Chapter 1: International Standards stating that this was an issue for legislators to decide.64 The ambiguity in the electoral law and the conflicting court decisions led to delays in determining the composition of the legislature, and damaged public confidence in the electoral system.65 The failure of election stakeholders to address these issues before the election put the KPU and the adjudicatory bodies in a difficult position after the elections. Summing up popular frustration, Indonesian election expert Hadar Gumay observed “the regulations cannot be changed just like that after the general election is over and the results are counted. In the end, this is becoming some sort of a political lust, not an arena whereby to seek justice."66 This example highlights the need to properly codify election laws relating to election process and to complaints adjudication sufficiently in advance of the election. Codification of electoral processes and election complaint mechanisms need not be elaborate. In Nigeria, the Electoral Tribunals are mandated under the Constitution,67 and the 2006 Electoral Act No.2 provides for the electoral complaint adjudication mechanisms. The Act states that election petitions arising from the conduct of a presidential election are handled by the Court of Appeal and in any other election petition they are handled by the Election Petition Tribunal.68 The Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court can also have appellate jurisdiction.69 The recourse to the judiciary ensures that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) does Arghea D. Hapsari, Court Rejects Judicial Review Request Of Election Law, The Jakarta Post, Feb. 9, 2010, available at http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/02/09/courtrejects-judicial-review-request-election-law.html; Arghea D. Hapsari, Court Annuls Judicial Review Filed Against Own Power, The Jakarta Post, Feb. 2, 2010 (“’If the court reviews the requested articles, then it will have to review [several articles] in [the Constitution] . . . the articles in the Constitutions are made by choice of the lawmakers and the court does not have the authority to judge their choices,’ presIding judge Mahfud MD told [a Constitutional Court] hearing.”). 65 Candidates Anxious, Frustrated Over Legal, Political Uncertainty, The Jakarta Post, Aug. 26, 2009. 66 Yandi M.R. & Iqbal Muhtarom, Fighting for Seats, Tempo Magazine, August 4-10, 2009. 67 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999), § 285(1) (“There shall be established for the Federation one or more election tribunals to be known as the National Assembly Election Tribunals which shall, to the exclusion of any or tribunal, have original jurisdiction to hear and determine petitions . . . .”), available at http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm#ElectionTribunals/; Political Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica Nov. 8, 1949, arts. 99-104 (“The organization, direction, and supervision of acts pertaining to suffrage are the exclusive function of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, which does enjoy independence in the performance of its duties. All other electoral organs are subordinate to the Tribunal.”). 68 Electoral Act 2010, § 133 (Nigeria), available at http://placng.org/Electoral percent20Act percent202010- percent20as percent20Gazetted.pdf. 69 Id. § 75(1). 64 29