Guidelines for Understanding, Adjudicating, and Resolving Disputes in Elections from the results, or when a repeat election must be held. In other countries, nullification requires a ruling by a designated adjudicating body or by a court. Regardless of a party’s or candidate’s expectation that they can have the results overturned if they prevail in court, it is a generally accepted standard that election results are only overturned if the seriousness and magnitude of the violation is of such significance that the outcome can no longer be determined. In most jurisdictions there is a reluctance to overturn results, and approaches to the treatment of tainted votes are based on the almost universal principal that they should only be overturned if the number of tainted votes is greater than the number of votes separating winners and losers. Even if an entire polling station is annulled, a repeat election for the polling station might not be called if the number of votes involved is insufficient to alter the outcome for the electoral district as a whole. It is in cases where evidence substantiates the perpetration of fraud, gross negligence and intentional wrongdoing that are more likely to result in the annulment of results or the repeat of the election. It is always important to ensure that the rights of parties and candidates to file legitimate complaints are preserved and that these stakeholders have access to complaints adjudication processes wherever they are warranted. It is important that any training of parties and candidates in the area of election complaints adjudication include sufficient information about these realities. Accurate information and realistic expectations as to what benefits might be achieved through successful litigation could factor heavily in helping parties and candidates decide whether or not to pursue their cases. B. Policy and Practical Considerations for Training Political Parties The term “training” should not be taken so narrowly as to replace or preclude other opportunities for preparing political parties to understand and exercise their rights. EMBs are in a perfect position to ease some of the doubts and controversies that are likely to arise as political parties avail themselves of the election complaint processes. It can be uncomfortable for election administrators to face a barrage of complaints. However, as guardians of the process and charged with the responsibility and authority to ensure equal conditions for parties and candidates, EMBs must find ways to promote confidence and trust in the system. 154