4.2. Observer missions and findings in the process of administration of justice 4.2.1. ODIHR findings and recommendations Within its mandate and pursuant to an official invitation from the state, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights - ODIHR has observed practically all election cycles in Serbia since 1997. Mission size and scope varies depending on the circumstances and capabilities - from limited missions to full-fledged, long standing missions, which was mostly in earlier times. Bearing in mind the importance of this body and the Charter for European Security72 (OSCE, Istanbul 1999) member signatory parties’ duty to agree to follow up promptly the ODIHR’s election assessment and recommendations, in this Chapter we will briefly reflect on this body’s findings and recommendations in terms of how fulfilled they are in the context of administration of justice. Firstly, during 2020 ODIHR evaluated how many of the priority and other recommendations issued after the 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017 elections were fulfilled73. ODIHR evaluated 56 from a total of 121 recommendations - 40 of which were priority and 71 were other74, giving them one of the following grades: not implemented, partially implemented, mostly implemented, and fully implemented. Among the 56 evaluated recommendations, 48 have not implemented status; 6 have partially implemented status, and a total of 2 recommendations have mostly implemented status. None were evaluated as fully implemented. The following text presents an overview of the evaluation status for all ODIHR recommendations issued after the 2017 and 2016 elections, distributed by fields, whereas recommendations issued after the June 2020 elections (not evaluated) will be briefly presented in text form. Table 4.2.1.1. An overview of the evaluation of recommendations relevant to the administration of justice process issued after the 2016 and 2017 elections, legal framework field, according to ODIHR75 Election cycle Recommendation Priority / Other 2016 #1 The electoral legislation would benefit from a comprehensive review to address legal loopholes and unclear provisions. To ensure legal certainty, substantial regulations should be included Priority primarily in the law, while only those related to technical matters and details should be included in REC instructions Status * Charter for European Security, Istanbul, November 1999; OSCE Istanbul Document 1999. Paragraph 25. Recommendations issued after the June 2020 elections have still not been evaluated by ODIHR. More on ways, reasons, and goals of the evaluation available at: https://paragraph25.odihr.pl/about/. An overview of all recommendations issued since 2012 and evaluation status of each recommendations available at: https://paragraph25.odihr.pl/home-page-countries/serbia/ 74 Some recommendations reoccur in identical or remarkably similar form in various reports. This presents a summary of all recommendations in all reports, regardless of their reoccurrence. 75 Final reports for 2016 and 2017: https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/0/e/259021.pdf and https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/c/6/330296.pdf. Evaluation status of each recommendation is available at: https://paragraph25.odihr.pl/home-page-countries/serbia/ 72 73 44