Investigating electoral corruption is not easy. Cases may be highly politicized and may implicate well-known politicians and sometimes investigation may be dangerous. Access to witnesses and suspects may be difficult, some documents may disappear or the investigation must focus on a high-ranking official or other powerful figure.

Difficulties vary with each country’s social and political context but they usually include political interference, physical safety threats, or lack of adequate legal and judicial infrastructure.

Political Interference

Investigations into electoral fraud may implicate very powerful individuals who seek protection through political interference. This may take the form of threats against investigators or prosecutors to dissuade them from pursuing their investigations. Threats include transferring investigators or prosecutors to another post; denying them professional advancement or even dismissing them from their jobs; transferring the investigation to another body; reducing government resources provided to the agency conducting the investigation or prosecution; and pressuring other agencies not to cooperate with the investigator or prosecutor.

Proper monitoring of enforcement and a transparent enforcement process can help minimize the risk of political interference.

Lack of Legal and Judicial Infrastructure

Countries undergoing transition may not have the legal and judicial infrastructure required to support an investigation of political corruption. There may be legislative gaps so investigators or prosecutors cannot demonstrate that a law has been broken even though it is evident that misconduct has occurred. They may not have the means to conduct a proper investigation because of lack of personnel, resources or institutional capabilities. The penal system may not be able to keep the suspect in custody until trial. The court system might be incapable of ensuring an expeditious and impartial trial.

For instance, in the 1998 Cambodian elections, the National Elections Committee was unsuccessful in its efforts to deal with violence and election law violations. Cases were referred to government authorities but not one was ever prosecuted because the Committee had no law enforcement powers. This was not surprising given the weak legal system, which had previously proven unable to handle human rights cases effectively.[1]

Building an effective national judicial system and the accompanying infrastructure is a long-term process. Electoral authorities can start by seeing to it that their electoral and related legislation establish a sound basis for free, fair and competitive elections.  In particular, the laws should contain adequate provisions for enforcement. In some countries in transition, where there is no history of an independent judiciary, the only way to compensate for gaps in the legal system may be by establishing an electoral commission with wide-ranging powers of the type normally exercised by judicial institutions.

Culture of Impunity

A culture of impunity may hold sway in countries that are in transition or emerging from violent conflict. Such a culture takes root particularly when the law enforcement system is weak or inoperative, when people lacking power or influence are arrested and charged while the rich, powerful and well-connected go free, and when officials have broad legal immunity.

A culture of impunity breeds corruption and unethical practices. Failure to enforce legislation weakens the integrity of the system and the rule of law. Breaking this cycle is extremely difficult; it requires a determined from civil society and strong political will.

Personal Safety

In a culture of impunity without a strong judicial system, honest investigators enquiring into corruption and criminal activities may become targets for retribution, intimidation or even violence. Protecting investigators requires not only the support of civil society, but international attention as well.[2] Safety mechanisms, such as UN-sponsored international human rights observer missions, may offer temporary support, but real change ultimately has to come from within.