and sub-regional electoral bodies in favour of the ruling party. The effects of which were noticed in the election of the Chairpersons of the Local electoral commissions, whereby 96% of the category of personalities proposed elected Chairpersons belonged to the by the ruling party (529 out of 549). This further undermines the notion of independence and impartiality of the electoral body, at least at the Local levels. 146. Whereas the balance before was four (4) members representing the government versus three (3) members representing opposition at the Local levels, the change of composition since the adoption of the Order N° 2020-306 of 4 March 2020, resulted in an equal representation of four (4) members of the government and four (4) members Bureau of the for the opposition. electoral body, the Commissions remains a member who However, majority without new elections of the of Chairpersons of the Local is aligned with the ruling party and who will cast the deciding vote in case of a split vote, as provided for under Article 35 of the law on the electoral body. 147. Accordingly, the Applicants greater representation Chairperson note that although in the Local to cast the deciding electoral vote in case the opposition bodies, parties have a the prerogative of the of a tie, demonstrates that a balanced composition is still not sufficiently established. 148. In its response, the Respondent State argues that the new composition of the electoral body offers sufficient guarantees of independence and impartiality of its members. It also claims that the modifications of the legal framework regarding the appointment procedure have strengthened the independence and impartiality of the electoral body and that its composition is sufficiently balanced since it is not dominated by any political group, neither by those in power nor by those in the opposition. 149. The Respondent State claims that the inclusion of persons proposed by political parties or groups in an electoral body cannot in any way be considered a violation 32