IFES actors (candidates and political parties, media outlets and journalists, electoral officials and security forces).  Starting in the pre-election period and continuing throughout, the establishment of regular meetings of a multi-stakeholder committee that works on dispute resolution and/or election security for information sharing and airing of disputes.  In pre- and post-election periods, leverage conflict programming to discuss electoral risks and issues. For instance, holding joint workshops between a voter education organization and a community-focused dispute resolution organization, or a radio talk show on reconciliation featuring a discussion of electoral competition.  In pre- and post-election periods, increase cooperation on information sharing between local organization monitoring efforts and security incident tracking.  A between-elections initiative to design election modules for integration into existing security sector training academies.  Provide the EMB with continuous attention and capacity building as is given to other state institutions during all phases of the electoral cycle, and, in particular, between elections if permanent staff are involved.  In the period between elections, the judicial system and legislative bodies should seek to identify issues that could make conflict more likely while making necessary reforms to the electoral framework (e.g., legislative reforms and court decisions on boundary delimitation, composition of election management bodies, candidate and voter registration, and procedures governing election dispute resolution).  Commitment to long-term civic education between elections to give citizens a greater understanding of their roles and responsibilities within a democracy, and a clear idea of their relationship to the state. Unrealistic expectations and inaccurate perceptions of government, political parties, political competition and citizen’s rights can lead to frustration, anger or disenfranchisement, if not corrected.  In the post-election period, transparent and efficient results transmission by the EMB, as well as careful monitoring and sharing of information among local organizations, security agencies and electoral officials can identify and prevent results-related disputes and rumors. Conflict Management and Mitigation When election conflict does erupt, stakeholders engage in a spectrum of mitigation and management responses at different points in the electoral cycle. Many common strategies could be enhanced through ICEP and a few new tactics could be added to the menu of possible responses. Impunity for perpetrators or supporters of electoral violence is a feature that many countries with recurrent electoral conflicts have in common. It is also one of those challenges that most requires cooperation as it cuts across the justice, security and electoral sectors. Many conflict prevention activities encouraged above can evolve into mitigation mechanisms when necessary. Electoral conflict responses can be implemented in the form of official sanctions or actions by official agencies (law enforcement, the EMB or the government), from security/military channels (special police units, military or 13