Election observation is an often used term.  Nevertheless, it is instructive to begin with a working definition taken from the 2005 UN Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation which states:

International election observation is: the systematic, comprehensive and accurate gathering of information concerning the laws, processes and institutions related to the conduct of elections and other factors concerning the overall electoral environment; the impartial and professional analysis of such information; and the drawing of conclusions about the character of electoral processes based on the highest standards for accuracy of information and impartiality of analysis.[i]

In consolidated democratic systems it is considered that the electoral processes are carried out in line with sufficient guarantees and that the establishment of systems for observation and additional control are not necessary. Thus, the combination of electoral management bodies, polling officials, representatives of political parties, the possibility to challenge the procedure before an independent authority and freedom of the media are seen as sufficient elements to ensure electoral transparency. In these cases, there is no imperative need for observation of the electoral process by international, national and politically neutral organizations, with the exception of missions of a very limited scope to demonstrate electoral transparency, such as for example, the presence of international visitors. In contrast, observation seems extremely useful in the transition to democracy. It is, in this light, possible to establish a qualitative division between electoral events based on the requirement or not for national or international observation.

Election observation may take the form of domestic observations (sometimes referred to as “monitoring”) and international observation.  Election observation also varies with short term observation most often focusing on election day and involving a large force of observers, and long term observation which involves usually smaller expert teams of observers in country well in advance of an election in order to observe the preparatory and campaign phases as well as voting, vote counting and results. 

Both types of election observation play an important role in terms of enhancing the transparency and credibility of elections and the acceptance of results and may potentially contribute to the prevention, management or transformation of election-related conflicts.[ii]  Therefore, “The legal framework should provide for observers, including domestic and foreign, and representatives of the media, political parties and candidates, to ensure transparency of all electoral processes. Transparency of the electoral process is a minimum standard necessary to ensure democratic elections.”[iii]

International law is largely silent in terms of the rights of observers[iv] but the value of election observation can be enhanced by a legal framework that goes beyond simply acknowledging its possibility.  It would be helpful if the legal framework specified the rights of observers to do their job by freedom of movement, inspection of documents, attending meetings, monitoring all phases, and having a right of recourse where observers have complaints about interference.  At the same time, it would be helpful to specify what an observer may not do, such as interfere with electoral procedures or act in any partisan manner. Ideally, “The legal framework should strike a balance between rights of observers and the orderly administration of the election processes.”[v]

Beyond the legal framework, there are also expectations regarding how observers should conduct themselves.  As general principles, election observation must must recognize and respect the sovereignty of the host country, be non-partisan and neutral, comprehensive, transparent, accurate and professional.[vi]  In 2005, standards for the conduct of international election observation were created by way of the Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation and an accompanying Code of Conduct. 

Notwithstanding that, “International election observation is neither a right, nor as yet a recognized international standard”[vii] there has been and continues to be a tremendous amount of such activity. In the 80’s and 90’s various international entities carried out complex election observation operations in African (Uganda, Mozambique, Angola, South Africa) and South American countries (El Salvador, Nicaragua) as a form of cooperation in the political transition process. However, since 1986, as an alternative to the increasingly costly operations of international election observation, national or international NGOs play the same role.

International election observers rely upon some form of invitation or agreement with a sovereign state in order to officially observe an election.  On the other hand, “As citizens, domestic observers have a right to participate in the public affairs of their countries.”[viii]  As such, “A legal framework for elections should provide guarantees for the right of domestic non-partisan observer groups.”[ix]

The phenomenon of national election observation deserves to be carefully analyzed. On the one hand, it is clear that this alternative presents many advantages, as it implies significantly lower costs than the international operations and contributes to the development of democratic awareness at national level. It is also an essential element in countries where international election observation missions are legally banned and this prohibition cannot be sufficiently overcome by using international visitors. It should be acknowledged that certain countries are not favorable towards international election observation, which explains why such operations are sometimes "observed" themselves with suspicion, as national electoral authorities and political parties consider that foreign interests are now pursued through these NGOs.

National election observation is an ambiguous phenomenon. On the one hand, it is very positive when seen as an alternative to the transfer of thousands of international observers, of whom the vast majority is not familiar with the country and even with the electoral process. On the other hand, it is questionable whether it contributes to the reinforcement of the electoral administration and the political parties. In the most effective scenario it is not a case of either/or but a case of both national and international election observation.  Each approach has its own limitations but each also can bring great value.

Overall, election observation and monitoring by international and domestic election observers may provide tremendous value in terms of aiding transparency, accountability and confidence in elections. Increasing trends toward longer term international observation and the role of domestic observers bode well and should be seen as an obligation:

An adage often repeated in the electoral arena is that it is possible to conduct a credible election under a weak or even bad legal framework, if those with governmental power have the will to do so – and it is extremely difficult to conduct a credible election, even under a strong legal framework for democratic elections, if those with governmental power intend otherwise. Civil society therefore has a responsibility to organize itself to monitor implementation of legal frameworks to ensure that credible elections take place and to expose the facts when elections lack credibility. Knowledge of legal frameworks is essential to accurately making that distinction.[x]