PEI INDEX CORE QUESTIONS
Sections
Performance indicators
Direction
PRE-ELECTION
1. Electoral laws
1-1 Electoral laws were unfair to smaller parties
N
1-2 Electoral laws favored the governing party or parties
N
1-3 Election laws restricted citizens’ rights
N
1-4 There was certainty about electoral rules and procedures
P
1-5 Any changes in electoral rules were made by consensus
P
1-6 All votes held equal weight
P
1-7 All citizens were legally enfranchised to vote
P
2. Electoral procedures
2-1 Elections were well managed
P
2-2 Information about voting procedures was widely available
P
2-3 Election officials were fair
P
2-4 Elections were conducted in accordance with the law
P
3. Boundaries
3-1 Boundaries discriminated against some parties
N
3-2 Boundaries favored incumbents
N
3-3 Boundaries were impartial
P
4. Voter registration
4-1 Some citizens were not listed in the register
N
4-2 The electoral register was inaccurate
N
4-3 Some ineligible electors were registered
N
4-4 Some population groups were less likely to be registered to vote
N
5. Party registration
5-1 Some opposition candidates/parties were prevented from running
N
5-2 Women had equal opportunities to run for office
P
5-3 Ethnic and national minorities had equal opportunities to run for office
P
5-4 Only top party leaders selected candidates
N
5-5 Some parties/candidates were restricted from holding campaign rallies
N
5-6 All citizens had an equal opportunity to run for office
P
5-7 Candidates and/or parties were targeted with violence or hate
N
CAMPAIGN
6. Campaign media
6-1 The media provided balanced election news
P
6-2 TV news favored the governing party
N
6-3 Parties/candidates had fair access to political broadcasts and advertising
P
6-4 Journalists provided fair coverage of the elections
P
6-5 Social media were used to expose electoral fraud
P
6-6 Disinformation and/or misinformation was spread on social media
N
6-7 There was informed public deliberation about key issues
P
7. Campaign finance
7-1 Parties/candidates had equitable access to public subsidies
P
7-2 Parties/candidates had equitable access to political donations
P
7-3 Parties/candidates publish transparent financial accounts
P
7-4 Rich people buy elections
N
7-5 Some state resources were improperly used for campaigning
N
7-6 Voters were bribed
N
ELECTION DAY
8. Voting process
8-1 Some voters were threatened with violence at the polls
N
8-2 Some fraudulent votes were cast
N
8-3 The process of voting was easy
P
8-4 Voters were offered a genuine choice at the ballot box
P
8-5 Special voting facilities were available for the disabled
P
8-6 National citizens living abroad could vote
P
8-7 Some form of internet voting was available
P
8-8 There were wide gaps in levels of participation between
population groups
N
8-9 The state encouraged voting amongst low-participation groups
P
8-10 Voters were turned away due to lack of proper paperwork or
identification
N
POST-ELECTION
9. Vote count
9-1 Ballot boxes were secure
P
9-2 The results were announced without undue delay
P
9-3 Votes were counted fairly
P
9-4 International election monitors were restricted
N
9-5 Domestic election monitors were restricted
N
10. Results
10-1 Parties/candidates challenged the results
N
10-2 The election led to peaceful protests
N
10-3 The election triggered violent protests
N
10-4 Any disputes were resolved through legal channels
P
10-5 There was an effective procedure for citizens to make complaints
about the electoral process
P
11. Electoral authorities
11-1 The election authorities were impartial
P
11-2 The authorities distributed information to citizens
P
11-3 The authorities allowed public scrutiny of their performance
P
11-4 The election authorities performed well
P
11-5 Electoral officials were targeted with violence or hate
N
Note: The direction of the original items P=positive, N=negative. Core items are repeated each year.
Source: www.electoralintegrityproject.com