The Question
This question is posted on behalf of Brechtje Kemp, Political Parties team, International IDEA

Dialogue between political parties usually takes place in already existing spaces, like national parliaments. However, in some contexts interparty dialogue mechanisms are especially created outside the conventional arenas to offer a protected space in which parties can talk freely with each other, overcome conflict, build a base for cooperation and work on political reform.

In many countries, Electoral Management Bodies (EMBs) liaise with political parties through these kinds of multiparty dialogue mechanisms. In some contexts, EMBs are in fact the main initiator/facilitator of interparty dialogue platforms.

International IDEA’s Political Parties team is working on a practical guide on Political Party Dialogue and would therefore be interested to learn more about:

1) The scope and key areas for cooperation between EMBs and political parties in different phases of the election cycle (e.g. code of conduct development one year before elections, election monitoring during elections,  review of election legislation after elections)

2) The organizational structures that are being used to manage the relations between parties on the one hand and EMBs on the other, and in particular:
a. The basis for cooperation (prescribed by law, or EMB /parties’ own initiative or request?)
b. The formal organizational structure (bodies like a board, chair, secretariat, subcommittees; available financial and human resources?)
c. Level of representation (who sits around the table: party leader, party SG, MP’s, party experts, women/men and why?)
d. Decision-making process used (consensus, voting, and why?)
e. Dispute/conflict resolution mechanisms that all sides agree upon
f. Other ‘rules of the game’ governing the dialogue process (e.g. confidentiality, media relations, chair rotation mechanisms?)”

Summary of responses
The majority view is that cooperation between EMBs and political parties is desirable. One expert recommends that any cooperation is best conducted and managed through a mechanism such as an inter-party action committee. Furthermore, it should be “operated on sound internal democratic rules with strict sanctions for non-compliance.” In Southern Africa, such Political Party Liaison Committees are common and meet at the national, provincial and local levels.

The example of Nepal is cited as one where the Election Commission works closely with the main political parties on a wide range of issues, both of a political and technical nature. Although the basis for this cooperation is not stipulated anywhere, it is followed by practice and wherever deemed necessary. Decisions are made by consensus, meetings are open to the media, and are coordinated as well as chaired by the Election Commission.

Close contact and dialogue is also maintained between the EMB and parties in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where there is a forum of political parties. The level of representation from parties is generally high and consensus is sought at meetings. In Burundi, the scope of cooperation also includes election observation. 

Two replies, however, advocate distance and limited cooperation between EMBs and political parties, for the purpose of safeguarding the former’s independence. This is the case, for example, in the Netherlands, where there is little cooperation between the Electoral Council and political parties. Another expert is of the opinion that, while supporting consultative forums between EMBs and political parties, they should be organised by an outside actor (i.e. a civil society group) in order not to jeopardise the EMB’s independence.

Examples of related ACE Articles and Resources
Encyclopaedia:
• Political Parties and Candidates as EMB Stakeholders

Names of contributors
1. Carl Dundas
2. Melle Bakker
3. Bhojraj Pokharel
4. Mirimo Mulongo
5. Lucien Toulou
6. Kisimba Albert
7. Bucumi Julius
8. Brechtje Kemp

Brechtje,

You are asking a lot to to be said in this confined space. The first limb of the question encompasses all the areas you mentioned and more. However, in general it depends on the level of development of the relationship between the EMB and the political parties. If there is no institutional mechanism or framework for the two entities to interact, then the first step is to construct such a mechanism. Perhaps the simplest mechanism is to have an inter-party arrangement (by whatever name called) and a framework where the EMB and the representatives of parties can meet regularly. Such an outfit can be within a code of conduct for political parties or otherwise. The various issues which you mentioned are not exhaustive, but can each be discussed in such a forum.

A structure similar to the one mentioned above, often called an inter-party action committee (IPAC), may be used to manage the relationship between political parties and an EMB. The IPAC must be operated on sound internal democratic rules with strict sanctions for non-compliance with the procedures and recommendations of the IPAC. In Nigeria, where flashes of unbridled conduct by some parties are some times experienced, the IPAC's role is vital in the quest to calm exuberance and unbecoming conduct. Decision by consensus is the preferred method, voting is often resorted to in difficult cases. In some jurisdiction, like Nigeria's the EMB set up a dedicated department (Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)) to deal with intra-party disputes and there is no shortage of work for the new department. Some other matters like incumbency may find themselves on the radar of the IPAC meeting.

In the Netherlands there is little cooperation between the Electoral Council and the political parties. Contact mainly in election periods regarding the use of electionsoftware. The Electoral Council wants to safeguard it's independancy and for that reason the Council does not want to play a role in the political arena.  

Election Commission of Nepal (ECN) intensely and closely works with political parties mainly in the areas of political development/process as well as on electoral policies and its technical preparations. To summarize them briefly: 

1.The scope and key areas for cooperation between EMBs and political parties in different phases of the election cycle: 

In Nepal, by practice, EC initiates to develop any policies or draft regulation regarding the elections and political parties. During this process EC invites to the representative of these political parties at various stages (to generate ideas, to get feed-back on the draft based on the idea generated, discuss on draft policies/legislation's/procedures,etc). Generally, following policies, procedures, drafts are developed in close consultation with the political parties. 

§  Electoral policies

§  Various Legislation governing election and its management. 

§  Rules, regulations and procedures to conduct the election.

§  Identification of Polling locations and their management.

§  Code of conduct development.

§  Overall procedures to manage the election.  

§  Introduction of new technology in electoral process. 

§  Review of security situation and involve political parties to create an enabling security environment, etc.

 Immediately after the completion of election cycle, a bottom-up review process is conducted inviting and involving political parties, election observers, electoral staff, security officials, civil society members to review and recommend for any future reform. 

2) The organizational structures that are being used to manage the relations between parties on the one hand and EMBs on the other, and in particular:
a. The basis for cooperation (prescribed by law, or EMB /parties’ own initiative or request?):

 It is followed by practice. Now it has been as an unwritten rule. Political parties feel comfortable to sit together in ECN and discuss and share. Generally whenever situation demands, ECN invites political parties. During the Constituent Assembly election in 2008, ECN had organized hundreds of such meeting at the center, district and booth level. All party mechanisms (forums) were created at these various levels to consult, discuss and to address the disputes to create an enabling election environment.

b. The formal organizational structure (bodies like a board, chair, secretariat, subcommittees; available financial and human resources?). 

During the election period political party’s representatives are also involved and engaged in some of the committee’s set-up by the ECN. Each (main) political parties also set up an sub/committee within their party hierarchy to liaise with ECN, to work as the focal point for ECN and to participate in ECN meetings. Generally EC uses its own (or in some cases external) resource to organize these forums. 

c. Level of representation (who sits around the table: party leader, party SG, MP’s, party experts, women/men and why?):

Depending on the issues, different officials attend these meetings. Generally ECN asks the Parties to send their representatives and they send various officer bearers (President, executive/ members, MPs, or the professionals) to represent their party. However, for any macro-level issues Party President/Chairperson/General Secretary are invited.

d. Decision-making process used (consensus, voting, and why?)

Generally decisions are made on consensus. Ownership of the decisions is vital. So, ECN always tries and works to create such environment during the proceedings.

e. Dispute/conflict resolution mechanisms that all sides agree upon 

Dialogue and engagement is the key instrument used. 

f. Other ‘rules of the game’ governing the dialogue process (e.g. confidentiality, media relations, chair rotation mechanisms?)”

These meetings are always open to the media. Meetings are coordinated by ECN authorities, mostly chaired by any Commissioner.

 Bhojraj Pokharel

Durant tout le processus électoral, l'OGE doit entretenir le dilalogue avec toutes les parties prenantes particulièrement les partis politiques. Il est important de les impliquer à travers une concertation permanente qui leur pendant toutes les étapes du processus.

1. Lors des premières élections post conflit organisées en RD Congo, nous avons mis en place un forum des partis politiques qui se réunissait chaque, un l'ordre du jour était arrêté de commun accord entre la CEI et les partis politiques et les candidats.

2. Le souhait était de voir les présidents ou secrétaires généraux des partis sièger au forum pour élever le niveau de débats. Nous avons constasté que ceux qui se disent "grands partis" se faisaient représenter par leurs délégués.

3. On privilegiait la prise de décision par consensus.

4. Nous avons également mis en place de comité de médiation à différent niveau pour la résolution des conflits (mécanisme non juridictionnel)

One avenue for interaction between EMBs and political parties is through the setting up of Political Party Liaison Committees (PPLCs). PPLCs provide political parties with space to consult with EMBs and are very useful in resolving election related disputes either between parties or between parties and EMBs. They also serve as an information dissemination forum for EMBs.

The first PPLC model was introduced in 1999 by the South African Electoral Commission and today most EMBs in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) have a similar structure. I remember Kenya also established a PPLC in 2010.  

 PPLCs usually meet at national, provincial and local levels during election and non-election periods. Nearer the election the frequency of meetings increases.  PPLCs can even be convened daily during election time depending on the issues to be discussed.

In South Africa, Party Liaison Committees exist at all levels and are set up to consult and inform political parties about the arrangements for the elections. They have no decision-making power. They merely advise the Commission and deal with conflicts between different parties or between a party and the Commission. PPLCs are therefore consultative forums and are just that. The final decision making powers remain with EMBs, which should be free from influences by political parties.

PPLCs can be included in the electoral legislation and form part of the mandate of the EMB. Topics of discussion in PPLC meetings can include: election calendar and brief discussion of what will happen in each electoral phase, voter registration preparations, the voter registration process, requirements for nomination of candidates, the guidelines and code of conduct for political parties, observers, the accreditation of party agents, the procedures for accrediting party poll watchers as well domestic and international observers, the nominations process, ballot paper format, polling  and counting processes, complaint procedures, results announcement, etc.

Les exemples étant similaires, la Commission Electorale Nationale Independante de la R.D.Congo a par ses démembrements dans les provinces et les antennes, une structure qu’on appel « Cadre de concertation », espace dans lequel les partis politiques et la CENI trouvent un terrain t’entente afin de conduire au mieux le processus électoral a tous les niveaux. Seulement pour que ces cadres de concertations fonctionnent, dans le contexte poste conflit et où le travail reste les élections, les membres de partis politiques (généralement représenté par n’ayant pas de décision ou au pire ne pouvant  influencer une quelconque décision dans la  structure du parti) pour des raisons diverses sollicitent une prime pour chaque séance et cela ne reflète pas la bonne démocratisation de la population.

En fait je me pose ces questions :

1.       Est-ce que la solution c’est la régularité des réunions des cadres de concertations ;

2.       Est-ce que la sensibilisation du processus électoral est bien faites a la base ;

3.       Est-ce que les partis politiques (les membres) comprennent-ils le bien fondé du partage électoral au cours d’un processus ;

4.       Faudrait-il avoir des épiques conjointes de sensibilisations à la base ou de la base ;

5.       Est il nécessaire que chaque électeur vote ;

Il possible que je ne sois pas dans la philosophie du débat, je trouve important que certaines questions internes soient posées.

Albert K

1. In additiopn of what you have mentioned above, the scope of cooperation between Burundi National Independent Electoral Commission(CENI) and political parties is extended to elections observation as representatves of their respective political parties; political prties are consulted by the electoral commission to understand in the same way the electoral provisions where the electoral Commission is to take decision to clarify such provisions. This is very important for the CENI to understand in the same way the interpretation of the legal provisions which seem to be difficult or impossible to be applied on ground.

2. In Burundi, the political parties are registered and are under control of Ministry of Home Affairs.

Political parties have their  FORUM FOR PERMANENT DIALOGUE as a consultave organ created by a joint ordinance of Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry in charge Good Governance and Privatisation.

In this Furum they discuss every thing concerning General interest and good governance to help the Governement and the political parties to improve their way of runing the administration.

a. In the ordinace said above, the CENI can contact the Forum to invite the political parties to discuss on certain questions.  But for all politcal parites didn't join the Forum, the CENI enters in contact directly  with the legal representives of political parties for concertation. We hold meeting with ploitical parties once two months or as many times as necessary.

b. There is a permanent secretariat for the Forum. Human resources are recruited .They are financed by the Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry in charge of good governance and privitisation.(article 5).

c. One representative of high level from each political party is required in general assembly organ. There must be at least 30% of women.

d. concensus to allow to take into account each opinion from any political party.

e. For conflict resolution between political parties or within it, they always say to refer to the law.

f. The Forum has relationship with govenmental institutions, international partners, media and civil society. For chairing, they elect their chairperson.

Whereas I support consultative forums between EMBs and political parties, I would rather that these avenues remain at the points where EMBs are passive facillitators inorder for Independence to be exercised fully and be seen to be practised.

I would support much if such forums are sponsored by Non-State Actors, NGOs, e.t.c. so that the EMBs and the Political Parties attend as invitees. Where an EMBs calls such meetings of parties, let it be informational in process of execution of its mandate.

Where I come from, Kenya, if an EMBs frequently calls for such proposed consultative meetings, it may not take long before some party sections brand the electoral body as partisan. This may also be common to other upcoming democracies.

"Good things must be guarded from affecting other equally good things".

Dear contributers, I wish to thank you all very much for assisting us in getting ACE experts’ views and opinions about the role of EMBs in interparty dialogue. It has given us greater insight into the different avenues for interaction between political parties and EMBs, and this information will be very useful for developing our publication on political party dialogue mechanisms. We will share the paper with you as soon as it is finalized. Kind regards, Brechtje