Election disputes are an important part of electoral governance. Good electoral governance and electoral integrity can be achieved if there is an election dispute resolution mechanism that meets the standards of the electoral justice system. There are three aspects of the electoral justice system that must be fulfilled in order for good electoral governance, namely the availability of effective dispute prevention mechanisms, the availability of complaint handling mechanisms, and election complaints which result in effective, corrective, and punitive actions, the availability of cheap, and effective, meaningful, and alternative dispute resolution mechanism. This research explains the three aspects of electoral justice system used in completing disputes over regional elections in districts / cities throughout the province of Central Java. The research method used is qualitative method with in-depth interviews to the perpetrators, especially members of Bawaslu and Pan- waslu who served as election dispute settlement body. Sampling method used is snowball method. These research findings are 1) the legal framework governing the mechanism of election dispute resolution has not provided a fair mechanism to guarantee and meets the standards of electoral justice. 2) The affectivity and ability of district/city of Panwaslu to become arbitrators in dispute resolution is highly dependent on the personal qualities of each member, such as the level of edu- cation, experience, and skills in managing the dispute resolution forums as well as the leadership capacity in the dispute resolutions. 3) Technically, the level of the skills of administrative staff in decisions making is the highest challenge for Panwaslu because of the lack quality of administra- tive training to support the dispute settlement administration. An alternative method of the dis- pute settlement is not used widely due to inadequate legal framework for the election supervisors.