Article 137 of the draft law substitutes the principle of positive silence with regard to complaints that are not acted on by the relevant election body as provided by Article 109 of the current law and obliges the CEC to review complaints unresolved by MECs. However, the draft law is silent about how the CEC triggers such review under the rule of Article 137, which needs to be addressed to ensure legal certainty and efficiency of the proposed legal remedy. Furthermore, while the right to object against inactions of polling boards and MECs is prescribed in Article 136, the draft law does not stipulate the consequences of the failure of the CEC to review complaints, which needs to be amended. Consideration could also be given to how the 72-hour deadline in Article 135 of the draft law for lodging complaints against decisions and actions is to be calculated for inaction. In choosing the legal avenues, it should be ensured that the principle of expeditious procedures stipulated in the draft law for election dispute resolution is respected and no additional administrative burden imposed on the applicants in pursuit of restoration of their rights. In conformity with the Code of good practice in electoral matters, “[t]he procedure [for lodging as well as for adjudicating electoral disputes] must be simple and devoid of formalism, in particular concerning the admissibility of appeals.” The provisions of the draft law dealing with complaints that are not acted on would benefit from review to address these shortcomings, i.e. by ensuring election dispute resolution mechanisms devoid of formalism.