Chapter 4: Case Studies Related to Training of Arbiters in Election Complaints Introduction At the heart of most election complaints adjudication systems stands a judge or arbiter responsible for overseeing and rendering a competent judgment. There are multiple ways in which an election complaints body can be structured. It can be judicial or quasi-judicial, parliamentary or administrative, full- or part-time, permanent or temporary, and independent or appointed. The role of the arbiter may take different forms as well. The relevant decision-maker could be a single judge from a court of general jurisdiction who is hearing an election complaint, or it could be a dedicated multi-member panel that exists solely to adjudicate such cases. Whatever the nature of the adjudicative body’s members, it is vital that they understand their role and power in the adjudication process from the time a complaint is filed to the resolution of the issue. In that vein, a country’s electoral management body must take the training of judges seriously if it is to ensure an effective outcome that encourages the fair, consistent and accurate resolution of election complaints.  Procedures and rules for election complaints might differ from other civil, criminal or administrative actions (for more information, see Chapter 1: International Standards). A regimented training program that ensures the competency of each member is necessary to the success of a fair and impartial election complaints adjudication system. Training programs for judges or arbiters must seek to impute a comprehensive and up-to-date understanding of the country’s electoral complaints adjudication process and the current status of legislation and regulations, including all relevant procedures for investigation and adjudication. Ideally, training will aim at both increasing the professionalism and efficiency of the judges or arbiters in election-related cases as well as promoting the understanding of international best practices as the framework for domestic codes. These trainings should also promote the uniform and transparent application of electoral law through the development of informal but authoritative guidelines. In sum, training of judges and arbiters will inform all relevant decision-makers in a common framework, resulting in predictable and sound legal decisions. 161