Article 21(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, says “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.” That will, it adds, must be expressed in periodic and genuine elections, by universal and equal suffrage, held by secret vote or an equivalent free procedure. Almost every international election standard since has grown out of that sentence.
What the treaties require
The 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights developed the idea in Article 25. It calls for periodic elections at regular intervals, universal suffrage that includes all sectors of society, equal suffrage on the principle of one person, one vote, and the right to stand for public office and contest elections. All eligible electors must be able to vote, and the result must reflect the free expression of the people’s will.
The 1990 Copenhagen Document of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe went further on practice. Signatories committed to free elections at regular intervals and to the popular election of every seat in at least one chamber. They also promised the right to form political parties kept separate from the state, campaigning in a free and fair atmosphere, unimpeded media access, secret ballots, honest counting with public results, and the installation of winners for their full terms.
The Venice Commission’s 2002 Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters spells out what universal, equal, free, secret and direct suffrage mean in detail. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly cited the code when interpreting Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights.
Handbooks and definitions
The most detailed rules sit in practical guides for observers, such as the OSCE’s Election Observation Handbook. The African Union, the European Union and the Organization of American States have adopted similar principles. In 2021 the UN human rights office published a revised edition of its handbook, Human Rights and Elections, with extensive guidance on how elections should run.
The ACE Electoral Knowledge Network weighed the debate over a single definition before recommending the Kofi Annan Foundation’s 2012 wording. An election has integrity if it rests on universal suffrage and political equality as reflected in international standards, and is “professional, impartial, and transparent in its preparation and administration throughout the electoral cycle.”
Those standards, once endorsed, apply to every country at every stage: before the vote, during the campaign, on polling day and afterward.
Sovereignty and malpractice
There is a limit. The United Nations does not endorse any particular institutional design or constitutional mechanism, leaving that to national sovereignty. Its resolution places responsibility on member states for ensuring elections free of intimidation, coercion and tampering with vote counts. UN electoral assistance happens only at a member state’s request.
Electoral malpractice means contests that break these norms, and the problems can arise at any point: ballot access laws that favor incumbents, an uneven field in money and media during a campaign, inaccurate voter registers, flawed counts, or partial election bodies. Unfree or unfair elections can leave doubts about whether the result is legitimate, erode faith in the democratic system and depress future turnout.
Contemporary cases that drew international concern include allegations of irregularities in Russia’s 2012 presidential election, violence during and after Kenya’s 2007 general election, and controversies in Cambodia’s 2013 general election.
