One of the issues involved in election integrity is determining who monitors those responsible for enforcing election integrity rules. As with other aspects of the process, enforcement may be tainted by partisan politics, subverted by money or power, rendered ineffective, or marred by errors. To ensure that enforcement plays its role in maintaining election integrity, it must be monitored and supervised, exactly like any other part of the process.
Most legal systems have a control mechanism to ensure that the administration of justice functions as intended. Police departments have an internal affairs office mandated to investigate complaints of police misconduct. Similar mechanisms operate in most prosecution agencies. Some legal systems have judicial inspectors and a mechanism for removing a judge from a case if needed.
Serious cases of judicial abuse or misconduct may result in a judge’s impeachment or removal from office. Impeachment proceedings are usually undertaken by the legislative branch; the power to impeach is one of its checks-and-balances on other branches of government.
In cases of systemic abuse, where there is no credible mechanism to investigate complaints, an independent judicial commission may be established.
The control mechanism within a law enforcement agency must examine complaints made against investigators. A supervisor may monitor the number of complaints and analyze their content—for example, determining whether a complaint concerns the methods used by a particular person or is partisan in nature. Systemic problems are usually referred to the internal affairs office, the solicitor general or another official oversight mechanism.
Election observers and monitors also examine enforcement. Observers may be present at all stages of an activity where integrity is at issue. Their task is to ensure that:
- an official investigation is undertaken;
- investigators act impartially, and have the resources and ability to conduct a proper investigation;
- suspects are located, arrested and brought to trial;
- the rights of individuals are respected throughout the process.
Holding a public trial and monitoring the proceedings may promote judicial professionalism and impartiality. Lack of action by judicial authorities, particularly the courts, can be the subject of an investigation reported by an independent and responsible press. Monitoring may also cover the penalty phase to ensure that persons found guilty are punished and that the punishment fits the crime.
