Democracy development techniques such as international election monitoring have increasingly become commonplace. Monitors are sent to far off locations to scrutinize the electoral processes and determine whether or not they have met the free and fair standards as established by their mandates. The term free and fair however, has become a catchphrase amongst many of those involved in the election monitoring and democracy development fields. The phrase is often interpreted loosely and is rarely clearly defined. Despite the recognition of the terms often differing interpretations, it remains a commonly used standard. The 2005 Ethiopian Elections demonstrate that free and fair, when interpreted differently by international electoral observers, can have consequential results. <p>The thesis provides a political analysis of the Carter Centers and European Unions international election monitoring final reports of the 2005 Ethiopian elections. Following the 2005 Ethiopian elections the Carter Centers and the European Unions electoral observation reports became highly politicized. In the post election period, the two organizations came to different conclusions in regards to the validity of the electoral process. At the core of these differences were the organizations differing conceptions of what constitutes free and fair electoral practices. In the post election period the European Unions and Carter Centers reports have been pitted against one and other as those concerned with the election results seek to make sense of the reports. <p>This thesis is significant because it asks relevant questions about the consequences of differing understandings of free and fair. The thesis seeks to provide insight into international election monitoring and provide recommendations to improve the process.

Democracy development techniques such as international election monitoring have increasingly become commonplace. Monitors are sent to far off locations to scrutinize the electoral processes and determine whether or not they have met the free and fair standards as established by their mandates. The term free and fair however, has become a catchphrase amongst many of those involved in the election monitoring and democracy development fields. The phrase is often interpreted loosely and is rarely clearly defined. Despite the recognition of the terms often differing interpretations, it remains a commonly used standard. The 2005 Ethiopian Elections demonstrate that free and fair, when interpreted differently by international electoral observers, can have consequential results. <p>The thesis provides a political analysis of the Carter Centers and European Unions international election monitoring final reports of the 2005 Ethiopian elections. Following the 2005 Ethiopian elections the Carter Centers and the European Unions electoral observation reports became highly politicized. In the post election period, the two organizations came to different conclusions in regards to the validity of the electoral process. At the core of these differences were the organizations differing conceptions of what constitutes free and fair electoral practices. In the post election period the European Unions and Carter Centers reports have been pitted against one and other as those concerned with the election results seek to make sense of the reports. <p>This thesis is significant because it asks relevant questions about the consequences of differing understandings of free and fair. The thesis seeks to provide insight into international election monitoring and provide recommendations to improve the process.

Depuis la fin de la Guerre froide, l'observation internationale des élections a connu une croissance exponentielle à travers le monde et en particulier au sein de la région formée par les 56 états participants de l'Organisation pour la Sécurité et la Coopération en Europe. En raison de l'intervention concomitante d'acteurs multiples et hétérogènes, cette activité est caractérisée par le développement de diverses procédures de coopération interinstitutionnelle mais des efforts restent à fournir afin de toujours garantir la cohérence du message délivré. Le contrôle opéré se fonde sur une profusion d'engagements internationaux de nature juridique et politique qui constituent un véritable droit international électoral, constamment enrichi par la jurisprudence dynamique de la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme. Bien que la méthodologie sur laquelle repose les évaluations auxquelles procèdent les observateurs ait acquis une fiabilité importante et que ceux-ci parviennent dans la majorité des cas à éviter l'écueil d'une politisation des conclusions, les retombées des missions d'observation électorale restent aléatoires, nuisant à l'effectivité du système de contrôle dans son ensemble. De nombreux dispositifs de suivi des recommandations existent, qu'ils soient technique, politique ou juridictionnel, mais leur mise en œuvre révèle trop souvent un manque de rigueur. Au-delà, si le mécanisme de conditionnalité démocratique instaurée par l'Union européenne permet de relayer efficacement les conclusions des observateurs électoraux dans le cadre de la procédure d'adhésion, il souffre d'une application inconsistante dans le champ de la Politique européenne de voisinage. Il s'ensuit une influence marginale de l'observation électorale internationale sur les Etats autoritaires de la région de l'OSCE. / Since the end of the Cold War, international election observation has grown exponentially worldwide and especially within the region formed by the 56 participating States of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Due to the concomitant action of multiple and heterogeneous actors, this activity is characterized by the development of various procedures for inter-institutional cooperation but efforts are still needed in order to always ensure the consistency of the message delivered. The control operated is based on a wealth of international legal and political commitments which constitute a genuine international electoral law, constantly enriched by the dynamic jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. The methodology underlying the assessments made by the observers has acquired a high reliability and these succeed in most cases to avoid the trap of politicized findings. However, the impact of electoral observation missions remains unequal, undermining the effectiveness of the whole control mechanism. Many devices, whether technical, political or judicial, exist for the follow-up of recommendations, but their implementation often reveals a lack of rigor. In addition, if the mechanism of democratic conditionality established by the European Union can effectively relay the findings of election observers in the context of the accession procedure, it suffers from an inconsistent application in the field of European Neighbourhood Policy. It follows a marginal influence of international election observation on authoritarian states of the OSCE area.

No description available.

The master thesis presents the role of election observation with emphasis on OSCE/ODIHR election observation missions with a special focus on the OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission at municipal elections in October 2017 in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, where the author participated as a long-term observer. It deals with the purpose and functioning of election observation missions, international electoral standards establishing political and civil rights, on the basis of which democratic elections should be held. Furthermore, the challenges the missions are currently facing and the role of the Czech Republic in the system of election observation. The case study presents OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission, summarizes the type of information needed to observe electoral aspects in the long term and evaluates election days with the outcomes of the election observation mission.