Election Audits: International Principles that Protect Election Integrity perceived and actual fraud and malpractice. Many of these actions would be categorized as “good election administration;” others were more directly aimed at addressing the malpractice and fraud experienced during Afghanistan’s 2009 and 2010 elections. It would have been useful, however, for the IEC to have developed a risk profile, ranked the vulnerabilities that were identified, and built into the process a monitoring and implementation mechanism. These steps would have assisted the IEC to more comprehensively prioritize reform and mitigation efforts, given the extreme integrity risk profile in Afghanistan. In Haiti, the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP) also did not conduct a comprehensive pre-election risk analysis or undertake these types of preparations, which would have helped it mitigate or at least manage challenges as they unfolded. Neither the CEP in Haiti nor the IEC in Afghanistan anticipated the possibility of a comprehensive, nationwide audit, so no contingency plans were made to conduct these exercises. Given the frequent occurrence of integrity-related problems with elections in Afghanistan and Haiti, and the lessons learned from these audit processes, elaborate election integrity support activities should form an integral part of all future election contingency planning at those EMBs. A comprehensive electoral integrity management plan can reduce the risk of fraud by highlighting to potential spoilers that the EMB is ready to effectively combat fraud. It will also increase the likelihood of spoilers being detected. For such a plan to be effective, it is very important that a robust enforcement mechanism is in place with serious penalties. The operational standards governing national audits largely correspond with the overarching election administration principles: transparency and uniform implementation of procedures by election officials following a clear code of conduct. Audits often are undertaken when tension between candidates is high and trust in the EMB is low. Ensuring transparency during all phases of the audit is critical, as access to the process and key documentation can remove the cloud of suspicion among stakeholders and the general public. As noted above, uniform implementation of clear and unambiguous rules governing the audit is an absolute standard underpinning all forms of adjudication, including audits. Politically sensitive audits are usually implemented by both permanent and temporary employees of an election authority, and the behavior of these employees as representatives of an EMB is of critical importance. Adherence to, and enforcement of, a well-crafted code of conduct is therefore essential. Transparency during movement of sensitive audit material. Transparency during the movement of sensitive election material is imperative to an audit’s credibility. External stakeholders should be permitted access to every step of the audit process, including transit and storage of evidence. During the 2014 audit in Afghanistan, the IEC, the International Security Assistance Force and the UN did a remarkable job of securing transportation of ballot boxes from the provincial warehouses scattered across Afghanistan to a centralized location. Procedures to ensure the presence of observers and party agents were quickly issued, facilitating sufficient transparency of this important component. For an audit process of this scale and level of controversy, the importance of transparency measures is hard to overstate. The presence of candidates and observers over many weeks was admirable. However, the complex operating environment, the pressure for rapid decisions, and the lack of pre-determined standards led to challenges in preserving the evidentiary chain of custody. 14