The Question

This question was posted on behalf of Ruta Avulyte Moreira, member of the Practitioners' Network.

On vote-buying: Recent elections in Lithuania revealed that at least three parties bought votes from certain voters. The legal regulations are well in place, fines and other measures are prescribed, however the sweet smell of possible victory by any means doesn't stop some politicians. Local NGOs are looking into programmes to solve this issue for the future. Who would be the target group? Political parties? Election Commission? Population at large? Is civic education the most effective mean for the long run? Suggestions and opinions are most welcome. Thank you in advance, Ruta.

Summary of responses
There are divergent views on the effectiveness of legislation against vote-buying, which in turn affects the extent to which civil society is seen to be able to play a role. Those practitioners who place greater stock in the efficacy of legislation see the impact of local NGOs as limited. One expert sees vote-buying as so multifarious that it can only be tackled with robust legislation and commensurate sanctions. The majority of replies, however, see legislation as having a limited impact on vote-buying and believe the roots of this behaviour lie deeper in society. They accordingly view civic education as the most effective means to combat vote-buying. The focus and target group of such education varies though, according to where the source of the problem is believed to lie.

Some replies advocate for NGOs to focus their education efforts on the instigators, i.e. political parties and candidates, while others believe it is more effective to concentrate on the recipient voters.  Others argue for a broader focus that educates and holds to account other actors such as EMBs and the judiciary. Another reply emphasises the importance of NGOs working in conjunction with the media to convey the importance of voters not selling their vote.

For those who believe the target group should principally be the voters, a number of approaches are put forward. Educating citizens about their vote, for example, and how it can impact upon their lives can help instil a longer term view and make selling their votes less appealing. NGOs can also play a role in preventing vote buying at the polling station through monitoring elections. Whatever the approach, it is important for NGOs to try and get political parties to support efforts to tackle vote-buying.

Several replies see vote-buying as symptomatic of a deeper, more serious issue: a breach of the secrecy of the vote. Generally speaking, vote-buying can only occur in an environment where voters do not trust the secrecy of the ballot and believe others will be able to check who they voted for. Advocates of this view therefore believe efforts by NGOs should be focused on protecting the integrity of the vote and educating voters about it. Vote-buying will then disappear of its own accord. Kerala is cited as an example of this. In the same vein, another expert recommends that the focus should be on educating voters to stick to their initial choice when voting, regardless of any whether any money changes hands or not. 

Examples of related ACE Articles and Resources
Encyclopaedia:
• Secrecy of the Vote 
• Discrimination, Intimidation and Fraud 

Consolidated replies:
• Secret ballots and vote buying 

Names of contributors
1. Kisimba Albert
2. Alimeti Kitutu Nonhon
3. Kevin Evans
4. Carl Dundas
5. Innocent Campos
6. Hadi Almou
7. Kazi Salim
8. Idi Boina
9. Thomas Mathew
10. Nadjombe Bagana
11. Moussa Abdou
12. Abdul Alim
13. Amon Emmanuel Chaligha
14. Manuel Wally
15. Adiza Lamien Ouando
16. Atem Oben Henry Ekpeni
17. Charles Winfree
18. Ata Okon Elder Ewa
19. Leopold Gnonke
20. Maman Gondah

L’achat du vote est d’une pratique courant dans les pays en développement, cela reflète le niveau de vie de la population. Il est important de cibler en premier lieu les partis politiques qui sont les premiers à déclencher la machine d’achat des consciences  des populations, la sensibilisation devra être orientée vers eux afin qu’ils la descendent vers leur bases. La société civile étant la sonnette d’alarme, elle ferait le monitoring et amplifierait la sensibilisation de proximité.

Le groupe cible pour combattre l'achat de vote des électeurs est l'affaire à la fois des candidats et des partis politiques qui en font un moyen pour acheter la conscience des électeurs. Pour combattre ce fleot, il faut un programme à grande echelle de sensibilisation sur l'education civique et electorale des acteurs potetiels précités dans un processus électoral car,  malgrè l'existence de l'arsenal juridique en la matière dans le pays concerné, les candidat et les partis politiques n'hesitent pas de profiter de la situation sociale et economique precaire des électeurs pour acheter leurs consciences. d'où il faudra deux programmes de senibilisation sur l'éducation civique et électorale notamment un pour les canidtats et les partis politiques et un autre pour les électeurs avec des messages precis pour chaque cathegorie d'acteur. 

Merci.

Alimeti Kitutu.

Alimeti Kitutu.

There are a number of approaches applied in trying to stop vote buying. Too often the approach is to simply "criminalise" it.

In my view this is ineffectual. In cases where the practice might actually have an impact on results, the practice is likely to be so pervasive as to make effective and even legitimate enforcement at best looking like a farce and at worst looking like a partisan abuse of law enforcement given that "so many other cases" are not dealt with. 

To me it is more important to try to work out the root causes of the practice. The classic explanation of "the poor will take anything offered" is middle class arrogance and ignorance. The explanation needs to be broken down further. The first and most important point is whether people do actually vote as they are bribed. On many occasions they do not. In this regard it is poor campaign strategy for parties and candidates to believe they will be successful by bribing people to vote for them. Basically these candidates and parties are already being punished by wasting their money. I see no reason to criminalise stupidity.

On occasions where voters do vote for those who bribe them it is because of pressure (such as a belief that their vote is not secret or where they may have to "prove" how they voted. Now it is at this point that I believe we have a problem. Breakdowns of integrity in the secrecy of the vote is to me a serious issue. In this regard vote buying should be seen as a symptom of a deeper problem of poor integrity in the electoral processes. 

How to counter these problems will vary from society to society. Some answers may be technological (control of phones with cameras at polling stations), other technical approaches like ensuring that defaced ballot papers are void, not counted. Other approaches may be more about law enforcement (keeping partisan thugs away from polling centres). Some may be cultural (in many societies when somebody gives you something, there is a sense that this "kindness" must be rewarded. Here it is critical to be able to smash this proposed relationship. Voter and civil education can be useful here. Other solutions may be in better guaranteeing no capacity to read links between voter and polling stations results. 

This might include boosting the number of voters per polling stations or at worst not releasing results per polling station but aggregated to a group of polling stations. To me this is not the ideal answer, as it could open the path for other kinds of ballot tabulation manipulation).

The bottom line on each of the above issues is to break apart any capacity to "link" vote with money, other inducements or threats offered. To me it is key to ensure that there can be no "contract" between briber, bribe receiver and vote delivered.

At a higher level of citizenship awareness it is also key to think of how voters see their vote in the context of their lives. For example if they do not expect that the candidates (whether they win or lose) to ever have any connection with them until the next election, why not take the money. "At least I get something from this democracy" would be a standard rationalisation for a willingness to be bribed, especially when combined with a view that "if we don't vote for them they won't give us anything at the next election".

In addition what about voters whose view of citizenship awareness has been very compartmentalised. This means they have never been educated to see that how they vote has any impact on what the next government does and has not impact on how this might affect their lives in the future. Where there is no capacity to link the impact of taking money from a candidate with how this could affect their future livelihood, it makes even a small voter bribe seem worthwhile.

Voter education and wider civil education programmes can campaign actively with a long term view to widening peoples' horizons on how their vote is linked to other things that happen in their lives into the future. One problem from a programme/project cycle is that these are long term initiatives, and not easily able to fit into the "election project support" cycle. They call for long term commitment by donors and home governments and community groups.

One rather easy initiative is to get voters to think "who paid you to bribe me, and what do they want". Most people are sharp enough to realise that the money is not free. Getting the,m to consider who is paying the candidate and what they may want as a return on their political investments can help people to think about the implications of taking the money, or at least to think about not voting for someone who is already seriously in (political) debt before they assume office.

Other approaches to containing such vote buying could include forcing some transparency in campaign financing and expenditure. My view is this is nice, but usually ineffective as political society activists will always try to wiggle about such regulations especially where they still believe that bribing voters works.

I would like to suggest some work be done in your countries to actually see just how effective the approach is. Depending on the country it may actually already be very ineffective. In these cases it is a matter of getting political society to accept this and drop the practice and find other ways to get voters to support them. To conduct such research it is key to get parties to be supportive and engaged from the start, otherwise they are likely to dismiss any results that say vote buying is ineffective as civil society bias etc.

Where the practice of vote buying is successful (that is bribed voters do actually vote for the candidate or party that pays them the most), it is likely to be useful to conduct further analysis of why they believe they have to vote for those who bribe them.

With regards to trying to make vote buying criminal, I would argue strongly against it. I would suggest it be better placed within some kind of political parties code of conduct or other means of non-legal sanction. It would be far better to focus effort at identifying criminal acts to such behaviour as trying to "force the contract" (making voters prove they did vote for their briber) or any form of intimidation. The core principle to be upheld is the secretness of the vote.

Sorry for the length of this report.

Vote buying/selling is one of the oldest forms of electoral abuses. In the 19th and 20th century Britain vote buying attained dubious prominence in elections. Today, new levels of 'sophistication' in vote buying/selling are displayed in the new and emerging democracies in South-east Asia, Caribbean, and in some States in the African Union. Sometimes the consideration for the vote purchase passes prior to Election Day, other times on polling day and in some areas, particularly in Thailand and Indonesia, through oral compact, post-polling day. Due to the various forms of vote buying/selling local NGOs and CSOs can have only partial and hence limited impact on the incidence of vote buying/selling. Strong electoral legislation with comprehensive rules banning all aspects vote buying/selling, as well as related activities such as 'treating' potential voters during election campaigns, would serve to mitigate or limit the practice to an irreducible minimum. Any legislative scheme that is fit for purpose in this regard should carry sanctions commensurate with the nature of the seriosness of the activities and take account of whether or not the activities were sponsored by political parties or groups of individuals.

Votre préoccupation est une question cruciale en matière de gestion reussie du scrutin électoral en termes d'élection libre, transparente et démocratique. Les faits que vous évoquez par rapport à la  Lithuanie sont monnaie courante en Afrique et sont très pernicieux. En effet comment assuser le respect des lois électorales en mettant en avant l'égalité de chances pour tous les candidats sans discrimination? Quelle éducation donnée aux électeurs pour réduire ce phénomène qui fausse les règles du jeu électoral? Existe t-il un lien entre l'achat des votes ou de conscience des électeurs et la pauvreté? Voilà un certain nombre de questionnement qui méritent d'être élucidés.

S'il est vrai que dans tous les pays  l'arsenal juridique  relatif aux élections prévoit et punit les actes liés l'achat ou à la corruption des électeurs en période électorale, il n'est pas moins vrai que la constatation matérielle des faits  de corruption électorale est difficile surtout quand ces faits mettent en cause le parti au pouvoir. En effet, la fraude électorale ou corruption des électeurs revêt plusieurs formes qu'il serait ici fastidieux d'énumérer. Cependant, interessons nous un peu aux bulletins d'autres candidats que certains électeurs devront ramener au siège d'un parti politique contre de l'argent ou un pacte entre  le parti politique et l'électeur qui a pris de l'argent que ce dernier, en aucun cas, ne devra manqué à sa parole. En cas de manquement il subira les conséquences de sa trahison. Ces deux exemples pour dire que le sujet est mouvant et l'ingénierie de l'achat des votes de plus en plus sophistiquée. Alors pour éradiquer l'achat des électeurs dans le cadre d'un programme de sensibilisation des électeurs, je pense qu'il est impérieux que tous les acteurs soient impliqués et plus particulièrement les partis politiques et les organisations de la société civile pour leur rôle majeur en matière d'éducation de leurs militants pour les uns et d'éducation civique des populations pour les autres notamment par rapport à leur dignité en période électorale.

Par ailleurs une attention particulière devra être accordée aux acteurs de la justice notamment les magistrats, les huissiers et les avocats par rapport aux tenants et aboutissants de l'application des textes électoraux. 

Civic Education could help.The target groups should be the Electoral Commissions for necessary measures such as reminders, sanctions and awareness, the political parties and candidates to respect the laws and cease their practices.

 The advisor should insist   on the consequences of such actions. The population has to denounce the practioners candidates. They should vote conscientiously according their programs regardless of the act of corruption. Such issues should be also discussed with the local authorities and Judges of elections.

An agreesive and robust Voters Education can only make the voters aware not to be sold .

It is the responsibility of the National Election Commission to apply the Electoral Regulations and strictly should monitor the implications of the electoral law.Mass Media can play a vital role to create public awarness aginst selling their voting rights to any political party candidate. Poltical Parties should give undertaking to the Election Commission against any kind of vote buying  from the voters.

Ciivic/voter education is the only solution to this problem. In early ninetees in a Muslim majority country in West Africa, there were complaints that the incumbent candidate for President ship was giving money to the voters and made them  swear on Quran  that they would vote for them. I was an Adviser to the Election Commission there at that time. I realised that in such a poor country it would be difficult to stop the people from accepting money given to them free. Therefore, I did not attempt stopping people from accepting the money. Bit quoting some muslim clerics I created a few television programmes and posters that making any voter swear on  Khuran on wrong things was a sin and that persons are not bound by such oaths. Further emphasis was also made about the secrecy of votes and  that money should not change their choice.  Though these steps were appreciated by the opposition candidates I do not know whether it really contributed as the incumbent President won the elections with a good majority.

An example that aware of the voters can curb this pratice can be seen from the State of Kerala in India.  With almost 100% literacy the voters have learnt that their vote is secret and money or threats have stopped affecting their choice. Realising that money cannot change the choice of voters, parties/candidates have stopped giving money to the voters to get their votes.

To sum up, the only remedy against purchase of votes is creating awareness among voters about the secrecy of votes, as distribution of money by candidates/parties and its acceptance by poor people cannot be stopped by any legal measure as it cannot be proved. 

L'achat des voix a encore de beaux jours dans nos pays si rien n'est fait pour juguler, sinon éradiquer ce mal socio-politique. Il est triste de constater que les tenants du pouvoir utilisent les ressources des contribuables pour acheter la conscience des mêmes contribuables. La pauvreté (engendrée par ces tenants du pourvoir) est le facteur le plus déterminant, après l'ignorance ou l'insuffisance de la culture civique et politique. Il n'est pas impossible de sortir nos sociétés de ce mal. Des exemples dans certains pays d'Afrique existent et doivent servir de modèle (permettez que je n'en cite pas...).  Les facteurs engendrant le mal étant identifié, il n'est plus question que de chercher les voies et moyens pour lever ces facteurs, et, du coup, mettre un terme au mal: éduquer, sensibiliser, convaincre les corps électoraux. Ce travail revient à toutes les composantes de la société et en particulier aux partis politiques (qui veulent conquérir le pouvoir politique) et aux ONG qui doivent veiller à l'épanouissement de la société dans son ensemble. C'est un travail de titan, de longue haleine mais qui finira par porter ses fruits pour peu tous et ensemble s’y engagent/.  

L'achat des votes constitue un handicap pour l'installation effective de la démocratie dans nos jeunes pays. Le problème posé exige d'actionner plusieurs leviers.

1. Est-ce que l'OGE, est indépendant et autonome ? si oui, est-ce que le choix de ses membres n'est pas biaisé ? si oui, le problème pourrait trouvé son fondement à ce niveau car on serait en face d'une institution qui de par les membres qui l'animent ne peut pas faire respecter scrupuleusement et rigoureusement les textes réglementaires en matière de fraude électorale.

2. Une population mal informée, mal sensibilisée sur ce qu'est le vote et ses implications sur la vie d'un pays et de ses citoyens, et où la précarité est quasi-endémique, est exposée à toute sorte de tentation.

3. Comment sont organisés les bureaux de vote ? quelles sont les structures ou personnel électoral chargé de les animés ?

De toute façon, pour éliminer la fraude électorale "visible" (puis qu'il y celle dite invisible ou subtile), il faut que les électeurs aient un niveau de culture partisane et démocratique élevé d'une part, que l'OGE soit un organe indépendant et dont les membres sont choisis pour leur neutralité et leur intégrité morale seule condition d'être aveugles dans l'application de la loi. Aussi, les partis politiques doivent se surveiller afin de dénoncer les éventuels abus.

Pour accompagner un processus électoral victime de l'achat des votes, il serait intéressant de mettre en place parallèlement à l'OGE, un organe de supervision des élection qui serait composé des magistrats et des avocats. cet organe qui est ad hoc, aura la charge d'envoyer des représentants dans tous les centre de vote afin d'enregistrer les éventuels dénonciations ou même d'être témoin des faits. faute de membres suffisants, la société civile pourrait s'adjoindre pour assurer une couverture optimale.

En tout état de cause, il serait on ne peut plus nécessaire d'entreprendre une formation continue des citoyens sur le problème auquel ils sont exposés et sur le processus électoral dans son ensemble.

In many countries there are laws and regulations to stop vote buying. In Bangladesh, there is specific law along with penalties, punishment. In the last parliamentary election held in 2008 in Bangladesh, Election Working Group, a coalition of NGOs initiated huge campaign/voter education against vote buying, but the result was not very good. In the discussion with political parties in 2011, BEC also admits that they were not successful to stop vote buying in the last parliamentary election. Later in the bi-elections held in Bangladesh BEC deployed special monitoring team to oversee the electoral irregularities including vote buying. In many places (e.g. Comilla City Corporation election) some people were arrested for vote buying. 

Democracy is a matter of practice, culture. NGOs can not arrest people, they can do huge and intensive voter education programme as well as raise their voice for effective implementation of the legal provision etc.  

In my view, NGOs can help reduce the problem of vote buying but can not eradicate it completely. NGOs can reduce the problem by providing civic  and voter education to the voters and society in general. Also, NGOs can use election monitors to make sure that vote buying does not take place and uncover it when it occurs and take legal measures.

Neverless, NGOs alone cannot succeed to prevent vote buying. NGOs must work closely with both political parties and the Election Management Bodies. Such joint programs can help to deter or discourage vote buying. In addition, the education system must also be used to introduce ethics classess for young citizens and inculcate in them a culture of ethical conduct. Children must know that vote buying is wrong and be in a position to say so to their elders. This will discourage adults from vote buying when they know that their children will not approve it and that it is a taboo that will not be tolerated by society.

The electoral laws must have deterent clauses that can be used by public prosecutors and judges when the vice is uncovered. The penalties must be heavy enough to act as a deterent to vote buying.

Dear Ruta,

Voter education campaigns against vote selling do not necessarily need to discourage taking the money or payment in kind per se, but instead it can call on the recipients to stick to their initial voting choice, regardless of the bribe. To achieve this outcome, civil society has come up with slogans such as "Honor Your Vote" or "Your Vote is Your Weapon."

For international observers, it is notoriously difficult to gather conclusive evidence of vote buying. As a recent exception, the 2012 EU EOM to Senegal's presidential election was able to photograph distribution of bank notes during a rally of the incumbent's governing party. Rural voters gladly took the bribes, justifying acceptance as restitution of taxes they paid to the state on cell phone use or fuel purchases. You may be pleased to hear that the culprit lost the election anyway.

Domestic observers are often better positioned to document vote buying, but require specific training nevertheless. Observations of vote buying can be texted into centralized incident mapping tools, such as Ushahidi, which can help publicly "shame" perpetrators.

Any contender who counts on vote buying to win election is increasingly perceived as illegitimate, and worse, as desperate, so the undertaking, legal or illegal, carries significant risk of backfiring. Vote buying may produce more likely rewards in elections for local office or in small and remote parliamentary constituencies. Only long-time incumbents in oil-rich states can afford buying majorities on a national scale.

Lastly, some presidential systems, especially in Francophone West Africa, grant the President sizable "discretionary funds," which are not subject to parliamentary oversight. Rendering expenditure of such funds transparent can prevent vote large-scale buying.

Manuel

This reply is posted on behalf of Adiza Lamien Ouando

Dear Ruta and other colleagues,

Vote-buying is a real threat to democratic elections. I am writing to share how we try with the National Commission of Decentralization to contribute to solve this problem.

The fact that regulations exist is a good thing but to have the rules respected. Both buyers and receivers have to be targeted. Buyers are political parties that could be targeted and helped on program designing and campaigning on the basis on what changes this program will bring on peoples' daily lives. There are many politians that just want the power but with no clear idea on how to use this position positively.

The other group; the receivers are: individuals, traditional chiefs, civil society organisations, business associations and civil servants.

We designed a hand book on how to vote usefully:
With local governments all local development stakeholders, we supported them in participative and gender responsive planning so that they have a basis of discussions will contestors rather than just listening to their promises. Through this they have learn to assess candidates on their programs and not on the personal relationships or the money or other goods they will receive.

A handbook on efficient and useful voting was designed and tested with associations' leaders and members in two different areas in the country. During the follow up made after the elections, some people declared that that have taken things but they did not vote for these donors. Buying occurs sometimes very early before the official campaign.

Some political parties’ representatives have learnt how to use daily social events and the mostly painful ones like deaths and funerals to insure people vote them when the time will come.

So I suggest that as we have in countries like for human rights permanent observatories of the political practices.

Sensitizations of all citizens are needed so there is a need to translate all the regulations and all the political system documents in local languages. As for Female Genital Mutilations, Child trafficking, Gender Based Violence, small local committees could be put in place in villages and towns to observe and report.

Wish you all a Good day,
Adiza

The contributions above are well founded especially on voter education. Poverty is the root cause of vote buying / selling. But as mentioned, feeding one for a day and leaving him angry for the rest of the days is not solving the problems of development that voters advocate for. Key, simple and understandable messages preventing vote buying / selling are essential to corp with the problem. "Vote buying/selling destroys ones choice to shape future decisions for you and generations to come". "It undermines your fundamental rights as a citizen; your individual choice of opinion, expression etc". "It makes you less of a man or a woman". The use of polling booths and envelops becomes valueless because it undermines the concept of secrecy of the vote etc.

Voter education has proved to be effective when designed and implemented depending on factors that are community specific. However, it is also important for the EMB to establish harsh sanctions to prevent such practice, though difficult to trace, voters should be encouraged to denounce such. 

All of these preachy comments notwithstanding, the best way to stop it is to make sure that there is no written or electronic proof of how any individual voted.  There should be no "receipt" or other acknowledgment of how the person voted, and no cell phones should be allowed, powered up, in the voting enclosure.

If the payee cannot prove how he or she voted, the buyer of the vote cannot be sure that he is getting what he is paying for.  This, combined with rigorous law enforcement and punishment, are the only ways to weed out the problem.

Vote buying is a serious electoral offense. despite stringent laws and enforce of the laws, politicians still device ways of buying votes. This as a result the advantage they would get and win election at all cost. In Nigeria, the Electoral Commission normally carries out massive voter education which normally highlights the dangers of vote buying and the consequence to the voter who sells his or her vote. On the part of the political actors, it is part of the code of conduct signed by the Parties contesting in the election.

however, these has not fully solve the problem but it has reduced the practice. the practice will be eradicated with increase in literacy level of the electorate and the growth of internal democracy within the party structure.

L'achat de vote est une véritable gangrene qui mine les pocessus électoraux dans les pays pauvres et singulierement en Afrique. Toutes les obediences politiques s'y adonnent a coeur joie! Ce qui fausse l'esprit et l'essence du jeu électoral 'et avec pour corrolaire les contestations, les soulevements populaires ave a la clé la destruction de la démocratie tout court.

Pour conjurer cette "pandemie", il faut des actions corsées, beaucoup plus que ce que nous obsevons actuellement.

Ce sera un travail de longue haleine:

1. il faut introduire dans les programme scolaire les cours d'éducation civique voire électorale

2. que le législateur dans ces pays votent des lois qui decouragent le phenomene

3. qu'on encourage une reelle volonte politique pour decourager le phenomene

4. il faut une reelle interaction entre acteurs electoraux, les ONG, les populations pour mettre en exergue les risques liés au phenomene afin de l'endiguer

Vote buying constitutes one of the major problems NGOs have to combat. This problem can change dangerously affect election results if any appropriate action is taking.

In fact it is NGOs business to educate the electorate and sensitize them on what must guide their vote. This could be done during the implementation of the civic and voter education programme. The full involvement and voluntary engagement of the NGOs is necessary to guarantee that the voters are duly informed and guided on the full electoral process, the polling operations included.

The NGOs must possess all sensitizing support documentation including the rules and regulations on vote buying.

The NGOs must be organized into alert groups to denounce vote buying cases and assist the other candidates to document their complains.

NGOs must be allowed to report any attempts to elections’ rules and regulations to the EMB or to the institution in charge of the elections related conflict’s disputes.

Maman Gondah