United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF14)
Hastily held elections may take place in unconductive environments, be technically disorganized and are therefore often destabilizing. Delayed elections may miss good momentum for reform and allow authoritarian regimes or warlords to regain strength. Sequencing of different electoral phases and sequencing of electoral processes in relation to other transitional processes (such as constitution-building, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, reconciliation, etc.) can make all the difference.
With respect to post-conflict elections, the United Nations finds that ‘it is difficult to create a general template for determining when the circumstances are right for holding a first post-conflict election and that there should be general agreement on the rules governing the election and the institutions that will administer the process, as well as adequate funding and sufficient time for all practical preparations. Moreover, it is critical to consider the sequencing of key events in the transition as a whole, rather than just the timing of a first post-conflict election’.1 To contribute to the debate on this topic, International IDEA commissioned fifteen case studies and convened three expert workshops (2016–2017) on the timing and sequencing of transitional elections. These involved high-profile electoral, peace building and negotiation experts. These findings were published in International IDEA’s Policy Paper on the Timing and Sequencing of Transitional Elections in April 2019.
5/9: NGO Committee on Migration
5/10: RUN Retreat at St. John's University