Once all of the laws and rules are in place, the key to a free and fair election or referendum is the way in which the electoral event is run.  It is vital that the elections management body is independent and impartial in its treatment of all who are involved in the election, and that it is both efficient and effective in the way it runs the whole election process.

Elections management bodies

There is much variation in the roles, size and names of electoral bodies. There is such a wide range of configurations and names across different countries that international bodies tend to use the generic term ‘elections management body’ or EMB.  The most commonly used terms are electoral commission and electoral office.  The range of roles carried out by these bodies also varies, as does their relationship with other parts of the government or state organisation.

In New Zealand, unusually, there are four separate bodies that play a part in parliamentary elections and another set for council elections.  The Electoral Enrolment Centre creates and maintains the electoral rolls that are used for parliamentary and council elections.  The Chief Electoral Officer runs parliamentary elections (and referendums).  Each council appoints an electoral officer who runs that council's elections.  The Electoral Commission is responsible for party registration and for education on electoral matters.  The Representation Commission convenes after every census to redraw electorate boundaries.  This set of roles is performed by one body in most countries, usually for parliamentary and local council elections.  Other roles that are performed by some electoral administration bodies are: policy advice, including research and reviews; boundary reviews; and capacity building of parties and candidates.

Impartiality and independence

Impartiality means that due process is followed and all are treated in the same way.  It is vital that the elections management body is, and is seen to be, impartial in the way that it operates in order to ensure that the election is free and fair and the resulting parliament has legitimacy.  Any departure from these principles can impact on the ways in which impartiality is interpreted and ensured.

It furthers free and fair elections when the elections management body is independent of political control.  Such a body makes its own decisions about details of how the election is run (within what the law specifies), which staff to hire, how to spend its budget and what it says about the election.  It is not possible to be totally independent from government as government provides the funds for the elections management body, but this can be done in a way that ensures that budgets are not affected by politicians’ reactions to the actions of the election management body.

Independence means that the EMB is free from political control or influence.  If the government can tell the EMB what to do then it will not be impartial.  Other than the law stating that an EMB is independent, key components of independence are that the EMB has full responsibility for running the election, has the power to make decisions, has members who are nor part of government and cannot easily be fired by government, has control of its budget and can determine its own policies and staffing.  Structural independence means that the law or constitution specifies the independence.  As important is the way in which the EMB behaves because even when structurally independent an EMB must also not sway to the indirect wants or suggestions of the government and must be a protector of free and faire electoral law and practice.

In maintaining impartiality and independence, guarding against bribery and corruption is an obvious step but other forms of bias must also be explicity avoided.  One group that may have an advantage are the incumbents, those who are currently in parliament or power, because they have access to budgets, staff and equipment as well as the ability to change laws and regulations.  Democracies tend to have rules that guard against this, for instance in how parliamentary funds and staff can be used in the months before an election campaign starts.  In some cultures the demands of impartiality come into conflict with cultural norms.  For instance, assisting the family and obeying elders may be the norm but could also lead to behaviour that assists some candidates or parties more than others.  Any attempts at bribery and corruption have two participants – those who offer the bribe and those who accept it. Anyone who knows about the bribe but says nothing is also implicated.

The electoral laws and elections management body must also guard against bribery and intimidation of voters.  The secret ballot is an important defence against bribery and intimidation because the voter should not show anyone how they vote.  The secret ballot was first used in South Australia in 1856.  Prior to that, it was normal for each voter to declare their vote in a public place and the vote was then recorded. So if a candidate had bought the vote or threatened the voter they could check on what the voter had done.  Without any way of checking that the vote had been delivered, bribery and vote buying became less certain.  Another form of bribery, often called treating, is when candidates offer voters ‘a good time’, with food, alcohol and entertainment.  In Papua New Guinea this entertainment often includes provision of prostitutes which has lead the Electoral Commission there to include safe sex and HIV/Aids prevention messages in their education materials.

Efficiency and effectiveness

A parliamentary election is the biggest recurring peacetime logistical exercise in most countries.  Everything has to be in place and working on election day with contingency plans to deal with any problems.  Not only must the whole system work but it must also be seen to be efficient so that people do not question the security and accuracy of the results.  Many of the things that contribute to ensuring a successful election are not noticed by voters, unless they go wrong.  Some of the core components to be organised are the polling places, staff, information for voters, printed ballot papers, and security arrangements.

For instance, in New Zealand for the 2005 general election the returning officers needed to find 2,714 polling places and check them against a list of necessary attributes such as parking, space, disability access and lighting.  On election day there were 17,000 staff employed, all of whom had to be recruited, trained and paid.  On election day over two-and-a- quarter million votes were cast, of which the 2,052,812 cast in voters’ home electorates between 9am and 7pm were all counted by midnight.

In many developing democracies these logistics pose significant problems.  For instance, how do you securely deliver ballot papers when there is not a road network across the country?  In Afghanistan they used donkeys; in the Cook Islands they have to charter a boat to reach all of the islands.  Aspects that we take for granted in New Zealand can also cause problems elsewhere.  For instance, in Lesotho the count took place after polling closed but as most polling places did not have electricity counting was done by the light of candles or the headlights of UN vehicles.  In Fiji there was only one printing press that could print the ballot papers and it had to run all day and night in order to have papers printed in time, which meant the printing staff slept at the factory, worried that if the press broke down they would not be able to complete the job.

Seemingly simple jobs, such as counting the vote, need to be organised with precision because the scrupulous counting of votes is central to a free and fair election.  Plans need to be in place to ensure the security of the papers from the time they come off the printing press to the time that they are destroyed after the election.  In the Timor-Leste elections there were ceremonial handings over of custody of the ballot papers to the national security forces for delivery to the polling places around the country.

Planning and resourcing

Two of the main constraints on running an efficient election are time and money.  Elections are expensive to run and budget decisions will impact on transport, equipment, staff, training and information materials. Simple jobs like printing ballot papers take a long time when over two million have to be printed.  The time available for these jobs is determined by the date at which nominations close and the date at which advance voting starts.  Recruiting and training staff is another component that takes a lot of time but cannot be done until the date of the election is known.  In Norway, Scotland and the USA the date of elections is set, but in other countries the date is determined by the head of state or head of government.  In New Zealand the norm is that six weeks’ notice is given of the election date.  All plans are in place ready to run an election at least six months before the last possible date for an election, and at all times there is a contingency plan in place in case an early election is called.  Dealing with these contingencies is another reason why a permanent elections management body is desirable.

Accountability

Given the need for an elections management body that makes its own decisions, it is important that it is also accountable for those decisions, for how it runs he election and uses its budget.  In New Zealand the Justice and Electoral Committee of Parliament holds an inquiry after every election at which committee members hear reports from the elections management bodies and submissions from the public.  They then report on any matters that they consider are in need of review. Between elections, electoral administrators publish annual reports on their activities so that government, parliament, the media and the public can see what they have been doing.

A permanent elections management body is important in ensuring free and fair elections because it provides continuity.  In particular, there will be people who have run elections in the past and are familiar with how the laws are applied and interpreted.  There is a range of specific skills needed to run a successful election and these are best maintained through a permanent administration.  After each election there will be areas of law and administration that need to be reviewed and possibly changed.  This process is most easily done by a permanent elections management body.  A permanent body can also play the crucial role of guardian of the election process and laws should any individuals or groups seek to make fundamental changes to benefit themselves.