A critical element in
maintaining election integrity is sound management of elections by a credible
election management body. To be credible, the electoral administration must be
impartial and have the institutional capacity to hold free and fair elections.
In a well-established
democracy, the structure that administers elections is usually taken for
granted. It has delivered fair elections for a long period of time; if there
are problems, they generally do not call into question the credibility or
legitimacy of the institutions. In such countries, the EMB and other agencies
supporting elections often is part of the State apparatus, and electoral
administrators are civil servants.
In newer democracies, the
electoral management system may still be developing and may face considerable
distrust, criticism and scrutiny. In addition to the problems inherent in
organizing an election, the body may have institutional problems— such as inadequate
staffing, funding or experience – as well. A viable solution to ensuring the
impartiality required to earn voter trust is the creation of an EMB that is
institutionally autonomous and not subject to political influence.
To safeguard integrity of the
electoral institution and the election process, the following are important
considerations:
Establish
a credible and non-political management body
Election administration is essentially
a technical task. The administrative system adopted and the institution that manages
the system should therefore have technical capabilities. This is true if the
electoral management body is part of the government structure and electoral
administrators are civil servants; and it is equally true if the electoral
management body is a separate, independent agency with its own personnel and
policies.
It can still be difficult to
separate politics from administration, however. The politicization of election
management can turn technical issues and administrative matters into political
issues. As political issues inevitably require compromise and negotiation,
reaching decisions may be time-consuming, making it difficult to follow the
electoral calendar. In extreme cases, politicization of decision making may
paralyze the entire process.
A neutral and non-partisan
administration enhances election integrity. Even when electoral administrators
are selected for their political affiliation, they are still expected to
fulfill their duties in a non-partisan, non-political manner. Almost every electoral
law calls for neutral administration of elections. For example, South
Africa’s electoral law requires all election officers to be impartial and
to exercise their powers and duties independently.
Financial and institutional
independence is another important factor that allows the electoral
administration to work without political interference and special interest
lobbying. In Mexico,
the electoral reforms of the 1990s owed their success in part to rapid support
for the principle of an independent electoral administration.[1] In
contrast, during the 2003 legislative elections in Cambodia,
the National Elections Committee was institutionally and physically within the
Ministry of the Interior and dominated by members of the ruling party. This
dependence fostered a climate of distrust among opposition parties and created
opportunities for dishonest practices, such as intimidating people trying to
register to vote and blocking attempts to file complaints against the incumbent
party.[2]
Create
a good administrative, financial and operational system
Insecurity, fraud and
corruption flourish in a chaotic environment. Sound management can remove many
of the opportunities for subversion or graft. An electoral administration that practices
good planning, hires qualified personnel and provides proper oversight is
better positioned to safeguard election integrity.
Proper financial management
and audit mechanisms can contribute to maintaining financial integrity and
deterring problems that might result from poor financial management. Sound and
effective procurement management is also a part of maintaining election
integrity when goods and resources are to be purchased.
Good operational systems—based
on strategic planning—facilitate work and help avoid problems:
A good logistical system, for
example, will help avoid problems that might arise when ballots arrive in a
country but must sit at a port or air terminal because of a lack of
transportation or storage. Such a system can also facilitate the tracking of
sensitive materials, such as voter registration cards or ballots. Inadequate
tracking will make it difficult to know whether ballots have been diverted or
tampered with.
Operational systems usually
include mechanisms for disseminating useful information to participants in a
timely and systematic manner. Parties and candidates have to know when and how
to register, and how to obtain funding that might be available for campaigning.
Good procedures are easier to develop if there are feedback mechanisms for
swiftly identifying problems, and for receiving and systematically addressing
complaints from candidates and others.
Ensure
effective information management
With the management tools and
control mechanisms provided by modern technology, electoral administrators can
develop and operate effective systems that protect election integrity. A
computerized voters list can help identify duplicate registrations and underage
voters. A printed list eliminates the problems created by illegible
handwriting, and can be posted or distributed to political parties and
observers.
However, for computers and
other technology to be effective tools, the proper equipment and training must
be available. Moreover, the adoption of new technology may not be sustainable
or cost-effective.
Use
adequate control and oversight mechanisms
Electoral administrators are
entrusted with public resources, which they are responsible for using
efficiently and economically. These resources must be used in compliance with
laws and regulations on the use of public assets, and with electoral
legislation.
The electoral management body
has to ensure that it has control systems in place, properly safeguarding
financial and material resources. Public disclosure of the election budget and
expenditures can increase the transparency of the process and in turn can help
protect the integrity of the administration.
This involves ensuring that
there are systems for inventorying and tracking public assets, keeping financial
records are accurate and up to date, and mandating an official or office to
enforce rules and regulations. Effectiveness will be enhanced if electoral
administrators are held responsible for the actions of their staff, and if
supervisors verify and certify their office’s compliance with all rules and
regulations.
Oversight mechanisms also
require a system for receiving and dealing with complaints. The electoral
management body is usually responsible for ensuring that electoral legislation
and related laws are followed, and that anyone who may have broken the law is reported
to the proper authorities for investigation, and prosecution if warranted.
Demonstrate
transparency and accountability
Transparency lends credibility
to electoral institutions and their activities, and confers legitimacy on the
elections they administer. The electoral management body can achieve
transparency in several ways, including:
- regular reporting to the
public through the media by holding press conferences, releasing factual
information, and identifying issues raised and their solutions;
- regular reporting to
oversight bodies on progress made, difficulties encountered and areas
requiring additional effort, plus making such reports available to the
public;
- regular meetings with
political parties and candidates to provide information, answer procedural
and other questions, and seek their input on draft protocols or
regulations; and
- allowing the election
decision-making process to be observed by representatives of political
parties, civil society and the press.
Transparency is valuable
because it makes clear who is responsible for what. Civil servants and other
officials entrusted with handling public resources must be accountable to the
public and to other levels and branches of government for their actions, and
must report on how they used public resources to conduct elections.
[1] Schedler, Andreas, “Democracy by Delegation: The
Path-Dependent Logic of Electoral Reform in Mexico,” paper presented to the
annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, Georgia,
September 2–5, 1999, p. 20
[2] National Democratic Institute for International
Affairs, Cambodian Elections: Lessons Learned and Future Directions - A
Post-Election Conference Report, February 2004
