Transitional elections, particularly in regions scarred by regional or national conflicts, represent a pivotal juncture in a nation’s trajectory. They are envisioned as a cornerstone of democratic governance, an opportunity to legitimise authority, foster peace, and offer a platform for former belligerents to engage in political processes through ballots rather than bullets. However, the question of when to hold these elections – what constitutes the “perfect timing” – is fraught with complexities and often becomes a high-stakes decision with profound implications for long-term stability and democratic consolidation. This essay will delve into the multifaceted considerations surrounding the timing of elections, particularly in areas where conflict shapes political life, exploring whether a universally applicable “perfect timing” exists or if optimal timing is inherently context-dependent. Drawing on various case studies and expert analyses, it will argue that while a singular perfect moment remains an illusion, adhering to key principles of informed decision-making, holistic perspectives, and a long-term vision for democratic consolidation can guide the pursuit of optimal electoral timing.
Keywords: Perfect timing, Election, Democracy, Politics, Constitution, Citizens, Voters, Governance, Peace
Introduction
The very notion of “perfect timing” for elections implies a confluence of conditions that would maximise the potential for a credible, peaceful, and legitimacy-enhancing electoral process. Ideally, this would involve a secure environment where citizens can freely participate without fear or intimidation, a level playing field for candidates and parties with equitable access to the political sphere, a robust and impartial electoral framework and architecture, and sufficient time for all logistical and technical preparations, including voter registration and public information campaigns. Furthermore, it would entail a political landscape where key stakeholders, including those previously in conflict, are willing to accept the outcome of the elections and view them as a step towards a shared future rather than a zero-sum game.
However, in areas marked by regional or national conflicts, these ideal conditions are often conspicuously absent or precariously fragile; for example, the political and social exclusion is one of the main roots of conflict in Nepal. The legacy of violence can foster deep-seated mistrust, perpetuate polarisation along ethnic or regional lines, and leave institutions weak and susceptible to manipulation. In such contexts, the timing of elections becomes a critical strategic choice, balancing the urgency for establishing legitimate governance with the need to ensure a conducive environment for a meaningful democratic exercise.
Comparative Electoral Systems: How Timing Decisions Shape Democratic Outcomes
Existing research offers insights into the risks associated with both premature and delayed elections in transitional settings. Holding the first elections too soon after the end of a conflict is deemed risky as it can entrench wartime combatants and narrowly focused, personalised parties in power, potentially undermining long-term democratic development. Early elections may also occur before strong political, legal, and civil institutions are in place, making them vulnerable to nationalist, sectarian, or extremist appeals and manipulation. The case of Angola in 1992, where an attempt to hold multiparty elections prematurely reignited armed conflict, serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of rushing to the polls without adequate preparation and political consensus. Similarly, the first post-war elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1996, held within a tight timeframe stipulated by the Dayton Peace Agreement, revealed the complexity of electoral processes in a deeply divided society and highlighted the challenges of conducting credible elections amidst security concerns and population displacement.
Conversely, delaying elections for a prolonged period is not without its own perils. It can lead to a loss of momentum for reform, allowing non-democratic forces to consolidate power or for political disagreements to deepen. The absence of a democratically legitimised government can also hinder crucial peacebuilding processes such as disarmament, demobilisation, and reintegration (DDR) and security sector reform. Furthermore, interim governments lacking a popular mandate may struggle to address fundamental structural issues that fuelled the conflict in the first place.
Given these competing risks, it becomes evident that a universally “perfect timing” for elections, especially in conflict-affected regions, is an elusive concept. The optimal timing is intrinsically linked to the specific context of each transition, including the nature of the preceding conflict, the terms of any peace agreement or political settlement, the strength of existing institutions, the level of political polarisation, and the broader peacebuilding and state-building efforts underway.
Crucial considerations in determining the most appropriate timing for elections in conflict-ridden societies
The Sequencing of Peace Processes and Political Settlements: Peace agreements often provide a timeframe for elections as a means of obtaining legitimacy for new power structures and integrating former combatants into the political system. However, the level of detail in these agreements regarding electoral timing and sequencing varies. Experts caution against minimalist approaches that prioritise early elections as an apparent conclusion to the transition without addressing underlying systemic weaknesses. Instead, a more substantialist approach emphasises a patient understanding of the local context and the integration of elections within wider, comprehensive policies of reform. The sequencing of key elements within a peace agreement, such as the establishment of a transitional power-sharing government, the granting of amnesty, and the release of prisoners of war, can also influence the stability of post-accord elections. The case of Bougainville, where the general election took place four years after the peace settlement following a disarmament process but preceded the independence referendum, illustrates a more gradual and sequenced approach.
The Imperative of Security Sector Reform: A fundamental prerequisite for credible and peaceful elections is a secure environment where voters can cast their ballots without fear. In countries emerging from armed conflict, security sector reform, including the disarmament and demobilisation of armed groups and the restructuring of the military and police, is crucial. However, the timing of such reforms in relation to the electoral calendar requires careful consideration. While a cessation of hostilities is essential, more effective security sector reform is likely to be sustained if undertaken by a government with legitimacy and credible oversight bodies. The failure to adequately address security concerns can undermine the electoral process, as evidenced by the prolonged transition period in the Central African Republic, which was partly due to an unstable security situation.
The Interplay with Constitution-Building: In many transitional settings, the question arises whether to hold elections before or after drafting and adopting a new constitution. Holding elections first might enhance the democratic legitimacy of the constitution-building process, as seen in Tunisia, where elections for a constitutional assembly preceded the drafting of the new constitution. However, an elected assembly may be too heterogeneous to reach a consensus. Conversely, drafting a new constitution prior to elections can lower the risks for political actors and promote acceptance of electoral outcomes by diffusing power. The decision on sequencing constitution-building and elections is context-dependent and should consider the potential impact on the relative electoral strength of different parties and the design of the constitution itself.
Nurturing a Competitive and Pluralistic Political Landscape: The timing of the first elections significantly affects the nature of the political parties that emerge. In post-conflict settings, holding elections too soon might favour former combatants or personalised parties over programmatic parties based on political ideologies and platforms. Delaying elections can provide more time for new political parties to organise and for a more diverse and competitive party system to develop. The objective of the elections – whether primarily to avoid a return to war or to promote long-term democracy – should inform the decision on when to hold them.
Establishing a Credible Electoral Framework and Institutions: The success or failure of an electoral process is largely predicated on the nature of the legal instruments and the effectiveness and impartiality of the electoral management body (EMB). A partisan legal framework can stoke conflict, as seen in Zambia in 1996 and Côte d’Ivoire in 2000. Establishing an independent and well-resourced EMB is crucial, but the timing and sequencing of this process are also important. Elections held under severe time pressure may be conducted by ad hoc bodies rather than a permanent and capable EMB. The case of Haiti, where a permanent EMB could not be established for decades after the adoption of the 1987 Constitution, highlights the challenges of building sustainable electoral institutions. Sufficient time must be allocated for electoral reforms, voter registration, and logistical preparations to ensure the credibility of the process.
Fostering an Inclusive and Participatory Environment: Elections gain greater legitimacy when the participatory environment is inclusive, allowing all citizens, including marginalized groups, to participate fully. Holding elections too early in a transition, particularly in post-conflict settings, can limit participation due to displacement and ongoing insecurity. Ensuring easy access to voter registration and the right to cast ballots is crucial for reducing complaints and conflict. Local-level mediation, often through traditional and civil society leaders, plays a vital role in mitigating tensions during the election campaign period and promoting inclusivity.
Navigating the Complexities of Domestic and International Involvement: Domestic actors often face accusations of partisanship, making it difficult to find nonpartisan mediators for election-related disputes. Regional and international actors face the dilemma of respecting national sovereignty while upholding universal principles. International involvement can provide crucial technical, financial, and observation support. However, the timing of international intervention and the coordination among different international actors are critical. Overly hasty international pressure for early elections, driven by an “exit strategy,” can be detrimental to long-term democratic consolidation, as arguably seen in Liberia’s 1997 elections. Furthermore, potential conflicts of interest between election monitoring and mediation efforts need to be carefully avoided.
Building Public Confidence and Ensuring Acceptance of Results: Public confidence in the electoral process and the willingness of political actors to accept the results are paramount for preventing post-election conflict. Transparency in the tabulation and announcement of results, along with proactive public information management by the EMB, are essential for managing expectations. Mechanisms for addressing election-related grievances through a fair and impartial judiciary are also crucial for assuring citizens that they can obtain recourse through non-violent means.
In light of these intricate and often interconnected factors, it becomes clear that a universally applicable “perfect timing” for elections in conflict-ridden societies does not exist. Each transitional context presents a unique set of challenges and opportunities that must be carefully assessed when making decisions about electoral timing and sequencing. As Lakhdar Brahimi aptly stated regarding organising polls in Iraq, “We need to organise elections as early as possible, but not earlier than possible”. This encapsulates the delicate balance between the urgency for democratic governance and the necessity for creating the conditions for a credible and sustainable electoral process.
Instead of searching for an elusive “perfect time,” the focus should shift towards adhering to key principles that guide the pursuit of optimal electoral timing.
Recommendations
Creating an informed decision-making environment: This involves ensuring that decision-making processes are inclusive, bringing together diverse groups such as political parties, civil society representatives, minorities, women, and youth. Expert insights on technical, legal, security, and contextual dynamics should be actively sought and integrated into the decision-making process. Building trust and striving for consensus among key stakeholders are paramount.
Adopting a holistic perspective: Decisions on electoral timing and sequencing should not be viewed in isolation but rather within the broader context of long-term democratic consolidation. Elections are instruments that contribute to wider transitional processes, including peacebuilding, state-building, and constitutional reform, and their timing should be considered in relation to these other elements. The incremental nature of democratic transitions, which may experience pauses and reversals, should be acknowledged.
Prioritising the building of sustainable electoral processes: Decisions regarding timing and sequencing should be made with a view to establishing resilient electoral laws, institutions, and processes that can ensure the long-term sustainability of democratic elections. This includes considering the capacity of the EMB, the financing of future elections, and the effectiveness of the electoral justice system. The aim should be to create a “road map” towards credible elections that are owned by national actors and can be sustained without perpetual international support.
Exercising caution with accommodative measures: While transitional agreements often include power-sharing arrangements and reserved seats to promote inclusiveness and stability, policymakers should be mindful of potential long-term negative implications for democratic development if such measures compromise fundamental democratic principles.
Ensuring targeted and coordinated international support: The international community can play a crucial role in supporting transitional elections through diplomatic, technical, observation, and financial assistance. However, this support is most effective when it is coordinated, strategically focused on long-term democratic consolidation, and based on an informed appreciation of unique local dynamics. International actors should strive to align their efforts and avoid contradictory approaches that can undermine the transition process.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the “perfect timing” for elections, particularly in the complex and often volatile environments shaped by regional or national conflicts, remains an elusive ideal. The notion of a universally applicable formula is negated by the highly context-specific nature of transitions and the intricate interplay of political, security, institutional, and social factors. Instead of pursuing a mirage, the focus should be on making well-informed and contextually sensitive decisions about electoral timing and sequencing, guided by overarching principles that prioritise inclusivity, long-term democratic consolidation, and the building of sustainable electoral processes. By embracing a holistic perspective, fostering genuine consensus among national stakeholders, and ensuring coordinated and targeted international support, societies navigating the turbulent waters of conflict can strive towards optimal electoral timing – a timing that maximises the potential for elections to serve as a genuine catalyst for peace, stability, and lasting democratic governance.
Bibliography
International IDEA, Electoral Management Design, pp. 22–5.
Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (CNCCR), ‘North South Kathmandu: Livelihood, Insecurity and Social Conflict in Nepal’, 2010, p. 1, available at , accessed 12 October 2012.
Angola’s Failed Elections.” in Postconflict Elections, Democratization & International Assistance, ed. Krishna Kumar (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., 1998), 139.
International Crisis Group (ICG), Elections in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Introduction and Background, -, 22 September 1996, https://www.refworld.org/reference/countryrep/icg/1996/en/18985 [accessed 12 June 2025]
Matanock AM. Engaging through Elections: External Observation and Incentives around Elections during Implementation. In: Electing Peace: From Civil Conflict to Political Participation. Cambridge University Press; 2017:216-256.
Anthony Regan, Light Intervention: lessons from Bougainville (U.S. Institute of Peace Press, 2010) 17.
Zargouni Lassoued, L., ‘Transition in Tunisia (2011–2014) and prospects for consolidation’, in S. Alihodžić, N. Matatu and A. Raffoul (eds), Timing andSequencing of Transitional Elections: Case Studies, Appendix to International IDEA Policy Paper No. 18 (Stockholm: International IDEA, 2019),
Bertrand, W., ‘Elections in Haiti (1987–2017) and prospects for modernizing theelectoral system’, i S. Alihodžić, N. Matatu and A. Raffoul (eds), Timing andSequencing of Transitional Elections: Case Studies, Appendix to International International IDEA 49References and further reading IDEA Policy Paper No. 18 (Stockholm: International IDEA, 2019),
Keih, G. K. Jr., ‘Post-conflict Elections in Liberia, 1997 and 2005’, in S. Alihodžić, N. Matatu and A. Raffoul (eds), Timing and Sequencing of Transitional Elections: Case Studies, Appendix to International IDEA Policy Paper No. 18 (Stockholm: International IDEA, 2019),
