The Quick Count and Election Observation
The Quick Count and Election Observation
The Quick Count and Election Observation
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
THE QUICK COUNT AND ELECTION OBSERVATION<br />
81<br />
CHAPTER SIX<br />
<strong>The</strong> Qualitative<br />
Component of the<br />
<strong>Quick</strong> <strong>Count</strong><br />
In many election observations the final vote count attracts the most attention.<br />
This is entirely underst<strong>and</strong>able. <strong>The</strong> vote count determines election day<br />
winners <strong>and</strong> losers, <strong>and</strong> the integrity of that count is a longst<strong>and</strong>ing concern<br />
in many countries. <strong>The</strong> final count, however, is just one aspect of an election.<br />
No one doubts that an accurate, honest vote count is a necessary condition for<br />
a democratic election, but it is not a sufficient condition. Electoral outcomes<br />
too often have been rigged in ways that have little or nothing to do with the<br />
counting <strong>and</strong> tabulation of results. <strong>The</strong> will of the electorate has been nullified<br />
for example by: blocking legitimate c<strong>and</strong>idates <strong>and</strong> parties from appearing on<br />
the ballot; otherwise tilting electoral laws <strong>and</strong> regulations; financing campaigns<br />
illicitly, including through the improper use of state resources; preventing open<br />
<strong>and</strong> free campaigns; intimidating <strong>and</strong> bribing voters; using biased voter registration<br />
lists; interfering with the secrecy of the vote; manipulating the<br />
administration of the election <strong>and</strong> complaint mechanisms; <strong>and</strong> preventing legitimate<br />
winners from assuming office.<br />
For these reasons, election observers must concentrate on the quality of the<br />
electoral process before, during <strong>and</strong> after election day, <strong>and</strong> contemporary election<br />
observations should not depend on just impressionistic evidence of<br />
anecdotes. To be effective <strong>and</strong> credible, contemporary election observations<br />
should not depend on just impressionistic evidence or anecdotes. Anecdotal<br />
or impressionistic evidence is unreliable, <strong>and</strong> it leaves too many important<br />
questions unanswered. Qualitative problems in the process should be quantified<br />
as much as possible so that their impact can be characterized appropriately.<br />
For example, if unused ballots have been tampered with then there is surely<br />
a cause for concern. But the more important questions include: How widespread<br />
was this problem? Did the tampering work in favor of one party to the<br />
detriment of others? Was the tampering part of a larger scheme aimed at interfering<br />
with the outcome of the election? <strong>The</strong> only sure way to answer these<br />
<strong>Election</strong> observers<br />
must concentrate on<br />
the quality of the<br />
electoral process<br />
before, during <strong>and</strong><br />
after election day.<br />
Contemporary election<br />
observations should<br />
not depend on just<br />
impressionistic evidence<br />
or anecdotes.