Global Integrity Report

Algeria Home

Facts

Timeline

Notebook

Integrity Scorecard

2007 Assessment

Algeria: Integrity Indicators Scorecard

Algeria: Integrity Scorecard Report > Sub-Category: Election Integrity
Indicators		Score
17	In law, is there an election monitoring agency or set of election monitoring agencies/entities?	100
18	Is the election monitoring agency effective?	40
19	Are elections systems transparent and effective?	63

Indicator and sub-Indicator Details

In law, is there an election monitoring agency or set of election monitoring agencies/entities?

17: In law, is there an election monitoring agency or set of election monitoring agencies/entities?

Score:

YES

Comments: It should be noted that for each national election a domestic monitoring agency is created. As there were no elections in 2006, the question can only be answered in a limited way.

The above entity was created by presidential decree for the national elections in May 2007.

References: La Commission politique nationale des élections législatives du 17 mai 2007

Décret Présidentiel n° 07-115 du 17 Avril 2007 PRESIDENCE DE LA REPUBLIQUE JO N° 25 du 18 Avril 2007, Page 5

Is the election monitoring agency effective?

18a: In law, the agency or set of agencies/entities is protected from political interference.

Score:

YES

Comments: It should be noted that for each national election a domestic monitoring agency is created. As there were no elections in 2006, the question can only be answered in a limited way. Historically, the military and security apparatus have been continuously interfered with every part of the election process. The most famous interference was the cancellation of the December 1991 municipal elections.

References: Décret Présidentiel n° 07-115 du 17 Avril 2007 PRESIDENCE DE LA REPUBLIQUE JO N° 25 du 18 Avril 2007, Page 5

Peer Review Comments: Yes. In law, the agency is protected from political interference.

18b: In practice, agency (or set of agencies/entities) appointments are made that support the independence of the agency.

Score:

100

Comments: National elections did not take place in 2006. Therefore this question cannot be answered.

References: National elections did not take place in 2006. Therefore this question cannot be answered.

Peer Review Comments: Independence yes, but oriented toward the actual majority.

18c: In practice, the agency or set of agencies/entities has a professional, full-time staff.

Score:

100

Comments: National elections did not take place in 2006. Therefore this question cannot be answered.

References: National elections did not take place in 2006. Therefore this question cannot be answered.

Peer Review Comments: In practice, the agency has a professional, part-time staff.

18d: In practice, the agency or set of agencies/entities makes timely, publicly available reports following an election cycle.

Score:

100

Comments: National elections did not take place in 2006. Therefore this question cannot be answered.

References: National elections did not take place in 2006. Therefore this question cannot be answered.

18e: In practice, when necessary, the agency or set of agencies/entities imposes penalties on offenders.

Score:

100

Comments: National elections did not take place in 2006. However, there are few known cases of penalties having ever been imposed.

References: National elections did not take place in 2006.

Peer Review Comments: No penalties are imposed.

Are elections systems transparent and effective?

19a: In practice, there is a clear and transparent system of voter registration.

Score:

100

Comments: All adults, as soon as they reach the age of 18, are automatically added to the "National File" in the different communities and offices of the mayor. As soon as they are registered, they receive their voter cards and they can vote during elections.

References: Interview with a government official, who wishes to remain anonymous. Date: August 2007.

19b: In law, election results can be contested through the judicial system.

Score:

YES

Comments: Though there are theoretical procedures by which election results can be appealed through the justice system, they are exceedingly complicated and in practice not useable.

References: Interview with former member of parliament, who wishes to remain anonymous. Date: August 2007.

Peer Review Comments: There are various procedures for protesting election results depending on the election -- some decisions may go before the consitutional court while other before the administrative court. ORDONNANCE N° 97-07 DU 6 MARS 1997 PORTANT LOI ORGANIQUE RELATIVE AU RÉGIME ÉLECTORAL Local and regional elections: Art 92 - Appeal before commission of elections. Parlimentary elections : Article 113 - In case of rejection of nomination, judicial recourse is available before the tribunal . Article 118: The constitutional council may hear cases contesting Senate electoral results Article 148 -149: presidential election results may be contested before the constitutional court. In short, judicial appeals are possible before the court only for parlimentary elections. The elections commission is an administrative body as opposed to a judicial entity.

Peer Review Comments: Yes, results can be contested.

19c: In practice, election results can be effectively appealed through the judicial system.

Score:

100

Comments: "The possibility to challenge election results through the court system does not exist in Algeria." Although theoretical methods exist by which to challenge election results through the courts, in practice they are so overly complicated and poorly understood that they are rendered useless.

References: Interview with former member of the parliament, who wishes to remain anonymous. Date: August 2007.

Peer Review Comments: In practice, the reason concerns the independence of the judicial system.

Peer Review Comments: Not in court, but there is another jurisdiction.

19d: In practice, the military and security forces remain neutral during elections.

Score:

100

Comments: As there were no elections in 2006, the question can only be answered in a limited way. Historically, the military and security apparatus have been continuously interfered with every part of the election process. The most famous interference was the cancellation of the December 1991 municipal elections.

References: National elections did not take place in 2006.

Peer Review Comments: In practice, the military and security forces remain neutral during elections.

19e: In law, domestic and international election observers are allowed to monitor elections.

Score:

YES

Comments: National elections did not take place in 2006. Therefore this question can only be answered in a limited way. As the above-mentioned article indicates, international observers were allowed to observe the presidential elections in 2004.

References: Lélection algérienne conforme aux normes européennes Liberté 10 April 2004 [ LINK ]

19f: In practice, election observers are able to effectively monitor elections.

Score:

100

$Scoring Criteria :: 100 Score Criteria: Election observers have unfettered access to polling sites, counting stations, and voters themselves. The government does not interfere with the observers\' activities. <p>50 Score Criteria: Election observers generally have access to polling sites, counting stations, and voters but encounter restrictions in certain areas. The government may impose burdensome regulatory or bureaucratic requirements on observers to discourage their involvement. <p>0 Score Criteria: Election observers\' movements are significantly limited by the government and many polling and counting sites are restricted or barred from observers. The government imposes so many bureaucratic or regulatory burdens on the observers that their mission is rendered ineffective.$

Comments:

References: Former observer in electoral processes

Peer Review Comments: Election observers -- both national and foreign -- generally have access to polling sites, counting stations, and voters, but encounter restrictions in certain areas. The government may impose burdensome regulatory or bureaucratic requirements on observers to discourage their involvement.