General
Context: Promotion of Free and Fair Elections
Globalization and advances in information technology have made it easier to propagate information about and observe elections. Largely through the media, the entire world has become aware of questionable elections and this has created a near-universal desire for free and fair elections. New communications tools, trade and travel have enabled people in non-democratic countries to learn about democratic or transitional political systems. The desire for genuinely and credibly elected leadership can be heard all over the world. The General Assembly of the United Nations has reaffirmed on numerous occasions that “democracy is a universal value based on the freely expressed will of the people” and that “while democracies share common features, there is no single model of democracy and that democracy does not belong to any country or region.”[1]
With the movement toward democratization, elections have become an essential means of political participation for citizens. Meanwhile, however, the growing importance of elections has given rise to increasingly sophisticated and diversified forms of electoral fraud. Some countries have combated electoral fraud effectively, while others have been less successful. The international community supports elections around the world to assist the less successful countries in managing fraud.
International organizations provide electoral assistance in many forms, including coordination of international observers, [2]
technical assistance and support, resource mobilization, actual conduct of elections in some instances, and supervision and verification (certification) of the electoral process.[3] The most important of these organizations are the United Nations (UN) including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS), the Commonwealth, the Organization of American States (OAS), the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) through its Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) and the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA). National donor agencies also support similar activities through their implementing partners, such as the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES) and The Carter Center (TCC).
International election observation and technical assistance efforts have played a significant role in drawing international attention to issues of electoral integrity. They have also contributed to elevating international election standards and best practices, increasing transparency and promoting accountability.
National Social and Political Features
Measures to maintain the integrity of elections should be adapted to local conditions. What can be a serious problem in one country might be insignificant in another and therefore not require the same degree of attention or protective measures. In particular, the system of governance, political culture and popular attitudes will affect the nature and scope of election integrity issues, along with the effectiveness of the different measures for addressing them.
• System of governance
Each country has its own form of governance, shaped by its political, economic and cultural history. In countries with an established history of rule of law, where procedures are transparent and public officials held accountable, the environment is generally conducive to holding genuine and credible elections. Violations of electoral law and procedures can be identified and rectified, and criminal acts prosecuted. In countries struggling with governance and suffering from weak rule of law, maintaining election integrity is much more difficult. The election management body and the political system have to demonstrate their institutional and administrative capacity and credibility. Ensuring election policy and administration are neutral, professional and transparent can be difficult and require additional measures. In the absence of credible legal and judicial systems, the election management body itself may have to rule on complaints about the conduct of election officials, parties, candidates and others.
• Political culture
The political culture of a country can also affect public attitudes toward the electoral process and what constitutes integrity problems. Various universal standards have been identified for democratic elections, but these need to be applied and interpreted in context, and political culture can affect how this is done. For example, ethical behaviour by election participants is an important part of electoral integrity more broadly, yet the definition of what types of action by participants are permissible may vary.
In countries with deep social and political divisions, it may be difficult to agree on a national standard for integrity. 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 mainly tranquil, but voter turnout may be so low as to cast doubt 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.
Countries in Transition: Special Considerations
Special considerations are often applied 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 considerable international assistance.[4]
The wave receded somewhat in the 2000s with problematic elections in Nigeria, Kenya and Cote d’Ivoire.
Also during the 1990s, in Asia, Indonesia was a notable instance of a successful transition to democratic governance. In Latin America, Mexico instituted a major reform that laid the foundations for electoral integrity. Meanwhile, many Eastern European countries continued to adopt democratic governance practices as they transitioned from Socialism.
Post-conflict elections held under a comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) 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. These countries lack a tradition of democracy and elections, are usually still working to maintain stability, and have actors with divergent interests.
• Lack of funding and dependence on foreign aid
Some countries do not have sufficient resources to administer an election without foreign aid and they may become dependent on this assistance. The percentage of international donor funding for elections varies according to the needs of the country and the degree of donor interest. A high level of foreign election assistance, coupled with donor-imposed restrictions on the use of the funds, may raise suspicions about donors’ motivations as well as concerns about the integrity of the electoral process.
Foreign funding may also bring uncertainty into electoral budgeting and programming, which can harm the integrity of the process. Even if donors pledge to cover 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 ongoing expenses. Furthermore, if conditionalities are not met, donor funds might never materialize.
• Possibility of conflict between stakeholders
The international community provides technical assistance to electoral management bodies (EMBs) 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 to ensure viable electoral processes. But if the different donors or contributors disagree over substantive or procedural matters, reliance on international assistance can create institutional conflict and programmatic uncertainty.
• Security
Security 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. Polling officials and workers can be subject to threats or violence by those seeking to influence the voting. National independent observers are subject to similar threats or violence. In such cases, the presence of international observers is particularly valuable and even 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 mistrust must be taken into account to determine what administrative and institutional structures are required for the elections, and what additional safeguards needed to protect the integrity of the process.
• Problems maintaining peace
Elections held under a peace agreement are an essential part of the peace and reconciliation process and key to restoring the legitimacy of national institutions. International assistance for the peace process is often generous. 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 may be based on political demands rather than technical considerations, and if so it can specify an unrealistically short time frame for election preparations.
- In polarized societies, technical issues can turn into political standoffs, in some cases delaying 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 since election officials and workers may have legitimate concerns for their personal safety.
- Displaced people may not have the time or ability to return to their home areas to register and vote.
- The second election after a transition can also present challenges, since international peacekeeping forces may have been withdrawn or reduced, even though a level of insecurity and intimidation persists.
[1] UN General Assembly resolution 66/163 of 19 December 2011, preambular
paragraphs 1 and 2.
[2] See,
e.g., UN Focal Point for Electoral Assistance, Electoral Assistance Division,
Department of Political and Security Council Affairs, Policy Directive: UN Support to International Election Observers, Ref.
FP/03/2012 (29 June 2012).
[3] See,
e.g., UN Focal Point for Electoral Assistance, Electoral Assistance Division,
Department of Political and Security Council Affairs, Policy Directive: Principles and Types of Electoral Assistance, Ref.
FP/01/2012 (11 May 2012).
[4] See Postconflict Elections, Democratization, and
International Assistance, Kumar, Krishna, ed., Boulder, Colorado:
Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998.
