An important part of the EMB’s planning is assessing the needs for procurement of election materials, and doing so in a timely and cost-effective manner. The time required for procurement can vary widely depending on factors such as the source of supplies and mode of shipment, but it is generally longer than most people imagine.

EMB procurement policies differ widely from country to country. Governmental and Mixed Model EMBs are often bound by government procurement guidelines and practices. Independent Model EMBs may be bound by governmental procurement requirements (such as those targeted at enhancing probity and effectiveness in procurement), or they may be able to determine some or all of their procurement policies and procedures. A few governmental and mixed model EMBs may in general have to follow government procurement procedures, but may have special dispensations for urgent purchases.

Some EMBs have to use a generic government or public-sector purchasing agency for all procurement. In some circumstances, as in EU member countries, the complexity of purchasing rules means it is more effective for the EMB to do this than to attempt to take on this task internally. In other countries where the EMB must use a government-wide purchasing agency, the EMB may obtain post-purchase approval of expenses or the exemption of some purchases from purchasing agency rules. However, this practice is generally regarded as incompatible with the principles of good governance and efficiency.

Using government–wide purchasing agencies may not be effective for EMB procurement, as many government bureaucracies are not able to work to the very short and strict time lines that generally confront EMBs for acquiring election goods and services. As a result, EMBs in some countries may be able to set up their own internal purchasing boards to manage their procurement independently. If an EMB has its own purchasing board, its control over procurement decisions and timing is increased, but accountability for all procurement now rests with the EMB.

Any public or government criticism about the probity or suitability of EMB procurement decisions can very quickly reflect on the overall credibility of the EMB. EMBs need to ensure that their purchasing processes are:

• fully transparent;
• conducted to the highest standards of probity;
• show no favouritism;
• genuinely competitive;
• objective; and
• free from any taint of corruption.

Before assigning control of procurement to an EMB, there needs to be certainty that the EMB has sufficient resources, skills, and control systems in place, including an enforceable code of conduct and conflict of interest provisions.

Robust checks and review procedures are required for major procurement decisions, as are control measures that are rigorous enough to withstand the pressures of any fast-tracked purchasing required due to late operational decisions or delayed release of funding. The EMB may find that its procurement procedures can be streamlined with no loss of integrity if it sets up pre-qualification procedures which identify earlier in the electoral cycle those suppliers which meet the EMB’s qualifications for supplying specific goods or services, and who are invited to tender for these before an electoral event. It is good practice to require bidders for contracts to accept the EMB Code of Conduct.

EMBs also need to ensure that their equipment purchases, especially in high technology areas, are driven by the needs of the EMB, and not those of suppliers to shift outmoded stock, field test new products, or sell expensive equipment that is over-specified for the task or which may not be maintainable in the absence of an expensive maintenance contract with the original supplier. Finding truly independent advice on IT systems can be very difficult, and EMB members and staff may not have the technical knowledge to analyse seemingly appropriate vendor proposals. EMBs have to be clear in their operational objectives about the outcomes that are expected of IT and other equipment or systems purchases, and rigorously and independently test vendor proposals far in advance of the next electoral event to ensure that they can meet these.