IFES Practitioner Brief on Alternative Dispute Resolution in Elections It is worth noting that Sri Lanka successfully introduced mediation as a mode for resolving disputes at the grassroots level three decades ago. The country adopted the Mediation Board Act and established a Mediation Board Commission to lead mediation programs with the policy and administrative support of the Ministry of Justice. 152 Mediation has been a successful practice in Sri Lanka; with a large number of trained mediators, this is now part of the legal tradition. It is therefore important for the EC to continue institutionalizing and strengthening the capacity of election officials to act as mediators during the elections. 153 This example shows the need to clearly define the scope and mandate of EDR and ADR bodies to avoid confusion and to manage complainants’ expectations. Training and coordination with relevant institutions such as the police and prosecutors should be encouraged to clearly understand the scope of their respective mandates. Indeed, while ADR should be encouraged, it is not always the appropriate forum to address severe violations. Ethiopia Ethiopia is an example of how vulnerabilities in the design and execution of EDR mechanisms can lead to ad hoc and inconsistent dispute resolution in practice, as well as a blurring of the line between formal EDR and informal ADR. This can cause confusion for stakeholders and also lead to forum-shopping. On the positive side, at the central level, the political parties’ joint forum, coordinated by the EMB, had some success as an ADR mechanism for dialogue and the prevention and resolution of disputes, including inter-party disputes. The Ethiopian Electoral Law provides for EDR mechanisms to be established by the EMB (the National Election Board of Ethiopia, or NEBE), in the form of grievance hearing committees (GHCs) at all levels, with an appeal to the courts. 154 The NEBE Management Board also has a role in resolving certain categories of disputes, notably counting and results disputes, with an appeal to court. The GHCs are EMB-led complaint bodies, each staffed by an election official and members of the public serving in an unpaid capacity. Their composition and operations make them potentially akin to an ADR mechanism in that the members of the public who serve on them are selected by voters from the local area, the proceedings are intended to be informal and accessible to all without needing a lawyer, complaints can be presented verbally rather than in writing, and their decisions must be rendered within a few days. But, under the law, they are a formal part of the EDR appeals process. Although the GHCs were intended to be established at all levels, this did not happen in most constituencies or polling stations during the 2021 elections, due partly to the difficulty of finding thousands of volunteers willing to serve on them. 155 Furthermore, the NEBE did not adopt procedures for the handling of disputes, and Parliament did not approve the draft regulation for the courts’ handling of electoral disputes (including those that came to the courts on appeal from Sri Lanka Government. Mediation Board Commission. http://www.mediation.gov.lk/whoarewe Ibid. “Considering the success rate of mediated settlements to varying disputes through the use of mediation services in Sri Lanka over the last 3 decades, it is evident that mediation has become a largely popular method of conflict resolution widely available in the country.” 154 Ethiopian Electoral, Political Parties Registration and Election’s Code of Conduct (Proclamation No 1162/2019), articles 13(7), 15(10), and 151(5) provide for GHCs. 155 The NDI/IRI Limited Election Observation Mission for the Ethiopia June 21, 2021 National Elections reported on page 27 the failure to establish grievance hearing committees except in a handful of places. The EU Election Observation Mission reported on page 26 on a similar problem in the 2010 elections. 152 153 61