Different organisations monitor elections to different levels and require different skill sets.
The UK provides election observers to elections in the OSCE region (56 countries) through 3 NGOs who recruit and select observers. The EU provides election observers to the rest of the world and recruits observers throughout the EU. The UK provides observers to EU missions, but only one of the NGOs recruits for EU missions. The lists of observers for OSCE missions are submitted to the FCO for approval; the lists for the EU go to Brussels. The contract for OSCE missions is signed between the NGO and observer and the observers do not report to the FCO. I don't know about EU missions as I've never been on one (which is a pity as I am told there are major differences in approach as well as more money).
The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA) also sends Parliamentarians as observers as does the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE). The European Parliament sends its own MEPs on missions.
Parliamentarians are a law unto themselves and, although part of the mission, can operate to different rules and to a different agenda. Some are exceptionally good, others less so.
OSCE missions work in English, although most of the senior observers speak Russian. EU missions work in English, Spanish or French.
The cost of sending observers is moderate, but even so some recruitment is done in country and the local embassies find a number of expatriates to act as observers. The reason for this is that they might already have in-country experience, knowledge of the language or a knowledge of the history or culture of the country. I am surprised that a 17-year old should act as an observer, but he was probably recruited in-country on that basis. Had he been recruited by the EU who were running the mission his accreditation would have been through the Nepalese Central Election Commission as an EU observer and not as a representative of the British Embassy.
Had Mr Gray junior applied to be an EU observer through the British NGO he would have been refused as lacking the necessary qualifications.
The invitation to apply to observe in Nepal stated:
Quote:
1. Previous electoral experience with the EU (possibly OSCE/ODIHR): Minimum 3 observation missions for LTOs including 1 EU EOM LTO missions; minimum 2 observation missions for STOs including 1 EU EOM STO mission.
2. Computer literate: (Microsoft office access, excel, word) and internet, Sat Phone, HF, VHF, GPS...
3. Excellent physical conditions and good health, capable of operating in difficult areas with basic hygiene and accommodation.
4. All observers must have a medical check up (electrocardiogram is compulsory). The Implementing Partner (IP) will require all observers to present a medical certificate for good health (show no diabetes) with the result of the electrocardiogram prior to departure. (The costs of the medical certificate and the ECG will be reimbursed to the deployed observers provided they present a valid invoice.)
5. Have vaccinations against; Polio and Tetanus, Hepatitis A & B (not reimbursed).
Malaria prophylaxis is recommended for those resident in Terai where a majority of observers will be deployed
|
The NGO in question has an open database and anyone can apply to be added, but most of the people they recruit have a minimum of one degree in politics, law or international studies or bring something else of use to the table - language skills, world travel experience, elected representatives, in country experience for specific missions. Mr Gray Jnr doesn't qualify IMHO.
There are usually 3 types of observer on a mission.
The core team which includes political analysts, media analysts, lawyers, logisticians etc. Most of the core team posts require a post-graduate degree in law, politics or international studies plus other relevant experience. The head of mission is always of ambassador status in his/her own country. The core team arrives first, deals directly with the host government and sets up the mission by establishing an office and recruiting local staff.
Long-term observers arrive a few weeks before the elections. They usually have 2 degrees, but some have only one or offer specific experience that is appropriate to the role (there are a lot of ex-military officers involved). I am an ex-military officer with 2 degrees in law and time served as an elected representative - hence my 6 LTO missions. LTOs establish field offices around the host country and observe the election process in a local area. LTOs interview candidates, election authorities, media and civic authorities, recruit drivers and interpreters and ensure the polling stations are covered on election day. On polling day my all time best was to manage 20 teams of 4 for around 30 hours.
Short-term observers are a more eclectic bunch. They are recruited for the period around election day and observe polling stations. They literally fly into the country, have a quick brief, deploy to their AoRs, meet their drivers and interpreters, have a local brief from the LTOs, familiarise themselves with their polling station/s and observe the election using a standard proforma. They are on their way home within 48 hours of the election. They are drawn from a wider variety of backgrounds, but the NGOs still expect them to have something to offer above wanting to travel.
All Parliamentary delegates are STOs, none works as LTO. All embassy recruited staff are STOs.
STOs are not paid. LTOs from the UK on OSCE missions are paid a basic honorarium. Core team staff are paid a salary of sorts; it is good by east European standards, but not by western standards. The job is done by people who love long hours, hard work and meeting educated people from around the world.
Teams operate as 2 observers (always drawn from different nations with the exceptions of some locally recruited staff), a local interpreter and driver (muleteer in Nepal??). The job is politically sensitive and if you can't cope with sharing a room with a person of a different race/religion/nationality/culture then you wouldn't enjoy it. If you are not prepared to entertain people with a different world view to your own you won't enjoy it. You have to tolerate long hours (24 hours plus on election day), hard conditions (no heating, no running water on occasion), earthquakes (well 3 tremors thus far), local drivers and people who are so friendly you can cause major offence by not drinking the home made raki, vodka, cha cha, wine etc (my last landlady couldn't guarantee heating or running water, but she owned her own vineyards).
Election observation is no place for people who will break off friendships just because someone doesn't agree with them or will e-mail people saying they don't want to hear alternative opinions to their own (aarable). The most important skill any election observer must demonstrate is tolerance of others. I have happily worked for 5 weeks with a French diplomat who wanted more EU and who had not only read the whole constitution, but had voted for it. Sometimes you have to talk about the Rugby.
