26. The essential purpose of an electoral justice system is the genuine and effective protection of the right • to either elect or be elected as a representative to hold a public or government position – national, local, or even supranational; or • to participate directly in a direct democracy process or procedure by means of voting in a referendum or recall vote. 27. When a given action, procedure or decision related to the electoral process is not in keeping with the provisions of the law, it is said to be an irregularity, and a conflict or dispute arises between the person or entity who committed the irregularity and the person or entity who considers himself or herself to have been harmed by a violation of their electoral rights. 28. Among the formal electoral dispute resolution mechanisms, a distinction can be made between those that are corrective in nature and those that are punitive in nature. Electoral challenges (see chapter 7) are corrective. They annul, modify or acknowledge the irregularity and, as the case may be, protect or restore the enjoyment of electoral rights. Mechanisms which are punitive punish the entity or person responsible, for example, through procedures for assigning administrative (civil) and criminal liability in electoral matters (see chapter 4, section 3). There are also AEDR mechanisms, which are characterized by their voluntary nature for the parties to a dispute and are frequently informal (see chapter 8). Figure 2.1. The elements of electoral justice The elements of electoral justice Prevention of electoral disputes Resolution of electoral disputes (EDR mechanisms) Corrective (annul, modify or acknowledge the irregularity): electoral challenges 10 Alternative electoral dispute resolution (AEDR) mechanisms Punitive (impose a penalty on the perpetrator or the entity responsible for the irregularity): election-related administrative and criminal liabilities