Observing the Observers – A critical approach of problem representations in Policy of the EU EOM Final Reports

(1)

Observing the Observers –

A critical approach of problem representations in Policy of the EU EOM Final Reports

By: Jacob Wiman

Uppsala University - Fall 2020 Bachelor Thesis

Development Studies

Supervisor: Joakim Johansson Word Count: 13916

(2)

1. Introduction

1.1 Formulating the research problem

Election observation, a form of promoting democracy in the world, is today widely recognised as an international norm for leaders of governments in aspiring electoral democracies (Hyde, 2011:28-29; Kelley, 2012:3). It is a sensitive operation since observers carry the potential to make a difference for citizens' lives, to promote peace and safeguard democratic institutions in unsafe and conflict-ridden countries. The observers also have a long-term will to influence and improve circumstances. But how can we trust that these missions are genuinely effective and of high quality? The missions of election observation showcase how the west still mixes themselves in domestic matters of sovereign states, without clearly knowing if it is a good idea (Kelley, 2012:5).

The European Union is a major actor in the business of election observation and has since 2000 completed 147 Election Observation Missions (EOM) in the world (EEAS, 2018). Its purpose is to increase trust in the electoral process, promote citizen participation and deter violence that may occur (ibid). It hopes to advance the procedure of competitive elections, contribute to democratisation and form a foundation for international development projects in the long run (ibid). The EU assesses elections through a set of criteria, it formulates recommendations that proposes changes and provides information for the host governments, which has the aim to help solve the existing problems (EEAS, 2016). Ideally, the EOM recommendations are defined by an accurate view of the problems and are targeting what is indeed relevant to the electoral context between each election. In light of this, it becomes important that the EOMs themselves are observed and examined.

1.2 Aim and research question

(4)

applied, to not just uncover ideas but also to critically examine them (Esaiasson et al., 2017:218). Seemingly obvious ideas or interpretations of a phenomenon may not be the only way to think or act about an issue (ibid:214-215). According to the theoretical assumptions by Lindberg, some specific themes require prioritisation while promoting democracy. To ensure that democracy can be maintained and advanced, three democratic qualities, Participation, Competition and Legitimacy, will serve as theoretical standpoints to show and compare how the EU views the challenges and to see how problem representations vary between elections. By looking at how the EU represents the problems of these democratic qualities during each election in Nigeria, we can characterise how the EU views the issues of democratic development and to what extent it may occur a learning-process throughout its continuous work.

The main aim of this thesis is to examine the problem representations used by the EUEOMs, and how these might change across the different final reports. Suppose the problem representations change in the reports from election to election. In that case, it could arguably indicate whether the EOM reports comprehend the challenges of the development of democracy, or not. To study how the EU formulates problem representations becomes a way of critically evaluating the efforts and views of the EU on the development of democracy. With the aim outlined, the research question can be formulated as follows:

How well are the EOMs representing the problems of the democratic development, and how do these change over time in relation to the electoral background?

(5)

2. Background and previous research

This chapter introduces the previous research, the background to election observation and how the EUEOM conducts an election assessment. It motivates studying the phenomenon in this particular way and contextualises the aim and purpose of this study.

2.1 Previous research

Democracy is indeed more than just elections, and holding an election does not cement progress towards democratisation; however, elections are a crucial component to any democracy (Kelley, 2012:4; Hyde and Marinov 2014; Dahl, 1971; Dahl, 1989; Bratton, 1998). Likewise, election observation has become a major democracy-promoting activity of many organisations and governments in the world (Kelley, 2012:9; Carothers 1997). Researchers in the field of election observation has focused on different areas, for instance on incidents of electoral violence (Daxecker, 2012; Bjarnesen, J. and Söderberg, M., 2018), the strengths (Hyde and Marinov, 2014) and weaknesses (Kelley, 2010; 2012) of electoral assistance, on norms within election observation (Magnes, 2019), and also on innovative ways to study the phenomenon and its effects (Hyde, 2010; 2007).

(6)

would not be as widespread as it is today. But by looking at the reality of the world, we can see that election observation has perhaps not been entirely effective, if it were then the quality of elections, as an indicator of democracy, should perhaps not show the decline it has (ibid:5). Because even though elections in countries that have not been observed may have not shown this decline, case studies confirm that election fraud and violence could occur despite the presence of observers (Daxecker, 2012:503).

The conflicting results of many studies on the effectiveness and the positive claims by the actors themselves, combined with what theory suggests, show us that it is necessary to study and scrutinise EOMs and the EU with a critical eye. With the two different views on the effectiveness of election observation, Kelley urges future studies to systematically analyse the operations of involved actors (Kelley, 2012:158). While it is essential to see the positive sides of election observation, it is of equal importance to be mindful of the negative (ibid:170). Existing literature lacks this critical perspective in examining monitoring actors in election observation, therefore this essay wishes to contribute to amending this shortage. This critical approach that Kelley advances is an essential notion that this essay will follow.

The EUEOM documents are gaining more and more scholarly interest; however, it is today still somewhat lacking (Ronceray, 2017:4). Even though it is (1) a significant part in EU foreign policy, (2) an essential type of assistance for improving citizens life-conditions, (3) a costly and potentially dangerous effort (ibid, p.5), and (4) a public judgement that attracts much attention internationally from donors and the public. Thus, this thesis will help increase the literary focus on the EUEOM efforts and on the policy documents as material to study. How the EU is framing and representing a particular problem could provide a rare perspective for current research in terms of examining and evaluating the efforts of the EOMs.

2.2 Election observation and the EUEOM procedure

(7)

parallel with the third wave of democratisation in the mid-1970s, in which the European community played a significant role by extending EU-memberships to numerous countries (Huntington, 1991; Carothers, 1997). As the best and most visible form of democratic assistance, which gained considerable interest at that time, it has now many different actors involved (ibid). Carothers concludes that even though democracy was on the rise, and electoral assistance managed to positively shape the international community, there were still doubts about its actual efficiency and critique of its post-colonial features as a “zoo-like atmosphere” (ibid:19). Democracy promotion has emerged and cemented itself in the post-Cold war world within international politics and serves as an example of the restored faith in liberal democracy as the only way of human governance (Fukuyama, 1989; Hobson and Kurki, 2012:1). In this context, matters of governance and politics are increasingly impacted by non-state actors that interact with a great number of states through foreign policies. Thus it becomes useful to study the EUEOMs through the perspective of international relations, since its policies and problem representations may affect it.

(8)

There is also a compendium overviewing and identifying the International Standards of a democratic election that assists the EU in its assessment (European Union, 2016). These two guidelines are regulating the efforts of the EOMs. The final EOM reports establish recommendations that aim to influence the host government and these can logically be seen as an official policy. It has a clear will to influence the actions of other actors within a specific issue. Henceforth, the EOM final reports are throughout this essay referred to as both policy documents and final reports.

This final assessment report includes recommendations for the host government and is published approximately one month after election day. The seven key criteria are overarching areas which are used by EOM staff to analyse elections (EEAS, 2016). Ultimately, the EOM assesses elections in hope to achieve a legitimate and reliable process for holding a democratic election of international standard. The seven key criteria are as follows:

● The degree of impartiality shown by the election administration

● The degree of freedom of political parties and candidates to assemble and express their views

● The fairness of access to state resources made available for the election

● The degree of access for political parties and candidates to the media, in particular the state media

● The universal franchise afforded to voters

● Any other issue which concerns the democratic nature of the election e.g. campaign violence, rule of law, legislative framework

● The conduct of polling and counting of votes

2.3 The Electoral background in Nigeria

(9)

2.3.1 The 2003 elections

After a civilian government was installed during the elections in 1999, the upcoming elections in 2003 were crucial for transitioning to democratic rule (Akinyele, 2004:66; Mole, 2010:424; Lewis, 2003:143). However, the transition failed in implementing sufficient democratic institutions for the historic election (HRW, 2003). The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), a vital organization with great responsibility, failed to deliver credible electoral management (ibid). The voter registration procedure was delayed, the voter cards and ballots were distributed irregularly and were not properly safeguarded, and ballot box-stuffing and misuse of pre-marked ballots were widely performed by both election officials and citizens (Mole, 2010:425-427). The INEC attempted to mend fraudulent activities and violence but were insufficient in doing so (HRW, 2003; Lewis, 2003:140-141). Therefore, the conflict-affected and rurally-located displaced citizens were unable to register and vote (HRW, 2003).

Others viewed the efforts of INEC as a success, the computer-based system for registration and choice of identity cards made fraud and vote-rigging ineffective (Akinyele, 2004:68). The overall democratic governance of the elections, the management by the INEC and the electorate behaviour were exceptionally well-performed in a free, fair and violence-less election (ibid:81). Omotola (2010:11) means that instead, the electoral legal framework was disputed and seen as distorting an even playing field for political competitors during elections. In this regard, the INEC was lacking, since the elections were hampered with irregularities and fraud, especially in voter exercises and registration, but also concerning the power the incumbent party attains over state media, security forces and through different patronage connections (ibid:12). Generally, much evidence on the 2003 elections ultimately points at the INEC and its ineffective and inadequate actions during preparations, management of the elections and its relations to different parts of the society such as the civil society (Omotola, 2010:14; HRW, 2003; Lewis, 2003).

2.3.2 The 2011 elections

(10)

Oshewolo, 2017:402). United States Institute of Peace (USIP) assessed the elections as the “best run, but most violent”, where violence claimed 800 lives in an election that was otherwise well-managed (USIP, 2011). The voter registration was improved and the INEC was chaired with new and well-regarded leadership, and a commission was set up to determine the cause of electoral violence and to prosecute perpetrators (ibid). The year presiding the election, offenders had wide impunity in numerous cases of human rights violations, as killings and bombings tarnished the country (HRW, 2011). Therefore, the commission was much needed but proved unsuccessful (ibid).

The National Assembly continuously failed in passing needed legislation for increasing transparency and information during election times and in the society (HRW 2011). Generally, free speech and the independence of the press were well-respected, and the Nigerian judiciary also operated to a large extent independently (ibid). In the party primaries, there was a lack of transparency, fairness and freedom for choosing candidates (Okolo & Okunkwo, 2011:66). As most of the political parties were financially constrained, the ruling party seemed to possess limitless funding (ibid:67). To use state resources for political campaigning by the incumbent is a critical matter of equality between competing parties. Here, the INEC have the primary mandate and should be involved to ensure equal opportunities between parties (ibid). In sum, the elections in 2011 became a promising light in the right direction, where the INEC had a positive influence, where the voter register improved and transparency increased (USIP, 2011; Nwozor and Oshewolo, 2017:397).

2.3.3 The 2019 elections

(11)

violations, where the voter turnout was at an all-time low (Freedomhouse, 2019). It is estimated that around 11.2 million Permanent Voter Cards were uncollected, which gravely harms the voters' rights and freedoms (Amao, 2020:433). State security agencies were widely deployed to ensure a safe electoral process, but they were strategically used to intimidate voters, while also failing to limit the electoral violence (Babalola & Onapajo, 2020:363).

Moreover, independent citizens can politically participate freely and fairly, provided by the constitutional amendments made by president Buhari in 2018 (Freedomhouse, 2019). Yet, party-internal procedures and freedoms are relatively constrained as candidates have a difficult time receiving party nominations (ibid). Legislation to increase access for voters to the election result and voter register was passed in 2018 by the National Assembly, but the efforts were ultimately blocked by president Buhari and not timely implemented for the 2019 elections (ibid). Freedomhouse (2019) also reports that government agencies often refuse to release public information, despite the support of the 2011 Freedom of Information act. Concludingly, many observer groups could not judge the election as credible, since it failed to take sufficient steps in the democratic development (Amao, 2020:434).

3. Theoretical framework

This chapter will provide knowledge on the theoretical stances which this study uses. Here, the theoretical ideas of the democratic qualities are constructed and aim to facilitate the understanding of election observation while also assist in following the analytical stages of this study. One can also see this chapter as a theoretical context where this thesis takes place.

3.1 Democracy and the inherent value of recurrence

(12)

Staffan I. Lindberg, who has done extensive research on elections and democracy in Sub-Saharan Africa, has argued that holding an election is inherently valuable since a series of continuous competitive elections can foster certain democratic qualities in society (2006a:139-140). Regardless of the fairness and freeness of the elections, the recurrence of them seems to affect democratic qualities and human freedoms (ibid). The level of these civil liberties or human freedoms in a society determines the improvement of the three key democratic qualities, which are; participation, competition and legitimacy (ibid). In what ways an election in society shows freedoms for its citizens determines how democratic qualities improve (ibid). Thus, elections do generally encourage democratisation. The three democratic qualities are seen as factors that indicate how democratisation has improved, and of course, can vary at different levels (ibid:8). As Lindberg has argued, these are nurtured when competitive elections are held successively where civil liberties and human freedom increase (ibid). Following the approach of Lindberg, democracy is conceptualised using the graded approach, since we are interested in the process of aspiring democracies in becoming more democratic (Lindberg, 2006b:27). It is also matching well with the grey-shaded reality we live in (ibid). Moreover, Lindberg suggests that particular mechanisms exist where these democratic qualities are generated by the holding of successive elections (Lindberg, 2006a:148). These concern the idea of the struggle of political power and are linked to elections since they provide citizens with an opportunity for challenge and change (ibid). At the moment of an election, voters become active and engage in activism, as they have a peaceful instrument to put pressure and demands on politicians (ibid). In short, the mechanisms are; Citizens become voters, Democratic “lock-in” mechanisms, Self-fulfilling prophecies, Civic organisations, New roles for state institutions and lastly, The role of the media (ibid:146-148). Even though these will not be given focus in this study, they help understand in what specific way a series of competitive elections help improve democratic qualities in society. This perspective of Lindberg is not the only explanation, there are many possible causal factors behind democratisation (ibid). Though, successive elections will with enough time result in improvement of democratic qualities, at least in the case of African countries according to Lindberg (ibid:149).

3.2 Conceptualising the three democratic qualities

(13)

and specified to show how the interpretations in the analysis have been made. This will assist other researchers to apply an analysis as similar as possible and perform this study. Also, it helps define what is meant when referring to the concept of “democratic development”. The main idea is that the problem representations of democratic qualities indicate how the EU views the development of democracy. These democratic qualities are important areas where the formal idea of democracy is realised, and where the level of it can have positive effects on civil liberties and human freedom in society. Each democratic quality could however entail numerous things. In this chapter, the thoughts explained are provided by Lindberg (2006a; 2006b), and constitute a source of inspiration. In agreement with the open approach of the WPR-method, this study will not use these conceptualisations as strict empirical indicators, but it will show how these concepts could be understood.

First, the democratic quality of Participation is essentially the core of any democracy, rule by the people requires the people’s participation (Lindberg, 2006b:37). Lindberg uses Voter turnout, Opposition participation and Previous authoritarian rulers, as indicators for the characterisation of participation (ibid:39). Arguably, participation regards each citizens’ right to vote, and the idea of equal and universal suffrage. The realisation of being able to vote indicates a higher democratic quality of participation. Citizens should enjoy the freedom to run for office and have access to the electoral process which should be genuinely conducted freely and fairly (ibid:23). Any indication of restriction of this decreases the level of participation. Summarily, these ideas are used to identify and interpret the democratic qualities in the text during the analysis.

(14)

conceptualisation of competition will be later used in analysing and interpreting the text material.

Thirdly, Legitimacy sets the mark on the whole election, election fraud or violence may delegitimize the process, even if the procedures have been conducted properly (ibid:43). Much of what legitimacy means depends on parties behaviour, and on accepting the post-election outcomes and on the presence of violence (ibid). This can be indicated by Looser’s acceptance of results, Peacefulness and Electoral cycle not aborted, as stated by Lindberg (ibid:44). Furthermore, legitimacy as an attribute is dependent on who judges elections to be legitimate, for the people to rule over the people, the citizens view on and confidence of the elections are crucial (ibid:32). Legitimacy is mainly seen as the absence of violence, fraud and irregularities. Such aspects are detrimental to voter participation, safety and right to vote, and when left unaddressed it decreases and damages the attribute of legitimacy which would have contributed to foster the development of democracy.

The sections above sought to explain the meaning of the democratic qualities, as inspired by Lindberg (2006b). Admittingly, these should not be seen as empirical indicators, and there are many ways to conceptualise and understand these ideas. Therefore the analytical questions are used to clarify what is being analysed in the text, and functions as empirical indicators of the examined phenomenon (Esaiasson et al., 2017:222). In general terms, analytical questions must be formed from the study’s theoretical framework (ibid:219). Thus, the analytical questions used in this study (as to be elaborated in the analytical framework) are formulated with the conceptualisations of the democratic qualities in mind. To pose the analytical questions to the three democratic qualities, Participation, Competition and Legitimacy, allows the study to examine the problem representations, and the potential change of them between elections, following the boundaries of the method and research design.

4. Research design and methodology

(15)

elections in Nigeria will constitute the material in this essay, which are official policy documents published by the EU in their democracy promoting efforts in election observation. Additionally, this study is indeed also a descriptive and comparative single case study. The approach of “What’s the problem represented to be'' by Carol Bacchi is applied. The critical angle of Bacchi’s approach, combined with applying a frame analysis resonates well with the aim of this study to evaluate and explore how the EU frames the problems of the development of democracy. Frames are important since they influence how actors behave, or the relations within a context, in regards to a certain problem (Esaiasson et al., 2017:218). Studying frames, and not just problem representations, put an increased emphasis on the actors theoretical meaning in this study (ibid:218). The critical angle strives to emphasize seemingly obvious ideas as products of specific human interpretation or context - suggesting that things might not be as evident as they seem (ibid:215). Thus, the WPR-questions are optimised and modified to fit the aim and limitations and to encompass the idea of the WPR-approach. As stated, the questions are also created from theoretical standpoints and functions as empirical indicators to operationalise the theoretical concepts and are fundamental to the analytical tool (ibid:222). The above-mentioned method and design have been determined with the research question and the nature of the research problem in primary focus. Something that is indeed rare for this thesis is the chosen research design of examining policy documents as text material, as much of the previous literature studies election observation using a quantitative design and different datasets.

4.1 Case selection and material

(16)

potentially indicating that the EOMs increasingly comprehend the contextual challenges to the development of democracy. If the EOM were to show such changes, it is most likely going to be visible in the final reports of Nigeria. Besides, Nigeria has the largest population in Africa and is central to West African regional stability which is why the long-term stability of a legitimate government is imperative to the success of new African ambitions (ibid). Using the final report documents proposed by the EU is ideal for studying problem representations and frames of an actor. Though, due to the limited frame of this study, only three out of the five existing reports are used. It is a methodological decision to either choose narrow material, that risk missing interesting findings, or broad material which may be too overwhelming (Esaiasson et al., 2017:226). Therefore the three reports in 2003, 2011 and 2019 are chosen to capture the long time frame of the EOMs in Nigeria. The longevity of the EUEOM and amount of reports is motivating choosing Nigeria in this study, something that is also compatible with the comparative approach and aim of this thesis.

4.2 Methodological limits and considerations

As discussed, this study aims not to determine the effects of election observation, nor the causal links to democratisation. The study is strictly descriptive and exploratory, examining the problem representations of the EOM policy documents. To say whether the democratic development in Nigeria is influenced by electoral assistance on behalf of the EUOM is not within the ambitions of this essay. Neither is to investigate what affects the EOMs in Nigeria have had, or why problems and challenges exist in the democratic development. Relatedly, this study does not acknowledge and therefore miss out on the vast context of different important aspects of the democratic, economic or political development in Nigeria. The study is strictly bound to the EU and the material, and cannot make claims beyond that, as such analysis is not within the aims of this research. How much the choice of Nigeria is affecting this study is also left unacknowledged, perhaps other results and conclusions can be drawn using another case of the EUEOM efforts.

4.3 What’s the problem represented to be?

(17)

fields (Bacchi C. and Goodwin S., 2016:13). The approach is constructed of a set of questions and focuses on critically studying implicit meanings and under-examined presumptions of a problem touched by policies. Drawing from the Foucauldian logic, the WPR-approach intends to “examine the unexamined ways of thinking” and problematise it in a new way (Bacchi C. and Goodwin S., 2016:15). It wants to open up the objects that are unquestioned and see how they have become (Bacchi, 2012:2). One of the intents is to not limit societal problems or actors in society to one precise representation or understanding (Esaiasson et al., 2017:217). The WPR-approach is a critical policy analysis, which provides helpful guidelines of critical thinking and scrutiny of underlying problem representations, appropriate for this study.

What policies intend to do about something indicates what is needed to be changed and ultimately what the problem is thought to be (Bacchi C. and Goodwin S, 2016:16). The approach takes a post-structural perspective on society and policies where nothing has a fixed meaning and everything can be contested and interpreted in multiple ways (ibid:15). The point is, our lives are affected by how we are governed, which depend on how specific issues have emerged and been problematised as “truths” (Bacchi, 2012:2). It is thus essential to open up these well-established truths, as they affect policies of governance and ultimately the reality we live in (ibid; Esaiasson et al., 2017:217). Bacchi argues that the public society is governed through what kind of problematisation exists, and not directly by policies, which is why we must investigate policies (Beasley and Bletsas, 2013; Bacchi, 2016:9). This does not mean that actors consciously frame a problem in a certain way, but that problems are subconsciously constituted in specific policies (Bacchi, 2016:8). Problem representation is the manner of how a problem is produced as the truth, this may also be determined by which actor is involved (ibid). The aim is not to solve policy problems, but to study how the problematized phenomena operate in its governing function. In other words, to analyse how governing works as problematisation, or as a process of producing a problem in society.

4.4 Applying WPR in this study

(18)

means which evaluates and examines the EOM reports. These can also help us understand what frames are used in policy within a specific issue (Esaiasson et al., 2017:218). How problems within a certain field are represented are meaningful for those acting upon the problem, and those affected by it (ibid). Hence, the foundational value of the analytical questions for the analytical tool cannot be stressed enough. To make sure the analysis does not miss potential interpretations, the full set of modified analytical questions are posed to the different text material individually (ibid:229). Each of the three modified WPR-questions is separately asked to the democratic qualities in each of the EOM policy documents. The analytical framework will also take a comparative approach to analyse the material, which could give a fruitful analysis (Beasley and Bletsas, 2013:133). Comparing problem representations forms dialogue and highlights the relations between them, while also providing an opportunity for reflection and a critical approach (ibid). A crucial part of this idea of the WPR-approach is to ensure the self-reflexivity of one’s thinking and interpretations, as this subjectivity affects how we view problems and ourselves (ibid:22). Thus the researcher, as a white male from the West, strives to acknowledge the influence this may have on the analysis and the interpretations made in this study.

4.5 Analytical framework

(19)

representations alter between elections. This essay follows the usual steps taken by critical studies, which first clarifies ideas in texts and then subsequently scrutinising them to expose potential asymmetrical power-relations that may occur (ibid:214). The second phase is thus smaller and aims at problematizing the analysis.

This study implements an open approach of possible answers that will not have, nor be constricted by a predefined structure. The open approach aims to capture nuances and inform unexpected meanings, while also refraining from trivialising the analysed material (ibid:224). The result will thus be more valid as the author may discover unexpected findings. The practicality of choosing the policy-recommendations and quotations to start the analysis is crucial. When applicable in the material, multiple recommendations or problematisations are analysed for a common meaning and forged together into one cohesive quotation (ibid:230). In other cases, multiple recommendations or problematisations are weighed against each other and the most important one is chosen. This practice of selecting quotations is dependent on the subjective analysis and interpretations of the researcher. Moreover, the analytical tool will help to analyse the text material and to transparently show how the analysis is conducted to amend intersubjectivity, reliability and validity objections (ibid:233). Improving reliability is done by communicating citations, arguments and evidence for interpretations while simultaneously refer back to theoretical concepts (ibid). Despite this, intersubjectivity is inherently difficult in qualitative textual analysis, as the analysis is subject to personal interpretations by the researcher.

Due to the limited scope of this thesis, the full set of WPR-questions by Bacchi will not be applied, rather, they will be tailored to fit the theoretical framework and the aim of this study. The questions strive to complement each other, and centre around the concepts of; problems, reasons and solutions, and will thus deal with the represented problematisation, the stated causes and the proposed solutions of the democratic qualities. The questions that will be used are shaped as follows:

1. How is the problem of (Participation/Competition/Legitimacy) represented to be in the EOM final report? What kind of problem is it represented to be?

(20)

3. How are the policy recommendations to the represented problem framed? Which options for action are made possible due to this problem representation?

Table 1. Illustration of the analytical framework with the modified WPR-questions with their respective explanation and purpose.

MODIFIED WPR-QUESTIONS

Applied to the three democratic qualities

EXPLANATION

Motivations of the formulated questions

1. How is the problem of

(Participation/Competition/Legitimacy) represented to be in the EOM final reports?

Question 1 pinpoints the start of the examination to open up truths that appear natural by working backwards from a stated proposal. It aims to clarify the implicit problem representations with each

democratic quality. This inquired problem representation is crucial for the rest of the analysis. It is possible to further ask; What kind of problem is it represented to be?

2. Which reasons underlie this representation(s) of the problem?

Question 2 digs deeper into this problem representation and scrutinises the

(21)

3. How are the policy recommendations to the represented problem framed?

Question 3 studies the proposed policy solutions and recommendations to the issue regarding the initial problem representation. The representation of the problem may entail how certain issues are framed and in turn affect groups of

people. Similarly, we could further question; Which options for action are made possible due to this problem representation?

5. Analysis

(22)

5.1 Participation

The EUEOM Final Report 2003

Applying the first analytical question suggested that participation is mainly represented as a problem of voter registration, even though it is possible to conclude that multiple problem representations arise. The report concludes the following recommendation:

A permanent system of voter registration should be implemented without delay. [...]. All eligible Nigerian citizens must be given the chance to register to vote.

(EOM, 2003:56)

It is constituted as a lack of voter identification and lack of equal suffrage, which consequently means a lack of democratic ideals where citizens cannot exercise their right to vote (ibid). The report suggests a voter registration is non-existent and that the constitutional boundaries are incomplete, this decreases the accessibility to voting and the possibility to exercise democratic rights (ibid:56). The problem of participation is thus a problem of the absence of the right and access to voting which is due to the inaction of the INEC.

The second analytical question is applied with the following outcome. The problematisation rests on the assumption that a complete voter register and a clear demarcation of constituencies in Nigeria would lead to voters being fully able to vote freely and fairly. This assumes other influencing factors would not interfere with and endanger the process of voting. The reasons for the problem representations is formulated below:

A number of gross abuses (parties buying and borrowing cards, cards distributed in private houses, underage voters in possession of large numbers of cards) were directly observed and reported throughout the electoral period.

(EOM, 2003:23)

(23)

The third analytical question is asked to describe and analyse the stated policy solutions. The represented problem has many proposed solutions but it is mainly framed as an organizational solution to the overall electoral system. This concerns implementing a full voter register, and merging the nation-wide databases of voters to then crosscheck this with performing a new civil register of all Nigerian citizens (EOM 2003:56). As witnessed below:

The foundations are laid, but now the voter register must become a thorough public and challengeable document.

(EOM, 2003:56)

It is assumed that full completion of the voter registration would solve the problems of fraudulent activities concerning ballots and votes, but arguably these issues are not only dependent on a fully working public and credible registration system. The voter register is temporarily and scarcely established according to the EOM report, but according to the electoral background, a voter registration system does exist even though its implementation was delayed and marred by irregularities (Mole, 2010:425-427). Here, the two perceptions are different, which could indicate that the understanding and quality of the report is neither high nor good enough, and could ultimately have effects on policy proposals.

The EUEOM Final Report 2011

We can see that participation is problematised as the incomplete legal framework that hinders free and fair conduct of elections, after having applied the first analytical question. These legal flaws have implications for the participation of candidates and indeed voters themselves in society. This can be drawn from the text with the following two recommendations set by the EOM:

The Constitution should be amended to allow for independent candidates to run for office, in conformity with international principles for democratic elections.

(EOM, 2011:51)

Any future amendments to election legislation should be enacted sufficiently in advance of elections to provide political parties, candidates and voters adequate time to become informed of the rules of the election process.

(24)

Fundamentals of democracy (as elaborated in the theoretical framework) are denied, where free information and right to run for office is restricted, thus decreasing participation in society.

Posing the second analytical question concludes that the problem representation builds on the assumption that voters are deprived of their democratic right to choose government representatives if the candidacy for office is neither free nor fair. This is also due to denying information to and disadvantaging the society (political parties, voters or candidates), and thus limits participation in the electoral process. As strengthened by the following statement:

Moreover, the absence of provisions for independent candidates to run for office, despite the Committee’s recommendation, is not in conformity with international principles, as it restricts the effective right of individuals to stand for elections and limits the voters’ choice of candidates.

(EOM, 2011:13)

The reasons for the problem representation in the policy proposal are framed as undemocratic, unfree and unfair, following the theoretical framework, and the International Principles for a Democratic Election. Simply, the lack of conformity to the principles made this problem representation possible.

The third analytical question is here applied and the solution is to implement revisions to the constitution while also encouraging that amendments to legislation are done promptly (EOM, 2011:51). The solution is simply to enact legislation that supports independent candidates to run for office and to advise the government to provide actors with information and adequate time following the international principles (ibid). Implementing legislation on short notice has crucial implications on the legitimacy of an election, as described below:

Electoral legal framework adopted shortly before the elections undermines the legitimacy of the legislation.

(EOM, 2011:51)

(25)

could be criticised as being too simple, individuals could still face problems of participating in the election despite that adequate election legislation exists. The electoral background shows us that the candidacy and internal party primaries were unfree and fair, which the INEC must mend (Okolo and Okunkwo, 2011:66). The EOM is not entirely consistent with other assessments but it identifies the same issue of free participation of candidates in the election.

The EUEOM Final Report 2019

As the first analytical question is applied, multiple problem representations of participation arise. However, the problem is mainly presented as a lack of transparency where citizens are denied information, as drawn from the following two statements:

Citizens did not have sufficient means to scrutinise results. (EOM, 2019:58)

This concentration of voters makes polling less accessible for voters. (EOM, 2019:57)

Polling units for voters needed to be separated to increase accessibility to vote, which would increase transparency in election results as well as availability to realise voting rights (ibid). Citizens are denied their equal right to vote and access to information, decreasing the level of participation, and ultimately endangers the basic democratic idea of equal suffrage. This is consistent with what the electoral background mentions.

Since collation and explanation of the results were not transparently published, and since new polling units were not implemented, the participation was deprived (ibid:56-58). There were insufficient means for voters to scrutinise and take part in the election results, and voters were unable to vote efficiently. Context to this may be drawn from the statements below:

Continued use of these same polling units means that voters are amassed in a limited number of locations, and may have further to travel making polling less accessible.

(EOM, 2019:14)

(26)

(EOM, 2019:14)

The problem representation was made possible with the reasons of procedural ineffectiveness of the INEC and is thus framed as an operational failure strictly pointing at the responsible actor of the INEC.

The third analytical question is posed and multiple solutions to the produced problem can be identified. Though to tackle the problem of lack of transparency, clear solutions are described which targets the polling units to first separate voting points to lessen the burden on voters, and secondly to let the polling units report all results to publish them on the INEC website (EOM, 2019:56-58). Seen by the motivation below:

Results forms from all collation centres be scanned and published on the INEC website by the time of the declaration of final results.

(EOM, 2019:58)

Upon analysing the solutions, they seem to be framed as concrete and practical recommendations, which are highlighting the voter as negatively affected. This framing may suggest the EOM aims at making them easier to understand and implement for the relevant actors. The problem of participation is produced as lack of transparency and the solutions are concrete, but according to the electoral background, the legislation of these issues has been lacklustre and perhaps the legal framework needs to be fully implemented and state agencies need to release public information, instead of focusing on making election information transparent on the INEC website (Freedomhouse, 2019). This shows a minor gap between the EOM report and the electoral background, both target the INEC as responsible and emphasises the rights and accessibility of voters, but they suggest different solutions and actions.

5.2 Competition

The EUEOM Final Report 2003

(27)

Federal and State-owned media were biased in favour of the parties and candidates in power throughout the elections.

(EOM, 2003:3)

Media coverage is seen as hindering competition between political parties during the elections, specifically its bias and partiality towards the ruling party. The above statement suggests it is a deep problem which severely impairs the competitive electoral process, that also contradicts foundations of conceptualisation of democracy, as seen in Lindberg (2006b).

The second analytical question is posed, identifying the assumption that competition equals fairness and balance in the media coverage of each political party, which would reflect a sense of fair competition and conformity of democratic ideals in the election process. The assumption builds on binaries such as biased and unbiased, and public and privately owned. As illustrated below:

These media have a particular obligation to provide impartial and unbiased information to the electorate, because they are publicly owned and because of their advantage in reaching the largest number of people in Nigeria. However, detailed analysis shows that they failed to live up to this.

(EOM, 2003:3)

Arguably, free and impartial media in a democracy is a core value. It provides the equal right to the electorate to receive adequate unbiased electoral information, while also giving the political parties their equal right to access the media (as theoretically illustrated by Lindberg). The electoral background also identifies the uneven playing field and the misuse of state media by the incumbent and pinpoints the INEC as the inadequate responsible actor (Omotola, 2010:10-14). Additionally, the reasons are framed as negatively impacting the voters and distorting the playing field for the parties in a democratic election (ibid:57).

(28)

The Independent National Electoral Commission should consider instructing publicly funded media to distribute free airtime to political parties and candidates competing in an election (within reasonable qualifying criteria), in order to ensure equity of coverage for all.

(EOM, 2003:57)

The solution regards advising the INEC to promote public media outlets to balance their coverage equally, this is also consistent with the electoral background. The framing suggests a simple adjustment of media coverage would level the playing field and make competition fair and free (ibid). Fair competition and an even playing field are not given just because free airtime for all parties is provided, the media could still be used to disadvantage the opposition in different ways. The report suggests multiple measures and solutions that would enhance media, impartiality and transparency (ibid:58). Describing these many options for dealing with the problem may suggest that the EOM are urgent in solving these issues.

The EUEOM Final Report 2011

The report produces competition as a problem of an uneven playing field, which is caused by the misuse of state resources by the incumbent party which disadvantages the oppositional parties. It is further represented as a lack of transparency of internal bookkeeping by the political parties, this is overall not conforming with the Electoral Act 2010 which the INEC does not enforce (EOM, 2011:28). This representation is illustrated by the statement below:

[...] the line between the ruling party and the State is often blurred. This lack of a clear distinction may have led to an uneven playing field for the opposition.

(EOM, 2011:27-28)

Transparency of political campaigning is an important feature in genuinely democratic elections, as the voters are otherwise disenfranchised by an unfree and unfair election.

(29)

will not be deterred to misuse state resources if there are no legal repercussions. Therefore, the meaningful bookkeeping policy on expenditure is proposed, to uphold the provisions. The following comment explains this context:

Nevertheless, the EU observers reported on misuse of state resources. For example during the election period the incumbent President and State Governors frequently merged their official duties with campaign activities.

(EOM, 2011:27)

The reason for the problem representation is framed as an uneven playing field for the political parties which is inherently undemocratic, unfree and unfair. This is again strictly the polar opposite of the international principles that aid the EOM assessment, and the theoretical ideas forwarded by Lindberg (2006b). The political context also indicates that the incumbent can distort the playing field not only financially, which makes the problem intricate to solve.

The third analytical question is posed, identifying the following solution formulated in the EOM recommendation below:

In order to enforce the provisions for campaign expenditure detailed in the Electoral Act 2010, as amended, political parties should develop internal transparent bookkeeping procedures. (EOM, 2011:53)

(30)

The EUEOM Final Report 2019

The first analytical question discovers that competition is problematised as the absence of legal provisions for candidates and citizens to run for office. Political parties can nominate candidates, but the INEC can only deny a candidate when the primary procedure is not properly conducted and not if the candidate is nominated on unlawful terms. As written in the 2019 EOM final report:

The law be amended to strengthen legal requirements for integrity and transparency in party primaries as well as internal party dispute procedures.

(EOM, 2019:61)

From this statement, one can see that it is a legal problem that interferes with conducting genuine elections and for citizens equal political right to choose government representatives.

Posing the second analytical question to the material, the produced problem lies on the assumption that the law and established legal framework can amend the competition in the elections. There is a perception that primaries are disorganised and unclear. Seen by the statement below:

Procedural problems included the late publication of party guidelines for the holding of primaries and an overall lack of transparency.

(EOM, 2019:20)

Financial procedural issues, discouragement of women and unpublished information caused problems for the primaries and the competition in the elections, there are therefore many reasons for problematising competition this way (ibid). Generally, party primaries are constructed on the binaries of being either transparent or ambiguous, and have integrity or dishonesty, and therefore sublimely democratic or undemocratic. Transparency is used to frame the reasons for problematising the problem this way, to improve the conduct of primaries and elections to ensure that they are genuinely conducted with the equal right for candidates to run for office and for voters to vote.

(31)

certain aspects of competition and free and fair elections regarding how candidates can run for office and how political parties function. It is framed as a problem for the INEC, as stated:

The law also be amended to give INEC powers to reject nominations for candidacies if primaries are not conducted in line with legal requirements.

(EOM, 2019:61)

The report points at the INEC, suggesting their lack of legal mandate is insufficient (ibid). Legal amendments may cause primaries to be properly conducted or internal party conflicts to be resolved or decrease, but can it ensure fair and free competition or safeguard the voters right to choose government representatives? There might still be problems with competition in the elections, despite that primaries legally offers a fair chance to candidates to run for election. Other options could for instance target gender quotas in candidate nominations. Generally, the electoral background also reports the same issue, there is legislation for free participation and competition, but party-internal procedures are still constrained (Freedomhouse, 2019).

5.3 Legitimacy

The EUEOM Final Report 2003

After applying the first analytical question, the following recommendation is stated in the report:

INEC together with the state authorities in charge must take necessary steps in order to create conditions for democratic elections observed by domestic observers in case election will be nullified in one or several states. This relates particularly to those states where serious patterns of irregularities and fraud have been observed and the trust and confidence of the electorate in the 2003 elections has yet to be re-established.

(EOM, 2003:54)

(32)

Here, the second analytical question is posed to the text. There is an assumption that fraud, irregularities and low confidence of the electoral process hinder the development of democracy. The reasons are contextualised by:

The elections were marred by serious irregularities and frauds of various nature: ballot box stuffing and ballot box snatching, forgery of results, falsification of results sheets, etc.

(EOM, 2003:37)

The reasons are framed as inactivity where the INEC must make necessary efforts to deal with the issues, as the presence of election offences and irregularities pose a serious urgent threat to democracy. The environment in which the EOM deals with problems and forms policies is assumed to be of serious gravity which then affects the shaping of the problem.

Upon using the third analytical question, solutions are framed as straightforward steps of action against what has been produced as the problem, serious irregularities, election fraud and malpractices which goes against democratic conditions (ibid:54). Multiple relevant actors are identified as responsible, as drawn from below:

The police, the judiciary and INEC should conduct investigations without further delay into the irregularities and malpractices observed [...]. Subsequently, INEC must take adequate measures, such as dismissing INEC officials involved in malpractice.

(EOM, 2003:54)

(33)

The EUEOM Final Report 2011

The first analytical question is posed to the material. The problem of legitimacy is represented as the absence of prosecution of anyone involved in electoral offences. It is also framed as a human rights issue that is extremely urgent as it requires prompt countermeasures. The problem regards inaction by the relevant state authorities and security agencies. It is a key recommendation, as seen below:

Prompt prosecution of people involved in election-related violence should be pursued as well as prompt prosecution of people involved in election offences.

(EOM, 2011:6)

Framing the problem as a part of a key recommendation further emphasizes its pressing formulation. The legitimacy of the electoral process and the voters’ safety to exercise their political rights during elections is harmed by violence and offences. Individuals which commit fraudulent and violent actions need to be held accountable to not disenfranchise the electorate. Importantly, the EU produces the issue as a problem of lack of prosecution and lack of protection of the electoral process by security agencies (ibid:35).

Applying the second analytical question, it is assumed that the produced problem would be solved through further stressing the urgency of the issues of electoral offences and violence not being properly prosecuted. It assumes that electoral offences must exclusively lead to prosecution. The context that allowed this produced problem can be explained as follows:

[...] the disenfranchisement of voters due to omissions on the voters‟ register, to alleged snatching of ballots boxes, thumb printing of ballots, vote buying, and fake results sheets. Intimidation, violence against voters, alleged threat to life and killings of party supporters. (EOM, 2011:22)

(34)

The third analytical question is posed where the policy solution to the problem is shortly mentioned in the recommendations, it concludes the following:

Prompt prosecution of people involved in election violence should be pursued. (EOM, 2011:55)

Legitimacy is problematized as the absence of prosecution, therefore the proposed solution is to advise authorities to implement prosecution measures. To prosecute should indeed be given in a stable society, but seeing the problem of legitimacy as just inaction by state authorities of prosecution may miss other aspects of the problem. This may have negative implications for the long-term development and the citizens. The report also mentions the failure of security agencies as a contextual problem, without properly stating a solution (ibid:35). The electoral background and the EOM report both describe the severe context of electoral violence and offences, where action and prosecution were acutely needed, which the INEC and other relevant actors failed to deliver (USIP, 2011; HRW, 2011). This consistency with other actors could suggest that the EOM report is of high quality and that it has improved its understanding of the democratic development.

The EUEOM Final Report 2019

The problem of legitimacy is produced as a failure of electoral security and coordination of security agencies, this is drawn from the following EOM recommendation:

The inter-agency body responsible for electoral security works more transparently and inclusively with regular consultations with political parties and civil society.

(EOM, 2019:67)

(35)

its work (ibid). This negatively impacts voters’ participation in elections and the confidence of the electoral process as genuinely free and fair.

The second analytical question identifies the assumption that a functioning, effective and coordinated inter-agency body leads to decreased electoral violence. Issues would be solved if there is an effective coordinated force tasked to deal with electoral security, violence and intimidation. Furthermore, even if INEC successfully organises the military to properly aid electoral security, there are still some sensitive aspects of military effects on elections and voters. As addressed by the report:

Beyond the overall issue of the effect of the military on voters, there were also more specific concerns about interference in the electoral process by military personnel [...]

(EOM, 2019:35)

In this context, it is reported that military personnel and soldiers have been denying access to collation points and INEC offices, and also militarising the election process (ibid:35). The problem of legitimacy is framed as security concerns and ineffectiveness of responsible agencies, this is consistent with descriptions from the electoral background. State security forces aim to increase safety but have been used for intimidation (Babalola & Onapajo, 2020:363). The relevant actors also failed in limiting the overall electoral violence (ibid).

Applying the third analytical question to the material, the proposed solution is framed as a collective and coordinated effort by primarily the inter-agency body of electoral security, but which also incorporates the political parties and civil society (ibid:67). It is further framed as a solution that will open up the work of such security agencies to the public, increasing transparency and also clarify the roles of the actors involved in electoral security (ibid). This context is drawn from:

Security arrangements, general principles for rules of engagement, updates, and complaints mechanisms be made public.

(EOM, 2019:67)

(36)

in society, where transparency and inclusion ought to make the host government take action on the recommendations. A clear contrast to simply advising and calling on prosecution urgently. The EU explains the context thoroughly and to produce the problem in this way could give different options for solving it. It could have focused more at the state level through strengthening the legal framework or improving the police force. This frame may show that the EU is giving more concern to the context, which could positively affect the citizens in Nigeria.

Table 2. Summary of the findings of problem representations.

5.4 Discussion of the results and theoretical implications

To discuss the dense display of problem representations and frames, table 2 is presented above and to help compare and understand the answers from the analysis. As stated in chapter 4, the analysis is conducted without pre-determined categories for possible answers, thus making the results open and nuanced, but simultaneously heavy and disorganised. The following discussion aims to bring that needed order of the findings.

Between 2011 and 2019 the problem of participation is framed as a lack of the provision of information to voters, which similar between the two reports, despite their differently stated problem representation. This could potentially mean that the EU has a deeper understanding of Year of report

Democratic quality

2003 2011 2019

Participation Lack of proper voter

register and identification Incomplete legal framework, lack of information Lack of transparency of information

Competition Media misconduct and

uneven playing field

Abuse of state

resources and uneven playing field

Absence of legal provisions

Legitimacy Lack of action by the

INEC and state authorities, and

absence of prosecution

Lack of action by the INEC and absence of prosecution

(37)

the challenges of the development of democracy, even though the representation has not changed. Moreover, problematisation regarding competition in 2003 and 2011 may seem entirely different at first glance, but both frames the problem as an uneven playing field. Similar frames are used, but at the same time, two slightly different problems are explained. Furthermore, legitimacy is in 2003 and 2011 similarly produced as an urgent problem that lacks action by state authorities and other relevant actors. Since violence caused instability and delegitimised the elections, the primary solution is then to simply prosecute perpetrators. This problem representation is perhaps solely due to the nature of this issue. Meaning that it is perhaps only possible to problematise the problem in one certain way. As for 2019, the problem representation of legitimacy also deals with the same issue. Thus, it is possible to analyse the problem representation as consistent over the three years. However, after a more profound analysis, the EOM rigorously frame the problem as a lack of cooperation between actors in electoral security due to the INEC. Problem representations seem similar, but they are differently framed in 2019. Instead of simply stating that relevant authorities must prosecute, as in 2003 and 2011, its problematisation target a deeper issue at hand, which could potentially mean the EU improves its understanding. All the above ideas suggest that the changes in problem representations are not as clear as first witnessed.

(38)

election. As in 2019, where the produced problems seem to target deeper issues with an increased argumentation and justification, positively also including the civil society (EOM, 2019:67; EOM, 2019:58).

In sum, the comparative analysis successfully showed how the problems of development of democracy based on the democratic qualities were represented across the reports. The similarities and differences that were identified could have different implications for the context. Crucial for the aim of this essay is to put the study in context to the electoral background and to how others describe the elections. The problem representations of the democratic quality of participation in the EOM report were described in incoherence with what other actors reported. Though, this gap shrunk from the 2003 elections to those in 2019, and could thus indicate that the understanding and quality of the EOMs increased over time with each election. Legitimacy and competition are instead described similarly throughout the elections which could mean that the EOM, in certain aspects, seem to provide reports of high quality. Based on this study we can perhaps put our trust in the quality of the EOM reports in Nigeria, but to answer more overarching questions about election observation or the general EUEOM efforts is difficult.

6. Conclusion

This study set out to discover and describe the problem representations and frames in the policy documents of multiple EOM final reports. It aimed to evaluate and critically interrogate the EU efforts, to fulfil gaps in previous literature. The study was guided by the research question: How well are the EOMs representing the problems of the democratic development, and how do these change over time in relation to the electoral background?

(39)

seen in 2003 and 2011 concerning the legitimacy and the problems with fraud, irregularities and prosecution of offenders. These reflections were made to critically evaluate the EUEOM efforts, a key point for this essay. The EOM report was seen in advance as a most-likely case for showing altering problem representations and high-quality reports, and ultimately, the comparative analysis and the results could substantiate these claims. What was reported by the EOM was aligned with the descriptions of other actors, which may indicate a high quality of the EOM reports. Despite this, generalising such claims or drawing firm conclusions may only be done by conducting a deeper study of the effectiveness on the EOMs.

A discussion has been made whether changes of problem representations could indicate a learning process by the EOMs of the challenges and problems of democratic development. Ultimately, the findings of this study are insufficient in providing a basis for making such conclusions. What is clear, though, is that the EU problematises different issues of the democratic qualities across the reports, which according to WPR-literature means that the EU changes its view of what the problem in the context is. As each election goes on, the EU construes the reality in different ways which are affecting what policies are adopted, and subsequently how the lives of the civilian population are affected.

6.1 Important takes for future research

(40)

7. Bibliography

7.1 Material

EOM, 2003. Nigeria - EUROPEAN UNION ELECTION OBERVATION MISSION FINAL REPORT. European Union. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/relations-non-eu-

countries/types-relations-and-partnerships/election-observation/mission-recommendations-repository/home

EOM, 2011. NIGERIA FINAL REPORT GENERAL ELECTIONS APRIL 2011

EUROPEAN UNION ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION. European Union. Available

at:

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/relations-non-eu-countries/types-relations-and-partnerships/election-observation/mission-recommendations-repository/home

EOM, 2019. European Union Election Observation Mission NIGERIA 2019 Final Report. European Union. Available at:

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/relations-non-eu-

countries/types-relations-and-partnerships/election-observation/mission-recommendations-repository/home

7.2 Other Sources

Books

Bacchi, C. and Goodwin, S., 2016. Poststructural Policy Analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US, pp.13-26.

Beasley, C. and Bletsas, A., 2013. Engaging With Carol Bacchi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Observing the Observers – A critical approach of problem representations in Policy of the EU EOM Final Reports