against the 2011 parliamentary elections, in the session dated 10 October 2011; and Appeal No. (104) against the municipal elections, in the session dated 21 December 2014. 6. In order to confirm the integrity of the electoral process, the Court of Cassation, in its ruling on Appeal No. (115) against the parliamentary elections of 2014, on 27 November 2014, stated that, “The Bahraini legislator has set bounds to the electoral process with guarantees that ensure its integrity and transparency. Hence, it subjected the electoral process to full judicial supervision, and entitled any candidate in the constituency to challenge the results of the election held in his/her constituency, and vested the jurisdiction to consider these appeals with the Court of Cassation, the apex of the judicial system in the State.” 7. Regarding who can file electoral appeals, the Court of Cassation confirmed that only the candidates have the right to challenge the validity of the election, while the voters are excluded from such. The Court held that, “the electorate (body of voters) shall not contest the election results. This right is limited to the candidates in the constituency where the validity of the election is contested.” The Court’s rulings based on this principle recurred in Appeal No. (19) and Appeal No. (21) against the parliamentary elections of 2002, in the sessions dated 8 November 2002 and 18 November 2002, respectively. 8. In all cases, the Court of Cassation, in its Appeal No. (16) against the Parliamentary Elections of 2002, on 5 November 2002, stated that, “The results of the election shall not be contested on grounds of the inclusion of the name of the successful candidate in the voters’ list or in the candidates’ list in the constituency in which the candidate has won the membership of the House of Representatives, as these are procedures prior to the election process, which are resolved by decisions or final judgments that have binding force in this regard.” 9. With regard to both the candidate and his/her agent, the Court of Cassation established that the agent must be one of the voters in the constituency of the candidate and gave both of them the right to object to all that appear before them during the polling and counting process. This confirmation was evident in Appeal No. (115) against the parliamentary elections of 2014 on 27 November 2014, whereby the principle states that, “Each candidate may choose a voter from among the voters registered in the voters’ list in the constituency of the candidate as his agent to the sub-committee. The candidate shall submit the name of his/her agent to the Ministry of Justice at least seven days before the election day.” 74