Foreword The current global health crisis deepened uncertainty in many fields, and democracy is no exception. The novel nature of the COVID-19 pandemic presents a variety of dilemmas for governments, parliaments, election administrators and judges when it comes to effectively protecting health – and ultimately, human life – and to upholding rights linked to political participation and representation. Tough decisions are being made around the world regarding electoral processes, but none should be made disregarding international standards and best practices. During a global health crisis that demands coordinated action for the protection of fundamental rights, close monitoring and international cooperation are acutely in demand. Now, more than ever, democracies around the world need each other, and international organizations, governments and civil society must cooperate to find creative solutions under the current pandemic. In a significant contribution to the global debate on the challenges posed by COVID-19, IFES is issuing a series of briefing papers that shed light on different aspects that may affect democracies. This second paper is particularly relevant, as it focuses on constitutional and legal features that arise from decisions made – or to be made – regarding electoral processes under the current context. In this sense, this is a most welcome contribution to debates on constitutional justice and international cooperation under the current pandemic and, more broadly, under emergency situations. From the outset, the author lists the relevant international standards and principles that guide and bound decisions under emergencies. With a well-grounded view, and relying on examples from different legal traditions and institutional designs, she also points out the importance of the timing and context under which solutions are implemented, with an emphasis on the transparency, inclusiveness and communication of each decision. Moreover, we are also reminded of the implications of the hierarchy of laws and the role courts may play when interpreting the legal framework for the implementation of emergency measures or to solve any controversies around said measures. For constitutional judges and other legal experts, this paper represents an excellent tool to assess the alternatives at their disposal when considering the modification of operational or legal aspects of electoral processes in order to protect public health. It is also a reminder that, as we face unprecedented situations, we may be called to issue rulings and develop guidelines to strengthen governance and uphold rights in our battle to protect human life. In my experience, to achieve this, international cooperation between judges is crucial. The systematic exchange of points of view through a consultative peer network reminds us of the common ground from which we fulfill our duties. While our constitutions, laws and precedents are the stronghold of our decisions, international best practices and experiences enhance the alternatives at our disposal. This paper makes a significant contribution to engage in this exchange with relevant information, sharp questions and a framework that helps to identify viable solutions and opportunities. Justice José Luis Vargas Valdez Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judiciary of Mexico Founder of the Global Network on Electoral Justice International Foundation for Electoral Systems -1-