Figure 4.9. Last-instance electoral dispute-resolution bodies dealing with disputes related to the nomination or registration of electoral contestants Supreme Court, High Court, or Court of Appeals 40 (56%) EMB (highest level) 12 (17%) Administrative Court 8 (11%) Constitutional Court/Council 4 (6%) Election Tribunal/Court 4 (6%) Other 4 (6%) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Notes: Graph shows number (percentage) of countries with each option. Data for 72 countries which allow appeals against the decisions of the first-instance body. Gambia, Germany and Uganda are excluded due to the fact that they have several last-instance bodies. Graph represents the data in the EJD as of August 2015. Part 2 of the EJD also contains questions that explore the requirement for hearings, the requirement for reasoned decisions, and available remedies in the law for both first- and last-instance bodies. This report does not cover these questions. Users who are interested in these questions should explore the online database. Maximum time for adjudication on the full electoral dispute-resolution process The research also attempted to collect comparative data about the maximum time allowed for a full EDR process from the day a complaint about the nomination or registration of electoral contestants is filed with the first-instance body until a decision is reached by the lastinstance body. Classifying data based on maximum adjudication times was not an easy task because the legislation in many countries does not clearly indicate timelines and/or deadlines for the adjudication of electoral disputes. This is especially the case when there is more than one level of adjudication and even more complicated when more than one EDR body deals with complaints as the first-instance body. Figure 4.10 shows that the legal documents of 38 per cent of countries contain no clear provisions on adjudication timelines. Among those countries which specify the maximum time available for the adjudication of disputes in some way or another, there are some exceptional cases in which it is more difficult to identify the adjudication time. For example, in Angola, Armenia and Germany, there are different adjudication timelines for candidate nominations and party registration. In Georgia, adjudication times differ depending on which body is hearing the complaint in the first-instance body (i.e. whether it is a court or an EMB). Figure 4.10 divides the countries into bands according to the time they allocate for the full EDR adjudication process. It should be noted that in some countries challenges related to nomination or 39 40