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.)