In its case law the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, the Court) holds the effective examination of election complaints as one of the essential guarantees of free and fair elections. For just over a decade, the Court has adopted an institutional approach to election disputes by interpreting Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) to contain a positive obligation for states to maintain a domestic system for effective examination of individual complaints and appeals concerning electoral rights. This contribution endeavours to provide an overview of the procedural requirements for effective examination as developed in the case law and what it means for existing election dispute resolution systems in the Member States. In particular, this contribution argues that the seminal Grand Chamber decision in Mugemangango v Belgium from 2020 will require fundamental changes in all Member States where parliament is the judge of its own elections. On a more general level, the contribution argues that this decision may herald a shiftin the Court's traditionally state deferent approach to Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 in favour of a more substantive approach to democracy.