5. Conclusions and strategic interventions: looking to the future The credible election dispute resolution is a precondition for building confidence in the electoral process. This field has been on the sidelines of public interest in Serbia for many years and has remained outside of reform processes conducted sporadically after 2000 (2004, 2008-2009 and 2020). That is why it is not surprising to see the findings of a public opinion poll showing that citizens are not aware of who are the officials to whom complaints can be lodged - for example, only 24% of the respondents know that citizens/voters have the right to file complaints. If we compare how election dispute resolution is regulated in Serbia with internationally accepted standards, we conclude that the highest levels of compliance exist with the principles of efficiency and effectiveness, while regulatory framework compliance is low regarding the principles of fairness and transparency. The study showed that there is an effective resolution of disputes and appeals with a broad and adequately set right to complaints, appeals/judicial resolution, and the availability of reasoned decisions. However, legal analysis and research with stakeholders suggest the risks of short deadlines for resolving appeals and disputes and inadequate implementation of remedies. When it comes to the fairness of the regulatory framework, the broadly and adequately set right to submit complaints and be notified of the procedure is an advantage, but it is a major challenge in terms of the de facto political character and composition of the election administration and the inability to adequately identify all facts. The political character of the election administration reduces the independence of the arbiters in the of election dispute resolution process. Decisions of the Republic Electoral Commission and the Administrative Court are public, but transparency is not complete due to the lack of access to all information in real time and the lack of transparency of electoral commissions. This study shows that the participants in the elections, particularly ‘soft’ political organisations, have exceptionally low capacities and knowledge of the of election dispute resolution process and that capacity building is necessary to strengthen them. The citizen awareness raising campaign should include the introduction to legal mechanisms in the complaint filing process, but also the promotion of the principle of secrecy of the ballot and vouching for it at polling stations. Defining priority areas for intervention should include practical interventions that can improve the process in the short term, but it is necessary to open room for change in the broader legal and institutional framework. There are two reasons for major and systemic changes: firstly, Serbian electoral legislation requires serious reform in almost all relevant areas and election dispute resolution would have to follow these changes and secondly, the growing importance of the election dispute resolution process and its impact on broader (dis)trust of the overall electoral process. Interventions will be divided into four segments - 1) institutional model for electoral dispute resolution, 2) rules and procedures for investigation and resolution of complaints and disputes, 3) legal remedies and sanctions and enforcement of decisions and 4) information and education 80