IFES Practitioner Brief on Alternative Dispute Resolution in Elections The introduction of ADR in Tanzania was welcomed by stakeholders when first established, in particular because of the limitations on bringing a challenge to court to address election disputes. The National Election Commission (NEC) established Ethics Committees in each district and at the national level, made up of NEC officials and political party and government representatives, to resolve complaints about violations of the code of conduct. In 2015, the EU EOM assessed that the NECs had some effectiveness in resolving minor disputes. Still, other disputes bypassed committees and were resolved through direct negotiation between interested parties. This experience was repeated in the 2020 elections; however, important shortcomings in the process were noted. The Electoral Code of Conduct did not provide sufficient guidance on the composition or procedures of the Ethics Committees, and there was no detailed process for hearings or a clear mandate for the Ethics Committees. While the Ethics Committees were intended to be limited to Code of Conduct issues, some were addressing issues related to candidate nomination. Furthermore, there was a lack of transparency and reporting, including on the composition of the committees and participation of opposition politicians. These issues could be mitigated by adopting clear guidelines, training, stakeholder outreach, and transparency in the number and nature of disputes addressed through ADR. Lesson 3: It is important to account for the country’s legal tradition, as well as relevant cultural traditions and practical factors, when designing an ADR mechanism for elections To provide an effective and meaningful remedy, the process of resolving disputes through an ADR mechanism should consider the legal tradition, customs, and history of a country. Some cultures have a longstanding tradition of resolving disputes by dialogue and discussion rather than adversarial court proceedings. The case studies highlight the need to customize and decentralize the ADR structures and processes depending on the country context. For example, in Somaliland, it is customary to resolve conflicts through dialogue. International observers reported that the Eminent Group comported well with this tradition, working as an ad hoc mediation committee to resolve conflicts between parties in the 2017 elections. 70 There is also strong practice of mediation at the community level in fields other than elections in Nepal and growing practice in judicial proceedings aside from elections—opening the door for new opportunities for ADR in elections. 71 The goals of providing for the peaceful resolution of disputes and avoiding violence and tension among ethnic communities are entrenched in the origins of ADR in elections in South Africa and Kenya. These cultures provide fertile ground for using ADR to resolve electoral disputes. In Kenya, ADR is mentioned in the Constitution, as well as in the Electoral and Political Parties Act, and both the IEBC and the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal are empowered to introduce mediation or conciliation as part of their EDR proceeding. However, these mechanisms are underutilized due to a lack of information. This has also been the case in El Salvador, where voluntary, informal mediation helps to prevent conflicts by orienting voters and explaining election day procedures to them, promoting dialogue and peaceful resolution of problems between individuals, political parties, and polling station staff during the voting and Walls, M., Heine, C., Klingel, A., Goggin, C., Farag, A., & Mwape, S. (2018). The limits of consensus? Report on the Somaliland presidential election, 13th November 2017. UCL Bartlett Development Planning Unit: London, UK. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10047014 71 The Asia Foundation has led successful mediation programs and trained mediators in several provinces, leading to resolving thousands of land or family disputes by local community mediators. 70 33