Positively, the draft Code provides more details on complaints and appeals procedures than the current Code. Different types of complaints are linked with the bodies to which these complaints may be channelled. This partly addresses concerns regarding the clarity of avenues for timely resolution of election-related complaints by the election administration and the courts, previously raised in the ODIHR reports. Article 99 of the draft Code describes how potential conflicts of jurisdictions could be solved, prioritising judicial dispute resolution. This is a step in the right direction, but it should be reminded that, according to the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters, “[n]either the appellants nor the authorities should be able to choose the appeal body”. While these provisions provide greater clarity for electoral dispute resolution, it is important to note that some elements of electoral dispute resolution are also regulated by administrative, civil and criminal legislation. ODIHR and the Venice Commission reiterate that the legislative framework for electoral dispute resolution should be consistent and coherent. When amendments are made to the electoral legislation, respective provisions of other legal acts should be harmonised with it.