Jorrit de Jong
Trends and Challenges in
Election Monitoring
Innovations Case Discussion:
National Democratic Institute
Election-monitoring organizations (EMOs) have shown a great deal of courage,
expertise, and ingenuity in their work around the world. Trained observers have
closely watched polling stations under difficult circumstances and with limited
resources. They have reported incidents of voting rights violations and circum-
stances that may have compromised election results. Data analysts who have gath-
ered and collated information coming in from remote voting districts have had to
deliver high-quality intelligence in very little time. Leaders of EMOs have had to
communicate the results of their monitoring activities to government officials and
to the international community at large—reports that have not always been wel-
kommen.
Monitoring elections is, in short, a difficult task but an important one. Even in
the most seasoned democracies, there is always concern for the fairness of the
Verfahren. EMOs contribute to safeguarding that fairness in at least two ways. Erste,
their mere presence may prevent election irregularities and fraud, and second,
EMOs provide an assessment of the integrity of the election process. This assess-
ment, if positive, may increase the credibility of the election results and the legiti-
macy of the newly elected mayor, parliament, or government.
The cases described by NDI show that monitoring elections involves much
more than observing and reporting alone. Election monitoring is most effective if
and when it gains legitimacy both among the population and with the govern-
ment. One way to gain legitimacy, as the article argues, is to present an accurate
and representative picture of the whole election process, preferably before the
results are officially announced by the government or election committee. In order
to do that, a lot of information must be gathered in very little time from a number
of places. Information and Communication Technologies have given EMOs new
opportunities to improve this process. In developing countries in particular, tradi-
tional telecommunications infrastructure, including land lines, is often far from
reliable. Using mobile communication technology, like radio transmitters and cell
Telefone, enables observers to report incidents in real time. Advanced software
(Geographical Information System, or GIS) allows data analysts in the EMO head-
Jorrit de Jong is a research fellow at the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and
Innovation at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.
© 2008 Jorrit de Jong
Innovationen / Frühling 2008
159
Von http heruntergeladen://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/3/2/159/704348/itgg.2008.3.2.159.pdf by guest on 07 September 2023
Jorrit de Jong
quarters to combine the data and draw conclusions from the emerging informa-
tion. In Sierra Leone, Jordanien, and Montenegro, EMOs have experimented with
short message system (SMS) reporting. SMS proved to be a more efficient and
effective use of the available cell phone technology. Short text messages, welche
contain codes for a variety of incidents and situations, not only cost less than
phone conversations, they also don’t use up phone capacity in the headquarters
and they allow data to be collated more easily. Although the NDI article mentions
that EMOs are still struggling with some of the technological aspects, one can
clearly see a set of highly significant monitoring techniques emerging from these
Erfahrungen. Observers are now better equipped with tools to monitor and report
disenfranchisement and fraud in the field.
In diesem Artikel, I discuss the innovations in election monitoring in the broader
context of realizing rights. I argue that the benefits of election monitoring could be
expanded if more factors impeding access to the electoral process are taken into
account and if more people are involved in election monitoring. The very innova-
tionen (SMS-aided reporting systems and GIS-powered data interpretation) Das
have made election monitoring more efficient in the first place could be employed
to make it more effective and legitimate as well. In diesem Artikel, I first discuss how
broadening the scope of election monitoring influences its effectiveness. I then dis-
cuss how involving more people in the monitoring process may increase its legiti-
macy.
REALIZING THE RIGHT TO VOTE
A citizen’s right to vote is one of the fundamental rights in a democracy and an
internationally recognized human right.1 Voting systems may vary from country to
country, but a democracy that doesn’t allow its citizens to vote is inconceivable.2
The right to vote implies an equal opportunity for everyone to participate in the
electoral process. Bedauerlicherweise, in many countries, this formal right is hardly
materialized to the full extent for everyone.
Effective participation in the electoral process is dependent on several factors.
Erste, to cast a vote, one must be able to know when, Wo, Warum, and how elections
are held. This may seem obvious to people who have voted all their lives in stable
democracies, but citizens need to know what the election is about and how the
procedure works. Voting is an act that requires both electoral officials and voters
to obey certain rules. If these rules are not followed—for example, with respect to
secrecy or proper use of the ballot or voting machine—it may result in an invalid
vote. Knowing where, Wann, and how to vote is crucial information, especially for
first-time voters in nascent democracies. Zweite, access to the polling station is an
essential factor. Are the polling stations within reasonable distance of the voters? Is
the capacity of the polling station big enough to handle all who show up on elec-
tion day? Do voters have sufficient opportunity to go to the polling station, für
Beispiel, before or after work or during lunch breaks? Is there a provision for
absentee voting for those who are ill, disabled, caring for children, or traveling?
160
Innovationen / Frühling 2008
Von http heruntergeladen://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/3/2/159/704348/itgg.2008.3.2.159.pdf by guest on 07 September 2023
Trends and Challenges in Election Monitoring
Dritte, while in the polling station, voters should feel safe and free to cast their vote
anonymously and discreetly. Are the election administrators trustworthy and is the
counting and reporting process adequately overseen? If and when irregularities
occur at any time before, während, or after the voting process, voters should be able
to file complaints and have their stories heard.
The right to vote, mit anderen Worten, may be a necessary condition for democrat-
ic participation but it is by no means a sufficient condition. There are many fac-
tors that influence citizens’ ability to cast a vote. Some of these factors are related
to people’s own capabilities, others are related to the way elections are conducted.
An extreme example of the former is someone who isolates himself completely
from the outside world and has no way of knowing that an election is going on.
Umgekehrt, if the government does not adequately publicize the information vot-
ers need about the election, many people will not be informed in time to vote. In
real life, situations are rarely as extreme as these examples. A lack of access to the
electoral process often stems from a combination of factors related to people’s
capabilities and the way elections are organized. Zum Beispiel, someone who is not
able to walk can’t go to the polling station, and if the election rules do not allow
her to have someone represent her or to cast an absentee vote, her access is imped-
ed just as much as by the institutions (the law, the administration, election offi-
cials) as by her own disability.3
Access to the polls may be understood as the match between the institutional
capacity to deliver the right to vote and the citizen’s capacity to enjoy that right.
Bedauerlicherweise, around the world we often notice a mismatch between the two—a
mismatch, so to speak, between principles and practice in democratic elections.
This mismatch may both be caused by and result in societal inequalities.4 Those
less able than others to participate in an election might easily be disadvantaged or
even disenfranchised in an electoral process that doesn’t take their limitations into
account. The illiterate are disadvantaged if information can only be obtained in
written form. The rural poor are disadvantaged if polling stations are scarce and
traveling is expensive. Ethnic minorities are disadvantaged when they feel intimi-
dated by hostile environments dominated by the ethnic majority in or around
polling stations. Women are disadvantaged if it is culturally or socially not accept-
able for women to exercise their right to complain.5 Fair and free elections are not
guaranteed by a lack of irregularities and explicit violations alone. daher, Wenn
election monitoring is to guarantee people’s right to vote, it should not only focus
on proper application of the rules but also examine the fairness of the rules them-
sich selbst. It should not only focus on the performance of the system but also on the
extent to which the system is designed to be equitable.6
Assessing the “fairness” of the voting system requires in-depth analysis of
demographics and sociogeographic data, as well as an examination of all aspects of
the election administration. This would have to be done long before the election.
Having the aggregate data ready and loaded into the GIS that some EMOs already
use would enable election-monitoring officials to combine relevant social statistics
with incidents as they occur during the election. Zum Beispiel, a lack of adequate
Innovationen / Frühling 2008
161
Von http heruntergeladen://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/3/2/159/704348/itgg.2008.3.2.159.pdf by guest on 07 September 2023
Jorrit de Jong
Figur 1. Screenshot from ElectionJournal.org.
information about the election in areas where many illiterate people live may be
noticed. Or, a lack of polling stations in areas where people lack the money to trav-
el to distant polling stations may be noted. Obviously, in every country, other sets
of statistics may be relevant. This will again depend on both the characteristics of
the population and the characteristics of the electoral system.7
VOTERS AS WATCHDOGS
Während der 2008 presidential primary elections in Pennsylvania, a citizens8 initia-
tive called Election Journal combined the benefits of Google Maps (free Internet-
based cartographic applications), Twitter (a system enabling users to upload pic-
tures and text on a Web page), YouTube (a free website hosting short user-gener-
ated movie clips), and Flickr (free storage for digital photos) with cell phones,
blackberries, digital cameras, and laptops. Concerned about voter disenfranchise-
ment and election fraud, the organizers invited voters to report any irregularities
in Philadelphia voting districts via one of the Web applications. On the initiative’s
website,9 all reports appeared on a Google Map of Philadelphia (see Figure 1
über).
Among the reported irregularities were incidents of machine failures, illegal
campaigning and flyering near polling stations, and perceived intimidation of vot-
ers. The website encourages citizen observers to report any kind of irregularities,
from broken machines to fraud and dirty tricks, from long lines to intimidation.
Election Journal is not a licensed EMO. Even though it may subscribe to all the
values and codes of conduct that officially certified EMOs subscribe to,10 this citi-
162
Innovationen / Frühling 2008
Von http heruntergeladen://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/3/2/159/704348/itgg.2008.3.2.159.pdf by guest on 07 September 2023
Trends and Challenges in Election Monitoring
zens initiative cannot officially be held accountable or sanctioned for the integrity
of their conduct or the validity of their reports. Tatsächlich, both the technology and
the content are provided by other parties. Election Journal simply provides a
forum that seeks to enhance transparency. It empowers the public at large and
“concerned citizens” in particular to take responsibility in safeguarding fair elec-
tionen. Like any open Internet platform, Election Journal can never claim represen-
tation or even the validity of the reported claims. In that sense, the initiative has
serious limitations as an EMO. Andererseits, it opens up new potential for
election monitoring that addresses some of the limitations that established and
official EMOs face.
Erste, EMOs are committed to using expert monitoring officials who are
trained and have taken a pledge. The problem is that they are limited in number,
making it impossible to have observers in every single polling station in any
national election. EMOs can at best provide a representative and fairly accurate
picture of the election process. Involving the general public in reporting irregular-
ities dramatically increases the observing capacity. Voters may be less informed
than official observers and perhaps partisan in their reporting, but they are liter-
ally everywhere and may be able to provide information that the officials miss out
An. The reports filed by citizens may be followed up on and investigated by official
observers.
Zweite, EMOs have been struggling with the technological aspects of the mon-
itoring and reporting systems. Election Journal shows that smart combinations of
readily available free software can produce amazing results. Combining the facili-
ties of Twitter, YouTube, GoogleMaps, and other websites with the equipment that
more and more people own reduces costs and the risk of unreliable home-built
Software. Another advantage of using public-domain platforms is that the moni-
toring process itself becomes transparent. The NDI article indicated that the legit-
imacy of the EMOs depends on the extent to which they can be accurate, quick,
and transparent.
CONCLUSION
In this article I have argued that election-monitoring organizations have been very
successful in developing innovative techniques to do their important work. Der
use of SMS technology in combination with GIS has increased efficiency and effec-
tiveness of election-monitoring operations. This in turn is likely to increase the
legitimacy of EMOs.
I also discussed the opportunities that these new techniques and technologies
provide to unlock new potential for EMOs. Including more data about the popu-
lation in the analysis will enable observers to interpret incidents and patterns of
incidents before, während, and after the election. We have argued that an evaluation
of real access to the polls cannot be based solely on observations with regard to
violations of rules. The capabilities of individuals or circumstantial groups should
be taken into account in order to establish whether an electoral process is fair or
Innovationen / Frühling 2008
163
Von http heruntergeladen://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/3/2/159/704348/itgg.2008.3.2.159.pdf by guest on 07 September 2023
Jorrit de Jong
nicht.
Another opportunity that new media have provided for election-monitoring
purposes is empowering the public at large. Although election monitoring requires
knowledge and skills and an accountability structure, its strength very much
depends on the reporting capacity available. Using public-domain Internet appli-
cations in combination with equipment that many citizens own, like cell phones
and digital cameras, may result in many more reports of incidents, or at least a
more vigilant electorate. Außerdem, if Internet platforms like GoogleMaps,
YouTube, and Twitter are used by EMOs, the monitoring process itself may be
monitored by the electorate. This will increase transparency and, arguably, legiti-
macy.
Endnotes
1. Article 21.1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted and proclaimed by United Nations
General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) von 10 Dezember 1948.
2. Some groups, Jedoch, like criminals, aliens, and children, may be deliberately excluded from the
voting process for reasons that legislators have considered justifiable.
3. Taking into account people’s real capabilities in the evaluation of institutions and policies instead
of judging institutions merely on the basis of their inherent characteristics has been a central
argument of the “capabilities approach” as advocated by, unter anderen, Sen (1999) and Nussbaum
(2006).
4. For a further elaboration of the concept of “access,” see Rizvi and De Jong (2008).
5. For cases illustrating the impediments to these specific groups, see www.ImprovingAccess.org.
6. Inequalities in society may not only result in unequal participation in the electoral process, Aber
also in other forms of democratic participation. There are high correlations between social status
Und (the effect of) democratic participation, as shown in research by Verba, Lehman Schlozman,
and Brady (1995).
7. An election-monitoring system that is able to detect mismatches between people’s capacity to
enjoy their right to vote and the institutional capacity to guarantee that right would be a power-
ful tool for social justice. It is conceivable that governments would consider it too powerful, seit
it could reveal deeper patterns of social inequality which, if made explicit, might not only affect
the way elections are administered but also raise questions about how other institutions of the
state are designed and managed.
8. The “brains of the initiative” is, according to the website, Mike Roman, a Republican strategist act-
ing on his own behalf. He states that a motivation for the effort to bring about more transparen-
cy is that “if an election is worth winning, then there is someone willing to steal it.”(Quote from
9.
10. Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation and Code of Conduct for
International Election Observers, Commemorated October 27, 2005, at the United Nations,
New York.
Verweise
Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Rizvi, G., & De Jong, G. J. (2008). The state of access: Success and failure of democracies to create equal
Gelegenheiten. Washington, Gleichstrom: Brookings Institution Press.
Sen, A. K. (1999), Development As Freedom, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Verba, S., K. Lehman Schlozman, H. E. Brady (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in
American politics, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
164
Innovationen / Frühling 2008
Von http heruntergeladen://direct.mit.edu/itgg/article-pdf/3/2/159/704348/itgg.2008.3.2.159.pdf by guest on 07 September 2023