Election Integrity & Foreign Influence Database
The truth about elections, held to a single standard.
Elections documented, attacked, and defended — with proven falsification kept strictly apart from interference, propaganda, and mere anomaly. Every finding is tiered by the strength of its evidence.
- 45
- elections
- 20
- operations
- 210
- sources
Database last updated August 18, 2026
Research tools
Interrogate the evidence, not just the headlines
Ask precise questions, compare cases, trace documented relationships, inspect change over time, and reuse the underlying data.
Evidence Lab
Build a transparent question and inspect every matching case.
Investigations
Short, curated paths through cases and primary evidence.
Compare
Compare the evidence fingerprints of three elections.
Network
Walk from a case to its findings, sources and related records.
Country Twins
Find countries with comparable voting rules and safeguards.
Time Machine
See when records entered the public database and changed.
Timeline
Documented cases in chronological order.
Statistics
The corpus counted, compared and charted.
Open Data
Bulk exports and a read-only API, CC BY 4.0.
The database at a glance
Documented findings by category
Documented cases over time
2019–2027 · 52 of 65
Five categories, never conflated
The difference between these is the whole point. An attacked election is not the same as a falsified one.
The recorded numbers do not reflect the votes cast.
Process violationsUnequal media access, repression, illegal financing, vote buying, misuse of state resources.
Foreign interferenceCyberattacks, hack-and-leak, covert foreign financing, impersonation of media or institutions by a foreign state or proxy.
Information operationsTroll farms, fake local-media networks, covert political ads, coordinated inauthentic amplification — foreign or domestic.
Statistical anomaliesPatterns in the data worth examining — explicitly not proof of fraud.
A finding sits in exactly one category. Colors and icons carry the same meaning everywhere on the site.
From the case files
What was proven — and what was not
The clearest test of a trustworthy record is whether it can hold both statements at once.
Mexico 2024 General Election
What is established
- Process violationsCorroborated
The campaign was Mexico's most violent on record: ACLED documented over 330 violent incidents targeting political figures between 1 March and 2 June 2024, at least 95 of them fatal, and at least 553 candidates requested state protection; more than 80% of candidate-targeted incidents concerned local races, largely driven by organized-crime competition and local power struggles.
Sources:1
What is not established
- Result falsificationDebunked
No substantiated falsification claims: Gálvez briefly urged supporters on election night not to let the results 'be hidden', then conceded the following morning. Results were produced by hand counts at roughly 150,000 polling stations with party representatives present, tallied in public district sessions consistent with the quick count, and the roughly 32-point margin left no plausible basis for fraud claims.
Method
Why you can trust this
No source, no claim. The same taxonomy and evidence bar applies to every country, party, and government — including Western democracies.
Read the methodologyAcademy
Learn how elections actually work
How votes are counted and verified, why interference is not the same as fraud, and how to check a viral claim yourself.
Enter the AcademyUpdates
Recently added and revised
- SourceNCSC Annual Review 2020: foreign interference in the 2019 general election
- SourceIllegal Doppelganger operation: targeting the Polish elections
- SourceConstitutional Court of Romania, Decision No. 32/2024 (annulment)
- SourceJustice Department disrupts covert Russian government-sponsored foreign malign influence operation
- SourceSix Russian GRU Officers Charged in Connection with Worldwide Deployment of Destructive Malware and Other Disruptive Actions in Cyberspace