Guidelines for Understanding, Adjudicating, and Resolving Disputes in Elections requires an enormous commitment of resources and political will that very few countries can make. This system is covered in greater detail in Chapters 4 and 5 of this book. Recommendation Checklist A central theme in establishing or improving systems for election complaints adjudication is the importance of recognizing the varying nature and seriousness of different types of complaints and disputes arising from elections. An effective complaints adjudication system must develop flexibility in its use of institutions and procedures to adjudicate this variety of election grievances and to impose penalties and sanctions. This chapter has emphasized (and country examples have illustrated) the need for mechanisms to fit the particular cultural, political and legal traditions of each country. The following checklist presents key issues for practitioners to consider when developing or reviewing legal and administrative frameworks for complaints adjudication: √ Election complaints body formation: The election complaints adjudication body is usually referred to as a Complaints Commission, Tribunal, Court, Panel or other name that reflects its quasi-judicial character. The choice of name should reflect the way the terms are used and understood locally. Occasionally, complaints are handled by the EMB itself. The legislation establishing the complaints body must also specify the number, method of appointment and term of its members, its independence, jurisdiction and powers.21 √ Clear jurisdiction: The establishing legislation for the election complaints adjudication body should be clear and should define the following: standing; the required burden of proof for complaints and the nature and sufficiency of evidence; and the jurisdiction of the bodies handling various aspects of the elections process. √ Independence: The appearance and reality of independence of an election complaints authority derives from the provisions of the 126