IFES Practitioner Brief on Alternative Dispute Resolution in Elections Designing and Implementing Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms for Elections Applicable Standards As well as resolving specific disputes, the broader goals of a dispute resolution mechanism are to deter electoral violations, prevent electoral conflicts from escalating into violence, strengthen compliance with the rule of law, improve electoral practice, and contribute to building trust in election results—or at least acceptance of the results. These goals apply to both formal and informal justice mechanisms. In post-conflict countries, informal systems of dispute resolution may also be fundamental to restoring some degree of law and order; they may be all that is available for many years, as formal justice sectors take time to rebuild. 20 As a recent IFES analysis of democracy and governance assistance in post-conflict countries has identified, “in some post-conflict countries, the legal structure for protecting citizens’ rights might be weak, manipulated, lacking in enforcement mechanisms or nonexistent. The lack of established justice mechanisms, or [lack of] awareness of existing mechanisms to resolve grievances in peaceful ways, can also lead to violence.” 21 The report continues that “[e]stablishing sound procedures for handling and resolving electoral disputes through legally valid mechanisms is crucial to strengthen trust in electoral systems, especially in regard to perceptions of impartiality and fairness. This is particularly true in post-conflict environments and applies to both formal EDR mechanisms and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms that might be put in place to resolve certain types of disputes in a more informal, consensus-driven way.” International frameworks promote the rights and standards that apply to dispute resolution. The International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and regional human rights treaties and conventions do not explicitly refer to ADR. Article 14 of the ICCPR applies to “courts and tribunals.” Depending on the characteristics of the ADR body, the ADR process may fall “outside the ambit of the procedural requirements of the Covenant.” 22 These agreement-based mechanisms are incorporated within national legal frameworks, and there is a proliferation of their use in courts in civil, administrative or criminal law. 23 For example, the “European Union has adopted a series of resolutions on mediation.” 24 In September 2015, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which includes Sustainable Development Goal No.16: “Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.” The goal of ensuring access to justice for all includes both formal and informal justice Wojkowska, E. (2006). Doing justice: How informal justice systems can contribute. UNDP Oslo Governance Centre. https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/files/UNDP%20DoingJusticeEwaWojkowska130307.pdf 21 Buril, F., Dinman, B., & Vickery, C. (2022, January). Increasing the success and sustainability of democracy and governance interventions in post-conflict countries. IFES, p. 35 https://www.ifes.org/sites/default/files/migrate/transitions_2_report_final.pdf 22 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Human rights and traditional systems in Africa. United Nations. p. 50. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/HR PUB_16_2_HR_and_Traditional_Justice_Systems_in_Africa.pdf 23 McGregor, L. (2015). Alternative dispute resolution and human rights: Developing a rights-based approach through the ECHR. The European Journal of International Law, 26(3), 607–634. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chv039 24 Ibid. 20 16