Election observations act as a lever for democratic governance

  1. Last updated on
Image
A woman casting her vote by placing a ballot into a voting box during an election process

A woman drops her ballot paper in an urn (Guinea-Bissau elections, 2009). In the background 2 election observers. © European Union

Our FPS regularly sends election observers to countries that request them. What exactly do they do? And did you know that foreign election observers will also be present during the European elections in Belgium on 9 June?

In the media, we regularly hear reports about observers who confirm or, in some cases, are unable to confirm that elections in some foreign country were conducted without irregularities. But where did this custom originate and what exactly happens during an election observer mission? For further explanation, we were able to talk to Denis Valois, the focal point in our FPS for EU election observations.

From 1857 to the present day

“Election observations are not a recent phenomenon,” says Valois. “The very first one took place as long ago as 1857 when the great powers of the day – Russia, Austria, Prussia and the Ottoman Empire – sent election observers to Moldova and Wallachia (present-day Romania).”

Yet election observations only really came into vogue after World War Two. For example, an observer mission arranged via the UN took place in Korea in 1947. As Valois went on to explain: “Election observer missions have only become a really frequent occurrence since the 1990s, when the Balkans were in severe crisis. At the time, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) organised election observations in several Balkan countries and from 2000 onwards, the EU also became very active in that field. To date, it has deployed over 180 missions in more than 65 countries.”

Our FPS and election observations

Each EU Member State must designate a focal point within its Ministry of Foreign Affairs or a related external agency for anything that concerns election observation. A focal point is responsible for recruiting and presenting candidates who can participate in observation missions once definitively selected by the EU. Within our FPS, there are about 10 people who have occasionally participated in such missions.

Furthermore, our FPS follows up on election observations organised by the OSCE. We participate in 3-4 missions a year and pay for them ourselves.

Foremost bodies

At the present time, the OSCE and the EU continue to be the most important bodies organising election observations. “There is even an agreement between the two of them,” explained Valois. “The OSCE monitors its 57 participating states – all European and Central Asian countries, in addition to the U.S.A., Canada and Russia – while the EU takes responsibility for the rest of the world. Broadly speaking, that encompasses Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and the rest of Asia.”

In addition, a host of other bodies are involved, such as the African Union, the Arab League, the International Organisation of Francophonie and international NGOs such as The Carter Center.

Image
Women waiting in line to register their vote

Women queuing up to vote in Pakistan (2008). © European Union

Code of Conduct

All have signed the Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation and the Code of Conduct for International Election Observers. This declaration forms the basis for credible international election observations and was finalised within the UN in 2005.

It not only states that the host country should grant unhindered access to election observers at all stages of the electoral process, but it also formulates a code of conduct for the international election observer. “For example, it is crucial that observers respect the laws and sovereignty of the country and remain strictly impartial,” emphasised Valois. “An observer may therefore only observe, without intervening or disrupting the electoral process.”

“An observer will also refrain from making any personal comments, in public and to the media. Even at restaurants, observers must be very careful what they say. They are expected to make highly accurate observations and draw conclusions in a professional manner, of course. An observer must behave impeccably and respect local culture and customs. Moreover, an observer is expected to cooperate with other observers he or she meets."

Leverage for democratic governance

For the EU, election observations form an essential part of its foreign policy. After all, they are a lever to support democratic governance in a country. Strong democratic institutions are vital in order to increase a country's resilience. They can prevent a further crisis from occurring, stabilise a war-torn region or mitigate tensions. The EU also associates this with respect for human rights, gender equality and so on. Each year, it spends 45 to 50 million euros on election observations.

But election observations are never imposed. The country in which elections are taking place must apply for them. “It is certainly in a government's interests to do that,” clarified Valois. “That way, they can demonstrate to the international community that the post-conflict political transition is going well. This was the case, for example, in Sierra Leone and Nepal.”

Image
A man holding up a finger with green ink on it, indicating a specific point or message

To avoid double voting, voters should dip their index finger in indelible ink (Sudan elections, 2010). © Ezequiel Scagnetti/EU

The usefulness of election observations

The EU also keeps a big stick up its sleeve when carrying out election observations. Indeed, in its projects with its partner countries, it sets conditions such as respect for human rights and democratic governance. Valois continued: “If an election observation shows that the democratic system is totally dysfunctional, the EU can cease all funding. One country where this occurred was in Ethiopia, where the 2005 elections were catastrophic and accompanied by very high levels of violence. The termination of all direct bilateral aid forced the Ethiopian government to implement reforms and stage new elections in 2010, which then took place in better circumstances.”

So we can certainly say that election observations are useful. They definitely contribute towards ensuring fair, free and transparent elections. They also discourage fraud, encourage citizen participation and strengthen public confidence in elections. In the longer term, they help to create stronger and more independent state institutions and a more robust electoral process.

Full-fledged missions and expert missions

Overall, we distinguish between two types of observational missions. Valois: “Firstly, there are full-fledged missions that encompass all aspects of the electoral process across the entire country. These are highly visible missions – even to the press – with a large number of observers, some of whom are present for long periods of time (see box). Expert missions are limited to 2-3 experts who spend about two months in the country. These are fairly technical missions that are carried out behind the scenes in order to verify that elections are conducted in line with international, regional and national obligations.”

Both types of observation missions result in an assessment and a report. The elections may have gone well, have gone well with areas for improvement or have been conducted poorly. The report's recommendations are intended to encourage governments to improve the organisation of elections. Such improvements for instance may include providing greater scope to the opposition or encouraging a press that is less tied to political parties.

“In many cases, follow-up missions are then carried out – midway between two elections – to check the extent to which the country has taken the recommendations into account. If too little action has been taken, the EU may refuse to carry out another observation mission.” Follow-up missions form an integral part of the EU's political dialogue with its partner countries.

For budgetary reasons, there are fewer and fewer full-fledged missions and more expert missions.

Image
A man and woman in orange vests counting votes

The count at the elections in Sudan (2010). © Ezequiel Scagnetti/EU

An intense human adventure

Election observers are usually well received. “Nevertheless, it is a fairly regular occurrence that people express criticism in the sense of 'why are you Europeans coming here to interfere with our business’," said Valois. “If that happens, it is a matter of emphasising that the country itself requested an observation mission and that an election observer is 100 percent neutral and will not favour anyone.”

“Since 1998, I have taken part in no fewer than 24 observation missions, including once as an long-term observer in Lebanon,” concluded Valois. “Initially, these involved missions to Balkan countries such as Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia for the OSCE. Latterly, the missions were being carried out for the EU in countries such as Cambodia, Kenya, Nepal, Tanzania, Madagascar, Yemen and Myanmar.”

“Either way, serving as an election observer is guaranteed to lead to a very intense human adventure. You share daily life with locals at a time that is very important to them, that is, a crucial moment of participation. You get to visit the most remote locations and often have to settle for the most basic lodgings and food. But most of all, you can make your contribution towards ensuring a freer society in a variety of countries.”

Election observations in Belgium

And yes, election observations also take place in Belgium, but are organised by the OSCE. In the past, for example, – including in connection with the 2014 and 2019 elections – pre-election missions took place in order to determine whether an observation mission was needed during the elections.

An expert mission is currently in Brussels to monitor the European elections in our country on 9 June. The mission consists of seven people, all from non-EU countries. At the head of mission is a member of the Icelandic parliament and the deputy head is from the United Kingdom. Experts from countries such as Azerbaijan and Ukraine are also taking part. The aim: to find out whether elections are conducted in line with international, regional and national obligations.

What does a typical full-fledged EU election observation mission consist of?

  • The core team bases itself in the capital city. It consists of a head of mission – who is always an EU parliamentarian – and a number of experts who analyse the electoral process in detail and draw up a final report. A team typically consists of a spokesperson and experts in election administration, human rights, media, social media, security and so on.
  • Long-term observers (LTOs) are present in each district throughout the country – in the district's main city – as early as one month before election day until at least one week afterwards. They monitor the election campaign, interacting with stakeholders such as local authorities in charge of organising the elections, the mayor, political parties, NGOs, the media, security forces and citizens.

They can check, for example, whether the freedom of association and freedom of expression were respected and whether women and vulnerable groups were able to take part in the electoral process. Do citizens also know why they are voting and what is at stake and do they know who the candidates are?

After election day, they follow up on how the country handles complaints and disputes surrounding the election.

  • Short-term observers (STOs) are the largest in number and span the entire country. They arrive about five days before election day and then stay on for about four days afterwards. They are the ones on the ground visiting polling stations and making observations.

In the case of election observation missions carried out by the EU, each team of observers (LTOs and STOs) consists of one female and one male observer, in addition to a local driver and assistant.

How is a typical, full-fledged election observation mission conducted in the case of a short-term observer (STO)?

  • Upon arrival, the STOs gather in the capital for a thorough briefing (politics, elections) by the core team.
  • They then move to the region where they will be making their observations. There, they first receive a briefing by the long-term observers (LTOs), which will cover regional topics such as who the candidates are and so on.
  • On election day, the STOs get ready for a marathon. On average, they visit 7 to 15 polling stations, neatly divided between urban and rural areas.
  • At the very first polling station, they are present for a half an hour to one hour before it opens. This enables them to check how everything is laid out in readiness: stamps, ink, ballot boxes, urns, forms... The findings are completed in a questionnaire and immediately sent to the core team in digital form.
  • After that, they move to the next polling station where they stay for 30 to 40 minutes. Were voters able to vote freely? Were voters not influenced? Were posters of the candidates on display? Did no-one get two or more ballot papers? Did every voter have a valid identity document? Was the voter checked for traces of ink on his/her finger? After casting their vote, did each voter leave the polling station with an index finger clearly stained with indelible ink? All observations are carefully noted and sent to the core team in digital form.
  • At the very last polling station, the STO team will stay until sometime after it closes. How was closure carried out? How many ballot papers are there? How was the count conducted? Are international and national observers, civil society representatives and representatives of political parties present?
  • Sometimes it is necessary to return the following day. About 24 to 36 hours after the election, basically all results – including those from the most remote polling stations – should have been collected. In any case, it is important to see how those results are passed on to local major city and from there to the capital.
  • Finally, the STOs will receive another regional debriefing by the LTOs and a general debriefing in the capital by the core team. After that – some 10 days after arrival – they can return home.
  • During the recent observation mission in Senegal (March 2024), a total of 498 polling stations were visited, which equates to 7-8% of the total number. That was more than enough to get a thorough idea of how the elections had gone across the country, in this case flawlessly. There were 22 LTOs (11 teams) and 42 STOs (21 teams).
  • The head of the core team makes an initial statement on the afternoon of election day. A second statement based on all observations then follows two days after the election. A thorough report will be presented two months later. That discusses not only the campaign and election day, but also all of the meetings of the LTOs. It also formulates recommendations.