IFES Practitioner Brief on Alternative Dispute Resolution in Elections These problems, due in part to the lack of a legal framework for ADR, could be remedied through adoption of guidelines, training, and transparency. The NEC’s introduction of ADR is a positive initiative that should be strengthened, in particular due to the low trust in the judiciary to address election disputes in Tanzania (often considered ineffective by lawyers themselves). An alternative mode of dispute resolution in elections is even more important in Tanzania following a recent change in the law restricting legal standing. Cases filed before the courts in the country are limited to individuals directly affected by the violations, therefore preventing NGOs or associations from filing on behalf of voters and vulnerable groups to challenge the results. Nigeria Nigeria’s cultural approach to election disputes shows that candidates, parties, and lawyers resist using ADR in preelection disputes when introduced by the EMB. These parties tend to perceive the disputes as a zero-sum game, and that the courts are better and more objective decision-makers than the EMB. The Nigeria case study also highlights the need to distinguish and adapt solutions for local versus federal issues and the importance of funding for outreach about the use of ADR. The case study features calls for reforms that would position the judiciary to introduce ADR for pre-election disputes, in line with expanding use of ADR in the courts in Nigeria. Nigeria has a longstanding practice of traditional ADR in other fields, but electoral stakeholders have appeared reluctant to use ADR since the election commission (INEC) introduced it in 2008 as a means of resolving electoral disputes. In 2011, the INEC established the Alternative Election Dispute Resolution (AEDR) Directorate, composed of election officials. The objective was for the staff of this unit within the INEC to “act as a third-party neutral which can confidentially address the resolution of intra-political party disputes, electoral issues before, during and after elections,” and “assist the courts in timely addressing electoral cases … and the public and parties in fact finding, early warning monitoring and in the mediation of electoral disputes.” 163 Despite continued efforts to promote the use of ADR to limit and triage the number of disputes, which overwhelmed courts before and after the 2019 general elections, the ADR mechanism in INEC remains under-used and under-funded. In the last election, the AEDR unit limited its mandate to addressing internal disputes within the workplace and was not used as an ADR mechanism for the election process itself. Another ADR mechanism that works more successfully with INEC is the National Peace Committee (NPC). The NPC facilitated the signing of two national-level accords by the main candidates during the 2019 elections to conduct lawful campaigns and to respect the results. The Commonwealth Observer Group noted that these accords “may have contributed to the generally peaceful atmosphere of the campaign,” and the EU lection Observation Mission (EOM) noted that the accords “enhanced confidence in the process.” 164 The NPC did something similar in 2015, which stakeholders considered helpful. Less impactful in recent elections, the Inter-Party Advisory Committee (IPAC) 165 is INEC. (2012). Draft AEDR Guide. Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group: Nigeria General Elections, 23 February 2019. (2019). page 23. The Commonwealth. https://production-new-commonwealth-files.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/migrated/inline/NigeriaCOGFullReport.pdf. See also European Union election observation mission final report: Nigeria 2019 – General Elections. (2019). https://www.eods.eu/library/nigeria_2019_eu_eom_final_report-web.pdf and International Republican Institute & National Democratic Institute, 2019, p. 25. 165 The umbrella body of registered political parties in Nigeria. 163 164 64