EDRIElection Dispute Resolution Index
How robust are mechanisms to resolve election disputes?
Dimensions
Contest
30.0% · 2/5| 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? | 1/1100.0% | § 101 codifies standing: 'the right of appeal belongs to anyone whose interest or right the decision infringes, and to every person who was a candidate and every party and joint list that filed a candidate application, on the ground that the decision is unlawful' — and additionally every eligible voter in the constituency (or, in municipal elections, every member of the municipality) may appeal on the ground that the election was conducted improperly in a way that may have affected the result. § 105 codifies onward-appeal standing. Comprehensive standing enumeration codified. “Valitusoikeus on sillä, jonka etua tai oikeutta päätös loukkaa, sekä jokaisella vaaleissa ehdokkaana olleella henkilöllä ja ehdokashakemuksen antaneella puolueella ja yhteislistalla sillä perusteella, että päätös on lainvastainen.” | § view source 2026-05-20 |
| 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 2026-05-20 |
| CONT.EDRI.3Filing deadlineIs the deadline for filing an election contest (days after certification, or after a defined event) specified by statute? | 0.5/150.0% | § 39 codifies the statutory timetable for resolving candidate applications (re-examined at the meeting on the 32nd day before election day) and § 36 codifies their initial examination on the 34th day before election day with the objection window. The election-result appeal deadline itself — 14 days from result publication — is codified in § 102, not surfaced by FTS for this datapoint. Statutory filing deadlines codified within the candidate-application stage. | § view source 2026-05-20 |
| 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 2026-05-20 |
Recount
75.0% · 3/4| 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? | 1/1100.0% | § 87 codifies the verification count (äänten tarkastuslaskenta): on the day after the election at 09:00 the constituency committee must re-examine all election-day ballots and the polling committees' tallies and decide which count for candidates and which are invalid. § 86 codifies the advance-vote count. § 89 codifies the result-calculation method. § 96 codifies application to the presidential and EP elections. § 99 codifies secure custody of ballots during any interruption. Comprehensive statutory recount procedure codified. | § view source 2026-05-20 |
| 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 2026-05-20 |
| RECT.3Recount cost allocationIs the cost of a petition-based recount allocated by statute (who pays under what outcome)? | 1/1100.0% | § 188 codifies cost allocation (kustannusten jako): the Ministry of Justice bears the costs of the voter register, the national candidate register, ballot papers, electoral envelopes, seals and ballot boxes, and — item 4 — 'the expenses of the constituency committees,' which conduct the § 87 verification count. The municipality bears the costs of the municipal central election committee, polling committees and home-voting. Comprehensive cost allocation for the count/recount apparatus codified. | § view source 2026-05-20 |
| RECT.4Recount-finding effectAre the legal effects of a recount finding (binding, advisory, mandatory amendment) codified in statute? | 1/1100.0% | § 94 codifies that the constituency committee, having completed the § 87 verification count, 'confirms the election result' at its meeting on the 3rd day after election day — the verification count's findings are thus binding on the official result it confirms. § 95 codifies the parallel for municipal elections. § 181 codifies result publication. The recount-finding's effect on certification is codified. | § view source 2026-05-20 |
Timing
50.0% · 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? | 1/1100.0% | § 94 codifies an explicit certification deadline: 'the constituency committee confirms the election result at a meeting beginning at 18:00 on the 3rd day after election day.' § 95 codifies the municipal-election result confirmation. § 179 codifies confirmation of the EP-election result. § 100 codifies the object of appeal (the result-confirmation decision). Statutory certification deadline codified. “Vaalipiirilautakunta vahvistaa vaalien tuloksen 3. päivänä vaalipäivän jälkeen kello 18 aloitettavassa kokouksessaan.” | § view source 2026-05-20 |
| TIME.2Pre-certification stayDoes statute provide a mechanism to stay certification while a recount or contest is pending? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-20 |