It is common for the legal framework to require support for the nomination of a candidate in the form of a collection of signatures in support of the application or a financial down payment, or perhaps both. It is important that appropriate limits are set when establishing these criteria so as not to impede the right to stand as a candidate. It is also essential that all conditions are applied equally to all applicants and not in a discriminatory manner. [iv] Although the EC does not have an explicit mandate to draft laws, a proposed legal instrument was attached to the final recommendations on the law on public order. However, the recommendations to amend the Electoral Law and the Law on the Registration of Political Parties, as well as the draft law on the financing of electoral campaigns, did not take into account the proposed draft laws. In addition to legal sanctions and enforcement mechanisms, it is preferable that the legal framework also provide for a more flexible mechanism, such as an advisory committee coordinated by the electoral management body, which allows stakeholders «to exchange views with each other or to file complaints against violations of campaign rules or codes of conduct in order to find a common approach to resolving these problems and curbing electoral violence». [xvi] However, it can be said that a legal framework must be structured in such a way that the principles are incorporated as follows: in Latin America, elections can be annulled for three reasons: the election was modified as a direct result of the annulment of the electoral results of many polling stations; at least one candidate may not be elected; and the election did not take place legally. In IEC`s VISION 2018 (IEC 2011), the IEC outlines five strategic priorities of the organization. Priority number 1 regarding the achievement of «leadership in the management of elections and referendums» states that the IEC will contribute to the «continuous improvement of the legal framework» (IEC 2011: 9). Some basic principles that can be incorporated into the Constitution to ensure the holding of free, genuine and fair elections in each country can be listed as follows: the right to vote is universal and must be used freely, secretly and directly; Elections must be held by one or more autonomous public bodies; Elections must be conducted in a lawful, independent, impartial and objective manner; Candidates and political parties must have equal access to the media; Finally, each individual electoral code must be subject to judicial review in order to confirm its constitutionality as well as its legality. Given the above provisions, a number of voters were unable to vote because a number of verification kits had collapsed at polling stations during the 2012 elections. After a long legal battle before the Supreme Court following the 2012 elections, the European Commission decided to reform the issue of «no review no vote» on the basis of public opinion.

In the second quarter of 2014, the European Commission invited political parties to submit proposals for this Recommendation. Civil society organisations, individuals and groups have put forward various proposals for electoral reforms, which the EC has developed and will make available to MEPs for consideration. Precedents are essential to the integration of the electoral system. Such a demand implies a very important change: electoral disputes are no longer resolved exclusively by the political authorities, but also by the judicial authorities (on the one hand, there are cases in which the settlement of electoral disputes takes place before the courts; on the other hand, other cases can be considered as cases of mixed systems in which the political and legal authorities play a role in the resolution of electoral disputes). Political authorities used to resolve electoral disputes on the basis of political criteria. Now, electoral disputes are resolved by special electoral tribunals that settle disputes according to legal criteria). Electoral disputes have been decided by the courts and decisions rendered by electoral courts and judges (which can be considered precedents) have become crucial to understanding what suffrage should be. In consolidated democracies, these functions are performed by the security, police or military forces. Sometimes, however, «the presence of security forces around the polling station can intimidate voters and instill fear,»[x] especially in countries of political transition, where this option is sometimes viewed with suspicion because of its relationship to the previous regime.

This mistrust can lead to a very costly and probably inappropriate appointment of a special civilian police force to carry out its functions on election day under the command of the electoral administration. However, experience has shown that the deployment of armed forces during electoral operations can bring many benefits, not only because of its efficiency and low additional costs, but also because of its importance for the stability of a country. Thus, the armed forces can be assigned functions of cooperation and strengthening democracy under the command of the electoral administration. It is also very important for public opinion to see such cooperation between the various public institutions with the aim of strengthening democracy, rather than creating a short-lived and untrained electoral police. When public security forces maintain order at polling stations, it is preferable for the legal framework to establish a code of conduct. [xi] In other words, what distinguishes a state from a central or autonomous state is the degree of decentralization. And between these and the international confederation of states, the difference is that the former find their legal basis in the national legal framework, while the confederation of states is based on international law. At the end of its work, the Working Group submits to Parliament a series of draft amendments to the electoral framework of a draft law.