As the Venice Commission and ODIHR have already stressed in their previous Joint Opinions, the electoral law must enjoy a certain stability, which is a crucial aspect of legal certainty; on the one hand, such stability allows for the understanding of the electoral rules by all the stakeholders: the candidates, the voters, the electoral administration, the observers, the public; on the other hand, it represents a guarantee against party political manipulation. “Stability of the law is crucial to credibility of the electoral process, which is itself vital to consolidating democracy. Rules which change frequently – and especially rules which are complicated – may confuse voters. Above all, voters may conclude, rightly or wrongly, that electoral law is simply a tool in the hands of the powerful, and that their own votes have little weight in deciding the results of elections.” The practice in Georgia of frequently amending the electoral legislation risks undermining the integrity of the electoral process and the state’s ongoing efforts to consolidate democracy. It furthermore risks confusing voters, parties and candidates, and makes it difficult for the competent electoral authorities to apply the law, which may lead to mistakes in the electoral process and, as a consequence, distrust in the elected bodies.