IFES Practitioner Brief on Alternative Dispute Resolution in Elections rejected that argument on the grounds that the second assembly reflected the values of the community, was an exercise in self-determination and was lawful and constitutional. 208 These difficulties do not mean that ADR should not be attempted in these contexts. However, they demonstrate the importance of training and sensitization on Indigenous customs as well as gender issues for all involved in the mediation, and the need for the mediator to be aware of power inequalities and the need for an appeal to court so an independent external body can consider the issues. More generally, ADR is recognized and encouraged by the Mexican Constitution (Article 17) and has become increasingly common in diverse fields of law to reduce the burden on courts and prosecutors and to save time and costs. The Organization of American States recommended in its report on the 2021 Mexican elections that some electoral disputes should be resolved by alternative mechanisms because the electoral court system is overwhelmed by thousands of cases. 209 Many legal CSOs and mediation experts have also called for mediation to be more widely used in electoral disputes. 210 Senegal For post-election disputes, Senegal features the use of judge-led mediation and consensus building in the verification and tabulation of results. This has enhanced acceptance of the results by all candidates. The low number of petitions filed against the results with the Constitutional Court since the introduction of this procedure points to its success. Senegal features the use of mediation techniques led by judges and involving election officials and candidates’ representatives during the compilation of results. The judiciary is responsible for protecting the integrity of the vote by deploying judges (délégués) on Election Day to control polling and counting operations up to the transfer from the polling station to the relevant commission (Commissions départementales de recensement des votes, or CDRV). The magistrates also control and supervise the results tabulation process at the departmental and national-level commissions (the CDRVs and the CNRV). As chairs of these commissions, the judges lead the process of establishing preliminary results prior to the certification of final results by the Constitutional Court. The CNRV includes representatives from the election commission and from all candidates, and it operates on a consensus basis. The role of the national commission is to review the results sheets (procès-verbaux) sent from all the departmental commissions, correct potential errors in the results and review any observations or comments included on the results sheet. During an interview with IFES, the former first president of the Appeal Court explained his role in the national commission. He saw the judges’ role as mediators of counting disputes to enhance acceptance of the result by all candidates and, ultimately, to avoid petitions being filed before the Constitutional Court. He described the mediation techniques used in the case of disputes during the results process and said that if mediation failed to reach an Ibid. Preliminary report of the mission of foreign visitors of the Organization of American States on the federal and local elections in Mexico. (2021, June 8). Organization of American States Electoral Observation Missions and Recommendations Database. http://www.oas.org/eomdatabase/MoeReport.aspx?Lang=en&Id=434&MissionId=516 210 The experts suggest that the general mediation centers that have been established by each state’s attorney general’s office could be used to support the mediation of electoral disputes. 208 209 74