Guidelines for Understanding, Adjudicating, and Resolving Disputes in Elections constitutional or legislative junctures to codify more long-term electoral complaints mechanisms.6 This guide explores seven standards of election complaint adjudication that strengthen the fair handling of grievances, which in turn preserves the public’s right to political participation and democratic representation. After establishing these seven standards, the guide moves from a theoretical framework to practical fieldwork, turning to experts in the field of international election complaint adjudication to discuss programmatic issues for implementing these standards. It is hoped that this exploration of principles and practice will serve as an important resource to law makers and election administrators as they consider their own election complaint adjudication processes and design new initiatives to strengthen this critical pillar of the election system. A Note on Terminology Throughout this book the authors use several phrases to describe the institutions and procedures employed within democracies to adjudicate election-related disputes, complaints, objections and alleged violations of election laws. The expression election dispute resolution (EDR) has gained some favor internationally for describing this topic. However, the word dispute suggests disagreements and competing claims that may only require an arbitrator or mediator to settle. Disputes of that nature are only one portion of election-related grievances, although an important part. Disputes within EDR can also be interpreted as challenges to election outcomes, when the official election results are contested. These can be significant challenges for any EDR system. Often, a high court (Supreme In Uruguay, for example, electoral law provIding for an autonomous electoral body was drafted in 1924 and included in the 1932 Constitution, making it the oldest system in Latin America. Sara Staino, Uruguay: The Electoral Court — A Fourth Branch of Government? 1-2 (2006), available at http://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/americas/UY/Uruguay_ percent20The percent20Electoral percent20Court percent20- percent20A percent20Fourth percent20Branch percent20of percent20Government.pdf. In Brazil, the Superior Electoral Court, the highest institution of Electoral Justice, was created on February 24, 1932, but the Constitution of the New State, established by Getúlio Vargas in 1937, extinguished the Electoral Justice. And on May 28, 1945, the Decree Law 7586/1945 reestablished the Superior Electoral Court. History of the Superior Electoral Court, Superior Electoral Court, http://www.tse.gov.br/internet/ingles/institucional/o_tse.html (last visited Jan. 6, 2011) [hereinafter Brazil Superior Electoral Court]. 6 6