In practice, criticisms remain. Following the last parliamentary elections of 6 May 2012, the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report stresses that “[s]ome violations of campaign provisions by electoral contestants, including the use of administrative resources and attempts to limit voters’ freedom of choice, created an unequal playing field.”60 Following the same elections, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly underlines that “administrative resources were misused, in direct contradiction with the Electoral Code. The RPA [Republican Party of Armenia, ruling party] actively involved teachers and pupils in campaign events, including during school hours. In one case, teachers and local authorities even asked parents to attend an RPA event. RPA campaign material and party flags were present on a number of school buildings.” The OSCE/ODIHR final report following the presidential elections of 18 February 2013 underlines that “the campaign regulations were not always interpreted or implemented properly by the authorities and contestants, especially with regard to campaign-finance provisions. This proved to allow for abuse of administrative resources and did not provide for a level playing field among candidates or protect voters from undue influence. In addition, the Criminal Code does not include specific offenses for abuse of office and state resources in an election campaign. These factors contributed to an undue advantage of the incumbent during the campaign.” The Parliamentary Assembly indicates in its report following the same election that “[t]he campaign regulations did not provide sufficient protection against the misuse of administrative resources, nor against the blurring of the distinction between the State and the ruling party.”