The Question
This question was posted on behalf of an anonymous user

I am wondering if there are any sources detailing best practices for instances when a country with some reasonable stability uses the military to oversee elections logistics and processes, such as transporting sensitive materials.
The country I am researching about is in Eastern Africa, and we are trying to establish some norms of practice for using the military in a situation like that for elections processes, like they do frequently in Latin America. Any help you could provide would be most appreciated.

Summary of responses
No sources are cited detailing best practices for using the military, but a number of experiences and views are shared. Most of the experts are in agreement that the role of the military in an electoral process should be used sparingly; limited to security issues and not interfere in the electoral process.
It is also important that voters and other stakeholders have sufficient trust in the military if their role is to be seen as legitimate.

Several experts also stress that where the military is employed in an electoral process, it is imperative that it falls under the command of the electoral management body (EMB). The example of the 2006 Venezuelan presidential election is given as one where there was friction over the chain of command and soldiers did not always following civilian orders as they should have.

Although the military was used extensively in the 1994 South African elections, no norms for its use were established by the Independent Electoral Commission. One practitioner sees the Bangladeshi military’s leading role in a massive voter registration effort as justified because of its unparalleled logistical capacity and good reputation. On the issue of transporting sensitive materials, one view is that although this is the responsibility of the EMB, it is advisable in many African countries to have a military escort and then assistance in securing counting centres.

Examples of related ACE Articles and Resources
Encyclopaedia:
• Security Actors

Names of contributors
1. Khalid Waheed
2. Nadia Nata
3. Ingo Boltz
4. Jagoda Petrovic-Ukaj
5. Monte McMurchy
6. Phiroshaw Camay
7. T. Krishna Murthy
8. Peter Eicher
9. Laurie McGrath
10. Atem Oben Henry Ekpeni
11. Rafael Riva Palacio Galimberti
12. Bhojraj Pokharel

Military is being used in some countries for logistics and more for security purposes 

where the law & order situation is not conducive for electoral processes.

It is good and appreciable to continue electoral process even if the stability is not

there.

Though the use of military seems not justified (apparently) but if one looks deep in to it

and analyses the situations it appears that continuity of democracy through electoral process is much better than not having elections.In my country Pakistan we some times do require  the services of military for security purposes.

In Eastern African countries the riots and other disturbances may create hurdles in elections but it would be more appropriate if will of people be upheld for formation of Government through electoral process.

The use of military should always be restricted to control law & order situation and in no way more than that and military should carry out its functions under the direct control of independent and empowered  EMB.

Thank you.

I will talk about West Africa because that is the Region I know the most. The military is used for security and logistics purposes.

For security issues military and other security forces are often used;  because elections period is a very critical period that generates many conflicts.

For logistics purposes the use of the military happens sometimes and it can be a big issue. But in very few countries it is not an issue. Militaries are in charge of security and the transport of the electoral material under the control of the EMB.

In a country like Benin (where I come from) the military is used for security and logistics also.  According to the Government the use of the military for logistics is due to financial and budget issues (Elections are too expensive in Benin). It is cheaper when the military is in charge of the transport of the material (even the sensitive one).   The decision was strongly (by NGO; opponents, etc) criticized but finally everything went well and it was somehow accepted the following election.

The use of military for logistics is possible in countries that have a political stability and where stakeholders somehow trust the institutions and the military. But in most of the countries in West Africa it is not possible because people fear the military.

In order to have credible and peaceful elections, it is better to limit the role of the military to security issues during electoral processes.

Thank you

Venezuela used the military for security on election day as well. When I was observing the presidential elections in 2006 with the Carter Center, there were a few occasions where military and civil lines of command conflicted. By law, during the elections, the military personnel has to follow orders from the civilian authorities at the polling station, however when superior officers contradicted such civilian orders, soldiers tended to obey their military superiors. Which makes sense, after all, after election day, they have to keep working with their superiors. So such conflicts of interest are something to look out for. 

In a country with reasonable stability, could be stabile situation for election process organization. From that point, regarding basic electoral principles, transparency, freedom of speech, impartiality, it is the best solution to avoid rule of forces at any part of electoral process. Police or military forces can carry out they duties in a regular way, emphasize on people`s crowd around polls, or be a part of security escort if it is necessary,  but with no interfere into election process on the way that it could look like compounding, for direct  interlocutors or people. In some countries is different election low about military role during election process, but with a goal to enhance level of democracy, the best way is to work on election staff organization, level of their responsibilities and commitment, at a word, react on a democracy appreciation in a whole country.

Warm regard

Jagoda Petrovic-Ukaj

The use of the military in an electoral process ought at all times be exercised with extreme caution as elements of 'moral suaision' and the like could compromise the electoral process as being sanctified in being without any form of overt or covert intimidation and or influence. I have been witness and have assisted in electoral processes which did use the military to render logistical support only under the direct supervision of National and International Election Officers.

Monte McMurchy

On behalf of Phiroshaw Camay, Director of Co-operative for Research and Education

During the 1994 first Democratic elections the military services were used extensively to:

1. guard and secure and transport security sensitive material.
2. secure polling stations
3. secure and transport ballot boxes.
4. transport additional material.
5. secure IEC premises.
6. secure the verification Centre.
7. transport by road/helicopter ballots to remote areas.

No norms were set by the IEC Commissions.  This was a relationship developed by the IEC monitoring unit within which I was deployed. The arrangements were bilateral and not recorded in any way.

These engagements emanated primarily from the previous National Peace Accord (NPA) structures where the parties to the agreement what the roles of the military and police were. We had at this time established four levels of intervention:

Level 1: Self regulation by their organization concerned.

Level 2: Peace monitors.

Level 3: South African Police.

Level 4: South African Defence Force.

This is a brief response to a very complicated process which we developed then in 1994.

Regards,

Phiroshaw Camay
Director
Co-operative for Research and Education
www.corejhb.org.za

Posted on behalf of T. Krishna Murthy

In India especially in Kashmir, the Military does not play any active role in the conduct of elections except in the militancy/terror prone areas such as Kashmir they are used to sanitise the polling stations/roads so that they are free from mining/IED explosives.

In other areas prone to violence,paramilitay forces which are specially trained police are deployed toprevent violence.

Best wishes,
T. Krishna Murthy
Former Chief Election Commissioner of India

In 2007-2008 the Bangladesh military played a leading role in a successful voter registration effort that resulted in an excellent voter list with photographs of over 80 million voters.  This resolved one of the major shortcomings of previous elections in the country.  The military worked under the direction of the Bangladesh Election Commission.  It organized and managed the logistics of the nationwide registration effort and the enormous IT operation. 

While in general elections should be a civilian matter, in Bangladesh the military was the only organization capable of undertaking such a huge effort in so short a timeframe.  Moreover, the military as an institution was generally well regarded and trusted by the population.

The details of the effort are included in a lengthy UNDP study – Elections in Bangladesh 2006-2009, Transforming Failure into Success, available at http://www.undp.org.bd/info/pub/election%20in%20bangladesh.pdf.

In the November 2010 elections in Tonga the Electoral Commission used the Tongan Navy to deliver polling materials and ballot papers to the outer islands and to get them back post polling day. The military in Tonga are seen as being a trusted organisation and the Commission used them to ensure safe delivery and return.

Additionally the Tongan Electoral Act requires a police officer to be present at each polling station to maintain order and to prevent the comimitting of offences.

Posted on behalf of Atem Oben Henry Ekpeni, member of the ACE Practitioner's Network

I think that in stable countries the military can still play an important role depending on the nature and how competitive the electoral event is. The use of early warning tools here is also crucial. The use of military is hardly enshrined in a Country's constitution or electoral law. Such use if applied should be justified and made public to stakeholders to ensure that their presence in polling stations or during the process does not scare the electorates.

I have witnesses situations where a good number of registered female voters refused to go to the polling station because they thought the presence of the military in the station was a reflection of insecurity whereas that was not the case. The EMB should be able to get security information about the election and plan military dispositions. Transporting electoral logistics to the polling station is the responsibility of the EMB but depending on the security situation the EMB officials can be escorted by the military. It is always advisable especially in some African countries to have the military transport electoral results after the polls and secure the verification and final counting centers. The losers always complain and at times try to prevent the results from reaching their destination.

Here in Mexico, Military corps guard and secure electoral material since it is manufactured and to be delivered in each of our 300 electoral district offices around the country. When the election is finished, EMB could ask them to continue guard and secure ballots.

Police secure EMB offices and polling stations during Election Day.

I think it is important that citizens have a positive opinion of Military corps. Otherwise, people could lose   confidence in the election.

Posted on behalf of Bhojraj Pokharel, MCS Centre participant.

In Nepal, during the past parliamentary and local elections Nepal Army was involved in the following activities:

1. Under the supervision of the Election Commission involved in ballot printing (security), packaging and their delivery to the districts.

2. Air transportation of essential electoral materials in extremely difficult areas and in collecting the ballot boxes.

3. Providing back-up security services during the whole election process.

However, during the latest Constituent Assembly  Elections (CAE) in 2008 (post-conflict election) Nepal Army was housed within the barrack (due to the provision of Comprehensive Peace Agreement) and Armed Police Force (APF) and Nepal Police (NP) took these responsibilities. But Army's helicopters were used only for the transportation purposes."

Best wishes,
Bhojraj Pokharel