No outvote shall be conducted in the places where election irregularities were noted by DPA and GROM – reads the decision adopted by the Administrative Court. These two parties reacted against part of polling places, where the secrecy of vote was violated, and family voting was conducted. SEC rejected the complaints, and the Administrative Court only reiterated the decision adopted by the State Election Commission.
The greatest part of the justifications of the Administrative Court on the allegations lodged by DPA is published on the Court’s official website. The justifications say that no proof was presented which would confirm the assertions of irregularities. In addition, the remarks were submitted after the deadline.
Total of 12 objections reached the State Election Commission. Of these, 2 are from DUI, 6 from DPA and 4 from GROM. Following SEC’s rejection of objections, DPA and GROM lodged allegations to the Administrative Court. DUI didn’t take advantage of this opportunity.