In the 2016 Paunović and Milivojević case, the ECtHR found that the complainant had no effective remedy against breaches of the Election of Members of Parliament Act. In that case, both the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant’s complaints without examining their merits because they found that they lacked jurisdiction to rule on the validity of a private law contract between the candidate and his party. The Venice Commission and ODIHR emphasise that the complaints and appeals system must provide an effective remedy to any breach of electoral law, including those concerning the outcome of the elections and the MP’s mandate. The jurisdiction of the relevant courts should include all types of interference with an MP’s mandate, irrespective of its legal basis and classification.