Skip to footer
Honesty
The Monitor's View

Lift for elections with honest observers

Independent watchdogs with expertise in voting standards are proving essential to boost democracies, even in the U.S.

|
REUTERS
Sheikh Hasina, the newly elected prime minister of Bangladesh, meets foreign observers of the country's election, in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Jan. 8.
  • By the Monitor's Editorial Board

Perhaps the biggest surprise in this week’s Republican presidential primary in New Hampshire wasn’t that Donald Trump won but that voter turnout was a record high. In other words, GOP voters – who mostly believe fraud was behind Joe Biden’s national win in 2020 – thoroughly trusted the electoral system in a state where Mr. Biden clearly won. Their faith in the system said more than the primary’s result.

Such triumphs for honesty in elections – that is, honesty in ballot counting and truthfulness in accepting a valid count – are what may help ensure the comeback of democracy in a year with a near-record number of elections worldwide.

Nearly half of the global population will cast ballots for national leaders in 2024, including voters in the United States. In most of these contests, civic-minded electoral officials will try to follow recognized international standards, such as impartiality and transparency. Yet even these officials often welcome an extra layer of protection for the sovereignty of individual citizens to shape their governance through the ballot. They invite neutral foreign observers – as New Hampshire has done – who are well steeped in electoral “best practices” to scrutinize the process.

A number of groups, such as The Carter Center in Atlanta, offer this service of expert observation and expert correction. Perhaps the most influential is the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, or OSCE, which has observed more than 400 elections over the last 30 years on either side of the Atlantic. Founded during the Cold War, the Vienna-based group – with countries ranging from Canada to Russia – is a watchdog for civic rights and fundamental freedoms within its 57 member states.

“By helping to increase public confidence in the honesty of the election process, election observation ... builds trust in elected representatives and democratic institutions,” Matteo Mecacci, director of the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, wrote in the EUobserver this week.

The OSCE, for example, called out the United States to make electoral reforms after the 2020 and 2022 elections. It is helping tiny Moldova withstand Russia’s malign influence on voters before a March presidential election. And when the authoritarian leader of Belarus refused to allow OSCE monitors to observe this February’s parliamentary vote, the organization lamented that citizens will not benefit from “an impartial, transparent, and comprehensive assessment” of the election.

Such international observers are beacons for the universal values of democratic government. Those values, if honored, help create trust in a free and fair election. As Mr. Mecacci states, “Trust is key to any election.”

And it certainly was key for Republicans in New Hampshire to accept Mr. Trump’s win in the first primary of the 2024 presidential election.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Lift for elections with honest observers
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2024/0126/Lift-for-elections-with-honest-observers
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe