Search

In recent years there has been increasing attention to the potentially disruptive influence of disinformation on elections. The most common forms of disinformation in elections include the dissemination of ‘fake news’ in order to discredit opponents or to influence the voting process, the falsification or manipulation of polling data, and the use of fake election monitoring and observation. This article presents an overview of the phenomenon of disinformation in elections in both democratic and undemocratic environments, and discusses measures to reduce its scope and negative impact.

Flawed electoral legislation in post-Soviet states has facilitated the conduct of undemocratic elections. Many of the flaws in the election laws are not sui generis but, instead, originate from provisions in Soviet and post-communist Russian laws from which the post-Soviet legislators have borrowed. This article traces the origin and evolution of the election laws of nine post-Soviet states that have been perpetually undemocratic until at least 2010. The article demonstrates that most post-Soviet states have routinely disregarded recommendations by the OSCE and the Venice Commission directed towards the improvement of national election laws and that these laws largely continue to be shaped by Soviet and Russian legislation. In addition, the author points to the enduring impact of the Soviet legacy and the relatively hegemonic position of Russia in the region vis-à-vis the legislation of post-Soviet states, and highlights a widespread but occasionally overlooked form of institutional choice: legal borrowing (legal transplants) and adaptation. The present article also carries implications for the efforts of the OSCE and other actors to bring electoral legislation of the post-Soviet states more in line with appropriate international standards.

Election commissions that serve the partisan interests of the authorities are key to the manipulation of election processes in OSCE participating states and beyond. Despite the importance of impartial election administration, OSCE/ODIHR, in its reviews of election laws or in its reports of election observation missions, has so far declined to put forward a comprehensive view on what constitutes best practices regarding the composition and functioning of election commissions. Drawing from a comparative study of the manipulation of rules for the composition and functioning of election commissions, this article develops insights, and formulates recommendations, that could inform a more assertive ODIHR approach to the issue of partisan election commissions..

Electoral assistance by the OSCE in the undemocratic states of the post-Soviet area is faced with a number of serious challenges: there has been no improvement in the quality of elections over the past decade; recommendations by the OSCE to improve electoral legislation are routinely disregarded in most countries; and, within the framework of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the undemocratic countries have stepped up a range of alternative electoral assistance activities that replicate and in large part contradict comparable OSCE efforts. This article discusses these three challenges and considers possible changes to the practice of OSCE electoral assistance that may contribute to its continued relevance and effectiveness.