Even though disinformation online, especially on social networks, is a considerable issue, it is questionable whether the CEC would have the capacity and expertise to evaluate whether, for example, a political statement in the print media, or an online post, falls under the category of false information that needs to be restricted by law, even if there was a definition available, or should remain protected by freedom of expression. However, it should be noted that according to Principle 2 of the CoE and Venice Commission Principles for a fundamental rights-compliant use of digital technologies in electoral processes, “[d]uring electoral campaigns, a competent impartial Electoral Management Body (EMB) or judicial body should be empowered to require private companies to remove clearly defined third-party content from the internet, based on electoral laws and in line with international standards.” ODIHR and the Venice Commission recommend that a definition of false information is provided, along with instruments of how false information should be dealt with, and the capacity of the CEC (or another body) is built to deal with related complaints. The legislator should make sure that the threshold set in the law to restrict the dissemination of information in the electoral context should not be set so low that it unduly limits the political debate.