the law can create confusion for those who are affected by the sanctions of oversight institutions. In regards to the legal provisions covering elections-related criminal offences, the findings suggest that in the great majority of countries (72 per cent) electoral crimes and offences are addressed in the electoral law, and only in 21 per cent of countries are they covered in the criminal (or penal) code. This indicates that most countries agree that the treatment of electoral crime or offences should not be outside the realm of the evolving dynamics of elections. In other words, developments and reforms in the elections field should make it easier to make changes to the treatment of electoral crimes or offences. With regard to the types of election-related misconduct that are regarded as criminal offences, the findings suggest that the legislation of the vast majority of countries contains provisions that penalize the main categories of crimes, such as the obstruction of electoral processes, electoral fraud, incentive-driven voter coercion and threat-driven voter coercion. When it comes to the imposition of penalties, the findings reveal that on average more than 80 per cent of countries apply both fines and imprisonment to all the above-mentioned types of criminal offences. The research also found that certain types of misconduct during voter registration and unlawful conduct in respect of campaign finances are treated as criminal acts, but in relatively fewer countries—in 53 per cent and 43 per cent of countries, respectively. This is understandable given the fact that these types of irregularities are also treated as administrative infractions in many countries and dealt with accordingly. Overall, the findings of International IDEA’s global research on EDR systems bring new insights to how electoral justice is provided across the globe. The mission of the research team engaged in this study will have been accomplished if these findings raise new questions and debate about the legal provisions on electoral justice, advance theoretical understanding of the impact of EDR systems on the quality of elections or other important outcomes and serve as a useful source of reference for practitioners working with elections on a day-to-day basis as well as reformers of electoral legislation. 54