266. In general, EDRSs entrusted to regular courts which are part of the judiciary or to constitutional courts or councils and administrative law courts do not provide for any formal or direct representation of political parties. 267. EDRBs entrusted to specialized electoral courts or EMBs with judicial powers whose members are designated by the judicial branch also do not provide for political party representation. This is the case: • in Costa Rica, where the members of the Supreme Elections Tribunal (Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones) are appointed by a two-thirds majority of the Supreme Court of Justice (Corte Suprema de Justicia de Costa Rica); • in Chile, where the Supreme Court of Justice (Corte Suprema) freely chooses four members of the Electoral Certifications Tribunal – three from among its members or former members, and one from other lawyers – while a fifth member is chosen by lot among the former presidents of the legislative chambers; • in Turkey, where six of the EMB members are elected by the Plenary Assembly of the Supreme Court of Appeals (Yargıtay) and the other five by the Plenary Assembly of the Council of State (Daniştay) from among its own members; and • in Albania, where the Electoral College is composed of eight judges for appeals selected by lot and nominated by the High Council of Justice (Këshilli i Lartë i Drejtësisë). 99 6. Principles and guarantees of EDR systems 265. Many analysts believe that the presence of representatives of political parties on EDRBs helps to achieve consensus among the contenders in the election process and can help to strengthen transparency. In practice, three approaches to political party nominations to EDRBs can be found: (a) none (the most common approach), (b) party nominees forming the minority (Uruguay), and (c) party nominees forming the majority (Colombia and Ecuador). It is however possible that a multiparty EDRB may obstruct or endanger decision-making processes or the enforcement of the law and the delivery of electoral justice, particularly when matters arise related to party political interests. EDRB members nominated by political parties need to be aware that their task is not to try to ensure that the EDRB’s rulings always benefit their political party, but to guarantee that the rulings are consistent with the law. EDRB members should never attempt to rule in favour of one party or against another by failing to observe what is prescribed in constitutional law or the statutes. In this regard, once a person becomes a member of an EDRB, even if he or she is an activist or has been nominated by a political party, he or she must cease to act as such in the performance of the body’s functions and focus on resolving the cases that come up strictly in accordance with the law.