Dispute Resolution

Dispute resolution is what prevents the Vote phase from collapsing into post-result escalation. This chapter defines how complaints are processed, how remedies are applied, and how timelines prevent indefinite contestation.

Objectives

Provide a credible channel to resolve disputes without violence.
Detect and correct irregularities quickly enough to preserve legitimacy.
Ensure remedies are real (not symbolic) and rule-based (not political improvisation).
Produce a record that can withstand later challenge.

What Kinds of Disputes Must Be Handled

At minimum, the mechanism should handle:

Registration and Eligibility Disputes

Rejected registrations (especially for displaced persons).
Duplicate registrations.
Documentation disputes and exception pathway disagreements.

Polling and Participation Disputes

Polling place access restrictions.
Intimidation incidents affecting participation.
Procedural violations (ballot handling, secrecy breaches).
Disruptions (violence, outages, closures).

Counting and Tabulation Disputes

Chain-of-custody breaks.
Reconciliation discrepancies.
Observer access violations.
Statistical anomalies (as triggers for review, not sole proof).

Rule Interpretation Disputes

Application of version-locked rules.
Any emergency procedural changes.
Application of vote-to-border rules (if used).

Institutional Design (Minimum Viable Structure)

A credible dispute system typically needs:

Intake Channel(s): Hotline + written filings + observer submissions.
Triage Unit: Classifies severity and urgency.
Investigative Capacity: Ability to gather evidence quickly (including site access).
Adjudication Body: Independent panel/court/commission with authority to order remedies.
Appeal Path: Limited and time-bounded to prevent stalling.
Publication Policy: Decisions published with reasoning (privacy-aware).

Timelines (Recommended)

Timelines must be defined and enforced.

Example Template:

T0 (Incident): Event occurs.
T0 + 24–48h: Complaint filed and acknowledged.
T0 + 72h: Preliminary assessment and interim measures (if needed).
T0 + 7–14d: Final adjudication for most cases.
T0 + 14–21d: Appeal window (only for defined grounds).
Final Certification Deadline: Fixed date after which results are certified, subject to defined exceptions.

The goal is not speed alone; it is preventing disputes from becoming permanent political weapons.

Evidence Standards and Chain-of-Custody

Define:

Admissible evidence types (observer reports, logs, records, verified imagery, testimony).
Chain-of-custody requirements for ballots/records.
How digital evidence is authenticated (hashing, logs, signed attestations).
Protections for witnesses and whistleblowers.

Remedies (Must Be Pre-Committed)

Dispute systems fail when remedies are unclear. Define remedies such as:

Corrective actions: Reopen registration window, reinstate voters.
Recounts: Full or partial under defined triggers.
Invalidation: Of compromised precinct results.
Reruns: In specified locations.
Sanctions: For obstruction or intimidation (procedural consequences, not just rhetoric).
Escalation: To Freeze governance mechanisms if violence/disruption is involved.

Integration with Observation and Monitoring

Observer findings should have standing to trigger investigations.
Coercion and safety incidents must be linked to Freeze monitoring and escalation channels.
Systematic obstruction should be treated as a high-severity integrity breach.

See:

Certification: How the Vote Ends

Define a certification protocol:

Who certifies: (Commission + Observers + Audit authority).
What documents are required: (Audit report, observer report, dispute summary).
What happens if criteria are not met: (Pause, rerun parts, or fallback mechanism).