In broad terms, ‘electoral integrity’ refers to, “agreed international principles and standards of elections, applying universally to all countries worldwide throughout the electoral cycle, including during the pre‐electoral period, the campaign, and on polling day and its aftermath.” [i] This definition highlights a couple of notions that have been present throughout discussion of the legal framework, namely; that no country can export its legal framework to another country, as context plays an important role in the application of international standards and, that elections must be understood as comprising all the components of the cycle and not just election day or the election campaign.  In this sense, election integrity is a daily obligation to be strived for.

Election integrity is closely related to moral integrity and responsibility on the part of the various political actors, election officials and public opinion makers acting together in order to achieve free and fair elections. Generally speaking, as in several Latin American countries, the fundamental ethical principles and values regarding electoral democracy are guaranteed by various legal orders and therefore violations may entail liability. However, there are other ethical values and principles which, even if they are not necessarily prescribed by law, have governed -or should have governed- the transition and democratic consolidation processes.  This is especially the case in Latin America during the last two decades.

The establishment and consolidation of a democratic system requires constant learning and reinforcement of the values of participation, stability, plurality and peace, as well as the exercise of rights and legality, the deployment of self-interest and auto-limitation, competition, cooperation and tolerance.  This learning process leads to the recognition of mutual rights and obligations, to the acceptance of the values of plurality and diversity, and to the renunciation of dogmatic principles and political Manichaeism. This learning process also leads to the formation of political parties and tendencies that are aware of the scope and limits of the proper democratic competition, in which no one can be above the law or invoke privileges over the majority. Indeed, eventual majorities should always be perceived as a part, not as a whole, and, therefore the rights of minorities must be fully respected, including their right to become a majority.

A serious view of the role of integrity in politics leads to the belief that not only should the electoral institutions and political actors (parties and candidates) take on an ethical role, fully recognizing democratic rules, but also the media have an ethical responsibility towards the society.   After all, society is informed about politics and assesses democracy through media such as radio, especially through television and increasingly through the internet.

The place of the media has a universal dimension and is present in all modern democracies. Thus, questions about the role of media in democracy and in election integrity are not random or secondary issues. In fact, reflecting on the relationship between media and politics is an essential task in order to consolidate democratic change and improve the quality of our democratic coexistence. These matters should undoubtedly be taken into consideration by the legal instruments.

The need to establish codes of ethics or conduct, which would complement the respective legal orders, has arisen in practically all fields of human activity. At the international level, there are several collective efforts aiming to prevent the misuse of the professions through the implementation of codes of conduct and universal application by various international organizations and professional associations.

In Latin America, several countries have adopted codes of ethics or conduct related to electoral processes such as: Argentina (applicable in two of its provinces: Code of Ethics for Judges and judicial officers of Córdoba and Code of Ethics of the Judicial Authority of the Province of Santa Fe, taking into account that electoral petitions in Argentinian provinces are usually resolved by the respective judicial authority); Colombia (Oath of Ethics, which is applicable to the National Registry of Civil Status, which is in charge of voter registration); Costa Rica (Code of Ethics of the Judicial Authority and Professional Code of Conduct of  Lawyers, considering that as a complement to the relevant functions of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal of Costa Rica, which is autonomous, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice has jurisdiction to protect certain fundamental political and electoral rights and to rule on other relevant constitutional issues); Guatemala (Ethical Standards of the Judiciary of the Republic of Guatemala, considering that the Supreme Court hears objections on grounds of unconstitutionality against decisions of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal which organizes elections and resolves electoral disputes); Honduras (Code of Ethics for Civil Servants and Judicial Employees, while the Supreme Court Justice also hears certain challenges against rulings of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal which has administrative and judicial powers in this regard); Mexico (Code of Ethics of the Federal Judicial Power and Statute of the Professional Electoral Service and the Federal Electoral Institute Staff ); Nicaragua (Electoral Ethics Regulation); Panama (Code of Ethics of the Electoral Tribunal of Panama); Peru (Democratic principles for officials and employees of the National Office of Electoral Processes); Puerto Rico (Regulation of Government Ethics and Norms of Judicial Ethics for the Supreme Court) and; Venezuela (Draft Code of Ethics for Venezuelan Judges) and; the Statute of the Ibero-American Judges (approved by the VI Ibero-American Summit of Presidents of Supreme Courts and Tribunals; as in several countries in the region its jurisdiction in electoral matters prevails over the respective national Supreme Courts or the corresponding specialized courts like in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico , Paraguay and Venezuela).

International organizations may similarly adopt codes of ethics or conduct.  The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) has adopted both a Code of Ethics and a Code of Conduct for Ethical Election Observation. International IDEA’s Code of Ethics sets out "universal minimum standards" regarding "election administration and professional ethics." This code of conduct aims to systematize the principles that should guide the conduct of election officials. In addition, this code establishes ethical principles that form the basis of the electoral administration and aims at ensuring both the appearance and the actual integrity of the electoral process. Thus, it is stated that election administration should conform to the following fundamental ethical principles: a) Respect for the law b) Impartiality and neutrality c) Transparency d) Accuracy and e) Voter-oriented.

In addition, there is the, “the indispensable role of public confidence in democratic elections.”[ii]  The extent of integrity, and perceived integrity, in the electoral process will heavily influence public confidence.  From time to time it may be expected that challenges and scandals will emerge. This is true in consolidated and transitional democratic countries alike although in consolidated democracies challenges to electoral integrity may be less damaging than in less consolidated democracies where such challenges may be more corrosive and potentially destabilizing.[iii] Having said this as a broad outline, certainly consolidated democracies may also face very significant challenges such as was the case for example with the Watergate scandal.

Electoral laws should recognize and encompass ethical principles and regulate in a way that contributes to the integrity of the electoral process because, “Only upon its firm foundation can legitimate elections be built and in its absence voters can have little trust in their representatives or government.”[iv]