Leemann and Bochsler (2014) rely on previous information about irregularities in election administration. In the referendum they analyse, a small number of municipal election administrations were found not to have followed the rules, and destroyed the ballots of a controversial referendum before a recount could take place. Relying on previous information about irregularities, statistical tests were run separately for wards where irregularities were known to have occurred and for those where elections were conducted according to the rules. According to the test logic, if the results of the statistical tests conducted on the wards with no irregularities do not show any anomalies, this offers additional confidence that natural processes did not produce misleading evidence of electoral malpractice. The information used to identify wards that are less vulnerable to irregularities might also be based on other pieces of evidence, e.g., evidence collected by election observation missions.