The so-called Austrian model is characterized by the existence of a constitutional tribunal empowered to solve judicial appeals in a definitive way. Sometimes, the Austrian system is combined with appeal systems either political or judicial, which sort out appeals ex ante.The Austrian model empowers a Constitutional Court to sort out electoral disputes.
Many European Constitutions framed after World War One followed the model used to frame the Weimar Constitution (1919) and the Austrian Constitution (1920) and empowered constitutional courts to solve electoral disputes.
As a matter of fact, the Austrian Constitution empowered the Constitutional Court to verify the elections of representative institutions at both the National Council and every single Land. The powers vested in the Constitutional Court have been extended in order to validate other democratic events (such as referendum, since 1929, and presidential elections, since 1931).
Both France in 1958 and Spain in 1978 empowered the Constitutional Council and the Constitutional Court to solve all the disputes derived from parliamentary elections in a definitive way. Besides, France empowered the Constitutional Council to solve appeals derived from presidential elections in a combined system which authorizes administrative courts to solve electoral disputes in a preliminary way. It must be said that Spain does not recognize any jurisdiction as independent from the judiciary power to solve electoral disputes.
Germany provides a clear example of organization in which a political system and a judicial one are combined to solve electoral disputes. In Germany the Constitutional Court can review the parliamentary validation made on elections.
It is also worth mentioning that many Central and Eastern European countries, such as Romania, have empowered Constitutional Courts to sort out electoral disputes.
