The Concept
There is an ongoing debate over a single, universal definition of electoral integrity. It is not (yet) clear whether it could serve
as a comprehensive and independent concept, an overarching quality standard,
or as a synonym for a “good election”. This is an active conversation in scholarly and policy circles over the proper definition and application of the term. A
major contribution to the discussion is the Report of the Global Commission on Elections,
Democracy and Security, Deepening
Democracy: A Strategy for Improving the Integrity of Elections Worldwide (September 2012). This report defines electoral integrity as "any election that is based on the democratic principles of universal suffrage and political equality as reflected in international standards and agreements, and is professional, impartial, and transparent in its preparation and administration throughout the electoral cycle. [1]
Without electoral integrity, leaders and officials lack accountability to the public, confidence in the election results is weak, and the government lacks necessary legitimacy. Electoral integrity allows for peaceful resolution of conflict, open dialogue, debate, and information sharing amongst leaders and the public. The Commission acknowledges that “at its root, electoral integrity is a political problem”, not just a technical problem. Integrity depends on public confidence in electoral and political processes. It is not enough to reform institutions; citizens need to be convinced that changes are real and deserve their confidence. Inclusiveness, transparency, and accountability are all fundamental to developing that confidence (p. 16).” To ensure that elections have integrity, other factors outside of the electoral institutions themselves need to be taken into account and strengthened. Election officials, judges, and courts must have independence that is respected by politicians.
In defining the notion of an
“election with integrity”, the Commission’s report takes everyday meanings as a
point of departure. Thus, it notes that integrity refers to “incorruptibility
or a firm adherence to a code of moral values”, suggesting that in the context
of elections it means an adherence to democratic principles. The term also generally
refers to “soundness or an unimpaired condition”, so that to speak about an
election with integrity means referring to an election “conducted competently
and professionally”. Finally, according to the report, integrity also refers to
“completeness or the state of being complete”, which, in connection with
elections, suggests that “soundness and ethical practice must persist over the
course of an entire electoral cycle, not just on election day itself.” The
report therefore defines an election with integrity “as any election that is
based on the democratic principles of universal suffrage and political equality
as reflected in international standards and agreements, and is professional,
impartial, and transparent in its preparation and administration throughout the
electoral cycle”.[2]
The Commission identified five major challenges to be overcome in
order to conduct elections with
integrity:
- “[B]uilding the rule of law to substantiate
claims to human rights and electoral justice;
- “[B]ulding professional, competent
electoral management bodies (EMBs) with full independence of action to
administer elections that are transparent and merit public confidence;
- “[C]reating institutions and norms of
multiparty competition and division of power that bolster democracy as a
mutual security system among political contenders;
- “[R]emoving barriers – legal,
administrative, political, economic, and social – to universal and equal
political participation; and
- “[R]egulating uncontrolled, undisclosed and
opaque political finance.”
The emphasis on creating confidence in elections – in addition to pursuing adherence to international standards – is also reflected in reports by the United Nations, which have emphasized the role of elections in bringing about sustainable peace: “The true measure of an election is whether it engenders broad public confidence in the process and trust in the outcome. An election run honestly and transparently, respecting basic rights, with the effective and neutral support of State institutions and the responsible conduct of participants (leaders, candidates and voters) is most likely to achieve an accepted and peaceful outcome”. [3]
General Discussion
An election is the result of a complex process requiring the participation of a multitude of players. There are winners and losers in every election. The stakes are high, and there is a great temptation to ensure victory through illegal or ethically questionable (improper or even corrupt) means. Election results can be rigged or disrupted to predetermine who will win or lose, casting doubt on the legitimacy of the process.
Electoral integrity cannot be taken for granted. Mechanisms for promoting and maintaining integrity in every aspect of the electoral process are often established within the official bodies that administer or support the administration of elections. These mechanisms make it possible to monitor actions of the electoral administration; ensure oversight of the electoral process by other government sectors or agencies, civil society, and the media; and provide for enforcement of electoral rules and regulations through administrative or legal means.
Consistent, legitimate electoral standards and practices help detect, deter and prevent electoral improprieties and illegalities, and help ensure integrity. Legal framework generally establishes protection mechanisms and determines the institutional structure to support electoral integrity.
Oversight of the election process by political parties, the media, individual citizens, and national and international observers is another important means of protecting electoral integrity. As with checks-and-balances among administrative bodies, public oversight helps detect and respond to problems. Active oversight and supervision ensures that participants in an election process are held accountable, promotes transparency, establishes the credibility of the electoral process, and helps ensure compliance with the legal framework.
Without effective enforcement, even the best regulations are merely good intentions. Effective enforcement mechanisms ensure that anyone breaching election law and regulations is detected and made subject to sanctions in a timely, appropriate and non-partisan manner. Effective law enforcement in response to electoral violations or improprieties not only helps to maintain the integrity of the electoral process but also to deter future problems.
International promotion of democratic elections by international organizations, national donor agencies, international NGOs and other bodies through technical assistance, election observation and other means has been very successful in improving the quality and credibility of electoral processes in many countries. Integrity is sometimes seen as a concern mainly for countries in transition to democracy, but electoral developments even in established democracies have shown that issues of integrity are equally important there. Examples include debates around voter registration practices in the United States during the 2000-2008 national elections [4] and mail-in vote fraud in Great Britain in 2005. [5]
[1]
Annan, Kofi A., Zedillo, E., Ahtisaari, M., Albright, M. H., Arbour, L., Helgesen, V. & Wirajuda, H. (2012). Deepening Democracy: A Strategy for Improving the Integrity of Elections Worldwide. Stockholm: Global Commission on Elections. Democracy, and Security. http://kofiannanfoundation.org/sites/default/files/deepening_democracy_0.pdf.
[5] See Birch, Sarah, “Explaining
Confidence in the Conduct of Elections,” paper presented at the Public Opinion
and Political Parties Conference, University of Essex, U.K., Sept. 9-11, 2005;
see also U.K., Prevention of Electoral Fraud Act (Northern Ireland), 2002
Chapter 13.
