(a) Any person who believes that a violation of any statute or regulation over which the Commission has jurisdiction has occurred or is about to occur may file a complaint in writing addressed to the General Counsel three (3) copies of any complaint not filed electronically. If possible, three (3) copies should be submitted.
(b) A complaint shall comply with the following:
(1) It shall provide the full name and address of the complainant; and
(2) The contents of the complaint shall be sworn to and signed in the presence of a notary public and shall be notarized.
(c) All statements made in a complaint are subject to the statutes governing perjury and to 18 U.S.C. 1001. The complaint should differentiate between statements based upon personal knowledge and statements based upon information and belief.
(d) The complaint should conform to the following provisions:
(1) It should clearly identify as a respondent each person or entity who is alleged to have committed a violation;
(2) Statements which are not based upon personal knowledge should be accompanied by an identification of the source of information which gives rise to the complainants belief in the truth of such statements;
(3) It should contain a clear and concise recitation of the facts which describe a violation of a statute or regulation over which the Commission has jurisdiction; and
(4) It should be accompanied by any records supporting the facts alleged if such records are known of, or available to, the complainant.
[45 FR 15120, Mar. 7, 1980, as amended at 50 FR 50778, Dec. 12, 1985; 82 FR 60853, Dec. 26, 2017; 89 FR 217, Jan. 2, 2024]
Notes of Decisions
Fulani v. Brady, 935 F.2d 1324 (D.C. Cir. 1991).
“See 11 C.F.R. § 111.4 (a) (providing complaint process for “[a]ny person who believes that a violation of any statute or regulation over which the Commission has jurisdiction has occurred or is about to occur.”
Lieu v. Fed. Election Comm'n (D.D.C. 2019).
“§ 30109 (a)(1); see also 11 C.F.R. § 111.4 . After reviewing the complaint, and relevant submissions made by the administrative respondents, the FEC must determine whether there is “reason to believe” that FECA has been violated.”
Lieu v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 370 F. Supp. 3d 175 (D.C. Cir. 2019).
“§ 30109 (a)(1) ; see also 11 C.F.R. § 111.4 . After reviewing the complaint, and relevant submissions made by the administrative respondents, the FEC must determine whether there is "reason to believe" that FECA has been violated.”
Freedman v. Fed. Elections Comm'n (D.D.C. 2023).
“§ 30109(a)(1); see also 1 11 C.F.R. § 111.4 . After review of the record, the Commission determines whether there is “reason to believe” that FECA has been violated, i.”
speechnow.org v. Fed. Election Comm'n (D.D.C. 2009).
“The FEC can investigate alleged violations of the campaign finance laws that are brought to its attention through administrative complaints filed under 11 CFR § 111.4 or that its staff discovers and has “reason to believe” that a violation has occurred.”
Jud. Watch, Inc. v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 10 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D.D.C. 1998).
“” 11 C.F.R. § 111.4 (d)(3) (1998). The FEC asserts that the FECA concerns only reporting violations, not bribery, and that it does not have jurisdiction over quid pro quo violations.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.