The risks of flawed and failed elections worldwide
In many countries, polling day ends with disputes
about ballot-box fraud, corruption, and flawed registers. Which claims are
accurate? And which are false complaints from sore losers?
New evidence gathered by the Electoral Integrity
Project has just been released in an annual report which compares the risks of
flawed and failed elections, and how far countries around the world meet
international standards. The EIP is an independent research project based at
the University of Sydney and Harvard University, under the direction of
Professor Pippa Norris.
This annual report evaluates all national parliamentary
and presidential contests occurring in 66 countries worldwide holding 73
election from 1 July 2012 to 31 December 2013 (excluding smaller states with a
population below 100,000), from Albania to Zimbabwe. Data is derived from a global
survey of 855 election experts. Immediately after each contest, the survey asks
domestic and international experts to monitor the quality based on 49
indicators. These responses are then clustered
into eleven stages occurring during the electoral cycle and summed to construct
an overall 100-point expert Perception of Electoral Integrity (PEI) index and
ranking.
Several major new findings emerge from the EIP report.
- Headlines often focus on problems occurring on
polling day. Yet lack of a level
playing field in political finance and campaign media were seen by experts
as the most serious risk to integrity worldwide. These risks were found
in many countries, with campaign finance the weakest part of the electoral
cycle.
- Overall, not surprisingly, electoral integrity is
strengthened by democracy and development. Longer experience over
successive contests consolidates democratic institutions, deepens civic
cultures, and builds the capacity of electoral management bodies.
Nevertheless electoral integrity
was particularly strong in several third wave democracies and emerging
economies, including the Republic of Korea, the Czech Republic,
Slovenia, Lithuania, Argentina, and Mongolia.
- By contrast, experts were critical about flawed
elections in several long-established democracies, such as Italy and Japan.
Most strikingly, according to the PEI index, the United States ranked 26th out of 73 elections
under comparison worldwide, the
lowest score among Western nations. Experts highlighted concern over
American practices of district boundaries, voter registration, and
campaign finance.
- Worldwide, South
East Asia was the weakest region. This includes Malaysia, due to its
district boundaries and electoral laws, and Cambodia, with concerns about
voter registration, the compilation of results, and the independence of
electoral authorities. Recent electoral protests and instability in
Thailand, Cambodia, and Malaysia vividly illustrate these challenges. Eurasian elections also raise concern, such as those in Belarus,
Tajikistan, Ukraine, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Finally,
several African states with
restricted human rights and political freedoms were at risk of failed
elections, including Equatorial Guinea, Djibouti, the Republic of
Congo, Angola, and Zimbabwe.
Subsequent annual reports will cover national
elections every year, to broaden the comparison worldwide.
“The spread of elections worldwide during recent decades has been
accompanied by widespread concern about their quality,” Pippa Norris commented,
“Too often elections are deeply flawed, or even failing to meet international
standards. This study is the first to gather reliable evidence from experts to
pinpoint where contests are problematic- such as in Belarus, Djibouti, and
Zimbabwe – and also to celebrate where they succeed, such as in Norway, the
Czech Republic, Slovenia, and South Korea.”
The Perceptions of Electoral Integrity (PEI) Index
Source: Electoral
Integrity Project. 2014. The expert survey of Perceptions of
Electoral Integrity, Release 2 (PEI_2)
No comments:
Post a Comment