It is essential that the security forces of a country obtain voter education. Even if they are composed of citizens in uniform, who therefore have the ability to obtain good information about the election during their off-duty life, members of the security forces have an institutional relationship with elections that is best discussed and considered specifically.
Societies in Change
This is particularly important in societies that have been highly militarised. In such societies, there may well be programmes under way for the demobilisation of soldiers, the demilitarisation of the police, the establishment of civilian authority over the security forces, and the training and retraining of members of security forces. On Election Day there may be special legislation regarding the confinement to barracks of soldiers and the exclusion of the police from voting stations. Or a new police service may have been created and deployed especially to guard the electoral process.
In this rapidly changing, and occasionally quite confusing and delicate situation, an understanding of security forces, of their role, and of the manner in which they will participate in the elections can be a major contributing factor in ensuring the success of the election. At the same time, educators may face a number of challenges in educating security personnel under such circumstances, not the least of which is gaining access to military facilities to conduct leadership briefings and information and education programmes (see Education In Closed Institutions).
Face-to-Face Methods are Essential
Because the situation is so delicate, face-to-face methods should be considered paramount. Educational workshops can be reduced in cost because of the close proximity of large numbers of military personnel. These workshops can be conducted by independent educators with the permission of the election authority and, by extension, the state. Without this consent, an educational programme is destined to fail due to suspicion and lack of access. With it, the natural tendency of such institutions to inculcate acceptance of authority serves to enhance the message.
Leadership Briefings
While voter education workshops and other lessons can be arranged with soldiers and members of the security forces, it is the acceptance of the officer corps that will make or break a programme. They have the ability to undermine the programme after an educator leaves, to make it difficult for people to attend a workshop, and to intimidate those who do. Special leadership briefings should where possible be arranged for them.
Such briefings should not, however, be communicated as voter education. Officers believe they know what is going on and do not usually take kindly to being told they do not. Instead, such programmes should be considered briefings to inform the officer corps of the programme that is being conducted for their other ranks, and a socio-political assessment of the elections and the role that the security forces will be expected to play during the election period. Apart from the fact that the officer corps needs this information, and may not be getting it from their superiors who have other concerns, this context also provides an opportunity for them to ask more mundane questions about basic voter information either during the briefing or with the educator immediately after its conclusion.
Where it is possible, a team of educators may visit a security force base and conduct a briefing followed by a set of general workshops so that they use the time as effectively as possible, especially if travel to the base has been extensive.
Training of Trainers
This is one context where it seems less suitable to train existing trainers to conduct the programme. Such trainers have a power relationship to ordinary soldiers or police that makes it difficult for them to convey, or the soldiers to receive, information about democracy and elections.
Stable Democracies use Standard Training Opportunities
There will come a time, when the general training curriculum of the security forces will have to include information about human rights, civil military relations, the soldier as citizen, and international law on combat and military behaviour. Introducing such programmes has been done in a number of post-war western armies, and the materials and technologies from these are readily available and regularly shared between countries.
Even in these societies, special material for the armed forces may be prepared. And those societies that provide soldiers for peacekeeping operations where elections are a likely adjunct need special election and civic education programmes.
