No, they shouldn’t. Holding people liable for finance law violations can still provide signals to the public, which may affect their voting. But you can’t allow unelected criminal justice officials to override elections. That’s a path straight to hell, as has been proven time and again in Asian countries that do that.
How would you suggest they be held to account here?
Keep in mind that their ill-gotten gains include votes, and that a criminal's ill-gotten gains of a crime must be disgorged to hold the criminal to account.
Voters can take it into account. But you can’t elevate legal technicalities above democracy. People will not trust the people administering the election laws over the people they voted for.
It’s a “who watches the watchers” problem. Many countries have tried to impose the legal system on elections and it invariably results in destruction of trust in both elections and the justice system.
