372. Usually there is no urgency to determine criminal or administrative liability for an alleged crime or an infraction during the period of the electoral campaign or before the declaration of the results. However, the dynamic for the hearing and resolution of electoral challenges which need to be resolved in the course of the electoral process is a separate one. If an alleged electoral offence is (if proven) also grounds for the annulment of an election, the evidence must be produced and the facts taken before an EDRB to hear the challenge so that it can rule accordingly – regardless of the conclusion reached subsequently through the procedures for determining criminal or administrative liability. 373. The determinations of the EDRB should be issued without unwarranted delay, always seeking to reach and issue a decision before the possible infringement of an electoral right becomes irreparable. The judgement should also be issued before the elected person or body is installed into office. It is thus common for EDRBs to meet continuously and for very long hours during key periods. 374. Some EDR systems do however provide for the possibility of the final decision being issued subsequently. There have even been cases of a decision being issued after the term of the official challenged is up, which means that its effects are exclusively financial (the payment of the salary of the elected member). This applies both in EDR systems that come under legislative bodies, as in the United States, and also, in some cases, in EDR systems entrusted to judicial bodies, as in Colombia. Conversely, in Nigeria a gubernatorial candidate in Anambra State, Peter Obi, who had successfully challenged the re-election of the incumbent governor, Emeka Ngige, in 2007, and was installed in office in his place, was granted a full five-year term of office by the court instead of the remainder of the term. This situation could be regarded as the restoration of Obi’s electoral rights in full instead of monetary compensation. 375. Where an EDRB does not resolve a challenge within the time frames legally provided for as a result of its own inefficiencies or behaviour, this may in itself give rise to some kind of liability. 127 6. Principles and guarantees of EDR systems in an objective, expeditious and impartial manner by the authority tasked to do it. It would be advisable to consider conferring technical autonomy on the body entrusted with prosecuting electoral crimes and offences, and it should enjoy the support of the various political forces. This is the experience in Panama, which has an Attorney General for Electoral Crimes provided for in the constitution as an autonomous position appointed by the legislature.