Introduction. In the electoral process, innovative technologies are legitimately and/or are de facto introduced. These are complex tools, the result of the integration of artificial intelligence, technology and human behaviour in elections. The article analyses the influence of these technologies on the electoral process from the standpoint of ensuring the rule of law. Theoretical Basis. Methods. In a State governed by the rule of law, the rule of law should fully apply to all stages of the electoral process. The paradigm (sample) of traditional approaches assumes direct physical commission of electoral actions by citizens, political parties, and other election participants, based on the presumption: “here and now”. The introduction of innovative technologies in the electoral process entails not only a change in forms, but also, as the quantitative growth increases, a change in the paradigm of the electoral process from traditional to digital, but at the same time the rule of law must be maintained. Results. The analysis of the functioning of innovative technologies shows their multi- vector and contradictory impact on the electoral process: from creating convenience for participants to complicating the structure, replacing electoral actions with transactions. Currently, there is no understanding of the legal significance of transactions in the electoral process, their relationship to electoral actions. The practice of Russian elections follows the path of changing the electoral process not by law, but by technical solutions that are a priori considered legitimate or do not allow their assessment from the position of the rule of law. As a result, the rule of electoral law is either ignored or is simply purely formal. The well-known principles of electoral law exist as if in parallel, without having a real impact on the introduction and regulation of innovative technologies of the electoral process. It is necessary to include innovative technologies in the subject of electoral law. A serious contribution to the solution of this problem would be the legislative consolidation of the principle of security of the electoral process. In this case, we are not talking about security in relation to public order. The content of the new principle should be a broad set of obligations of the state as an organiser of elections, including the obligation to fully verify these technologies, their transparency, new rights and guarantees of election participants, and public control. Discussion and Conclusion. The predominant use of innovative technologies aimed at providing voting services does not always have a positive impact on the integrity of the electoral process and the operation of the principles of electoral law. It is advisable to take care of the introduction and use of innovative technologies to serve them at all stages of the electoral process with unconditional guarantees of the rule of law.