International Foundation for Electoral Systems and Democracy International results. The core function of an electoral complaints body is to maintain credibility and reliability by making available a clear, legal right of action for complainants. 48 As with general adjudication systems, the appeal process must encompass the fundamental right to judicial review, must be clearly established by the law, and must be known to the general public. 49 This is particularly important when an audit changes the outcome of elections because the public must understand why the election result was challenged and accept the remedy that was administered. 50 In the 2014 Afghanistan audit of presidential ballots, audit decisions by the IEC could be appealed to the Independent Electoral Complaints Commission. The audit review process needs to be fast and effective, but it must not contravene due process protections. Specific time frames should take into account the need for the adjudication of the claim to take place within the limits of the election process, 51 for the remedies to be implemented in a similar timeframe, and for the decision to be released in a timely manner. Appeals should not be used to delay the certification of the results or to harass the adversarial party or candidate. Time limits for lodging and deciding appeals must be reasonably short. The Venice Commission has set the standard of three to five days for actions at first instance. 52 This recalls and buttresses the general principle of expeditious proceedings in the adjudication of electoral complaints. Finally, as previously stated, a transparent right of redress requires that the complainant be informed of the reasons why the claim was dismissed or denied. Thus, the appellate body, in making its decision, should clearly state the legal basis used or factual determination made when it ruled on the particular case, based on a clear elucidation of the possible electoral offenses in the law. The judge or arbiter should detail which audit findings they have used to make their decisions, what violation was committed, who committed the violation, and whether the violation influenced or might have influenced the outcome of the elections. 53 Judges and arbiters should provide relevant parties with the means to understand the legal and evidentiary reasoning behind the decision. The appellate body should also provide the concurring or dissenting opinions of the judges or arbiters. This will provide transparency about the reasoning used by arbiters to reach their conclusion and any personal legal views that entered into the decision. A legal justification for a decision will also facilitate the enforcement of the decision and help to establish the legitimacy of the final electoral results. V. Operational Considerations for EMBs Managing an Audit Process The 2010 presidential election in Haiti and the comprehensive, nationwide audit after the 2014 presidential runoff election in Afghanistan are instructive when considering the myriad of operational issues facing EMBs during audits and how election officials can best prepare for crisis situations. International research underscores the importance of proper planning to successfully prevent, identify, and mitigate fraud and malpractice. 54 An EMB should use fraud prevention tools, such as pre-election integrity assessments and electoral integrity management plans (EIMPs), to prioritize vulnerabilities, identify the most severe risks, and outline how and by whom the risks will be mitigated. In Afghanistan, the IEC developed a fraud mitigation plan almost a year before the 2014 general election, which was a positive initiative. The plan laid out steps the IEC had already taken to address risks of 13