Elections and the democracy challenge

Many observers argue that the blandness and predictability of established democracies is a sign of national maturity. Indeed, American author and social critic, Gore Vidal, once commented: 'A democracy is a place where numerous elections are held at great cost without issues and with interchangeable candidates'.

In much of the Western world, gone are the great ideological battles of the past. Instead, today's political candidates debate the details of important, though hardly exciting, issues such as health care, trade and tariffs, and social security. It is little wonder, therefore, that voter turnout rates have been dropping in the USA and western Europe for many years. While international experts lament this creeping political-electoral apathy, in developing countries, where elections have been burdened with excessive significance, residents would probably prefer that their balloting was a bit more mundane.

The contributors to this issue of id21 insights show that since the early days of promoting global democracy over 20 years ago, the conduct of national and local elections has proved valuable. They also demonstrate, however, that while elections may be a significant precondition for modern democratic societies, they are only one element of democracy.

In Gerard Stoudmann's article, elections – especially in post-conflict countries – have often become synonymous with democracy, partly because of the simplistic reasoning of international donors. Thus, if polls go badly (as in Kenya), the world is quick to proclaim the death of democracy, whereas if they go well (as in the Democratic Republic of Congo), the event is touted as a glorious triumph for democracy. The truth lies somewhere between these two extremes.

Elections are highly technical and political, and the two elements are interdependent. A technically proficient election conducted in a negative political climate will be useless. Likewise, an environment of political goodwill will not salvage a technically chaotic election. The international assistance community generally has far more control over the technical than the political aspects of elections, although there are examples of elections where the outside world controls political aspects as well (in Iraq, for instance).

Technical issues
Technical assistance alone is insufficient in the preparation and conduct of elections. Nevertheless, good technical assistance is critical and must take into account the entire electoral cycle and not simply the electoral event itself. To begin with, any electoral system has its foundation in the national constitution and related legislation. If this is poorly conceived, as it is in many countries, what follows may be doomed. Even the most rational and well-structured constitutions and electoral laws require a profound understanding of the political landscape of the country in question. For example, in 2005, the adoption by Iraq of a 'winner takes all' electoral system may have worsened existing sectarian and ethnic tensions.

The composition and independence of the electoral management body (EMB) comes next in terms of importance. Too often electoral commissioners serve at the pleasure of the head of state and tend to be political allies. Ideally, an EMB will be led and staffed by individuals of a variety of political, ethnic, and regional affiliations. In Liberia, one of the African electoral success stories mentioned by Denis Kadima, the inclusion of women, civil society representatives and members of faith-based groups, gave the EMB much-needed independence. Funding for the elections should be approved by parliament on at least an annual basis and be deposited into an account under the control of the EMB. Unfortunately, one still encounters EMBs which are nearly wholly dependent on the president's office for all but the most modest financial requirements. Edward Joseph makes a compelling case for an internationally accepted system of electoral certification of EMBs, which could improve electoral administration.

An accurate voter registry is also an essential ingredient in free and fair elections. As electoral experts are fond of saying, 'only amateurs steal elections on election day'. In other words, controlling who is registered to vote can influence the outcome of the polls. Enfranchisement and, conversely, disenfranchisement are powerful weapons, something that rulers such as Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe understand supremely well.

There are many other prerequisites for representative elections, including:

• fair party and candidate registration
• effective voter education
• well trained poll workers
• order and security
• comprehensive monitoring and observation
• accurate results tabulation and transmission
• a well managed system for the resolution of disputes
• properly enforced campaign finance laws.

This last topic is discussed by Marcin Walecki, who writes about corruption related to political finance and regulations introduced by some countries to improve transparency in campaign donations.

One final technical development which warrants attention is the advancement of electoral technology in both developed and developing nations. This trend is unstoppable, as Vladimir Pran shows.

Political issues
There are also significant non-technical obstacles to the conduct of good elections, mostly political. For example, both Kenya and Nigeria had fairly competent and well-qualified EMBs, at least nominally in charge of their flawed elections. As many observers have noted, this depth of professional expertise did not prevent mischievous interference by political parties and the executive.

Both countries, however, are key partners of the USA: Kenya as a strategic ally in volatile East Africa and Nigeria because of its enormous petroleum resources. Not surprisingly, neither nation's mishandled election was subjected to the same level of fierce criticism as that of Zimbabwe, for instance, a country with limited mineral resources and of little strategic value to the USA and its allies. This tension between political and economic concerns and democracy promotion is a source of frustration for many proponents of democratisation.

Another political challenge is the presence of conflict and insecurity in many electoral environments (Afghanistan, Congo, Iraq, East Timor and so on). Although sometimes overlooked by policymakers, as Carlos Valenzuela tells us, elections can provide opportunities for conflict resolution, or at least mitigation, when they force an open discussion of divisive issues among all stakeholders.

Although there are nations that are largely indifferent to democratic influences (such as Kazakhstan) and that will conduct elections as they see fit, most countries recognise the value of elections and make at least a token effort to hold them, if for no other reason than to avert external criticism.

Cuba and North Korea, for example, both conduct regular, though fraudulent, elections. And although the Republic of Guinea holds elections, few Guineans would call them free and fair. Fortunately there are other important democratic forces at work in places like Guinea, such as trade unions, civil society organisations and professional guilds, a point well illustrated in Elizabeth Côté's article.

Elections do have value but, as the articles show, lessons from past conduct need to be learned, including:

• Elections are not isolated events, but part of a cycle that includes a range of undertakings from constitutional reform to disputes resolution.
• Elections assistance programmes must take into account local and regional particularities in case they deepen divisions, particularly in conflict-prone countries.
• The electoral reform community should subscribe to a set of qualitative norms to be applied equitably to all elections, which would include standards for ensuring EMB independence.
• Serious election work is long-term by nature and requires significant and reliable financial and political support.
• Electoral reform is a fragile and delicate process, which can easily be set back without adequate care.
• Electoral work is just one component of democracy building and should be well coordinated with other related elements, such as support to civil society and mass media.
• As far as possible, electoral reform should not be linked to external political agendas

Christian Hennemeyer
International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES), 1101 15th Street, NW, Third Floor, Washington, DC 20005, USA
T +1 202 350 6700
F +1 202 452 0804
CHennemeyer@ifes.org