OSCE member states must deliver on election observation mission for Hungary

Earlier this month, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (“OSCE”), pointedly recommended the deployment of a full-scale election observation mission (“EOM”) — one that includes a core team of analysts as well long and short-term observers — for Hungary’s April 3, 2022, parliamentary elections. The OSCE assessed Hungary’s 2014 parliamentary elections as “free but not fair” and found little subsequent improvement in the country’s 2018 parliamentary elections. And since 2018, Hungary has taken additional steps that could raise further questions about the integrity of its elections.

OSCE member states need to do their part and provide enough observers to ensure that the OSCE can assess whether Hungary’s upcoming elections are legitimate.

Fulfilling such a recommendation is not a foregone conclusion, particularly during the pandemic. For example, following its Needs Assessment Mission for the U.S. 2020 presidential election, the OSCE warned that the election “[would] be the most challenging in recent decades” and proposed sending 100 long-term and 400 short-term observers (STOs). Unfortunately, OSCE member states — who have the responsibility for funding and recruiting the trained observers — were only able to send 30 long-term observers (LTOs) because of COVID-related precautions and travel restrictions. As a result, the OSCE examined the overall environment of the U.S. vote, but was unable to fan out to polling places across the country and provide more systemic and comprehensive observations of the election.

The OSCE cannot afford to find itself in a similar situation for Hungary’s parliamentary elections. During the 2018 parliamentary elections, reputable electoral watchdog groups documented a number of significant electoral issues, including forged elections results, widespread vote-buying, and significant intimidation of poll workers and voters — any of which of could call into question the integrity of a democratic election.

One of the co-authors of this piece is an experienced election observer. The OSCE is more likely to have trouble assessing issues like the aforementioned ones if it cannot deploy a full-scale EOM.

Some OSCE member states could argue that the safety concerns and travel restrictions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic continue to create challenges for election observation activities, particularly the deployment of long- and short-term observers. Others could argue for a more scaled down mission, citing the fact that the OSCE hasn’t sent an election observation to an EU member state since a 2013 election in Bulgaria. Both concerns are understandable, but neither is compelling.

Unlike earlier in the pandemic, more countries and its citizens are aware of and have access to vaccines, masks, and tests to guard against COVID-19. OSCE has also amended its election observation missions to provide greater protections for its observers and other personnel, including more virtual briefings and providing observers and in-country staff with more personal protective equipment to reduce the likelihood of transmission.

Additionally, OSCE’s Needs Assessment Mission Report for the upcoming parliamentary elections makes clear that there is limited confidence among election stakeholders in the administration of the election, both the long-term process and election-day proceedings, and that the presence of LTOs and STOs could help enhance public trust in the process. These are justifications often cited for deploying a full-scale observation to any OSCE member state.

The Hungary EOM recommended enough STOs — 200 — to observe election-day procedures in a statistically significant sample of polling stations throughout Hungary. These STOs could delve into all aspects of the electoral process, from the political campaign to vote counting, and see whether many of the changes made to Hungarian laws since 2018, like the legalization of vote tourism, that appear to make the country’s current election process more vulnerable, are in fact exploited.

If the OSCE is unable able to observe the parliamentary elections in such a manner, that could have serious implications beyond Hungary. As one of this article’s authors previously noted, this EOM’s findings could impact what — if any — additional actions the EU and other countries take against Hungary following the election.

Providing enough observers will enable the world to see once and for all whether Hungary’s upcoming parliamentary elections are free and fair. Failing to provide enough observers risks being seen as turning a collective blind eye to the ongoing autocratization of EU member states, like Hungary, and giving a pass to those who only provide lip service to democracy.

David Levine is the Elections Integrity Fellow at the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a nonpartisan initiative housed at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. He previously served in a range of positions administering elections. As the Ada County, Idaho, Elections Director, the Washington, D.C., Election Management Advisor, and Richmond, Va., Deputy Director of Elections, he has helped manage the administration of federal, state county and local elections. Follow him on Twitter @davidalanlevine.

Daniel Hegedus is nonresident fellow for Central Europe at the German Marshall Fund. He previously worked at Freedom House, the German Council on Foreign Relations and the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, and has taught at the Institute for Eastern-European Studies at the Free University in Berlin, Humboldt University in Berlin and the Eotvos Lorand University in Budapest. Follow him on Twitter @DanielHegedus82.