Election Audits: International Principles that Protect Election Integrity Election audits and recounts are common around the globe. Any use of these processes – especially in post-conflict, transitioning environments with widespread allegations of fraud – must be guided by international standards. This paper attempts to outline these standards, including the procedures and the limited circumstances under which full-scale audits should be conducted. III. Audits and Recounts: Definitions and Distinctions The terms “audit” and “recount” are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same thing. A recount is a process by which ballots in an electoral contest are tallied again. Unlike a recount, an audit is undertaken to investigate alleged fraud or malpractice. An audit may include a recount of the votes, but it also involves other aspects of an investigation into allegations of fraud. Understanding the difference between an election audit and a recount can help determine which process should be applied to a particular situation. In general, a recount is a process by which ballots in an electoral contest are tallied again after the initial count following an election. Recounts are usually conducted under the same rules and procedures as the original count and can take many forms. A partial recount may include the ballots from specific polling stations or electoral districts; a full recount would normally involve tallying all ballots in all polling stations. Recounts can be done centrally or locally, depending on the legal framework under which the election was conducted and logistical considerations such as security or transportation infrastructure. In a recount, ballots cast in an electoral contest are tallied again following an election. Often a different organization will count the ballots to confirm the results. In an audit, allegations of fraud or malpractice are investigated. An audit may involve a full or partial recount as well as other actions undertaken to determine whether one or more people have deliberately sabotaged the election process, unfairly manipulated the election results, or committed extensive mistakes in administration. There is no clearly accepted international model for how and when to conduct an electoral recount, and the process can vary widely from one country to another. Regardless of the specifics, it is vital that prior to an election there are in place clearly defined processes for making the decision to recount ballots and for conducting the recount. Information on the recount process, and under what circumstances a recount would take place, should be widely disseminated and available to the public before voting takes place. A standard practice is to require that the request for a recount be made immediately after the announcement of results. Whether recounts are mandatory or optional can depend on several factors, most notably the margin of victory. Some elections require a recount wherever the winning candidate’s margin of victory is less than a pre-determined percentage. 5 Election procedures typically give authorization for a recount to a court, electoral tribunal, or other electoral dispute resolution body. Usually, if the non-winning candidate chooses to accept the results, a recount is not undertaken. 4