Part of thePolitics series
Elections
Basic types By-election Corporate Direct /Indirect Fixed-term Free and fair General Local Mid-term Plurality Primary Partisan Nonpartisan Proportional Recall Retention Snap Sortition Two-round system Unfair
Terminology Anonymous elector Apportionment Audits Competition Boundary delimitation Crossover voting Electoral college Election law Election silence Gerrymandering Initiative Psephology Secret ballot Suffrage Right to stand for election
Subseries Administration Political party Voting Electoral systems
Lists Elections by country Close elections Most recent Next general elections National andlocal elections in 2025
Related Election security Electoral fraud Referendum (by country) Electoral reform Election science Paper candidate
Politics portal
v t e

Afree and fair election is defined as anelection in which "coercion is comparatively uncommon". This definition was popularized by political scientistRobert Dahl. A free and fair election involvespolitical freedoms and fair processes leading up to thevote, a fair count of eligible voters who cast a ballot, a lack ofelectoral fraud orvoter suppression, and acceptance of election results by all parties. An election may partially meet international standards for free and fair elections, or may meet some standards but not others.^[1]

A 2016 study evaluated ten dimensions of the conduct of elections between 1975–2011:^[2]

1. legal framework(whether there was a constitutionalright of citizens to vote and seek office, whether elections were held at regular intervals, and whetherelection-related laws were not changed immediately before an election);
2. electoral management (whethergerrymandering occurred and whether election management bodies, if they existed, were independent,impartial, andaccountable);
3. electoral rights (whether citizens were generally able to vote on the basis ofequal suffrage and access);
4. voter registers (whether they were accurate, current, and open to voters for easy and effectivevoter registration);
5. nomination rules/ballot access (whether candidates had in practice a right to compete in the election, with rejections of candidate applications being based on "internationally recognizable and acceptable norms" and with no candidate receiving more than 75% of the votes, a signal of malpractice orelection boycotts);
6. campaign process (whether elections were carried out without violence,intimidation, bribery (vote buying), use of government resources to advantage the incumbent, or a "massive financial advantages" for the incumbent);
7. media access (whetherfreedom of speech was protected and whether the ruling party was disproportionately benefited bygovernment-owned media);
8. voting process (whether elections were conducted bysecret ballot on aone person, one vote basis, with adequate security to protect voters and protection againstballot box stuffing, multiple voting, destruction of valid ballots, and other forms of manipulation);
9. role of officials (whether the election was administered with adequately trained personnel, free from campaigning or intimidation at polling places, and with the ability ofinternational election observers andparty representatives to observe polling places); and
10. counting of votes (whether votes weretabulated transparently and free of fraud or tampering)

The study of 169 countries from 1975 to 2011 estimated that only about half of elections were free and fair.^[2] The study wondered whether the increase innon-democratic regimes holding elections over time alongside a rise in global efforts around election observation led to a rise in the proportion of elections that were deemed to not be free and fair. The presence of election monitors and constraints onexecutive power were associated with a 31% higher probability of a free and fair elections in the study.^[2]

TheV-Dem Democracy Indices estimate thecleanliness of elections, share of adult citizens with activesuffrage, if top officials are elected,freedom of speech,freedom of information,freedom of association and combine these estimates as the electoral democracy index.^[3][4]

Indices byV-Dem Institute for year 2024^[3]

Country	Clean elections index	Share of population with suffrage	Elected officials index	Freedom of Expression and Alternative Sources of Information index	Freedom of association thick index
Denmark	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.98	0.93
Ireland	0.95	1.0	1.0	0.97	0.91
Estonia	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.97	0.91
Switzerland	0.94	1.0	1.0	0.97	0.92
Belgium	0.97	1.0	1.0	0.97	0.89
Norway	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.94	0.91
Sweden	0.95	1.0	1.0	0.95	0.92
Czech Republic	0.95	1.0	1.0	0.96	0.88
Luxembourg	0.94	1.0	1.0	0.96	0.9
France	0.95	1.0	1.0	0.96	0.89
New Zealand	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.95	0.88
Costa Rica	0.94	1.0	1.0	0.91	0.92
Australia	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.94	0.88
Uruguay	0.95	1.0	1.0	0.92	0.89
Finland	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.95	0.85
Chile	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.92	0.87
Iceland	0.92	1.0	1.0	0.91	0.92
Canada	0.94	1.0	1.0	0.94	0.87
United States of America	0.91	1.0	1.0	0.89	0.95
Germany	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.94	0.85
Austria	0.93	1.0	1.0	0.92	0.89
Latvia	0.92	1.0	1.0	0.93	0.89
United Kingdom	0.93	1.0	1.0	0.91	0.89
Portugal	0.94	1.0	1.0	0.89	0.89
Spain	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.86	0.91
Netherlands	0.96	1.0	1.0	0.89	0.87
Japan	0.93	1.0	1.0	0.85	0.93
Jamaica	0.87	1.0	1.0	0.92	0.89
Italy	0.95	1.0	0.98	0.84	0.9
Brazil	0.84	1.0	1.0	0.93	0.89
Taiwan	0.94	1.0	1.0	0.85	0.88
Lithuania	0.89	1.0	1.0	0.94	0.84
Vanuatu	0.9	1.0	1.0	0.88	0.89
Barbados	0.87	1.0	1.0	0.9	0.86
Malta	0.9	1.0	1.0	0.84	0.9
Cyprus	0.91	1.0	1.0	0.82	0.89
Suriname	0.86	1.0	1.0	0.88	0.86
Cabo Verde	0.84	1.0	1.0	0.85	0.89
Trinidad and Tobago	0.82	1.0	1.0	0.9	0.86
Slovakia	0.93	1.0	1.0	0.81	0.84
Greece	0.95	1.0	1.0	0.82	0.81
Seychelles	0.89	1.0	1.0	0.84	0.83
South Africa	0.81	1.0	1.0	0.84	0.9
East Timor	0.84	1.0	1.0	0.84	0.85
South Korea	0.93	1.0	1.0	0.79	0.82
Poland	0.76	1.0	1.0	0.91	0.86
Panama	0.85	1.0	1.0	0.8	0.88
Croatia	0.91	1.0	1.0	0.79	0.82
Slovenia	0.92	1.0	1.0	0.74	0.86
Israel	0.88	1.0	1.0	0.84	0.78
Argentina	0.87	1.0	1.0	0.76	0.86
Dominican Republic	0.71	1.0	1.0	0.9	0.88
Colombia	0.76	1.0	0.95	0.84	0.9
São Tomé and Príncipe	0.82	1.0	1.0	0.8	0.79
Nepal	0.72	1.0	1.0	0.81	0.87
Ghana	0.67	1.0	1.0	0.86	0.88
Solomon Islands	0.7	1.0	1.0	0.82	0.87
Sri Lanka	0.79	1.0	1.0	0.86	0.74
Lesotho	0.79	1.0	1.0	0.7	0.88
Kosovo	0.75	1.0	1.0	0.77	0.84
Ecuador	0.83	1.0	1.0	0.75	0.77
Bulgaria	0.71	1.0	1.0	0.8	0.83
Peru	0.85	1.0	1.0	0.73	0.74
The Gambia	0.77	1.0	0.96	0.81	0.77
Moldova	0.78	1.0	1.0	0.7	0.84
Romania	0.77	1.0	1.0	0.73	0.8
Armenia	0.68	1.0	1.0	0.73	0.89
Namibia	0.63	1.0	1.0	0.81	0.85
Senegal	0.72	1.0	1.0	0.85	0.71
Montenegro	0.61	1.0	1.0	0.81	0.87
Liberia	0.6	1.0	1.0	0.84	0.84
Guatemala	0.62	1.0	1.0	0.81	0.79
Botswana	0.61	1.0	0.92	0.81	0.86
Malawi	0.6	1.0	1.0	0.79	0.8
Paraguay	0.62	1.0	1.0	0.75	0.8
Bolivia	0.69	1.0	1.0	0.72	0.76
Maldives	0.63	1.0	1.0	0.73	0.78
North Macedonia	0.67	1.0	1.0	0.66	0.81
Bhutan	0.86	1.0	1.0	0.71	0.62
Kenya	0.49	1.0	0.98	0.9	0.75
Honduras	0.4	1.0	1.0	0.88	0.87
Malaysia	0.59	1.0	1.0	0.62	0.8
Fiji	0.54	1.0	1.0	0.75	0.72
Zambia	0.44	1.0	0.97	0.81	0.79
Bosnia and Herzegovina	0.52	1.0	1.0	0.65	0.81
Albania	0.49	1.0	1.0	0.7	0.82
Mexico	0.6	1.0	1.0	0.67	0.7
Nigeria	0.36	1.0	1.0	0.89	0.79
Benin	0.65	1.0	1.0	0.7	0.61
Mongolia	0.61	1.0	1.0	0.69	0.65
Mauritius	0.61	1.0	0.89	0.62	0.79
Guyana	0.42	1.0	0.9	0.78	0.83
Indonesia	0.52	1.0	1.0	0.72	0.69
Georgia	0.47	1.0	1.0	0.7	0.73
Papua New Guinea	0.29	1.0	1.0	0.79	0.87
Sierra Leone	0.25	1.0	0.98	0.82	0.82
Hungary	0.6	1.0	1.0	0.49	0.65
Philippines	0.39	1.0	1.0	0.67	0.72
Tunisia	0.52	1.0	1.0	0.77	0.48
Ivory Coast	0.39	1.0	1.0	0.67	0.71
Somaliland	0.53	1.0	0.75	0.64	0.66
Madagascar	0.23	1.0	1.0	0.7	0.85
Tanzania	0.37	1.0	0.91	0.7	0.69
Singapore	0.8	1.0	1.0	0.34	0.58
India	0.52	1.0	1.0	0.49	0.59
Ukraine	0.6	1.0	1.0	0.42	0.57
Thailand	0.44	0.99	1.0	0.52	0.63
Togo	0.29	1.0	1.0	0.58	0.59
Iraq	0.35	1.0	0.97	0.56	0.53
Lebanon	0.3	1.0	0.5	0.72	0.72
Angola	0.29	1.0	1.0	0.49	0.61
El Salvador	0.32	1.0	1.0	0.39	0.67
Kyrgyzstan	0.42	1.0	1.0	0.49	0.41
Mauritania	0.28	1.0	1.0	0.65	0.42
Democratic Republic of the Congo	0.2	1.0	1.0	0.64	0.53
Serbia	0.21	1.0	1.0	0.42	0.66
Pakistan	0.16	1.0	1.0	0.57	0.57
Mozambique	0.15	1.0	1.0	0.52	0.58
Central African Republic	0.16	1.0	1.0	0.62	0.46
Zanzibar	0.12	1.0	0.82	0.56	0.66
Kuwait	0.66	1.0	0.77	0.59	0.1
Turkey	0.41	1.0	1.0	0.18	0.56
Cameroon	0.14	1.0	1.0	0.6	0.41
Comoros	0.13	1.0	0.93	0.52	0.51
Guinea-Bissau	0.0	1.0	1.0	0.62	0.62
Jordan	0.51	1.0	0.0	0.58	0.58
Uganda	0.12	1.0	0.99	0.52	0.42
Kazakhstan	0.34	1.0	1.0	0.37	0.3
Zimbabwe	0.16	1.0	1.0	0.38	0.5
Morocco	0.45	1.0	0.0	0.6	0.55
Ethiopia	0.34	1.0	1.0	0.27	0.36
Algeria	0.3	1.0	1.0	0.34	0.3
Republic of the Congo	0.1	1.0	1.0	0.4	0.46
Djibouti	0.17	1.0	1.0	0.34	0.39
Niger	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.75	0.68
Gabon	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.76	0.58
Haiti	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.72	0.53
Uzbekistan	0.3	1.0	1.0	0.23	0.14
Palestine (West Bank)	0.0	1.0	1.0	0.32	0.39
Chad	0.06	1.0	0.5	0.48	0.41
Rwanda	0.29	1.0	0.92	0.15	0.17
Bangladesh	0.06	1.0	0.0	0.31	0.42
Mali	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.63	0.47
Venezuela	0.07	1.0	1.0	0.22	0.26
Libya	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.56	0.51
Cambodia	0.1	1.0	1.0	0.16	0.2
Egypt	0.15	1.0	0.98	0.18	0.14
Equatorial Guinea	0.08	1.0	1.0	0.14	0.17
Cuba	0.29	1.0	1.0	0.09	0.02
Burundi	0.07	1.0	0.91	0.17	0.18
Azerbaijan	0.09	1.0	1.0	0.13	0.15
Vietnam	0.51	1.0	1.0	0.14	0.02
Oman	0.69	1.0	0.0	0.15	0.05
Tajikistan	0.1	1.0	1.0	0.12	0.15
Russia	0.14	1.0	1.0	0.08	0.13
Hong Kong	0.3	1.0	0.0	0.34	0.2
Somalia	0.0	0.0	0.5	0.66	0.44
Iran	0.24	1.0	0.5	0.23	0.09
Guinea	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.55	0.24
South Sudan	0.0	1.0	0.5	0.19	0.35
Belarus	0.18	1.0	1.0	0.03	0.07
Burkina Faso	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.35	0.39
Nicaragua	0.15	1.0	1.0	0.03	0.04
Turkmenistan	0.07	1.0	1.0	0.04	0.06
Syria	0.0		0.5	0.07	0.1
Sudan	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.25	0.32
Laos	0.22	1.0	0.5	0.04	0.05
Eswatini	0.38	1.0	0.0	0.12	0.02
Yemen	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.24	0.26
Bahrain	0.22	1.0	0.0	0.13	0.13
United Arab Emirates	0.54	0.36	0.0	0.06	0.04
Palestine (Gaza)	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.07	0.18
Qatar	0.41	0.35	0.0	0.06	0.04
Myanmar	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.05	0.11
North Korea	0.12	1.0	0.0	0.01	0.03
Afghanistan	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.09	0.05
China	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.04	0.04
Eritrea	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.02	0.02
Saudi Arabia	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.09	0.03

• Election subversion
• Electoral integrity
• Polyarchy
• Unfair election
• Voter suppression

• Katz, Richard S. (2005). "Democratic principles and judging 'free and fair'".Representation.41 (3):161–179.doi:10.1080/00344890508523309.S2CID 154352155.
• Geisler, Gisela (1993). "Fair? What Has Fairness Got to Do with It? Vagaries of Election Observations and Democratic Standards".The Journal of Modern African Studies.31 (4):613–637.doi:10.1017/S0022278X00012271.S2CID 154664000.
• Mercurio, Bryan; Williams, George (2004). "Australian Electoral Law: 'Free and Fair'?".Federal Law Review.32 (3):365–395.doi:10.22145/flr.32.3.3.S2CID 220285411.
• Fick, Glenda (1999)."The Gender-Sensitive Check-List for Free and Fair Elections".Agenda.15 (40):66–74.doi:10.1080/10130950.1999.9675739.
• Shah, Seema (2015). "Free and fair? Citizens' assessments of the 2013 general election in Kenya".Review of African Political Economy.42 (143):44–61.doi:10.1080/03056244.2014.995162.hdl:10.1080/03056244.2014.995162.S2CID 154891103.
• Goodwin-Gill, Guy S. (2006).Free and Fair Elections. Inter-Parliamentary Union.ISBN 978-92-9142-277-7.
• Falade, Adesola; Adebiyi, Ayodele A.; Ayo, Charles K.; Adebiyi, Marion; Okesola, Olatunji (1 January 2019)."E-voting system: the pathway to free and fair election in Nigeria".Electronic Government.15 (4):439–452.doi:10.1504/EG.2019.102578.ISSN 1740-7494.S2CID 204539213.
• Bjornlund, Eric (2004).Beyond Free and Fair: Monitoring Elections and Building Democracy. Woodrow Wilson Center Press.ISBN 978-0-8018-8048-3.

• Explainer: Free and Fair Elections

• Elections by type

• Articles with short description
• Short description matches Wikidata