We start with the financial autonomy of the electoral management body, more specifically whether the legislature determines its budget and/or control its expenditures. It could be argued that electoral management bodies need financial autonomy from legislatures in order to maintain their full independence from the parties and government.
As a matter of fact, the legislature votes the budget to be allocated to these agencies in two thirds (69%) of the cases but it actually scrutinizes their spending in only one third (34%) of all the countries. There is thus more autonomy in the concrete operational side than at the planning stage. Surprisingly it is in Europe that financial autonomy is weakest; the budget of the electoral management body is voted by the legislature in 36 (84%) of the 43 European countries where information is available, and expenditures are controlled by legislators in 20 countries (54%). There is only a weak relationship between the level of democracy and the degree of financial autonomy, and it applies only with respect to the control of expenditures. Many democratic countries do not find it necessary to bestow electoral agencies with full fiscal independence. But at the same time, legislatures in former French and British colonies are less prone to oversee the revenues and expenditures of electoral management bodies. There may be a tension between two
“democratic” principles. On the one hand, all public organizations should be scrutinized by the representatives of the people; on the other hand, politicians should have no leverage on the organization that may determine their future.
A second issue concerns the term of the members of the electoral management body. In most cases (51%) the members are nominated for a fixed term, sometimes (25%) the period is left unspecified, and there are 26 countries (14%) where they last only for one election (there are in addition 20 (11%) “other”, meaning until retirement, permanency, a minimum term defined, but also cases where the information is not detailed enough).
We are particularly interested in those 26 countries where the members are nominated for only one election. The concern here is that the members may feel that they have to please the eventual winner in order to be renominated for the next election. There is the possibility that the members of such bodies will not feel completely independent. Indeed, the two regions where such rules prevail are precisely those where democracy is weaker, that is, Africa and the Middle East. And indeed there is a significant negative correlation between the degree of democracy and the presence of agencies in which the members are
nominated for one single election (we also find a positive correlation with French colony).
A final question is whether the national electoral body is in charge of all the elections that take place under the territory. This is the case most of the time. There are only 41 countries (23%) where the national agency takes care of only national elections, and leaves other institutions with the task of administering regional or provincial elections. Such specialization is particularly rare in Africa and more generally in poorer countries and is more popular among former British colonies. It is neither more nor less frequent in more democratic countries.
It is striking to observe that:
- Many democracies have themselves shown relatively little concern for the full financial autonomy of these bodies, as is testified by the absence of any correlation between the degree of democracy and independence from legislative oversight of their budget.
- Democratic countries have been more consistent in avoiding the use of very short mandates for the members of these bodies. If there is any example setting here it could be the United Kingdom, since electoral agencies seem to enjoy greater independence in former British colonies.
The impact of degree of democracy, colonial heritage and economic development on electoral management rules
| ELECTORAL MANAGEMENT |
Degree of democracy |
Former French colony |
Former British colony |
Former Spanish colony |
Economic development |
Budget determined by legislatures
|
-
|
less likely
|
less likely
|
-
|
-
|
Expenditures controlled by legislatures
|
less likely in more democratic countries
|
less likely |
less likely |
-
|
-
|
| Members nominated for one election only |
less likely in more democratic countries |
more likely |
- |
-
|
-
|
In charge of national elections only
|
-
|
-
|
more likely
|
-
|
more likely in wealthier countries
|
Click here for the next chapter "Boundary Delimitation"
