GASPRO International Journal of Eminent Scholars

ABSTRACT

Electoral reform is a broad term that covers, among other things, improving the responsiveness of electoral processes to public desires and expectations. However, not all electoral change can be considered electoral reform. Electoral change can only be referred to as reform if its primary goal is to improve electoral processes. It was observed in the study that the simultaneous implementation of major reforms in a range of different areas can place a great burden on an EMB, and will increase the risk of suboptimal implementation, especially when deadlines are tight. While sound implementation has the potential to meet intended targets, and hopefully to build confidence and trust in the effectiveness of elections and the EMB, failed implementation can have the opposite effect. This will be especially problematic if reforms are pursued without strong political support across the board; opponents of a particular initiative are likely be looking for opportunities to characterize it as a failure, and to push for its abandonment. Conclusion was made in the study that electoral reforms are changes targeted at improving implementation of the guiding principles of electoral administration. Electoral reforms may be directed at the electoral legal framework— including the EMB—the administrative and technical processes of electoral management, or the political context for electoral activities. EMBs have vital roles as advocates of electoral reforms in general, as implementers of institutional reforms, and as initiators and implementers of administrative reforms, including technical reforms. it was recommended in the study that no aspect of electoral frameworks, systems, institutions, planning, management or operations is immune from reform or modernization. EMBs need to have a clear strategy for developing or responding to and implementing electoral reforms.

KEY WORDS: Electoral Management Board, Implementation, Electoral Reforms.