integrated work of the core team, LTOs, and STOs; it goes into further depth than the preliminary statement, thus reflecting the extent to which the electoral process was carried out in a manner that enjoyed the confidence of the candidates and the electorate, as well as the degree to which political will was demonstrated by the authorities to conduct an election in line with OSCE commitments.88 The ODIHR also offers a set of recommendations to align the election process more closely with OSCE commitments. H. Co-operation with partners 142. The early legacy of parallel press conferences, competing for media attention, and delivering diverging assessments on the ground has long been overcome. This situation had enabled national authorities to engage in forum-shopping and play observation bodies against each other in order to distract from electoral shortcomings. The ODIHR has therefore come to value its co-operation with parliamentary assemblies and has embraced the tasks assigned by the 1994 Budapest Summit Document: namely, to “consult all relevant organizations in order to develop a framework for coordination in this field [of elections]”.89 It has built a practical framework for co-operation with other international bodies such as the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the European Parliament (EP) and, on occasion, the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA), as well as with the Council of Europe’s Congress for Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE). As a matter of regular practice, the ODIHR maintains contacts with CIS observers with a view to exchanging preliminary findings. The OSCE can look back on the successful establishment of a framework of co-operation with those parliamentary assemblies that fully subscribe to the ODIHR election observation methodology as elaborated in 1996.90 143. Parliamentary bodies have an important role to play in co-operating with the ODIHR to deliver its mandate through their regular participation in the overall Election Day observation. The ODIHR values the specific experience brought by elected parliamentarians and their contribution to the delivery of preliminary findings. The ODIHR formulates the presentation of the findings in close co-operation with the OSCE PA, and, should they participate, with the PACE, the EP and on occasion the NATO PA and the CLRAE.91 In accordance with the 1997 Co-operation Agreement, the OSCE Chairman-in-Office regularly appoints the President of the OSCE PA or another high-level OSCE PA representative as Special Coordinator to lead the short-term OSCE observers and to deliver the preliminary statement in conjunction with other appropriate officials, including the head of the ODIHR EOM.92 88  The final report comprehensively describes the political context; legislative framework; the performance of the election administration; voter and candidate registration, the election campaign; the media; the voting, counting, and tabulation processes; the complaints and appeals process; and the announcement of the results. 89  Decision VIII, para. 12. 90  The ODIHR has always welcomed contacts between ODIHR EOMs and other organizations in the field. Although others have, on occasion, expressed aspirations to develop their election observation practice in line with ODIHR methodology, differences in method and approach still seem to prevent closer co-operation, as evidenced by different observation conclusions and the interpretation of the same facts in different ways. See note 70 of this report. 91  The participation of these international parliamentary bodies depends on acceptance of an invitation by the authorities of the country in question. 92  The 1997 Co-operation Agreement was signed by the OSCE Chairman-in-Office and the President of the OSCE PA. 46 Common Responsibility: Commitments and Implementation