In some countries responsibility for administering elections may lie with a specialized branch of the judiciary. Uruguay, for example, has an Electoral Court that administers the vote, can rule on disputes between the parties and can investigate challenges to the election results. It may also consider complaints about election campaigning in the media, including attempts to pressure the media into biased campaign coverage.

This is a common model in Latin American countries. In Costa Rica, for example, elections are run by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, which also has responsibility for regulating media coverage. The tribunal is an independent constitutional body composed of judges, with its finances approved by the legislature. It is entirely independent of the executive branch of government. The exercise of its authority over the media has not been without controversy. In 1999, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal instructed a privately owned television channel, Teletica Canal 7, to invite all 13 presidential candidates to appear on a scheduled debate, rather than just the top four candidates as the station had planned. The Supreme Court refused to hear the station’s appeal on the grounds that this was an electoral matter.

The Russian Federation has a specialized "information court" - the Judicial Chamber for Information Disputes. This is not strictly speaking a body that is confined to dealing with media and election issues, since it also functions outside election periods. However, it was established in 1993 specifically because of the need for a body to resolve disputes that had arisen during election campaigns.

In most instances, whatever the precise mechanism that has responsibility for regulating the media in elections, there will be a right of appeal to a judicial body against the regulator's decisions. Such an appeal may come from the media organ itself, a political party, or an individual complainant. Like any such procedure during an election period, this is likely to be an expedited process. A well-considered judicial decision may not be much use if it is handed down after the election is over.