D. Organizational Scheme for the Election Dispute Monitoring Team Election dispute monitoring should be an integral part of election observation and should be integrated into the election observation mission. Since the assessment of a legal system’s efficiency in resolving election disputes indicates the overall state of the rule of law within a country, election dispute monitoring can help to link election observation with other human rights and democratization projects. Whenever possible, election dispute monitoring should be headed by a legal adviser and done in close co-operation with an election expert responsible for liasing with the election commissions or administration and an expert responsible for co-ordinating with long term observers (LTOs). Regardless of the roles of the election commissions vis-à-vis the courts, there are always likely to be areas where co-ordination, if not collaboration, between the two institutions is required. Because of the tremendous variations in legal systems around the world, assistance from local jurists is essential. The number of local jurists will depend on various factors, such as the size of the country, the size of the population, the jurisdictional regimes (i.e. in instances where there are autonomous regions with separate rules and procedures), and the type of election. While the legal adviser represents the international community, it is the local jurists who are better equipped to navigate the local laws, even in instances where the legal adviser is fluent in the language. Ideally, the LTOs will do much of the election dispute monitoring. The LTOs are wellplaced to gather information on election disputes and, if equipped with a computer, can easily register the data directly on the database. Otherwise, the registration of complaints will have to be done by the local jurists and the legal adviser. If election disputes can be monitored and registered by the LTOs at the regional level, the staff at headquarters can then focus on the following tasks: • election dispute monitoring at the national level; • legal research directly related to election disputes; and • analysis of election dispute patterns. While the LTOs are best situated to monitor local disputes, headquarters can more readily observe cases and decisions at the national level. This includes those election disputes which reach the highest courts and election commissions. Legal research on election disputes requires assessing, at the national level, the consistency with which election laws are applied (i.e. are courts around the country coming to similar conclusions or are the election laws being interpreted differently?). Finally, an analysis of election dispute patterns requires an overview of the information gathered throughout the country. E. Guidelines for Long Term Observers and Comments Part of election observation has always touched upon the dispute resolution mechanisms available during elections, yet a systematic and comprehensive approach to election disputes greatly complements the election observation mission and can identify the weaknesses of both the election process and the legal system within which elections are held. Furthermore, the following guidelines for information gathering on election disputes have been developed. 22