International Election Observation

International election observation has become an important mechanism for ensuring election integrity in countries undergoing a transition to democracy or in post-conflict societies. International observation today enjoys almost universal acceptance, and helps in raising voter confidence and evaluating the legitimacy of an electoral process and outcome. [1] It has also become a learning opportunity for national electoral administrators and election participants. It promotes bilateral exchanges of knowledge and information on electoral practices, sometimes leading to lasting international relations.

Ordinarily, international observation is used when there are concerns about the freeness or fairness of an election. For international observation to be an effective detector and deterrent of integrity problems, it needs to be adapted to the type of electoral system and election it is covering. An election in a post-conflict society requires a far different kind of observation from an election in a country adopting electoral reforms.

Decision to Organize an International Observer Mission

Most international observers take on a mission by invitation. The question that arises is whether an electoral process must respect the basic criteria of a free and fair election to deserve being observed. Some organizations feel that a country must meet certain basic standards before they will decide to send an international observer mission. They take this stance because they are concerned that international observation might be perceived as conferring legitimacy on an illegitimate election. However, a country with an electoral process falling short of basic requirements may also need international observers to help it uncover illegal and dishonest practices.

Effectiveness of International Observation

To be effective in ensuring election integrity, international observation should cover the entire electoral process rather than a specific aspect, such as voting or counting of the ballots. Observers should have proper qualifications and training. One of the most common criticisms levelled at international observation is that it has become an opportunity for “electoral tourism”: observers are sometimes seen as lacking professional experience, and they arrive in a country only a few days before election day. To ensure that observer missions are effective and reliable, several conditions must be met:

• Adequate time period. Observer missions should have enough time to get organized and observe the pre-election steps (such as candidate and voter registration), and the post-election steps (counting of the ballots, consolidation of the results and enforcement of the law, if applicable).
• Adequate resources. Effective missions require enough qualified observers and the means (communications, transportation, interpreters) to help them perform their work properly.
• Qualified observers. To ensure that their work has credibility, observers should be qualified and trained.
• Comprehensive coverage. Observers should observe the electoral process as thoroughly as possible to be able to make a credible judgment. Most effective are large-scale checks covering the entire electoral process, performed nationally rather than regionally, and including all areas rather than only problem areas.

Accreditation

To be able to enter electoral sites and undertake credible observation, international observers must be accredited by the electoral management or policy-making body. Selective accreditation or no accreditation raises questions of integrity.

Security Problems

In countries with security problems, certain areas are off limits to observers if government security forces cannot guarantee their safety. How such restrictions affect election integrity and the quality of observation will depend largely on how much of the country is off limits to observers.

NOTES

[1] International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, The Future of International Electoral Observation: Lessons Learned and Recommendations, 1999.

Roles and Rules of International Observers

International observation plays an important role in safeguarding election integrity. This role may be compromised if election observers do not follow certain rules that should guide their conduct during their mission.

International Observers' Role in Maintaining Election Integrity

Serious and professional international observation can help maintain election integrity in many ways:

• Spreading good practices. Electoral administrators, politicians and national observers can learn to better understand international standards for free and fair elections by cooperating with the international observers and studying their reports. International observer missions provide electoral administrators the opportunity to exchange professional knowledge with other experts, particularly on integrity mechanisms used in other systems.
• Deterring integrity problems. The presence of international observers monitoring the election process may deter attempts to disrupt or tamper with the process. There is a public perception in most countries that international observers will be able to uncover fraud on election day. [1]
• Detecting integrity problems. Experienced observers can detect problems or questionable activities, and bring them to the attention of the election management body and the public. Early detection can allow a problem to be solved before it is too late.
• Holding a fragile process together. In situations of conflict or in countries in transition, the presence of international observers can to some extent deter the use of violence and intimidation. Their ongoing presence reassures candidates, monitors and voters that it is safe to participate. Their presence may also convince opposition politicians that competing in the election is preferable to engaging in civil disobedience or violence. [2]
• Increasing the credibility and legitimacy of the process. Through their reporting and analysis, observers can confirm or deny the legitimacy of the electoral process and its outcome. If their reports show that the election is proceeding within acceptable parameters, this finding reinforces the viability of the process and the legitimacy of the results.
• Developing the capacity of national observers. If international observation is linked with national observation, international observers can help develop and improve the capacity of local observation efforts. For example, they can provide guidance on setting up a nationwide election observation effort, conducting a parallel count and analyzing field observation reports.

Rules of Conduct for International Observers

To ensure the legitimacy of their work, international observers have to follow internationally recognized standards of conduct. Several organizations that specialize in international observation have developed codes of conduct to guide observers’ behaviour. The main requirements for ethical and professional observation3 are as follows:

• Respect the sovereignty of the host country. To maintain the credibility and effectiveness of their election observation mission, international observers must respect the laws of the host country and the rules of its election management body. They must not give instructions to electoral administrators or interfere with the internal government or the business of the country being observed. They must also respect accreditation rules during their mission.
• Objectivity. To be effective, international observation must be objective and non-partisan, and must provide balanced reports. Objectivity protects the credibility of the mission and helps maintain the integrity of the electoral process. When observers do their work, they must be very careful not to show a preference for any particular party or candidate lest they compromise the objectivity required for preparing impartial reports.
• Non-interference in the election process. International observers must not interfere with the work of electoral administrators. Their mandate is not to supervise, correct mistakes or resolve local conflicts, but to observe.
• Accuracy. The reliability of the observation and assessment depends on the accuracy with which international observers report the facts. Many of the observers do not have an opportunity to observe the entire electoral process; accordingly, they must avoid generalizing on the basis of limited observations. Observation reports should clearly indicate the basis for the information presented, and should provide support for the findings.
• Avoid conflicts of interest. Election observation should be kept strictly separate from technical assistance for elections. International observers should not be engaged in electoral assistance activities in the country where they are observing (for example, assisting electoral administrators, developing electoral legislation or training election staff). Professional and credible assessment of an electoral process requires reasonable distance from the administration being observed.

NOTES

[1] Carothers, Thomas, “The Observers Observed,” Journal of Democracy, 8(3), 1997, p. 19.

[2] Ibid., p. 20.

[3] Bjornlund, Eric C., Beyond Free and Fair: Monitoring Elections and Building Democracy, Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2004.

Standards to Evaluate Elections

The issue of common standards for evaluating elections poses many difficulties. There is a generally agreed upon set of principles that define free and fair elections, including: equal voting power for all citizens; freedom to organize for political purposes and the right to campaign; the right of access to political information; and regular holding of elections that are decided by the freely cast vote of the majority. Applying the concept of free and fair elections can be difficult in practice, however, especially in a transitional election when parts of the process may go well but other parts are seriously flawed. If one candidate is denied media access but the rest of the process goes smoothly, is the election free and fair? If the process goes well but a prominent politician boycotts the election, are the results acceptable?

Experience shows that these concerns are warranted and that it is not always easy to reach consensus. International observation reports may disagree because different observer groups use different criteria. The problem is that inconsistencies may give rise to confusion in the countries being observed. What’s more, contradictory reports undermine the credibility and purpose of observation. For example, during the 1998 election in Cambodia, the election observers’ statements sowed confusion and resentment. Many groups seemed to give a passing grade to the election, based on their observation of the voting and the count; a few others took emphatic exception, citing the unhealthy political atmosphere that had existed since long before the election. [1] Similarly, during Zimbabwe’s legislative elections in 2000 and its presidential elections in 2002, contradictory evaluations were issued by various international and national observation groups. [2] Once again, the reports were greeted with some bitterness by local participants.

This is why adoption of common observation standards is becoming essential to ensure the credibility and legitimacy of missions. The criteria [3] are as follows:

1) The observation should cover a broad range of issues:

• the administration and functioning of the election process;
• the legal and institutional framework for the process;
• the political circumstances and climate in which the election is held (extent of political rights).

2) The observation should cover the entire process from beginning to end, including:

• the pre-election period of the official and non-official campaign;
• election day and the beginning of vote counting;
• the post-election period with the announcement of the official results, dealing with complaints and the forming of the new government.

3) Coverage should be as broad as possible:

• sufficient observers stationed throughout the country;
• candidates, national observers and public officials.

NOTES

[1] Neou, Kassie and Gallup, Jeffrey C., “Conducting Cambodia’s Elections,” Journal of Democracy, 10(2), 1999.

[2] Bjornlund, Eric C., Beyond Free and Fair: Monitoring Elections and Building Democracy, Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2004.

[3] The criteria are taken from Beyond Free and Fair.