Suchergebnisse

Latest issue consulted: 93. ; Description based on: 78. ; Volumes for -19 distributed to depository libraries in microfiche. ; Vol. for 1981 not published. ; Mode of access: Internet.

General Elections are the embodiments of the mandate stipulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Article 1 paragraph (2) which affirms that "sovereignty is in the hands of the people and carried out according to the Constitution". The Formulation Document that will be formulated in the research are: (1) What is the violation in the general election? And (2) What is law enforcement in general election. The method used in this study is normative legal research, normative legal research methods or library law research methods are methods or procedures that are used in legal research by examining existing library material. Election violations constitute acts prohibited by the Election Law against election organizers resulting in the imposition of sanctions for violations. The enactment of Law Number 7 Year 2017 on General Elections provides for different types of violations, disputes, criminal offenses and electoral disputes. The crime of elections is a criminal offense punishable by a particular punishment based on the criminal justice system. The purpose of election is to carry out popular sovereignty and the realization of the political rights of the people to produce leaders who will occupy important positions in the government.

The 2000 presidential election, marked by a crisis in the electoral process in the state of Florida and a challenge to the legitimacy of the election of George W. Bush, sparked a national debate on the quality of American democracy. The discussion quickly came to focus on "technical" problems associated with voting practices, including issues related to voter registration, ballot counting, ballot machinery, and election administration. Numerous commissions weighed in on these issues and made recommendations for reforming various aspects of the election system.1 Congress debated election reform and ultimately passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) at the end of the 107th Session of Congress in 2002. Legislatures in all fifty states also took up the issue, and many states passed measures to improve election administration.

Superseded by 3 separate publications: its: General election laws of Indiana, governing general elections with instructions to voters; its: Primary election laws of Indiana, governing primary elections with instructions to voters; and: Indiana. State Election Board. Official political calendar. ; Vols. for 1908-44, issued by the Board of Election Commissioners, 1946-51, by the State Election Board. ; Title varies slightly. ; Issued in 2 pts., one including laws governing primary elections and one with laws relating only to the November elections. ; Biennial. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Although the Storting election of 11 September 2017 reduced the number of seats backing the incumbent conservative government, it still gave the two governing parties and their supporting centre-right parties a parliamentary majority. Thus, Prime Minister Solberg's premiership will continue after the election. In the previous period, the government could secure a parliamentary majority with either of the two centrist parties; the Liberal Party or the Christian Democrats. After the 2017 election, they will need the support of both parties to secure a majority, unless they can get help from one or more of the centre-left opposition parties. When Solberg formed her government back in 2013, the populist right-wing Progress Party entered government for the first time. Even Progress Party leaders feared that they would lose support from anti-establishment voters. Poor turnout at the 2015 local election did not bode well. However, the Progress Party did far better in the 2017 national elections and lost only 1.1 percentage points and two seats compared with the 2013 election. A major success factor for the Progress Party was the attention given to immigration issues during the election campaign (see below). At the previous election, in 2013, the Green Party won a seat for the first time, increasing the number of parties in parliament from seven to eight. In 2017, the far-left Red Party increased the number of parties from eight to nine. Despite the re-election of the incumbent government, the election signalled a shift to the left, even to the left of the Labour Party.

General elections are held every five years in South Africa. During the 12 to 24 hour period after the close of the voting booths, the expected final results are of huge interest to the electorate and politicians. In the past, the Council for Scientic and Industrial Research (CSIR) has developed an election forecasting model in order to provide the media and political analysts with forecasts of the final results during this period of peak interest. In formulating this model, which forecasts the election results as the results from voting districts (VDs) become available, some assumptions had to be made. In particular, assumptions were made about the clustering of previous voting patterns as well as the order in which VD results are released.This election forecasting model had been used successfully for a number of elections in the past and in these previous elections, with around 5%{10% of the results available, the predictions produced by the model were very close to the final outcome, particularly for the ANC, being the largest party. For the 2014 national election, however, the predictions, with close to 50% of the voting district results known (equivalent to an estimated 40% of the total votes), were still not accurate and varied by more than 1% for both the ANC and the EFF. This paper outlines a post-election analysis to determine the reasons for these discrepancies and how they relate directly to the model assumptions. The aim is to highlight how practical realities can affect the assumptions and consequently their impact on the forecasted results. Reference is made to previous election forecasts and the 2014 post-election analysis is presented.Keywords: Forecasting, elections, assumptions, post-election analysis

With the intention of assisting legislators, election officials and the public to make sense of recent literature on post-election audits and convert it into realistic audit practices, the Brennan Center and the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic at Boalt Hall School of Law (University of California Berkeley) convened a blue ribbon panel (the "Audit Panel") of statisticians, voting experts, computer scientists and several of the nation's leading election officials. Following a review of the literature and extensive consultation with the Audit Panel, the Brennan Center and the Samuelson Clinic make several practical recommendations for improving post-election audits, regardless of the audit method that a jurisdiction ultimately decides to adopt.

Advances in Virginia's election law happen incrementally. This year was typical in that regard. While over one hundred bills and resolutions pertaining to elections were introduced in the 2006 Regular Session of the General Assembly, the legislature was judicious in its approval of election related legislation. This article surveys recent developments in Virginia's election laws by focusing on those legislative enactments and judicial decisions that are significant, interesting, or show some developing trend in the area of election law.

Subtitle varies. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Issued 1916-44 by the Board of Election Commissioners; 1946- by the State Election Board.

Title varies slightly. ; Description based on: Vol. 3, no. 2 (2nd quarter, 1979). ; Index to U.S government periodicals ; Suspended with no. 11, summer 1981-1984; resumed with v. no. 12, summer 1985. ; Issues for 2nd quarter 1977-3rd quarter 1979 called v. 1, no. 1-v.3, no. 3; issue for summer 1981 called no. 11; issue for summer 1985 called v. no. 12. ; Suspended with v. no. 16, summer 1989; resumed as no. 17, 1996 with title: Journal of election administration. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This audit report by the South Carolina State Election Commission for the Democratic PPP Election in Laurens County provides reports generated by the iVotronic voting machines and Unity election system.

This audit report by the South Carolina State Election Commission for the Democratic PPP Election in Aiken County provides reports generated by the iVotronic voting machines and Unity election system.

This audit report by the South Carolina State Election Commission for the Democratic PPP Election in Anderson County provides reports generated by the iVotronic voting machines and Unity election system.

This audit report by the South Carolina State Election Commission for the Democratic PPP Election in Bamberg County provides reports generated by the iVotronic voting machines and Unity election system.

This audit report by the South Carolina State Election Commission for the Democratic PPP Election in Barnwell County provides reports generated by the iVotronic voting machines and Unity election system.