Electoral
dispute resolution (EDR) mechanisms provide a formalized structure for appeals
through which electoral actions and/or procedures can be legally challenged.
Disputes may arise at any point in time throughout the various stages of the
electoral process.[1] If effective and trusted
EDR mechanisms are not put in place from the initial stages of an electoral
processes, those involved may decide to resort to violent means in their efforts
to resolve disputed issues.
Empirical cases:
- Ethiopia
parliamentary election 2005.
The President of the National Election Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) also acted as
the head of the Supreme Court, which had a mandate to rule on electoral disputes
– a fact viewed as controversial by some parties. Electoral complaints were
processed in a way that was alleged to impact on some parties’ electoral rights
as well as generating exposure for alleged human rights violations. Overall,
the complaints process was viewed by some as significantly problematic, including
security force presence at hearings and alleged witness arrests.[2]
Interrelated factors: Grievances relating to genocide,
crimes against humanity and war crimes (external);[3]
human rights violations (external); presence of
non-state armed actors (external);[4] rejection of the election
results (internal).[5]
