Why Election Observers Are Human-Rights Defenders

Election observers are the first line of defense for democratic rights and freedoms, and they work in some of the most challenging places. They deserve the same protections as human-rights defenders.

By Gerardo de Icaza

April 2025

Democratic recession has been spreading across the world for nearly two decades. All the major democracy indexes have documented this decline, pointing to the steady erosion of democratic principles, weakening institutions, judicial interference, and election tampering, as well as increasingly autocratic behavior among leaders, even in countries previously considered to be stable democracies. Although this phenomenon has touched all corners of the globe, it has been particularly pronounced in Latin America, where we have witnessed government interference in the work of electoral bodies, the weakening of judicial oversight, and intimidation of political opponents.

While many factors contribute to democratic backsliding, the mounting attacks against election observers stand out. Election monitors, who serve as critical watchdogs ensuring electoral transparency, are now confronting heightened restrictions, threats, and legal challenges. The growing hostility toward election observers reflects broader attempts to undermine democratic accountability and silence dissenting voices.

This regression is evident not only in authoritarian regimes but also in democracies where political leaders are seeking to consolidate power. The weakening of democratic norms is often accompanied by a decline in political pluralism, as authoritarian-leaning ruling governments systematically marginalize opposition parties and manipulate electoral processes to secure favorable outcomes. The rise of populist leaders, who often challenge the legitimacy of democratic institutions, only exacerbates these tendencies, creating a hostile environment for electoral observation.

We often see increased restrictions on election monitoring during periods of democratic regression. Governments that perceive election observers as threats will implement policies to limit observers’ access to polling places, discredit their findings, and, in extreme cases, expel them from the country. The systematic targeting of election observers signals a broader effort to erode transparency and accountability in electoral processes. As a result, the role of international election-observation missions has become more crucial than ever in safeguarding democratic norms and ensuring that elections remain free and fair.

Attacks on International Electoral Observers

The rising attacks on national and international election observers range from hostility on social media to more severe threats and physical harm. While election observation has historically been considered a neutral and technical job, recent years have seen growing resistance to external election oversight, particularly in countries where democratic norms are weakening.

One of the most prevalent forms of attack against election observers is defamation and smear campaigns. In many cases, governments and political actors have launched targeted disinformation campaigns to discredit observation missions — accusing them of bias, political interference, and working against national interests. State-controlled media and high-ranking officials often engage in rhetorical attacks, portraying observers as foreign agents attempting to undermine national sovereignty. This has been particularly evident in countries such as Venezuela and Russia, where election observers have been labeled instruments of Western interventionism.

Another increasingly common method used to restrict election observation is legal harassment. Governments have denied or revoked accreditation for international observers, imposed arbitrary visa restrictions, and created bureaucratic obstacles that limit observers’ ability to monitor elections effectively. In some instances, observers have been accused of espionage or subversion, leading to their expulsion from the country or even their detention. These tactics serve to intimidate observers and deter independent monitoring efforts.

Physical violence against election observers has also become more common and intense. Observers have been threatened, assaulted, and even killed while carrying out their duties. One of the most tragic examples was the 2019 assassination of Anastácio Matavel, a prominent civil society activist and election observer in Mozambique. Matavel was shot multiple times in a drive-by attack just days before the country’s general election. Investigations later revealed that the perpetrators were members of the local police force, underscoring the complicity of state actors in targeting observers.

Other examples abound. In Afghanistan, election officials and international election observers have been kidnapped over the years, and in 2020 unknown assailants gunned down the democracy activist and election monitor Mohammad Yousuf Rasheed on his way to work. After the March 2008 elections in Zimbabwe, observers from the Zimbabwe Electoral Support Network were attacked, forcing them to flee their homes and go into hiding. Suspected supporters of the ruling party harassed and physically assaulted observers and their family members. The lack of accountability for such attacks sends the chilling message that election observers carry out their work at great personal risk.

Governments also obstruct election observation by restricting access to information and movement. Observers have reported being denied entry to polling stations, having their equipment confiscated, and being blocked from witnessing crucial stages of the electoral process, such as vote counting and result tabulation. In some cases, governments have altered accreditation processes at the last minute, preventing observers from being deployed in time to assess the full electoral cycle. These restrictions not only hinder the ability of observers to provide accurate assessments but also diminish public trust in the electoral process.

Finally, expulsions and diplomatic pressure on observer organizations have increased. In countries such as Nicaragua, international observer missions have been expelled outright. Governments in other countries, meanwhile, have pressured international organizations not to send observer teams. Without external scrutiny, these governments can more easily consolidate control over the electoral process.

Despite these growing threats, international election observation remains a critical tool for safeguarding the democratic process. The presence of observers helps to deter fraud, increases public confidence in elections, and allows for impartial assessments that can contribute to electoral reform. Yet without adequate protection mechanisms, observers will continue to face significant risks. As attacks on election observers become more systematic and sophisticated, the international community must take action to ensure their security and operational independence.

The Need for Stronger Protections

Given the increased threats, we need stronger protective measures for election observers at both the national and international levels. Election observation is not merely a technical exercise; it is a fundamental aspect of democratic governance that ensures the transparency and fairness of electoral processes. Recognizing observers as human-rights defenders would be a crucial step toward providing them with greater legal protections and means to defend themselves.

In 2021, during the Convening Committee of the Declaration of Principles for International Electoral Observation — an annual meeting of election-observation organizations — representatives from the Organization of American States (OAS) raised the issue of attacks on election monitors. It quickly became clear that observers across the world were experiencing similar forms of repression, intimidation, and violence despite variations in intensity and institutional frameworks. The meeting underscored the systemic nature of the attacks and highlighted the need for coordinated responses to protect observers.

The OAS created a working group to learn more about these attacks and explore ways to defend against them. I personally coordinated these efforts. After analyzing comparative national law, reaching out to citizen observer groups around the world, and studying the distinct particularities of each international observer organization, we reached two conclusions.

First, national and international legal frameworks meant to protect electoral observers are extremely weak. Most national laws do not include provisions for election monitoring, and the ones that do are limited to listing observer obligations and requirements for accreditation. Very few of these laws say anything about rights or protections for observers. While countries such as Ghana and Mexico do provide comprehensive legal protections for election monitors — guaranteeing their safety, access to electoral information, and presence at various stages of the voting process — many other countries focus on the accreditation process and impose strict obligations on observers without offering safeguards. In countries such as the Philippines or Russia, legal frameworks often emphasize neutrality, eligibility requirements, and codes of conduct, but lack explicit provisions ensuring observers’ protection or right to access information. This disparity leaves observers vulnerable to harassment, restricted access, and even legal repercussions, undermining the transparency and accountability that election monitoring is meant to promote.

Second, observer-mission recommendations alone would not be enough to compel every country to pass laws protecting and defending election observers. We needed something fast and wide ranging. So I proposed seeking international organizations’ explicit recognition of electoral observers as human-rights defenders. The reason for this difference is that laws regulating human-rights defenders guarantee their right to act, establish the state’s responsibility to protect them, and provide avenues for international appeal and reporting. In contrast, the regulations governing election observers tend to focus on their duties, accreditation requirements, and the need for neutrality. As a result, legal protections for observers are either nonexistent or insufficient. Establishing a legal analogy between election observers and human-rights defenders would give observers broader state protections and effective appeal mechanisms. The working group agreed, and many members actively worked within their own multilateral organizations and NGOs to achieve this goal.

The first big step came in 2022 when the UN special rapporteurs on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association and on the situation of human-rights defenders issued a statement recognizing election observers as human-rights defenders and emphasizing states’ obligation to ensure their security and protection against attacks. That same year, both the Ninth Summit of the Americas and the OAS General Assembly adopted resolutions to guarantee the safety of international election observers.

Adding to the international political support for the cause, former High Representative of the European Union Josep Borrell repeatedly argued before the EU Parliament that “electoral observers must be considered what they really are: defenders of human rights.”

In 2024, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) issued a resolution recognizing election observers as human-rights defenders, emphasizing their crucial role in ensuring transparency, accountability, and the protection of political rights during the electoral process. The resolution highlights the growing threats against national and international election observers, including harassment, defamation, restrictions on movement, arbitrary detentions, and physical violence. Considering these challenges, the IACHR called on governments to adopt legal and institutional measures to guarantee the safety, independence, and operational effectiveness of election observers so that they can carry out their work free of intimidation or reprisals.

In order to create a more specific legal doctrine on the issue, OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro requested the opinion of the Venice Commission (European Commission for Democracy through Law) on three questions: Which concrete civil and political rights are defended by international and nonpartisan citizen election observers? What international instruments safeguard election observers in their work? And what are the normative elements that states can incorporate into their national legislation to ensure appropriate protections for both?

In December 2024, the Venice Commission adopted the Report on Election Observers as Human Rights Defenders — one of the most important international instruments to date on election monitoring. The report asserts that both international observers and nonpartisan domestic election monitors should be formally recognized as human-rights defenders due to their role in upholding key civil and political rights, including the rights to vote, to stand for election, and to the freedoms of expression and association. The report also highlights the need for a robust legal framework to guarantee the independence and security of election observers, and to prevent undue interference or threats to their work.

Furthermore, the report calls for the implementation of national legal and institutional mechanisms to provide explicit protections for election observers in their capacity as human-rights defenders. It emphasizes the responsibility of states to enact legislative measures that ensure the free and unhindered operation of election-monitoring missions and protect observers from threats, harassment, and legal persecution. Strengthening these protections not only enhances the credibility and transparency of electoral processes but also reinforces democratic institutions and the rule of law. The recognition and protection of election observers as human-rights defenders are, therefore, imperative to ensuring the integrity of electoral systems and fostering public trust in democratic governance.

Working Together to Strengthen Democracy

The escalating threats against election observers reflect a broader crisis in global democratic governance. As electoral processes come under increasing pressure from authoritarian regimes and weakened democratic institutions, the role of election observers has become more critical than ever. However, their growing vulnerability signals an alarming trend that must be addressed through coordinated international efforts. Election observers are not merely neutral actors in the electoral process; they are fundamental defenders of democratic principles, ensuring that elections remain fair, transparent, and legitimate. Without adequate protection, these individuals face risks that could deter independent electoral oversight and ultimately erode public trust in democratic processes.

Because of the concrete actions of the international election-observer community, election monitors now have more international legal protections than ever before. This is no minor accomplishment. In the coming years, the IACHR, the European Court of Human Rights, and the universal human-rights system will hear cases of rights and other violations against electoral observers. Because of these new legal instruments, such cases will have a much greater chance of succeeding.

Democratic backsliding is a continuous process of small, but in many cases quick, steps that weaken checks and balances, diminish opposition, eliminate the separation of powers, eradicate transparency and accountability, silence dissent, and violate fundamental rights. Each of these steps must be countered with legal, social, and political force to defend the democratic rights we have fought so hard to achieve.

Although the recognition of election observers as human-rights defenders is but a single triumph in a sea of democratic losses, it is nonetheless a victory for the institutions we have created to defend democracy and human rights. This accomplishment demonstrates the importance of working together across different continents, international organizations, and civil society groups. It is proof that small steps can be taken to strengthen democracy while the trend is moving in the opposite direction. Those who seek to weaken democracy know the path and are moving steadfast in that direction. Those who wish to defend democracy — in academia, international organizations, journalism, civil society, and public institutions — must work together to block that path and secure election observers the protections they deserve.

Gerardo de Icaza is an electoral expert with twenty-plus years of experience. He has led and participated in more than a hundred electoral observation missions in more than thirty countries. This article is based on previously published material in Spanish and from conferences presentations by the author.

Copyright © 2025 National Endowment for Democracy

Image credit: OAS