1. “ Ensuring the integrity of Elections”: A common effort ! Some thesis for deliberations to the OSCE Chairmanship Expert Seminar on Electoral Management Bodies by Andreas Gross (Switzerland) Political Scientist & Swiss MP & Leader of the Social-Democrats in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) & Member of the Council for Elections of the Venice Commission Vienna, 17 th of July 2009 www.andigross.chwww.andigross.ch info@andigross.ch

2. I. None of us is able to ensure the integrity of elections alone   Elections are a multidimensional process over 4/5 years:   The integrity of the process depends of the quality of the work by different key actors and institutions (Government, Parliament, Parties, Candidates, Citizen registration offices, EMB, Media  private and public , Voters )   Their responsibilities are different and unequal; but the shortcomings of one of them undermines the integrity of the whole process !

3. II. PACE-MP-Observers do have specific evaluation capacities for the whole election process ! Especially if the cooperation with LTO’s from ODHIR is functioning well !   The PACE-Monitoring-Committee’s work enable us to evaluate the quality of the other actors contribution to the electoral process years and months before the Election day.   Independent PACE-MP’s have a specific sensibility, empathy and are able to read and listen between the lines and discourses to contribute to the evaluation of the quality of a election process.   The quality of the international Observation Missions depend from their cooperative capacities and of their mutual recognition of each specific strengths.

4. III. Especially PACE-MP-Observers evaluate a process for which the EAB’s are only very partially responsible   The EAB’s do not have to identify with and defend shortcomings of those elements of the process, for which they are not responsible !   It might be in a common interest (EAB’s and Observers) and especially in the interest of further improvements in the forthcoming election processes if our discussions would be more open, critical and frank !

5. IV. No democracy and no Election is perfect, but each Election Process might be improved !   It’s our common duty to propose those reforms which reduce the imperfectness of the process most - knowing that it will never be perfect !   There are different ways to get the highest products of free and fair Elections - Legitimacy of political power, Trust in the process by the Citizens, peaceful integration of Diversity and conflicting interests - and none should impose any way to any other - but the criteria's to evaluate the quality of these products are everywhere the same !

6. V. How to “ensure” the honest vote counting and reporting of the results ? Stick to the decentralised approach Let citizens to and do the job (“Ownership” of the E-Process), supervised by Professionals, observed by national and international Obs.: All sign the protocols. Let independent Profs. - observed by citizens and Observers - report the results and do the counting on the, district, regional and national level.   Participation is a contribution to transparency, social learning,trust building and mutual controle !

7. VI. How to “ensure” the financial fair- ness and enforce finance regulation ? The biggest shortcoming of Swiss direct and indirect Democracy: The lack of any financial fairness rules !   Lessons from all the others: - Don’t try too much, don’t me too bureaucratic - Stimulate citizen’s engagement in and for the parties: Double small and middle contributions if all contributions are made public on the Net. - Equal chances are not possible in unequal societies, but the un-equalness have to be limited - Wrongdoings are criminal acts; Wrongdoers will be brought to the Courts and undermine their election opportunities