Holding an election can be costly. Staff must be recruited, trained and equipped. Offices need to be rented and set up. Voters, parties and candidates need to be registered. Voters lists and ballots have to be printed and distributed to every polling site in the country. Polling stations need to be opened and staffed. Votes must be collected and counted. All these tasks require personnel, communications systems, transportation, equipment, supplies and operating funds.
Integrity Problems Caused by Lack of Funds
Having an adequate budget to administer electoral law is an important factor contributing to election integrity. Lack of funds may compromise all aspects of electoral administration. The independence of the electoral management body depends on the availability of sufficient funds at the right time. Integrity problems may result from delayed or insufficient funding.
- Security safeguards may be cut to save money. For example, the electoral management body may forgo using watermarked paper on ballots, or printing serial numbers on voter registration cards or ballot stubs.
- Electoral materials may be distributed via transportation methods that are less expensive but also less secure or reliable; examples are using employees’ own vehicles or hiring less reputable firms. Lower-quality materials may be used that will not last through the election period. Copy machines or printers may not have the capacity to handle the volume required.
- The performance of underpaid or unpaid election workers will be weaker. Underpaid workers may be forced to moonlight to make ends meet, lowering their productivity. They may also seek to make up their salary shortfall by accepting bribes.
- Physical security for the campaign, voting and other critical electoral events may be substandard. Election security costs are often covered under a different budget, such as the police budget. A lack of funds could mean that police forces do not have the transportation or communications systems needed, or that there are not enough security agents to ensure a safe election.
Good planning and systems can help overcome budget constraints. There are cost-effective solutions to all the problems. At the same time, elections cannot be conducted as required by law without good planning and the necessary funding.
Integrity Problems Caused by the Source of Funds
The source of funds may be an integrity issue. The election management body is usually funded in the government’s yearly budget. It should be allocated enough funds to hold elections as required. With an assured budget and funds available on a timely basis, the election management body will have the financial independence it needs to hold an election. In India, for example, the Election Commission’s secretariat has an independent budget set by agreement between the Commission and the Ministry of Finance. Unfortunately, some election management bodies, especially in less developed countries, have to compete for government resources and may end up with insufficient funding.
Sometimes the electoral management body is allocated enough funds in the government budget, but the funds are administered through a particular ministry or government agency. The result is that the election management body becomes dependent on that organization. For the 1998 Cambodian legislative elections, funds were allocated in the government budget but were released piecemeal by the Ministry of Finance, making it difficult for the National Elections Committee to get established. Committee members started the process using their salaries to cover running costs, such as electricity bills and purchases of paper for copy machines.
The international community may provide election funding to countries undergoing a transition to democracy or developing countries. Donor funding is usually conditioned on the holding of free and fair elections, and is tied to the funding cycle of each donor country. This may sometimes give rise to funding shortages at critical times.
In some systems, the election management body is allowed to receive funds from other sources, such as prominent citizens or groups. However, accepting private funding may lead to the perception that money buys influence. Electoral administrators can counter misperceptions by disclosing the names of donors and ensuring that they receive no special treatment. Private funding is prohibited by law in certain countries, such as Thailand. [1]
NOTES
[1] Noel, Theo, advisor in the 1999 Indonesian elections, communication with Sue Nelson.
