In addition, as noted in the last Joint Opinion, Article 68(3) of the code appears to vest courts with authority to introduce changes to final result protocols in case any mistakes are revealed.[38] The amendments failed to clarify what is meant by the sentence “…shall exclude the electoral competitor which got less validly expressed votes, replacing him with another electoral competitor, which got a bigger validly expressed votes, in a decreasing order." This seems to be an overly generalised way of correcting possible faults in a protocol.
