Sonya Reines-Djivanides – EPLO Executive Director, with a presentation about the challenges and some recommendations

1. Preventing election-related violence:
What role for civil society?
Sonya Reines-Djivanides – EPLO Executive Director
Outline of the presentation
1. Introductory comments
• The EU and election-related violence
• Learning from peacebuilding and conflict prevention efforts
2. Civil society organisations (CSOs) and election-related violence
• CSOs as essential actors before, during and after elections
• The importance of inclusiveness and civic and voter education
• CSOs and election monitoring
• The role of CSOs after elections
3. Challenges and recommendations
• Addressing the root causes of violence
• Seeing electoral support as part of broader peacebuilding efforts

2. 1. Introductory comments
• Significant progress has been made in recent years with regard to how the EU seeks to address
and prevent election-related violence in partner countries (in particular through the evolution of its
election observation missions (EOM) framework and of its EOM recommendations follow-up). Still,
challenges remain.
• One is the need to better integrate some of the tools at the EU’s disposal in its external action.
For example, ‘democracy assistance/election support’ and ‘peacebuilding and conflict prevention’
are still too often seen separately and carried out in silos.
• It is now widely understood that elections should be seen as processes as opposed to isolated
events. However, despite the progress that has been made in this regard since the
‘Communication on EU Election Assistance and Observation’, international actors and donors
which engage in election support continue to remain overly focused on election day and on the
moments of the electoral cycle which immediately precede and follow it.
• In contrast, insights from peacebuilding and conflict prevention can help to understand the
relevance of long-term actions and support – not only to prevent election violence, but also to
build the positive foundations on which populations can thrive and feel included and able to
participate in the political process.
• This requires going beyond technical assistance and embracing the political dimension of election
support, as well as the political engagement necessary to sustain peacebuilding efforts.
• A major insight from peacebuilding research is that local CSOs can play a key role in helping to
develop a peaceful environment and to reduce the threat of election-related violence.

3. 2. CSOs and election-related violence (1/5)
• CSOs can help to prevent election-related violence at different stages of the electoral cycle
(i.e. before, during and after the election). They are essential actors for a variety of reasons,
including that:
 They are familiar with local contexts and understand the possible unmet needs of
populations, which means that they can help to design solutions which are tailored to
the specific issues faced by local actors.
 They can reach areas and engage with groups with which the state cannot or does not
want to engage.
 In situations of tensions or violence between communities, they are often the best
equipped actors to carry out reconciliation processes. Indeed, they can serve as
bridges between citizens and the political authorities, at the local and national levels.
 They can also complement EU actions in sensitive contexts in which the EU may not
want to get directly involved.

4. 2. CSOs and election-related violence (2/5)
• An important area where CSOs can make a substantial contribution to the strengthening of
the election process is civic and voter education. A large number of studies have
demonstrated the merits of sustained civic education initiatives. Informing citizens on their
rights, on the functioning of the state and of the election, on the options open to them for
political involvement, etc., helps to build trust in the political process and encourages
people to participate in it.
• As part of this effort, CSOs can also promote inclusiveness by reaching and seeking to
empower various groups which can often feel disenfranchised, including youth and
women. Inclusiveness and broad community participation in the process is essential: it
provides legitimacy both to the elections themselves and to the elected representatives
after the vote.
• In addition, CSOs may work with national and local media to promote narratives of
inclusiveness and social cohesion. They may also work with authorities to prepare officials
and candidates for the possibility of electoral defeat.

5. 2. CSOs and election-related violence (3/5)
• Another useful area of activity for CSOs is election monitoring. By sending observers to
polling stations to monitor the different stages of the election, CSOs can help to ensure that
authorities do not engage in election tampering, assuage the fears of the population with
regard to vote rigging, and discourage candidates from disowning the results. Working with
authorities, CSOs can also help to ensure that the registration and accreditation process
before the election is carried out fairly, and participate in early warning mechanisms which
can play a crucial role in addressing problems before they lead to violence. In addition,
CSOs can work with authorities to help to ensure that transparent election dispute
resolution mechanisms are available if needed after the vote.
 Platforms through which several CSOs work together during an election to carry out
monitoring activities can be particularly effective. Two such examples are the ‘Electoral
situation room’ model supported by the European Centre for Electoral Support (ECES)
in Burkina Faso, and the ‘Women’s Situation Room’ initiative in several African
countries. The latter monitors acts of violence during electionin order to document them
and to increase security where needed. Such early action mechanisms can help to
avoid a serious deterioration of the situation when and where violence is about to break
out or escalate.

6. 2. CSOs and election-related violence (4/5)
• CSOs can also help to ensure that all citizens, including marginalised communities, and men and
women within all groups in the population, are aware of their rights and are able to hold to
account authorities and security forces. CSOs can notably:
 Carry out public information campaigns on the rights and duties of law enforcement and
other security agencies, in particular with regard to election proceedings.
 Organise and promote the training of journalists and other media representatives to
enhance their knowledge of security matters and increase their ability to deal with security
officials in order to improve reporting on and monitoring of the security sector and its
activities.
 Conduct public surveys, in particular of victims and other marginalised groups in order to
identify their security needs and assess their perceptions of the security sector.
• CSOs can also contribute to building trust in public authorities if they are provided with a degree of
oversight over security mechanisms. Sustained dialogue and co-operation between CSOs and
the police at the local level, transparent sanction mechanisms, and fair legal processes in cases of
police abuse can help to improve relations between police forces and communities. This can both
assuage the fears of citizens with regard to the possibility of police violence and improve the
safety of populations through enhanced communication and reactivity on both sides.

7. 2. CSOs and election-related violence (5/5)
• After the election, CSOs remain critical actors with regard to the election process:
 If the election results in tensions or violence, their contribution to mediation and
dialogue efforts is essential.
 In order to help the electorate to accept the result of the election, they can work with the
winners to ensure that the voice of the opposition will continue to be heard and taken
into account.
 They can help the newly elected officials to remain connected to the voters and their
needs.
 Their role with regards to civic education and long-term institution and trust building
continues to be relevant.
 They have an ongoing role to play as watchdogs.
 When consulted, they can help local/national authorities and international actors to
understand better the lessons which can be learned from previous elections and
election support initiatives, and to identify capacities for resilience and good practices.

8. 3. Challenges and recommendations (1/2)
• Election-related violence can erupt for different reasons and at different stages of the
election process. It can also be carried out by different actors. Such violence can be a
symptom of deeper issues; it is vital to address the root causes and fundamental drivers of
the potential violence in order to build peaceful systems.
• The EU should support and promote coordination platforms which allow local CSOs to
exchange, collaborate, and learn from each other.
• CSOs should be involved as much as possible in the design and implementation of EU
EOM recommendations.
• Election support tools should be conflict sensitive as well as gender sensitive. In
particular, context (and conflict) analysis is extremely important to understand the
potential local, national and regional drivers of election-related violence. As part of context
analysis, input and information should be gathered from CSOs in an ongoing manner
rather than as part of one-off consultations. In-depth context analysis can also serve to
understand which types of CSOs can have the most impact in addressing different types of
issues pertaining to the election process.

9. 3. Challenges and recommendations (2/2)
• To prevent election violence, international donors often tend to focus on projects carried out in
short time frames (spanning a few months) before/around election day, for example on peace
messaging and youth programming. Such short-term efforts are frequently less effective than if
they had been designed as long-term, sustained actions. The EU should therefore support long-
term initiatives to give CSOs the opportunity to design projects fully adapted to local needs.
• In order to build lasting peace in a given country, there must be a positive engagement from
national and local authorities. EU mediation and dialogue efforts can and do make a substantial
difference in this regard, but the EU should be more flexible and reactive on the short term, and it
should engage with – and put pressure on – partner countries in a more sustained manner beyond
moments of violence and/or around election day.
• Whenever possible and relevant, the EU should push for local CSOs to be included in mediation
and dialogue efforts. It can also be useful for the EU directly in more flexible and informal
exchanges with local CSOs, next to the ongoing, more formal diplomatic discussions with all
stakeholders.
• At the EU level, co-operation between units and divisions working on democracy assistance and
those working on conflict prevention and peacebuilding should be promoted further. Electoral
support should be seen as part of broader peacebuilding and conflict prevention efforts.