General Context: Promotion of Free and Fair Elections

Globalization and advances in information technology have made it easier to observe elections. The rise of the media has made the entire world aware of questionable elections and has created a universal understanding of free and fair elections. New communications tools (e.g. the Internet, international television networks), trade and travel have enabled people in non democratic countries to learn about other political systems. Democracy has become a universal norm, and the principles of free and fair elections have become an international goal.

With moves toward democratization, elections have become an essential means of political participation for citizens. The downside is that the growing importance of elections has given rise to increasingly sophisticated and diversified electoral fraud. Some countries fight electoral fraud effectively; others are less successful. This is why the international community helps promote free and fair elections around the world.

A number of international organizations provide electoral assistance in many forms, including coordination of international observers and support for them, technical assistance and organization, holding of elections, and supervision and verification of the electoral process. The most important of these organizations are the United Nations (UN), the Commonwealth, the Organization of American States (OAS), the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES), and the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA).

International election observation and technical assistance efforts have played a significant role in drawing international attention to the importance of electoral integrity. They have also contributed to increasing transparency and strengthening democratic norms.

Local Context: Social and Political Features

Even though the concept of free and fair elections has become an international norm, measures adopted to maintain electoral integrity need to be adapted to local conditions. What can be a serious problem requiring protective measures in one country might be insignificant in another and therefore not require the same degree of attention or protection. In particular, the type of governance and political culture will affect the nature and scope of election integrity issues, along with the effectiveness of the different measures for establishing and ensuring integrity.

• Type of governance

Each country has its own form of governance, shaped by its political, economic and cultural history. In a country with a history of governance based on the rule of law, where public officials are held accountable and procedures are transparent, the environment is usually conducive to the holding of free and fair elections. Breaches of electoral law can easily be identified and rectified, while criminal acts can be prosecuted through a working legal system.

In a country struggling with governance and rule of law issues, maintaining election integrity is much more difficult. The election management body and the political system will need to prove their institutional and administrative credibility. Keeping election policy and administration neutral, professional and transparent can be difficult and might require additional mechanisms, such as international technical assistance or the presence of long-term international observers. In the absence of credible legal and judicial systems, the election management body itself might have to be empowered to rule on complaints about the conduct of election officials, parties, candidates and others.

• Political culture

The political culture of a country can affect public perception of the electoral process and of what constitutes an integrity problem. Universal standards have been identified for free and fair elections, but the political culture can affect how the standards are interpreted. For example, ethical behaviour is a part of integrity, yet the definition of what is ethical may vary. In countries with deep social and political divisions, it may be difficult to agree on a national standard for integrity. This is why it is important to adopt an electoral policy suited to the political culture of the country when creating an electoral system. Ensuring election integrity is much easier when there is a national or general consensus on the rules of the game and the value of integrity.

The political culture also has an impact on the nature and intensity of citizen participation. Some countries have a history of mass action, such as demonstrations, requiring physical security measures to maintain integrity during campaign events or voting. In other countries public participation is peaceful, but the voter turnout is so low that it may cast doubts on the integrity of the election. In each case, the measures required to encourage and safeguard healthy participation need to be adjusted to fit the cultural circumstances.

Special Considerations in Countries in Transition

Special considerations are necessary in developing countries and countries undergoing a transition from authoritarian rule to a democratic system. In addition to security problems and a lack of trust connected with the transition, these countries often lack funds and require international assistance. Elections held under a peace agreement involve particular problems in maintaining integrity. Ensuring a transparent and honest electoral process in such circumstances can be more difficult than in countries where democracy has strong roots. However, several countries saw successful democratic transitions in the 1990s. A wave of democratization in Africa led to elections in Benin, Ghana, Mali, Mauritius and Senegal that observers pronounced free and fair. In Asia, Indonesia was a notable instance of a successful transition. In Latin America, Mexico instituted a major reform that laid the foundations for election integrity. East European countries adopted democratic practices in their transition from communism.

• Lack of funding and dependence on foreign aid

Some countries do not have sufficient resources to administer an election without foreign aid, and the result is that they may become dependent on this assistance. The percentage of donor funding for elections may vary according to the needs of the country and the degree of donor interest. A high percentage of foreign election funding, coupled with donor-imposed conditions on the use of the funds, may raise concerns about the integrity of the election process within a country.

Foreign donor funding may bring uncertainty, which can harm the integrity of the process. Even if donors pledge to cover the estimated costs, unexpected expenses can lead to shortfalls. Donor funding is also dependent on the funding cycles and regulations of each donor country. Funds may arrive late, forcing the electoral management body to scramble to cover start up and registration costs. If there are conditions that are not met, donor funds might never materialize.

• Possibility of conflict between stakeholders

The international community provides technical assistance to electoral management bodies in developing countries and countries in transition. Technical assistance plays a valuable role in helping inexperienced electoral officials understand what is required to maintain election integrity and transparency, and to ensure viable electoral systems. But if the different assistance groups disagree over procedures or choices to be made, technical assistance could create problems for new electoral administrators, fuelling conflicts and casting doubt on election integrity.

• Security

Security environment issues are another factor that can undermine election integrity. In developing countries and societies experiencing post-transition conflicts, physical safety can become a serious concern. Domestic observers who attempt independent monitoring may be threatened or, in extreme cases, injured or killed. In such cases, the presence of international observers may ensure greater safety for domestic observers.

• Lack of trust

Lack of trust is a major factor in countries where citizens have little confidence in government institutions or do not believe that political parties will follow the rules. The degree of distrust must be taken into account to determine what administrative and institutional structures are required for the elections, and what additional safeguards will be needed to protect the integrity of the process.

• Problems in keeping the peace

Elections held under a peace agreement usually follow a war and are part of the peace and reconciliation process. International assistance for the peace process is often generous. [1] If peacekeeping forces are required to maintain election integrity, other problems could arise. For example:

-  The electoral timetable, or at least the election date, is usually set in the peace accord after lengthy political negotiations. However, it is based on political demands rather than technical concerns, and it often specifies an unrealistically short time frame for election preparations.

-  In polarized societies, technical issues can turn into political standoffs, in some cases even freezing the process for months at a time.

-  Insecurity, including intimidation and human rights violations, discourages participation by voters and candidates. It also undermines electoral administration.

-  Displaced populations may not have time to return home to register and vote.

-  The second election after a transition can present challenges: international peacekeeping forces may have been withdrawn or scaled down, while insecurity and intimidation persist.

NOTES

[1] For more information, see Postconflict Elections, Democratization, and International Assistance, Kumar, Krishna, ed., Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998.