(cont.) video conferencing tools allow faster conduct of hearings. The same mechanism allows stakeholders to propose witnesses or withdraw their case. This system required the Constitutional Court to adopt new security measures to verify the identity of complainants and witnesses who interact online. Above all, the expeditiousness of these proceedings is accompanied by an unprecedented degree of transparency, which in the past proved difficult to achieve within short timelines in such a vast country. The successful cases of Brazil and Indonesia raise the issue of whether the administration of electoral justice by electronic means could become a complete substitute for traditional proceedings across the world. Will the traditionally golden principles of oral evidence in public and the immediacy of proceedings soon be redundant? More than that, e-justice applications in electoral matters could shake one of the central axioms of ICT applied to elections: that technological investment cannot make up for a lack of trust in the institutions administering the process. While this dilemma deserves careful consideration and continued research in the other disciplines of law, the notion of electronic justice certainly has additional appeal in the administration of electoral disputes. Electoral law is arguably the most political of all the branches of law, and the administration of electoral justice often suffers from this underlying tenet. The balance between time-effectiveness and accuracy that electoral justice authorities must always strike is affected by political factors that often have very little to do with the principles of the rule of law or due process. In this respect, the vast possibilities offered by ICT applications in the administration of electoral justice, especially in terms of the transparency of actions, access to information, effectiveness and the timeliness of the possible remedy, should be viewed as powerful motivations for the digitalization of electoral justice. 4. Procedural guarantees of electoral dispute resolution systems 339. Procedural guarantees are those elements or attributes which foster and safeguard electoral justice and have as the basic aim the effective and efficient operation of an EDR system. 340. Procedural guarantees are normally put in place to ensure that the proceedings of an EDRS (trials or hearings, remedies and, in general, the handling of any challenges) are accessible, effective and efficient. Any proceeding must be accessible to those who seek the protection or defence of their electoral rights, that is, free of charge or with charges are not onerous; simple in its procedures; expeditious and timely in offering a safeguard or restoring an electoral right or, in a general sense, restoring the electoral legal framework before it becomes irreparable; and respects the essential formalities that should be found in any judicial proceeding – corresponding to the nature of the electoral right that a challenge seeks to protect. 118