Electoral management is fundamental and has to be taken into account to design a legal framework. The more successful an electoral management can be, the more successful the election as a whole becomes. To achieve an efficient and efficacious electoral management some requirements have to be fulfilled as follows: first, electoral legislation has to detail every single phase, stage, activity, and procedure in order to prevent any mistake or illegality; secondly, electoral authorities have to be designed according to the country’s or the region’s political and social particularities.  Such authorities must have institutional powers to perform their duties under the general principles ruling electoral processes: certainty, legality, independence, impartiality, and objectivity. 

The efficient and efficacious performance of electoral management can be seen as a fundamental component of any election. 

Bearing this in mind, the ideal requirements that electoral authorities have to meet are further discussed under the title Electoral Organization and can be summed up as follows:

• A professional and independent performance in respect to the political party in power.  They have to treat all the contenders in an impartial way. 
• Neutrality has to be recognized as one of its distinctive features by every single contender.
• Their performance has to be efficacious and they must be provided with as much material resources as needed to fulfill their duties.  
• Their performance has to be closely related to the legal framework ruling their existence.  Electoral managers have to be scrutinized by permanent and independent examiners, which can be judicial. 

Usually, trust is linked to power.  Therefore, the lower the public confidence on public institutions, the stronger electoral authorities become.  Such a situation is not the case for consolidated democratic federations.  As a matter of fact, electoral managers can be grouped as follows:

• There are some countries in which electoral management is vested in ordinary executives (national or local). In such cases, regular review systems are not modified for ordinary executives are usually seen as trustworthy, neutral, and impartial. 
• There are some countries in which electoral boards are created to review the electoral management carried out by the Executive Branch of Government.  Such boards are usually not empowered to manage electoral processes.  
• There are some countries in which specific electoral divisions within a traditional branch of government are empowered to organize elections.
• There are some countries in which the level of confidence is so low that autonomous electoral authorities are set down in the Constitution.  Such authorities not only replace the governmental management of elections, but also prevent any kind of external influence by any other governmental organization.  Actually they can be seen as a kind of fourth branch of government. The creation of autonomous electoral authorities can be seen as an important step towards the construction of an independent and impartial electoral management trusted by voters and political parties. 

The effectiveness and trustworthiness of an autonomous electoral authority is based not only on the existence of sound finances, but on the existence of impartial and independent employees working for it.  

The management of democratic elections requires independent and non-partisan electoral authorities, which are free from any kind of political bias.  This a fundamental issue, especially for countries in which a democratic regime is not still consolidated. There electoral managers takes and executes important decisions which can affect the electoral results.  Therefore, specific political conditions have to be taken into account to determine who is going to be in charge of electoral management and what kind of institution will be empowered to do so. 

Such legislative decisions have to determine both the size and the integration of electoral authorities.  Such legislative decisions have to determine who will be appointed and how the appointments and the firings from such appointments will be done. All such topics determine the performance of electoral authorities. The integration of electoral authorities has to take into account considerations as follows:

Structure

The managerial structure has to include a higher electoral agency whether central or national.  There can be some inferior agencies at state or regional level.  According to the extension of electoral jurisdiction and to the extension of communications systems there can even be district electoral agencies. Intermediate electoral agencies can exist as long as the respective electoral system, the geographical situation and the demographic density of the country make it possible.  Anyway, it is convenient to prevent a widespread creation of trivial electoral agencies.  Trivial and unnecessary electoral agencies have a straightforward effect: they do increase electoral spending. 

The electoral structure is organized around voting points.  Voting points are the core of any electoral structure. A fundamental task for the legal framework is to define in a precise and clear way who will integrate the voting points, and how they relate to headquarters and to other electoral authorities. The legal framework also has to set down what kind of relations voting points will have with governmental authorities on election-day. 

Powers and accountability

Electoral authorities’ powers and accountability has to be legislated in a clear way.  Such legislation should include topics as follows: structure and composition; how legal duties will be accomplished; how many officers are needed to open electoral authorities for business; voting procedures; public relations; due process considerations regulating the execution of legal powers.

Composition requirements

As long as it is possible it is recommended to appoint professionals who know the legal framework ruling the election’s management.  Usually it is required that at least some of the individuals integrating electoral authorities are legal professionals.  Some problems affecting inferior electoral authorities can be derived from such a reasonable requirement.  Electoral authorities integrated by political parties’ representatives can also produce some setbacks.  Both the independence and the impartiality of electoral authorities integrated by officials or judges appointed by the ruling party can be jeopardized. A reasonable solution can be found in those cases in which political parties are empowered to express their opinions before the electoral authorities, with no power to play a role in solving electoral issues whatsoever. 

The appointment of honorable political agents such as non governmental organizations and members of the Judicial Branch of Government to occupy electoral Offices, are usually a good option. 

Terms

Electoral authorities have to be permanent. In some countries they are open for business during a period of time.  However their permanent work is necessary when they are in charge of the voter’s registrar.  In such cases, the permanent activities of electoral authorities have to be legislated. A voters’ registrar has to be up and running for every single election.  Usually inferior electoral authorities, as those in charge of small electoral territories or those in charge of voting points are not permanent, they are open at the beginning of electoral periods and are shut down once the final results have been validated. 

Electoral organizations should better be partially renewed.  It is not very wise to renew electoral authorities once and for all every single time.  As a matter of fact, experience can helps us to raise the institutions’ productivity.    All the procedures and fundamentals supporting appointments and impeachments have to be legislated in order to immunize members of electoral authorities against any sort of political pressure. The electoral officials’ wages must not be cover by the government. Some countries grant immunity to electoral officials to perform their duties. 

Funding

Electoral authorities have to be inaugurated and composed before the election takes place under the law.  Besides, they have to be provided with an adequate funding to perform their duties.  Legal frameworks have to include clear and objective rules on how permanent activities of electoral authorities will be funded, in order to prevent budget to become a political tool which can be drawn by a Parliament, political parties or the Government against electoral authorities. 

Powers and Duties

Electoral authorities’ power and duties have to be legislated in a clear way. A clear electoral legislation will also contribute to execute a more efficacious supervision over electoral authorities. 

Electoral authorities have to be independent, transparent, and impartial.  Once an electoral authority has been integrated, it has to perform its duties and execute its powers in an impartial way.  Every legal framework aims at guiding electoral authorities on how they have to organize a free and fair election.  In doing so, electoral authorities have to perform their duties in an impartial and efficient way. 

Among the fundamental features of an electoral authorities, some can be listed as follows: a) Independence and Impartiality;  b) Efficiency and Effectiveness; c) Professionalism, Legality, and Objectivity; and d) Clarity.

Bearing this in mind, it is important to notice that when an electoral system finds itself in a consolidated stage, it is possible to answer some questions which can be arisen from the existence of autonomous organism, and which can be related to the available funds. 

Of course, to select an agency independent from traditional powers is the right move for countries going through a political transition.  However, such a selection can raise some questions in the long run.  The more successful the democratic transition can be, the less important en independent electoral authority becomes.  This is particular true in the case of countries in which a real system of checks and balances has been consolidated. Checks and balances represent the existence of rule of law and the strengthening of public confidence towards public agencies.  Besides, to keep an independent electoral authority under such circumstances can be very expensive.  

As a matter of fact, electoral authorities tend to be expensive institutions.  Actually they can be seen as representing a disproportionate expense within the general framework of public services offered to taxpayers. In some countries, however, democracy is considered to be very valuable and the public funds used to pay for electoral institutions, seem to be justified. Usually successful elections are not reviewed from financial points of view. This is particularly true for those cases in which electoral expenses have been funded through international cooperation.  However, as soon as electoral processes become more and more successful, democratic regimes become more and more consolidated and international funds become more and more scarce, financial considerations are located in a central spot. Under such conditions democratizing countries should do well asking themselves whether electoral expenses are exaggerated or not.