- 35 - CDL-AD(2020)025 The composition of the body deciding on complaints and appeals, except concerning voter registration or disputes related to election day, should preferably be a collegial one. 135. Concerning the grounds for complaints and the decisions, actions, inactions open to challenge, the majority of Venice Commission’s member States provide for provisions ensuring voters, candidates and political parties the right to lodge complaints for violations of the law for the essential steps of the electoral process, such as registration of voters and candidates, electoral campaign, voting operations and election results. Nevertheless, there remains room for improvement: the Venice Commission indeed recommends that grounds for complaints and appeals should not be limited to violations of electoral rights and interests due to the State’s decisions and actions but also include inactions and inadequate enforcement, as well as violations of electoral law by private actors. 136. Concerning the persons entitled to complain (standing), most of the Venice Commission’s member States enable in their legislation voters, candidates and political parties to lodge electoral complaints, in line with international standards, but only few go beyond and provide such rights to other categories of persons. Extending the right to complain to additional electoral stakeholders could be envisaged to reinforce procedures regarding the settlement of electoral disputes and increase trust in electoral processes as a whole. If necessary, safeguards must be put in place to prevent the misuse of the complaints system, to avoid frivolous complaints with the only aim to disrupt or block the electoral process. 137. The variety of situations concerning time-limits among the Venice Commission’s member States prevents drawing trends. The Venice Commission reiterates its recommendation that national legal frameworks stipulate short periods for lodging complaints and prompt decisions by competent bodies, inherent to the nature of electoral processes. A balance is however necessary and advisable in the law between the thoroughness and complexity of the election dispute resolution system on the one side, and speedy and flexible procedures on the other side. 138. Other procedural issues involve ensuring the right to a fair trial in electoral matters and the effectiveness of the appeal system, which includes the necessity of providing legal guarantees regarding evidence and the possibility of hearing parties contesting an electionrelated decision. The emphasis must also be put on the transparency of election dispute resolution systems, by ensuring procedures devoid of formalism. The importance of reasoned and substantive decisions must be underlined, despite the requirement of making the procedures of examination of electoral complaints and appeals short. 139. The legislation of a number of Venice Commission’s member States does not address the issue of the decision-making power of the body entitled to examine a complaint or appeal and to resolve an electoral dispute; the Venice Commission recommends in particular the reinforcement of the legislation regarding the cases of partial or full cancellation of election results and underlines the crucial role of the electoral judge in this respect, as well as of other remedies following electoral frauds or malpractices.