistance for voters unable to read because of illiteracy, defines eligible assistants (excluding employers/union agents), specifies the procedure (voter requests assistance, aide assists without influencing choices), and provides ballot-secrecy protection through the prohibition on aides telling voters how to vote or influencing them. The reference to section 682 establishes a defined legal constraint protecting voting independence.

The statute codifies assistance for voters who cannot read (explicitly naming illiteracy alongside blindness and disability), prescribes a specific certificate form documenting the assistance, and protects ballot secrecy by requiring the assisting person to mark the ballot according to voter instructions while the voter marks it in secret (subsection 1). The procedure is set in statute with defined forms and roles, satisfying both statutory grounding and enumeration.

The statute codifies assistance for voters unable to read or write, establishing a clear triggering mechanism (declaration under oath to election judges), enumerated assistance options (election judges of different parties, or voter's chosen assistant), and a defined procedure requiring the assistant to enter the booth with the voter and cast the ballot as directed. Ballot secrecy is protected by limiting assistants (only election judges and immediate family per subsection 3), requiring oaths, and specifying that assistants follow voter direction.

“If any voter declares under oath to the election judges that he cannot read or write, is blind or has any other physical disability and cannot vote his ballot, he may be assisted by the election judges or by any person of his own choice other than a judge. If the voter asks for the assistance of election judges, two judges of different political parties shall go to the voting booth and cast his vote as he directs. If the voter asks for the assistance of someone other than election judges, the assistant shall go to the voting booth with the voter and cast his vote as he directs.”

The statute codifies assistance for voters who cannot read, enumerates two specific procedures (assistance by selected relative/friend or by bipartisan judges/clerks), and establishes ballot-secrecy protections through mandatory recording in the sign-in register, identification of the assisting person, and a sworn oath by the assistant confirming secrecy and faithful adherence to voter intent. The procedural clarity satisfies both procedural grounding and protective safeguards.

“If a registered voter declares to the judge of election that the voter cannot read or that the voter is blind or visually impaired or has a disability such that the registered voter requires assistance in the marking of the voter's ballot, (a) the registered voter may be assisted in marking the voter's ballot by a relative or friend of the voter's selection or (b) one judge of election and one clerk of election of different political parties may take the ballot or ballots from the polling place to a convenient place within the building or to the registered voter's automobile if the automobile is within one block of the polling place and the registered voter may cast the voter's ballot in the general presence of the judge and clerk.”

The statute explicitly codifies the right to assistance for voters unable to read or write English, enumerates prohibited assistants (employer and labor organization agents), and contains a defined ballot-secrecy protection requiring non-disclosure of casting information by the assistant. All procedural elements are set in statute rather than administrative discretion.

The statute codifies assistance for voters unable to read by explicitly authorizing a registration officer or agent to complete the registration certificate and permitting a mark signature. While the section addresses registration assistance rather than in-booth ballot assistance, it demonstrates statutory recognition of and procedure for literacy-based accommodation, meeting the codification requirement of ASSIST.3 with defined procedural steps.

§ 6-8(1) codifies that 'voters have the right to guidance on how they vote' (Velgere har rett til veiledning om hvordan de stemmer) — applies to illiterate voters and others needing instructional help. § 6-7 codifies universal-design accessibility. Assistance for illiterate voters codified.

ORC 3505.24 expressly includes 'illiteracy' as a basis for assistance, with the same protective procedure (elector's choice + exclusions) as for blindness/disability.

§ 1504 codifies assistance for 'inability to read or write' alongside blindness/disability — illiteracy expressly included.

The statute codifies assistance for voters unable to read, specifies the procedure (affidavit filed with warden), defines who may assist (voter's choice, excluding employer/union), and protects ballot secrecy through the affidavit requirement and prohibition on the assistant marking the ballot unless the voter requests it due to physical disability. The procedure is enumerated in statute with safeguards against coercion and conflicts of interest.

Section 39(1) codifies in statute a mandatory assistance procedure for voters unable to read, specifying who may provide assistance (presiding or voting officer) and requiring supervision by named parties (accredited observers and agents from different parties). Subsection (3) explicitly requires preservation of voting secrecy. The procedure is enumerated and clear, with witness protections built in.

§ 12-18-25 codifies BOTH 'physical disability or illiteracy' as bases for receiving voter assistance from any person of the voter's choice. Illiteracy is statutorily enumerated as an assistance ground.

The statute clearly codifies assistance for illiterate voters in statutory language, enumerates the permitted assistants (voter's selection or judges of opposite party), specifies the procedural safeguard (presence of judge or official of different party), and requires a certified record. The procedure is exhaustively set out rather than left to administrative discretion, and ballot-secrecy protection is embedded in the witness-requirement.

“A voter who claims, by reason of illiteracy or physical disability other than blindness, to be unable to mark the ballot to vote as the voter wishes and who, in the judgment of the officer of elections, is so disabled or illiterate, may: Where voting machines are used, have the ballot marked on a voting machine or on a paper ballot subject to the provisions of § 2-7-117 by any person of the voter's selection, or by one of the judges of the voter's choice in the presence of either a judge of a different political party or, if such judge is not available, an election official of a different political party; or Where voting machines are not used, have the ballot marked by any person of the voter's selection or by one of the judges of the voter's choice in the presence of either a judge of a different political party or, if such judge is not available, an election official of a different political party. The officer of elections shall keep a record of each such declaration, including the name of the voter and of the person marking the ballot and, if marked by a judge, the name of the judge or other official in whose presence the ballot was marked. The record shall be certified and kept with the poll books on forms to be provided by the coordinator of elections.”

The statute codifies assistance for voters unable to read through a clear, enumerated procedure: the presiding officer marks the ballot in the voter's presence and as directed by the voter, with polling agents present. The requirement that the ballot be marked 'in the presence of the polling agents' provides procedural safeguards protecting ballot secrecy. The rule is grounded in statute, not administrative discretion.

52 USC § 10508 expressly includes 'inability to read or write' alongside blindness/disability — illiteracy assistance with same elector-choice rule and exclusions.

The statute provides a clear, codified procedure for assistance to voters unable to read and write. It enumerates who may provide assistance (officer of election or designated person, explicitly excluding employer/union agents), requires a signed request and statement before entry into the booth, and mandates that the assisting person follow defined conduct requirements and not divulge how the voter voted. The procedure protecting ballot secrecy is explicit: the assister must not 'divulge or indicate, by signs or otherwise, how the voter voted on any office or question.' Statutory grounding, enumeration of authorized assisters, protective safeguards, and ballot-secrecy provisions are all present.

The statute codifies a defined procedure for voters unable to sign their names (which encompasses illiteracy). It specifies the exact mechanism (mark affixed by poll clerk in presence of another), requires documentation of which clerk performed the task, and establishes a two-person verification process that protects against error or manipulation. While the statute does not explicitly address literacy assistance beyond signing, the procedural framework for voter assistance is statutorily grounded and enumerated with sufficient specificity.

“If that person is physically or otherwise unable to sign his or her name, his or her mark shall be affixed by one of the poll clerks in the presence of the other and the name of the poll clerk affixing the voter's mark shall be indicated immediately under the affixation.”

§ 49 codifies that voters with 'mangelnde førlighed, svagelighed eller lignende' (lack of mobility, weakness, OR SIMILAR) can request assistance — illiteracy covered under 'similar' category. Personal assistance from a person of the voter's choice is permitted. § 99 codifies parallel for referendums.

7 kap. 3 § codifies general assistance for voters who cannot prepare their own votes (illiteracy is included implicitly under 'functional limitation or similar'). 8 kap. 2a § codifies ballot-selection assistance. Illiteracy is not separately enumerated as a category but is covered by the general assistance framework.

§ 62.0115 codifies, as part of the statutory voters'-rights notice, the right to 'receive assistance in casting the ballot if the voter cannot read the language in which the ballot is written.' The detailed procedure protecting ballot secrecy is codified in § 64.031-64.033 (eligibility for assistance includes inability to read the ballot language; two election officers or a person of the voter's choice provide it). The right is codified; the procedure is established by cross-reference.

This section establishes a statutory procedure for illiteracy assistance at the registration stage (a witness reads the application and records answers), which satisfies codification and enumeration of the core procedure. However, the criterion asks specifically about assistance 'protecting ballot secrecy'—i.e., assistance at the voting stage itself, not registration. This section addresses registration assistance only and is silent on ballot-marking assistance or secrecy protections during actual voting. The procedural clarity is strong for what it covers (registration), but it does not address the voting-stage assistance contemplated by the criterion.

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute provides a clear codified procedure for voter assistance, permitting blind voters and those with disabilities to receive help from the mesa president or a chosen assistant, with documentation requirements. However, the section explicitly delegates critical procedural details—including ballot secrecy protections—to future regulations ('en los términos de la reglamentación que se dicte'), meaning the core safeguard mechanism is not statutorily enumerated. A dual-scholar test would agree the framework exists but the secrecy protections are left to administrative discretion rather than statutory specification.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 7-1-103 addresses campaign finance, political activity by public servants, and electioneering prohibitions—not voter assistance procedures. It contains no statutory procedure for assisting illiterate or visually impaired voters, no enumeration of who may provide assistance, and no safeguards protecting ballot secrecy during assistance. The criterion requires codified procedure for illiteracy assistance; this section does not address that topic.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

The section provides statutory grounding for assistance to visually impaired voters (ballot templates) and establishes a procedure for assisted voting with a companion selected by the voter and confirmed to the election official, with documentation required. However, the section does not address illiteracy assistance specifically; it covers visual impairment and general disability. The ballot-secrecy protection is implicit (voter selects companion, must confirm) but not explicitly codified as a distinct cure or appeal mechanism if assistance is denied or mishandled.

“blinden oder schwer sehbehinderten Wählern sind seitens der Wahlbehörde als Hilfsmittel zur Ermöglichung der Wahlausübung Stimmzettel-Schablonen zur Verfügung zu stellen”

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section (Article 131) governs the designation and rights of candidate witnesses at polling stations and counting operations. It does not address assistance procedures for illiterate or disabled voters, nor does it establish any mechanism to protect ballot secrecy during assisted voting. The criterion requires codified procedures for voter assistance with secrecy protections; this section is silent on that topic entirely.

The statute permits assistance instruments for illiterate voters but does not codify a defined procedure, does not enumerate what instruments are acceptable, does not specify how ballot secrecy is protected during assistance, and leaves implementation to electoral justice discretion. The permission is stated but lacks the procedural specificity, exhaustive enumeration, and safeguards required by the criterion.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: PRC Constitutional Article 19 concerns state policy on education and literacy promotion generally; it is aspirational legislation addressing national educational development, not electoral procedure. The section contains no provisions regarding voter assistance, ballot administration, ballot secrecy protections, or any defined procedure for assisting illiterate voters in casting ballots. It does not establish statutory rules, enumeration, cure procedures, or appeal paths for electoral assistance.

The statute delegates to the Secretary of State the authority to 'establish procedures' for accessible voting but does not enumerate the specific procedures in statute itself. While ballot secrecy protection is mentioned ('independently and privately'), the core procedural requirements—what forms of assistance are available, how they are requested, how they are delivered, and the specific safeguards—are left to administrative discretion rather than codified in statute. A dual-scholar test would find this lacks statutory enumeration of the procedure itself, even though the statute addresses the topic.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses the mechanical processing of mail ballots (opening envelopes, duplicating unreadable ballots, securing materials) but contains no procedure for assisting voters who cannot read during the voting process itself. The criterion requires codified assistance for illiterate voters with ballot-secrecy protections; this section deals entirely with post-election ballot preparation and does not establish voter assistance procedures.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

The statute codifies assistance for voters with physical infirmities preventing ballot insertion or machine operation, but the criterion addresses illiteracy assistance specifically. The provision grants assistance only for physical inability, not reading inability. There is no enumerated procedure protecting ballot secrecy during assistance (e.g., no privacy safeguards, no neutral assistant requirement, no confidentiality specification). The second paragraph addresses signature inability with a procedural notation but does not address illiteracy assistance or reading-based assistance needs.

“Tout électeur atteint d'infirmité certaine et le mettant dans l'impossibilité d'introduire son bulletin dans l'enveloppe et de glisser celle-ci dans l'urne ou de faire fonctionner la machine à voter est autorisé à se faire assister par un électeur de son choix”

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

The statute requires provision of accessible voter information materials (screen-reader format, translations, printed copies) but does not codify a defined procedure for in-person voting assistance for illiterate voters, such as who may assist, how assistance is provided at the polling place, or explicit ballot-secrecy protections during the assistance process. The section addresses voter information access, not direct voting assistance procedures.

“Prepare a digital voter information guide, which shall be posted on the office of elections website in a screen reader-accessible format for voters with special needs who are unable to read standard print due to disability”

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 301 addresses ballot counting, ballot box procedures, and simultaneous election management. It contains no provisions regarding assistance for illiterate voters, cure procedures, or ballot-secrecy protections for such assistance. The section is procedurally focused on post-voting operations (counting and tallying), not pre-voting voter support.

Article 158 provides statutory authorization for voter assistance and permits a voter to choose their assistant, which addresses basic procedural grounding. However, the statute is silent on critical safeguards: it does not enumerate protections for ballot secrecy during the assistance process, does not specify what procedures the assistant must follow, does not define how to prevent coercion or undue influence, and does not establish a cure or appeal mechanism if assistance is denied or mishandled. The criterion requires both codification AND defined procedures protecting ballot secrecy; this section satisfies only the first element partially.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute codifies that illiterate and physically impaired voters may receive assistance from a trusted person of their choosing, which is a core procedural safeguard. However, the statute provides no explicit mechanism to protect ballot secrecy during or after assistance—it does not specify how the assisting person must handle the ballot, whether they may observe the voter's choices, or what restrictions apply to prevent coercion or vote-buying. The procedure is partial: the right to assistance is clear and statutory, but critical ballot-secrecy protections are absent.

No matching sections in corpus.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

The statute codifies assistance for voters unable to self-mark ballots and excludes certain categories of assistants, with a recording requirement. However, the provision does not address literacy specifically, does not enumerate the procedures protecting ballot secrecy during assistance (e.g., how the assistant marks the ballot, what happens if the assistant tampers), and contains no cure or appeal mechanism if assistance is wrongly denied or mishandled.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

The statute grants authority to provide assistance when a voter's physical condition requires it, establishing statutory grounding for voter assistance. However, the text addresses only physical disability (lichamelijke gesteldheid), not illiteracy specifically. More critically, the statute contains no enumerated procedure for how assistance must be delivered, no protective measures defining how ballot secrecy is maintained during assistance, and no cure or appeal mechanism if assistance is wrongly denied. The criterion requires codified procedure protecting ballot secrecy; this provision grants discretionary permission without procedural safeguards.

“Wanneer aan het stembureau blijkt dat een kiezer wegens zijn lichamelijke gesteldheid hulp behoeft, staat het toe dat deze zich laat bijstaan.”

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section criminalizes fraudulent imposition of ballots on illiterate voters, but it does not codify an affirmative procedure for providing assistance to voters who cannot read. It prohibits abuse rather than establishing how assistance should be rendered, who may provide it, how ballot secrecy is protected during the assistance process, or what steps an illiterate voter should take to request help. The statute addresses only the criminal penalty for misconduct, not the procedural framework for legitimate assistance.

§ 16.1-07-18 codifies the procedure when a voter leaves a ballot uncast — limited illiteracy-assistance context. § 16.1-13-27 codifies general elector-choice assistance which covers illiteracy needs (already scored in ASSIST.2). Statutory illiteracy-specific assistance not separately codified.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 34.º addresses appeal and review procedures for candidacy admission disputes—it governs the interposition and escalation of appeals to the Constitutional Court. It contains no provisions whatsoever concerning assistance for illiterate voters, ballot secrecy protections, or any related procedural safeguards. This section is entirely irrelevant to the criterion.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

The statute codifies eligibility for assistance and identifies illiteracy as a qualifying condition, satisfying statutory grounding. However, the section does not define the procedure for requesting or providing assistance, does not enumerate who may provide it, and does not establish safeguards protecting ballot secrecy during the assistance process. A voter and election scholar reviewing this section would find the eligibility criterion clear but lack procedural detail on implementation and secrecy protection.

“Only those persons who are unable to read or write or who are physically unable or incapacitated from preparing a ballot or voting shall be entitled to receive assistance of any kind in voting.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 35 of LOREG concerns only the administrative procedure for updating the electoral census—the collection and transmission of padrón modifications by municipalities to provincial census offices. It contains no provisions whatsoever regarding voter assistance for illiterate or disabled voters, ballot secrecy protections, or any related procedural safeguards. The criterion requires codified assistance procedures for voters unable to read; this section is entirely outside that domain.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Only § 12.13 (Election Fraud) was surfaced — criminal penalties protect electors generally but no specific illiteracy-assistance procedure codified in surfaced corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.