This section on election administration covers integrity issues starting with the creation of the electoral policy and management bodies and the management and administration of elections. Potential integrity issues are identified for each part of the process, along with the mechanisms that have been used to address them.
Despite its technical nature, election administration can be highly politicized and emotional. Control over the electoral apparatus and its manipulation of the process has been one of the primary tools used by nondemocratic governments to ensure their continued win at the polls. In addition, election administrators themselves can be suspect, as they can be seen as agents of the government, of a particular party, or sector of society.
As stated by Dr. Andreas Schedler,
.. In transitional regimes or new democracies (as in Mexico), monopolies of power tend to go hand in hand with the abuse of power. Opposition parties tend to fear, with good historic reasons, that incumbent parties will use their eventual control of the electoral apparatus in particularistic ways to their own benefit.101
Inexperienced commissions can also be suspect. The persons may be unknown or untested. The inexperience of a new election policy or management body, can be taken advantage of by seasoned politicians and parties. For example, in the 1998 Cambodian elections,
The National Election Commission's (NEC) inexperience was an important weakness in dealing with the Cambodian People's Party (CPP). The ruling party (CPP) managed to exploit deficiencies in the election law to outmaneouvre the NEC on several points. For example, although the spirit of the law called for a neutral election apparatus from top to bottom, with government officials kept out of the process, the CPP managed to get its partisans, including officials, into the system at many levels.103
Distrust of the electoral apparatus still exists in many places and is one of the primary reasons for the prevalence of extra safeguards and in the monitoring by parties and civil society. It is one of the primary factors in changing an election administration, both structurally and administratively. It has also led to the promotion of 'independent commissions'. As stated by Dr Andreas Schedler:
This distrustful attitude towards leviathan controlling of the organization of elections explains today's consensus on the need to have, at the core of election management, an independent election commission, as well as the corresponding impressive spread of independent election management bodies in new democracies.102
If participants see the electoral process as being administered by a partisan group or being manipulated for partisan purposes, the result can be nonparticipation or a rejection of the election results.
For an election to be perceived as free and fair, it must have a good and neutral administration. A well organized, credible election administration can eliminate many of the opportunities for those opposed to the process to undertake fraudulent or discriminatory actions and, in turn, builds trust in the elections and its institutions.
