Why observe elections? For many, the idea is still to get an independant verdict on the quality of the process: If the observers declare the elections "free and fair", then the outcome should be respected by both the citizens concerned and the international community. The newly elected government is considered legitimate and its decisions understood to be in line with the will of the people.

Holding regular, free and fair elections is thus seen as an indicator for a healthy democracy, but we should be mindful not to equate one with the other. Democracy, as I understand it, is an on-going participatory process of forming opinions and taking decisions on issues affecting the larger community - and elections are just one part of this process.

Election observation can be a useful tool to strengthen democratic practices, but only if it puts elections into a wider perspective. First, by  seeing elections as ONE element of a larger process. Second, by not reducing elections to an isolated event on polling day, but by including all its phases such as internal political party nominations, public campaigns, voting, counting and possibly judicial procedures in case of contentious outcomes. Third, by taking a longer-term perspective - not just judging the current elections, but working towards improving the next ones.

Election observation should thus not be a one-off event. Institutions and organisations should make a firm commitment to stay involved, not only by observing consecutive elections, but also by staying engaged in between elections.

Take the case of Cameroon's President Paul Biya who managed to use his
huge majority in Parliament to delay constitutional changes that would have
allowed the creation of an independent electoral process and allow for a free, fair and democratic process.

Instead, parliament allowed him to stand for President of the country in
future elections. Previously, the country’s constitution allowed a president to
stay in office for 2 terms of 7 years each.

President Biya started making noises to suggest that he wanted to stay
longer in office over a year ago and with a majority of 153 in an 180 seat
legislature, and his well-known tough control of the ruling Cameroon People’s
Democratic Movement, (CPDM) and allegiances owed to him by members, long suffering
opposition leader John Fru Ndi and his Social Democratic Front (SDF), did not
stand a chance against Biya’s new found aspirations.

Although in a dramatic move, the SDF showed their contempt for the
CPDM's vote to change the country's constitution, nothing seems to have changed
Biya’s aspirations to stay in power.

The oppositions amendments were swept aside and a vote for change went
through. So what did this mean for Biya's political career now spanning
slightly over 25 years in office? Biya's second term in office expires in 2011.

Proposed changes to the country's constitution led to riots in Febrary
2008 and blogs on the internet showed how many disaffected Cameroonians writing
critically, about these consitutional changes.

Biya is just another African leader leader who is manipulating democracy
for his own personal gain. Nigeria's Obasanjo tried this same tactic but was
defeated and had to leave office in Nigeria.There is an impasse in Zimbabwe
over election results and Kenya is still trying to survive a fragile coalition
government which has come under pressure.

African politicians still seem to believe that the countries that they
are elected to run become their personal property and will do anything to
manipulate the electoral system, constitution, their own political parties to
ensure that they hold onto power for as long as possible.

For Cameroon, it seems that the dice is cast now and Paul Biya is going
to stay in office for a very long time. Not just that, he has set a dangerous
precedent.

Any other president after him may use this very same system to
manipulate democracy, the will of the people and do as they please in office.
Therefor, its critical to mobilize the power of citizens to participate in free
and fair elections and for both local and international election observers to
safeguard a free and fair electoral process by monitoring elections.

Where a free, fair  and
democratic process is evident, human rights, the rule of law and democratic
governance is restored. This qualifies election monitoring as a process through
which the tools of governnace and constitutionalism are protected aganist
political manupilation. There is every reason to believe that election
monitoring facilitates citizenry participation in the consolidation of their
democratic institutions and the revivals of a people driven processes.

In conclusion, election monitoring privdes a tool to monitor the democratic processes and helps to hold governments accountable to the principles of a free, fair and democratic process 

. 

I think elections are foundation and/or building block towards democracy and human rights. It is elections which lead towards a democratic and good governance. If elections are held in free, fair, transparent and democratic manner, of course, they will help in establishing society with democractic value, a society where everybody's rights are resepected, a society where government cares to provide all basic amenities and needs to its citizens.

 There are no two opinions about the fact that it is prime responsibility of the governments and the election authorities to ensure free, fair, transparenta and democratic elections but election monitoring/observation has vital role in making elections free and fair.  Therefore, civil society groups and internaitonal election observation groups have to monitor/observe the elections. 

 In my personal opinion, election monitoring is directly related with human rights. Most importantly, it is right of citizens' and international community to monitor/observe the elections since people have a right to information. Secondly, peoples' participation in elections, in terms of voting, is also their right, so election monitoring not only helps in collecting information about the manner in which elections are held, but it also facilitates in knowing whether people were given their right to participate in elections. It is right of people to voter for the person of their choice, so election monitoring helps in revealing the facts if people were grant this right to freely vote for person of their choice. 

Hassan Nasir Mirbahar, Cavish Development Foundation, (Pakistan)

Genuine democratic elections serve two fundamental and inter-related purposes in any country.  They resolve peacefully the competition for political/governmental power, and they serve as the vehicle through which the people freely express their will as to who is to hold the authority and legitimacy to govern.   Election monitoring, when done properly, can contribute to each of these purposes by promoting electoral integrity and the warranted degree of public confidence in the electoral process.   Election monitoring can also expose violations of election-related rights, which violations can subvert electoral integrity and deny legitimacy to those who falsely claim electoral victory.  That is why election monitoring, when done properly, is a powerful tool.

The Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation, now endorsed by 32 intergovernmental an dinternational nongovernmental organizations, provides an overview of the bases for proper election observation - in light of international human rights standards and basic observation methodology. 

The Declaration notes that genuine elections are both an internationally recognized human right and are dependent on the exercise of a wide range of other civil and political rights in the electoral context (e.g., association, peaceful assembly, freedom of expression, freedom from discrimination on improper bases, equal protcection of law, and others) that permiate all elements of election processes.  Those processes transpire over extended periods, from drafting laws and other "rules of the game" through, legal recognition of parties, drawing fo election districts, qualifying for listing on the ballot, financing of campaigns, freedom from violence and coercion, media access, employment of electronic election technologies, and many other things well before and beyond election day.  It also notes that rights apply to those seeking to vote and those seeking to be elected.

Nonpartisan election monitoring is carried out by domestic election monitors, who are active in the thousands and tens-of-thousands in over 80 countries around the globe, as well as by international election observers.  These citizen "watchdogs" promote governmental and political accountability, encourage citizens to exercise the right to participate in government and public affairs and defend the rights of citizens to exercise broader civil and political rights.  They also advocate for electoral reforms and other types of democratic progress.  Such election monitors fall among the ranks of human rights defenders.

The findings and recommendations of election monitors, domestic and international, can therefore touch on a wide range of institutions and processes in a country.  If acted upon in good faith, the findings and recommendations can have significant positive impact on promoting democratic progress, the rule of law and human rights.  It can also help citizens increase their participation in government and public affairs, which can result in more responsive and open governance.  Where good faith is lacking, election monitorng can reveal democratic deficits.

---Pat Merloe---

kntb I am glad to finally join this exciting group, had been travelling for days and had limited access to internet. I am in for the next 3 days before i travel again. Just to check, this guy is from Nigeria where it seems elections have gotten worse in the last 2 experiences.

Looking back, i can though say that there is a growing awarenss on the need for election monitoring by all staekholders. Although some contributors have raised key issues, is it just about the election per se or the process that leads to the election and how conflicts are resolved afterwards?

 Fundamentally, if the electoral body is not independent, the the entire process is flawed as the case was in the 2007 general elections in Nigeria. The incumbent controlled the electoral body so that the process for candidates emergence was not transparent and did not reflect the true desire of the people. This said, monitoring is begining to also alter the manipulative tendencies of political godfathers. For instance in Jos Plateau state where i reside, the gubernatoral candidate had contested elections 3 times consecutively and each time it was alleged he was denied office through electoral fraud. But during the 2007 elections, people, both old and young i personally observed after casting their votes waited to observe the counting and announcement of results. It was invariably difficult to rig the elections again becuase of the monitoring by the electorate per se. And that brings in the dimension of the importance of the use of mobile telephone technology to enhance election outcomes.

Ok, will gist on later.

Election monitoring defends and promotes a broad range of electoral related rights, as many participants in our discussion have noted.  It is based on the right to participate in government and public affairs, which is integral to the right to genuine elections.  Election monitors not only shine a light on fraud and lessor electoral deficiencies and/or deter fraud and abuse; they also offer recommendations, where appropriate, on how to improve elections and broader political processes.

In all of these senses, election moniotoring - both international and more so dmoestic -contributes to democratic progress.  International election observers often can help domestic actors to improve processes by offering recommendations based on international principles and comparative practives for democratic elections.  Follow up on recommendations in the pre- and post-election periods is a challenge for international observation in terms of striking a proper balance between respect for sovereignty and rights defense/promotion.  It also presents challenge in developing relationships with a range of domestic actors, who are ultimately the ones who promote reform and democratic progress,  A third challenge for international observation is how to sustain longer-term engagements to monitor follow-up. 

Various organizations are addressing these challenges.  NDI tries to integrate its international observation with long-term activities through ongoing offices in most countries where it observes elections.  OSCE/ODIHR relates to OSCE Missions and other OSCE offices in countries; plus it sometimes is invited to send follow-up missions. The EU is developing an intiative with International IDEA to enhance follow up.  Other organizations are making similar efforts and are discussing this topic in the process surrounding the Declaration of Principles for International Election Observation.   

 The relationship between election monitoring and promoting democratic progress is much stronger for domestic nonpartisan election monitors.  Genuine elections are a fundamental part of democracy but are only a part of it.  Mobilizing thougands of citizens to participate in election monitoring builds broader civil society capacities to conduct government and political accountability efforts.  Advocacy for genuine elections frequently leads to advocy for publicv policy, law and regulatory improvments in the electoral arena, which builds experience and skills that flows to other topics.  There are scores of examples of this around the world where domestic election monitors have championed improvements in electoral frameworks, opend parliaments to citizen observation, promoted forums and other dialogue bewteen citizens and elected officials. 

These developments also have led to groups and group members taking up quality of life issues in economic, social and cultural areas that demonstrate benefits of democratic processes.  Election monitoring is not a panacea for deomcratic progress or even for ensuring electoral integrity.  It has contirbuted beyond elections though and promises to continue to do so.  In countries where election monitoring becomes less than an ungent need, human rights and democracy activists can carry lessons to other important activities. 

---Pat Merloe---

Leonida

I would like to concur with  what has been said by fellow Tactics community members on the power of election monitoring.I would like to share some of the challenges existing in Kenya during the election process ie as people queue to cast their ballots which to a great extent interfere with the monitoring:

In Kenya  though secret ballot is the preferred method of voting, elements such as  lack of indelible ink , lack of voting papers has been a  problem in some cases especially in rural areas

Late opening of voting stations  results into scores of people not voting thus  even if the votes are cast an an individual wins , it may not be a proper reflections of the wills of the people 

Violence in polling centres 

The absence of names of voters on the voting registry

Electoral violence is also a hindrance which deters many people from participating in the electoral process which is their constitutional rights

 Based on the  election  related violance we had in Kenya, my take would be  to have an independent electoral commission.

Election monitoring makes people feel that their voices will be hears since they elect people they want to represent them.Proper monitoring  also ensures that  the elected are accountable to the electorates as opposed to situations where there  are malpractices such as rigging, nobody can be held accountable because even the  winning itself is rigged.Proper monitoring also ensures resources will be used well because politics is all about allocation of scare resources.When monitoring is properly done it helps build a sense of nationhood ( In Kenya and  many African countries politics and elections are based on ethnic lines )

 Leonida Odongo

Ebony Youth and Orphans Support Initiative Kenya 

Allow me to share with you my personal experience during the disputed December 2007 presidential election in Kenya. Soon after the voter register was officially published, the power of the citizens to mobilize for change was evident. Under the then prevailing circumstances, a bigger number of people were willing to express themselves and shre their opinions. Africa Interactive Media Foundation through the Voices of Africa project and the Media Focus on Africa launched an election plat form to encourage more citizens to participate in the process and to take advantage of the mobile phone technology.

What we realized is that the more number of people expressing themselves through technology, the stronger becomes democracy  and the more participation in the process was realized.

With over 13  million registered voters and a voter turn out of about 80 % slightly less than 10 million voters, tmobile users stood at 16 million due to reduction of call rates and cheap mobile hand sets that was encouraging for citizen journalism during the election period.

The plat form enabled citizens to send in images, sms and monitor the campaign process. Most images send in by citizens using their mobile phones captured instances of police brutality, and violence targetting opposition supporters from polling stations. 

There was also evidence of electoral malpractise and vote buying that was captured even as the Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) maintained that the process was free and fair.

Reactions from election observers who had witnessed the flawed process and open protest by local and international observers was captured on mobilephones.

Its usually important to consider any prevailing circumstances that would enable external participation by the citizenry and other observers to monitor elections.

It was feared that violence and intimidation would be used to deter voters from voting and especially, violence aganist women voters and candidates was systematic and wide spread in areas associated with the ruling party-the Party of National Unity.

Where there is evidence of planned violence or reported incidents of violence or attempts to steal the vote, its obvious to monitor the process during and after voting.

Many people in this discussion have said there is a need not just for the presence of observers on election day, but also some type of monitoring for campaign financing, freedom of the press and other such campaign activities. 

 The question is what are the best methods for effectively monitoring these types of activities?  Are local or international monitors better?  How does the methods differ between different types of countries?  Given that often resources (both money and time) are limited, the ability of groups must also be limited, what is the best way to allocate these resources?  

 For example, during the recent Bolivian referendum, there were few (though some) accusations of ballot-stuffing or denying of voting privledges, I noticed the greater election violation was the monopolization of television advertisment time by the the Morales government.  Yet international obeservers, often the most quoted in western newspapers, were only present for a few days before and after elections, thus the lack of balanced coverage was under reported.  Are there suggestions on how this can be avoided?

Before sending in the observers to monitor an election, the decision must first be made of whether or not you will monitor the election. How does an organization make this decision? What conditions must be met to make this tactic feasible? What are the risks that need to be assessed? Is there a checklist? 

Kristin Antin, New Tactics Online Community Builder

ثورة العقول بداية التغيير

MindQuake

While human rights abuse are most prevalent in dictatorship goverened countries, the election system is a fake process helping the dictator to abuse human rights and utilise the para military GOS to make the election a game which guarantees the exixting ruling system success.

The question would be how to ensure that the election is a fair process that will bring to power the poeples choice and not to legitimise the existing dictator.

In the early years, election observation was mostly confined to observing the casting and counting of ballots on election day. While this could capture the most blatant attempts at electoral fraud, such as ballot box stuffing, it neglected the more subtle – but not less effective – ways of manipulations in the months ahead. In the meantime, professional election observers have improved their approach: The analysis of electoral and media laws, the process of delimitation of constituency boundaries, voter registration and election campaign monitoring have all been integrated in the observation methodology. The use and abuse of state resources by incumbents during election campaigns is also an issue that receives more and more attention. However, one issue is still widely neglected – namely that of party and campaign funding. It is widely accepted that the availability of funds has a huge impact on the election outcome, be it to pay for TV, radio and press adverts, to allow candidates to travel through the country and meet more voters in person or by directly engaging in vote buying. All this distorts the democratic process. Voting and counting may have gone smoothly, but the newly elected leadership may feel more indebted to whoever funded their successful campaign than to the interests of those who cast their ballot.  Thus, I argue that issues of political finance should be included in a good election observation methodology. The Transparency International chapters in Latin America have developed and piloted a methodology (CRINIS) to measure the level of transparency in political finance. A first eight-country study found that while laws may be in place, information is not made available to the public and that violations are not likely to be sanctioned. For more information on the CRINIS project see http://www.transparency.org/regional_pages/americas/crinis 

A problem I encountered while living in Bolivia during the referendum, a problem that was also mentioned to me while I was living in Tanzania, was not only fradulent election problems, but the problem of keeping the local people informed.  This seems to be particularly true the farther away from the larger cities one got.  As these elections are, first and foremost, about what the voters desire, is it not important to keep them informed of the transparency of their democratic process?  In particular I remember in Tanzania local villagers not knowing there were now voting in a (nominally) multi-party system, instead of the single-party system they were accostomed to.  What is the best way to keep the voters informed?

I'd like to add one more topic relevant to how we conduct election observation.  In post-conflict elections, the participation of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) is important to build trust and confidence in electoral processes and the democratic governments they produce.  If a part of the population is excluded from the electoral process, the resulting system of governance can suffer from a lack of legitimacy, accountability, and sustainability, particularly in fragile democracies or post-conflict environments.  Where refugees and IDPs are able to participate (as candidates or as voters), the conditions through which they participate are often very different from other sectors of the population.  It is important that observation groups incorporate the participation of these populations into their observation methodology.

As noted above, there are major differences between international and domestic observers, especially for the short term observation on election day. International observers are much fewer in number, and skewed towards more accessible voting sites, and so their role is more likely to be qualitative rather than quantitative. In cases where the sample size is so small as to only catch the most widespread and egregious forms election fraud, their role becomes largely symbolic –demonstrating international interest and concern. This is not to say that symbols are not important. They are very important – and international observers tromping around in t-shirts and baseball caps can perform a beneficial demonstration of the uncertainty principle, positively influencing something by observing it. As noted, domestic observers may number in the tens of thousands and can offer both greater coverage and local knowledge, but have a harder time proving they are not influenced by local and national political considerations, fairly or not.

As with other forms of research and monitoring, there is an essential role for both foreign and international actors, who often work together but will not always agree on strategies or findings. There are times were it is advantageous to keep a separation between the groups but in most cases coordination and even cooperation is called for. At a minimum there is a need for consultation between the two groups before and after the elections so that local groups are not undermined, or overlooked by the press. International groups can use their influence with government to expand the space for local observers to operate. It would be good to see more innovative approaches, such as matching up pairs of international and local groups for joint monitoring and statements in those situations where that tactic would increase the credibility and coverage of both.

Kristin Antin, New Tactics Online Community Builder

I'm so glad that Eka describes how three domestic election NGOs worked together to monitor the election in Georgia (from her comment titled Length of election Monitoring):

"During recent elections in Georgia, we have collaborated with two other
domestic, monitoring organizations very successfully. Each one of us
conducted monitoring with different approaches, and in slightly
different fields. i.e. we monitored election administration, another
NGO monitored campaigh financing and the third one conducted media
monitoring. On regular basis we informed public about each ones
findings on joint press-conferences. Having said that I mean that it is
practically impossible to cover every single field of election
monitoring by one NGO, however there are other NGOs that might be
working in the same field and colaboration during the monitoring is
very crutial and important. In addition the joint statments are more
listened by the government than if each organization would make
separate statment on its side."

I wanted to add another example of collaboration between domestic election monitoring organizations. In Southern Africa, election monitoring organizations have come together to form the Southern African Development Community Election Support Network (SADC-ESN), with the help of NDI. NDI's website states:

 Civic organizations in many SADC countries have played an important role in safeguarding elections. By recruiting, training and deploying thousands of monitors on election day these groups deterred and documented fraud during voting and counting. Their oversight not only improved the conduct of elections, but gave political parties and the public greater confidence in the process. As a result of domestic monitoring efforts by these groups, transitional and second elections held in the 1990s generally reflected the will of the people. However, in order to contribute to the conduct of free and fair elections in the future, these groups will need to develop increasingly advanced technical skills required to confront the new and more sophisticated challenges that serve to undermine elections. Because these challenges are similar across the SADC region, an opportunity exists to address these concerns by engaging groups on a regional basis. In response to their common experiences, domestic monitoring groups from across the region have formed the SADC Election Support Network (SADC-ESN) to support information and skills sharing.

Are there other examples of coordination and/or collaboration among domestic election monitoring organizations? What do you think is necessary for the success of such a collaboration?

Our discussion of election monitoring has concentrated on international election observers and domestic nonpartisan election monitors.   There are other important actors in safeguarding electoral integrity that should be mentioned. 

Electoral authorities are often such actors, and nonpartisan observers, both domestic and international, more often than not verify that authorities are doing proper jobs and are deserving of public confodence.  Ghana's recent elections were a classic example of this.  Election monitors' findings about the quality of the election authorities' work were important in Ghana because of the razor's edge margin in the presidential vote.  Montenegro's independence referendum was another such example.  Electoral authorities, of course, are not always such positive actors, as Zimbabwe's 2008 presidential election, Kenya's 2007 presidiential election and Nicaragua's 2008 municipal elections demonstrate.  The efforts of many electoral officials to produce honest and accurate elections, nonetheless, should be acknowledged.

Political parties also can be powerful actors in safeguarding electoral integrity.  While there may always be a temptation to manipulate the process where possible, actions of parties to protect their interests in honest elections do provide "checks and balances" that are critical.  Party and candidate pollwatchers, as well as their representatives at each step of the election process - including using electoral complaint mechanisms to remedy violations of electoral rights - are important.  Election monitors need to be in communication with parties to learn of such efforts, as well as to assess the crdibility of complaints they make.  In addition, in post-election periods, parties are key to building support for electoral reforms, and monitoring groups that follow up on recomendations for reform need to find ways to engage appropriately in dialogue with parties as well as with the legislature.

News media also can be effective election monitors, if they follow their journalistic responsibilities and ethical principles.  Article 19, the Global Campaign for Free Expression based in London, published Guidelines for Election Broadcasting in Transitional Democracies, which along with the Commonwealth Broadcasting Association's Editorial Guidelines and other documents, are touchstones for media and individual journalists who seek to play positive roles in investigating and reporting on the nature of the election process.  Election monitors can build relationships with media outlets and journalists in common efforts to promote electoral integrity beyond simply seeking coverage of election monitor reports and press conferences.

Law enforcement authorities also are important in safeguarding electoral integrity.  A culture of impunity exists in too many countries, where electoral related rights are trampled, the people's will is denied in the choice of who should govern and the legitmacy of government is thus subverted.  The use of Commissions of Inquiry (often convened by legislative bodies to conduct fact finding), legislative hearings and so-called Blue Ribbon Commissions can spur law enforcement efforts.  However, there is no substitute for criminal proceedings, with due process fo law, to break a culture of impunity for electoral fraud, including use of politically motivated violence and voter coercion, as well as stuffing ballot boxes and changing tally sheets. 

---Pat Merloe---

I am a Zimbabwean studying at the University of Minnesota's Law School and would like to share with colleagues on why election monitoring is important for good governance and the promotion and protection of rights

Zimbabwe's electoral processes from 2000 until the recent one in March 2008 have shown the citizens the need to have independent election observation and monitoring in order to come up with legitimate and uncontested electoral outcomes.

For the record, Zimbabwe's elections have not been monitored by independent bodies local or international although observers with little say are often invited from what the Harare regime calls friendly countries in Africa and selected ones abraod such as China and Russia while Western democracies are completed bared.

In my view, election monitoring is important in order to promote and safeguard the credibiltiy of the democratic processs and outcome. Its also imporatnt to monitor the electoral processs with a view of making sure that the political and civil liberties of the ctizens and the political contestants are protected.

Lack of this vital process has led to the tragedy that Zimbabwe is today. The regime of Robert Mugabe has appointed itself a refree and a player in the election process in the country. It bans the independent media, bars foreign media organisations from writing news on the electoral process and does not even allow local human rights organisations to monitor the process.

As a result, the process and the outcome of the four previous elections in 2000, 2002, 2005 and the 2008 have been hotly contestant on grounds of an opaque election processs that has no independent safe guards.

Because the election processes in all these elections were not monitored, civil and political liberties of citizens were violated with impunity, allegations of vote rigging were rampant while political violence was the order of the day. As a result, Zimbabwe is facing a twin crisis of legitimacy and govervance emanating from these unmonitored electoral process where the Mugabe regime is both a player and a refree

Kristin Antin, New Tactics Online Community Builder

As Kwami mentioned in his comment titled Making Results, the use of mobile phones in Ghana during the recent elections played "an important role in getting the electorate informed about the electoral process." Additionally, mobile phones were used to monitor the election. 

In an article on mobileactive.org,  "systematic SMS reporting by trained local citizen observers about how well an election is conducted can prevent rumors, and is an independent and reliable indicator about the quality of the election process."

In Ghana, the Coalition of Domestic Election Observers (CODEO) were able to mobilize 4,000 trained observers "deployed all over Ghana are using their phones to report on incidences at the polls and how well the polls are conducted, using a coded checklist."  This information is then sent to the Observation Center (the 'OC') which serves as the technology hub, where the data is compiled.  

The article states, "Mobile technology, and text messaging in particular, is playing a
critical piece in relaying both qualitative data on how the election is
being conducted, and quantitative data that will verify the official
results issued by the Ghanaian Election Commission."

Furthermore, CODEO (with help from NDI) has developed a way to measure the accuracy of vote counts via mobile phones:

"1,000 of the observers are also conducting 'Parallel Vote Tabulation', a methodology that independently verifies the accuracy of the official vote count at the end of election day.  As the name suggests, the observers are watching as the votes are counted at the randomly selected polling stations where they are deployed before ballots are collated and transported. This allows observers to get as close as possible to an actual count.  The vote tabulation for each candidate and party are then immediately transmitted by the observer via SMS to the CODEO Observation Center to be tabulated and compared with the official results. 

Since these 1,000 polling stations constitute a representative sample of the more than 22,000 polling stations in Ghana, a well-conducted parallel vote tabulation provides a very reliable indicator as to whether the total official vote count announcements are accurate."

How have other organizations used mobile phone technology to monitor elections?

There have been excellent resources developed by a wide
variety of organizations with vast experience related to election monitoring
and processes.  Some of these resources
have been cited by the dialogue participants. I thought it might be useful to
place them here for easy access.

Resources from the National Democratic Institute (www.ndi.org)

Organizations involved in election monitoring: http://www.ndi.org/election_monitoring_organizations

They have a wealth of publications available: http://www.ndi.org/publications

NDI has wonderful manuals on a wide variety of democracy
building efforts and training that are available. There a wide variety of
country specific manuals available in country specific or cross-border
languages. For a list of their manuals, use this link: http://www.ndi.org/libraryquicksearch?op0=%3D&filter0=manual

Here are a few that are specific to election monitoring:

New NDI Guide on Monitoring Electronic Technologies Designed to Help Ensure International Electoral Integrity (http://www.ndi.org/node/14414)

Mobile Active Strategy Guide #1 - Using Mobile Phones in Electoral and Voter Registration Campaigns (http://www.accessdemocracy.org/node/13808)

Campaign for Good Governance Toolkit: An Organizational Framework (http://www.accessdemocracy.org/node/13409)

An English-Arabic Translator's Guide to Election Terminology (http://www.accessdemocracy.org/node/13617)

The Quick Count and Election Observation: An NDI Guide for Civic Organizations and Political Parties (http://www.accessdemocracy.org/node/12993)

NDI Handbook: How Domestic Organizations Monitor Elections: an A to Z Guide (1995) (http://www.accessdemocracy.org/node/15090)

Media and Elections (Arabic) (http://www.accessdemocracy.org/node/13613)

Resources fomr the OSCE/ODIHR (www.osce.org)

From the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights there are a wide variety of handbooks available regarding different
aspects of electoral processes. Use this link for a list of all their manuals: http://www.osce.org/publications/

Here are a few specific to election monitoring:

Handbook for Domestic Election Observers (Available
in English and Russian) (http://www.osce.org/item/13586.html)

Election Observation - A decade of monitoring elections: the people and the practice (2005) (http://www.osce.org/item/17148.html) (Available in English, Dutch, French and Russian)

Election Observation Handbook (Available in English, Albanian, French, Georgian, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, and Ukrainian) (http://www.osce.org/item/14004.html)

Guidelines to Assist National Minority Participation in the Electoral Process (Available in English, Russian and Serbian) (http://www.osce.org/item/13589.html)

Handbook for Monitoring Women's Participation in Elections (Available in English, Russian and Serbian) (http://www.osce.org/item/13585.html)

Handbook for Long-Term Election Observers (http://www.osce.org/item/24088.html)

For other OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) publications related to elections: (http://www.osce.org/odihr/publications.html?lsi=true&limit=10&grp=243)

NEEDS Network of the European Union (http://www.needs-network.org/) has put
out a couple of publications that are very useful:

Promoting
and Defending Democracy: The Work of Domestic Election Observer Groups Around
the World

http://www.needs-network.org/pdfs/Promoting-and-Defending-Democracy.pdf

Handbook for European Union Election
Observation (Available in English, French and
Spanish) http://www.needs-network.org/pdfs/Handbook%202008.pdf

Compendium of International
Standards for Elections (http://www.needs-network.org/pdfs/Needs_Comp_2007_(web).pdf)

Benchmarks for Electoral Standards: A Guide for
European Union Election Observation Missions (http://www.needs-network.org/pdfs/Benchmarks-for-Electoral-Standards.pdf)

International IDEA has a free CD-ROM
Electoral System Design (http://www.idea.int/publications/esd_cd/index.cfm)

This CD-ROM presents full text versions of the Handbook in five languages:
English, Spanish, Nepali, Russian and Kyrgyz. Translations into Burmese, Arabic
and French of the 1997 edition of the handbook are also included, together with
a world map of electoral systems and other related materials. There is a new
2005 handbook available for purchase.

Electoral Institute of South Africa (EISA) has links to
additional helpful resources: http://www.eisa.org.za/WEP/links.htm#han

There is also a great list of on-line resources from around
the world, see this website:

Elections and Electoral Systems (http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/election.htm)

I wanted to share this new report recently published by DigiActive on mobile activism in African Election. 

Title: Mobile Technology in African Elections: a Comparative Case Study

Author: Rebekah Heacok

Abstract:
The proliferation of mobile phones in Africa is transforming the
political and social landscape of the developing world, empowering
people to source and share their own information and to have a greater
say in what comes to international attention. This R@D product compare
the use and impact of mobile technology in three recent African
elections: Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Kenya.

In
Nigeria’s April 2007 presidential election, a local civil society
organization used free software to collect over 10,000 text message
reports from voters around the country, boosting citizen participation
in a political process many Nigerians doubted. In Sierra Leone’s
August-September 2007 elections, trained local monitors used mobile
phones to collect data from designated polling sites, enabling the
independent National Election Watch to compile and release an accurate,
comprehensive analysis of the election almost two weeks before the
official report. And in Kenya’s December 2007 election, a group of
local digital activists developed and implemented a citizen reporting
platform to allow Kenyans to report and track post-election violence
during a month-long media blackout, collecting and publishing a
comprehensive account of riots, displacement and human rights abuses
that serves as one of the best available records of the crisis.

Let us know if you find this helpful!

Kristin Antin, New Tactics Online Community Builder

This makes the important point that election observation can make a positive contribution in long-established democracies as well as in new or developing democracies.  No election is perfect.  In addition to finding mistakes and building confidence, an important function of observers is to provide recommendations on how future elections can be improved.  This is a contribution that should be welcomed in developed democracies, 

Very interesting story about election in Canada. I fully agree with the idea that there are not perfect elections, as there is no perfect election code and perfect election procedures however the difference in election processes between the functioning democracies and developing countries is in the level of transperency and in trust towards the electoral processes. Basically trust is strenghtened when the process is implemeted transparantly in a good faith. As you mentioned in your experience poll worker did not know whether she could allow you on the ballot counting but she did finaly after consulting the Election Canada rule book and this is very important because in many developing countries the poll worker would simply refuse.

I think that if behaving in a bad faith elections can be frauded with both electronic voting mashines and with the paper ballots. The most important is the transparancy of the process for the sake of trust and poll workers acting in a good faith.   

The issue of by-elections underscores the importance of domestic observers.  Since international organizations seldom observe by-elections, the role of domestic observers can be crucial in helping ensure the integrity of the process during by-elections. 

There are many methods of helping to reduce irregularities through impersonation.  The best are a good voter list and a carefully enforced requirement for voters to present photo identifcation.  Political party or candidate agents at the polling station can also participate usefully in the process of preventing impersonation.   The most important factor in preventing impersonation on a large scale, however, is honest election officials.

The problem of money power is more difficult to control.  One way to reduce the problem is to have a limit on campaign expenditures, coupled with a good oversight and enforcement mechanism to police expenditures.  This works best in a system that is transparent, that is, a system in which candidates must publicly reveal, in a timely manner, all campaign income and expenditures.