A fair and equitable candidate
registration process that guarantees equal treatment for all candidates is
vital to election integrity. The registration process has to be transparent,
the electoral calendar must allow enough time for candidates to prepare their
applications, and for electoral administrators to review the applications and
notify candidates of their decision.
As with Political Party
Registration, it is necessary to set reasonable
eligibility requirements to maintain integrity, review applications in a fair and transparent manner,
give timely notice of acceptance or rejection, and offer information about the
right to appeal if applicable.
Eligibility
Requirements
The basic eligibility
requirements for candidates in an election are usually set out in a country’s
constitution or other legislation. They may include citizenship, age and (depending
on the type of election) residence criteria. Specific
requirements may be added to these, such as the deadline for filing an application, the support of a
set number of registered voters (as evidenced by a submitted “signature
petition”), or payment of a deposit.
For integrity purposes, the candidate
eligibility requirements must be reasonable and fully disclosed, and must not
exclude any particular group or individual without good reason. During Indonesia’s 2004 presidential election, electoral
legislation set educational requirements. This restriction was criticized by
international observers as being discriminatory, particularly against women.[1]
One of the basic requirements
for a free, fair and credible election is competitiveness. Candidate
requirements may affect the number of candidates. The “right” number of
candidates (ensuring a lively and competitive electoral process) can be difficult to determine. Too few candidates
will limit choice but too many will confuse voters. In India,
for example, measures were taken to reduce the number of candidates, such as by
increasing the amount of the deposit and the number of signatures required.
Reviewing
and Rejecting Applications
The electoral management body
checks candidates’ eligibility against legally-established criteria.
Establishing review procedures and standards can ensure consistency in the
review process. Rejections must be given in writing. The reasons must be
clearly stated, providing the information required to ensure transparency. The
necessary information must also be offered to candidates who wish to contest
the rejection of their application in the rejection letter.
In Ireland,
the process is as follows: “The returning officer, accompanied by a judicial
assessor, who is either the President of the High Court or another judge of the
Court nominated by the President of the Court, rules on the validity of the
nominations received. Every prospective candidate or his/her representative
must attend the ruling on nominations, and must furnish all relevant
information required by the presidential returning officer or the judicial
assessor.”[2]
Decisions to reject candidates
who do not fill out the form properly or did not meet the basic requirements
are usually straightforward, provided the rules are applied consistently to all
candidates. (It is provided in most
systems that candidates/parties who submit incomplete or incorrect
applications may correct them if they re-file within the relevant
registration period.)
Right
to Appeal
Candidates are protected
against arbitrary rejection if they can appeal the decision and be heard. The
appeals mechanism varies according to the system. In South Africa
appeals are heard by the Commission to the Electoral Court, on dates set in the
electoral calendar. The appeals process should be expeditious enough so that a
candidate rejected by error still has an opportunity to run in the election.
Right
to Withdraw
For candidates who wish to
withdraw from the race, electoral administrators generally establish procedures
allowing them to do so within a reasonable time frame. Since ballot-papers must
be printed early enough to be distributed nationwide before election day, a
candidate who withdraws late may find that his or her name remains on the
ballot. In many systems the deadline for withdrawal coincides with the date for
final approval of ballots. Specifying
the applicable rules and deadlines in electoral law or procedures will help
avoid integrity problems connected with a candidate’s withdrawal after the
ballots are printed.
To avoid disputes, it is
useful to adopt rules defining if and how a candidate can refuse to accept
public office after winning an election, and how to select a replacement for
such a candidate. (In proportional
election systems, the next candidate on the same party’s list usually obtains
the mandate, while in majoritarian systems, a by-election is usually held.)
[1] Carter Center, The
Carter Center 2004 Indonesia
Election Report, June 2005
[2] Republic of Ireland; Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government, “How the President is Elected”
