EIIElection Integrity Index

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 56 of PPERA 2000 addresses political party donation verification and acceptance procedures. It contains no requirements related to downloadable public packages, certificates, device records, or result signatures—topics relevant to election result verification infrastructure. The section is about party finance compliance, not election integrity artifacts.

No matching sections in corpus.

This section requires the use of physical ballot papers that are counted and recorded by the returning officer in the presence of counting agents, establishing a voter-verifiable paper trail. The entire paragraph structure emphasizes paper ballots as the fundamental voting mechanism, with strict procedural requirements for their handling, verification, and security, which inherently provides a voter-verifiable paper record.

“The returning officer shall— a in the presence of the counting agents open each ballot box and count and record the number of ballot papers in it”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses the classification of Electoral Commission records under the Public Records Act 1958, establishing that Electoral Commission records are public records. It does not address citizen rights to re-tally election results from published precinct data or any aspect of citizen verifiability of election outcomes.

The section mandates tamper-evident seals on ballot boxes—a seal must be placed such that opening the box breaks it, making tampering visually apparent. However, the provision does not address logging, monitoring, or automated response systems, and it predates modern tamper-responsive technology standards.

“shall then lock it up and place his seal on it in such a manner as to prevent its being opened without breaking the seal”

No matching sections in corpus.

The section establishes a chain-of-custody mechanism through 'completed corresponding number lists' and specifies procedures for sealing, delivery, and retention of documents. However, it explicitly excludes the corresponding number lists themselves from public inspection, thus failing to require that full chain-of-custody documentation be publicly available.

“The documents mentioned in paragraphs (1) and (1A) except— a ballot papers, b the completed corresponding number lists, c certificates as to employment on duty on the day of the poll, shall be open to public inspection.”

No matching sections in corpus.

Section 81 mandates an audit, but only when campaign expenditure exceeds £250,000. This is a conditional rather than universal requirement—audits are not required for every election or every campaign, only those meeting the spending threshold. The criterion asks whether a post-election audit is legally required for every election, which this threshold-based approach does not satisfy.

“Where during a relevant campaign period the campaign expenditure incurred by or on behalf of a registered party in the relevant part or parts of the United Kingdom exceeds £250,000, a report must be prepared by a qualified auditor”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses recount procedures available upon candidate request, not a mandated post-election audit method. It does not establish any systematic audit methodology such as hand recounts, comparison audits, or risk-limiting audits as part of the election process.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 160 is a definitional section that provides meanings for terms used throughout PPERA 2000, such as 'qualified auditor', 'registered party', 'document', and 'public funds'. It does not address post-election audit procedures, observer access, or any provisions governing transparency or public observation of audits. This section is purely interpretive and definitional in nature.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 160 of PPERA 2000 is a definitional section that provides interpretative rules and definitions for terms used throughout the Act. It contains no provisions concerning audit results, their legal binding force, certification procedures, or the finality of election results. The section is entirely procedural and lexical in nature.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 13ZA addresses the Speaker's Committee's power to examine the Electoral Commission's performance and require information disclosures. It does not concern voting system source code disclosure, vendor access restrictions, or the legal accessibility of software used in elections. This section falls entirely outside the scope of software verifiability and source code transparency.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section of the Representation of the People Act 1983 addresses the application and interpretation of transitional provisions relating to references to statutory matters and Secretary of State powers to make orders. It contains no provisions concerning software, binary builds, source code, reproducibility, or any computational infrastructure. The criterion is entirely inapplicable to this statutory text.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 32 of the Electoral Administration Act 2006 addresses the use of candidate photographs on ballot papers in pilot local government elections. It does not address the publication or signing of ballot contests, layouts, or tabulation rules before polls open. The section concerns ballot paper design authority and consultation procedures, not the pre-election publication or certification of election definition materials.

No matching sections in corpus.

The section establishes a clear statutory right for candidates to appoint polling agents and counting agents with procedural access to polling stations and vote counting processes. This provides party observers with full procedural access to key election activities, satisfying the criterion for domestic observer rights.

“Each candidate may, before the commencement of the poll, appoint— a polling agents to attend at polling stations for the purpose of detecting personation; and b counting agents to attend at the counting of the votes.”

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses ballot secrecy requirements and electoral offences related to disclosure of voting information in postal voting scenarios. It does not contain any provisions regarding publication timelines for precinct-level election results.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 92 of the RPA 1983 addresses restrictions on election-related matter broadcast from outside the UK and is entirely unrelated to vendor certification or the operation of multiple vendors in elections. It concerns broadcasting arrangements and illegal practices in the context of election communications, not vendor independence or certification systems.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 9A of PPERA 2000 establishes a framework for the Electoral Commission to determine and publish performance standards for electoral registration officers, returning officers, and counting officers. It contains no provisions relating to vote formats, device protocols, or technical standards for voting equipment. The section is concerned with administrative performance standards for election officials, not the technical specifications or openness of voting systems.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section governs the appointment, tenure, and removal of Electoral Commissioners—not vendor contracts. It contains no provisions regarding vendor contracts, their duration, or any caps on contract length. The criterion concerns vendor lock-in prevention, which is completely outside the scope of this paragraph on Commissioner governance.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section amends provisions regarding free delivery of election addresses to candidates in the Greater London Authority, specifically extending those provisions to persons with anonymous entries in voter registers. It does not address ballot secrecy, voter–ballot unlinkability, or any mechanism to guarantee or enforce the secrecy of voting. The section is about electoral communication logistics, not ballot confidentiality.

The section mandates that every polling station must provide specific accessibility equipment for voters with vision disabilities: large-print ballot papers and a device enabling blind/partially-sighted voters to vote independently. It also establishes detailed procedures for assisted voting. However, the scope is limited primarily to vision and mobility assistance; language accessibility standards are not addressed, and the prescribed device details are left to further regulation.

“The returning officer shall also provide each polling station with— a at least one large version of the ballot paper which shall be displayed inside the polling station for the assistance of voters who are partially-sighted; and b a device of such description as may be prescribed for enabling voters who are blind or partially-sighted to vote without any need for assistance from the presiding officer or any companion”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 18 RPA 1983 requires councils to designate polling places and keep them under review with a view to giving electors 'reasonable facilities for voting,' but it contains no numerical floor or density requirement (e.g., minimum polling places per X voters or per square mile). The section permits polling places to be omitted entirely if the district's size does not 'materially affect the convenience' of electors, and references only practicability and reasonableness rather than fixed quantitative standards.