This week, the Constitution Unit publishes a series of new and updated briefings on key constitutional topics. In this post – covering one of the series’ new topics – Alan Renwick and Lisa James describe the principles and mechanisms that underpin free and fair elections, and discuss the opportunities for strengthening these in the UK.

Background

The vast majority of countries hold elections. In democracies, elections must be held at reasonable intervals, and must be the means by which key decision-makers are chosen. The conduct of those elections is also crucial: to count as democratic, elections must be ‘free and fair’.

What makes elections free and fair?

There is no single agreed definition of ‘free and fair’ elections. Various bodies offer descriptions, including the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and the Inter-Parliamentary Union. Democracy-monitoring bodies such as Freedom House and International IDEA also assess elections against various criteria.

As explored further in the sections below, free and fair elections require that: suffrage and candidacy rights among adults are equal, subject to only very limited, clearly justified limits; electors can form their views freely; candidates can campaign freely (without infringing other candidates’ or electors’ rights); and voting and counting processes are free from corruption or fraud, with the outcome determined by a fair count of the votes alone.

As also discussed below in the UK context, putting these principles into practice requires various mechanisms to be in place. These include legislation that enshrines the principles and is clear; independent, impartial, and competent election administration; robust enforcement mechanisms; a healthy information environment; and a strong, widely supported democratic culture.

Elections in the UK take place at all levels of government. They use a variety of electoral systems, including First Past the Post (for Westminster elections, and local elections in England and Wales), and various proportional representation systems (for the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Senedd, Northern Ireland Assembly, and local elections in Scotland and Northern Ireland). These systems all have merits and drawbacks – but all are compatible with the basic requirements of democracy.

Elections in the UK are widely seen as free and fair, including by international observers. But experts and campaigners have also identified various ways in which the system might be strengthened. The government’s recent elections policy paper has pledged several reforms.

Free and fair elections in principle

1. Equal suffrage and candidacy rights

• Equal suffrage requires universal adult voting rights, and that all votes count the same.
• The UK has had universal adult suffrage since 1928, when the voting age was equalised between men and women. An obvious question is at what age people are considered adults. The 2024 Labour manifesto pledged to lower the UK voting age to 16 in time for the next general election, bringing Westminster into line with the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd in Wales; the pledge was repeated in the elections policy paper and is expected to appear in a forthcoming Elections Bill. The last change to the UK voting age was in 1969, when it was lowered from 21 to 18.
• One area of controversy has been prisoner voting rights. The UK’s ban on prisoner voting was found to be unlawful in 2005, and in 2018 the vote was extended to offenders released on temporary license. In Scotland, prisoners serving 12 months or less may vote in Scottish Parliament and local elections. Similar reforms have been the subject of consultation in Wales.
• Though universal adult suffrage dates to 1928, equal suffrage came only in 1950. Until then, graduates could vote in university constituencies as well as local seats, and business owners could vote in the constituencies of both their premises and their home.
• Another key aspect of equal suffrage is the drawing of electoral boundaries. Constituencies should have broadly equal numbers of electors, and boundaries should be set independently, without regard to effects on political parties. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland each have an independent boundary commission to redraw boundaries at regular intervals.

2. Ability of electors to form their views freely

• Electors’ ability to form their views freely depends on the information environment, including in the media. The growth of online media poses challenges for traditional election regulation: while the impartiality of broadcast media is regulated, such rules do not apply to online or print media.
• There is widespread public concern about the role of money in politics, and the scope for wealthy individuals disproportionately to influence debate. Political finance regulations currently set local and national spending caps and require transparency for larger donations. The elections policy paper pledges further changes to restrict foreign money in politics, but falls short of the donation cap recommended by bodies including the Committee on Standards in Public Life.

3. Ability of candidates to campaign freely

• Candidates in the UK can generally campaign freely, without the impediments seen in many non-democracies. However, there is growing concern about violence toward or intimidation of candidates and campaigners. The Electoral Commission’s 2024 candidate survey found that 70% of respondents had experienced abuse or threatening behaviour. Around 65% had been abused online, and 46% while canvassing. This is a difficult but important problem to address.
• Voting and counting processes free from fraud, and an outcome determined by votes alone
• There is little evidence of fraud in UK elections, and high confidence that outcomes are determined by the votes cast. The Johnson government cited concerns about potential fraud as a key reason for introducing voter ID requirements in the Elections Act 2022. However, most experts argued that the requirements would disproportionately affect certain groups – risking damage to the principle of equal suffrage in practice. The current government plans to rebalance the rules by extending the list of forms of ID that are accepted.

Mechanisms for guaranteeing free and fair elections

1. Legislation that enshrines the principles and is clear

• The UK’s electoral legislation has grown up over time, and is now widely agreed to be confusingly complex. The Association of Electoral Administrators (AEA) has highlighted the challenges caused; the Law Commissions have recommended consolidation and simplification. The absence of any plan to tackle this point in the government’s elections policy paper has sparked concern.

2. Independent, impartial, and competent election administration

• Elections are administered at local authority level. Though they generally run smoothly, the AEA has highlighted challenges arising from growing complexity (e.g. rising numbers of postal votes, and the challenges of distributing these in a timely way), and inadequate funding.
• There is wide agreement that automated electoral registration (AER) could simplify administration, improve the accuracy of the register, and ease electors’ access to voting, though it also faces practical hurdles. The UK, Welsh and Scottish governments are all conducting or planning pilots.

3. Robust enforcement mechanisms

• Important concerns have been expressed about the independence of the Electoral Commission. The Elections Act 2022 introduced the power for the government to write a Strategy and Policy Statement for the regulator; this was widely criticised at the time as a threat to the body’s independence, including by the House of Commons Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee, the Electoral Commission itself, and experts. The current government’s elections policy paper indicates a plan to retain the statement, despite a minister saying last year that the existence of the statement was incompatible with the Commission’s independence.
• The Electoral Commission and other groups have welcomed changes proposed in the elections policy paper to close loopholes in electoral finance law, including an increase in the maximum fine that can be levied from £20,000 to £500,000.

4. A healthy information environment

• Concerns have been growing about mis/disinformation. Today’s media business models often incentivise attention-grabbing material, which may be sensationalist or divisive. Traditional media outlets facing financial difficulties (particularly acute in the local press) struggle to fund in-depth journalism. Mis/disinformation can then flourish, while reliable information is harder to identify. While an early version of the Online Safety Act required social media companies to address democratic harms, the final text did not.
• Political parties may respond to this environment either by issuing sensationalist and divisive material themselves, or by avoiding any messages that might provoke negative coverage (as with
•  the widely criticised ‘conspiracy of silence’ over tax and spending during the 2024 election campaign). Both approaches damage the information environment for voters.
• The House of Lords Democracy and Digital Technologies Committee recommended that a ‘democratic information hub’ should be created, to provide a source of trustworthy information.

5. Strong, widely supported democratic culture

• Intimidation and misinformation point to weaknesses in the UK’s wider democratic culture, along with polarisation and unwillingness to ‘disagree well’. Survey evidence suggests that public trust in politicians is low, and declining: in the 2024 Ipsos veracity index, only 11% of respondents generally trusted politicians to tell the truth.
• Building a healthier democratic culture is a complex task. One element would be widely available, ongoing, impartial citizenship education, which could help voters relate to politics more effectively, and build skills of media literacy, genuine listening, and critical thinking.

Upholding free and fair elections

UK elections are generally well-run, and meet international standards for freedom and fairness. In any discussion of election reform, the principles that underpin free and fair elections must be balanced against one another – for example, weighing the ease of voting against appropriate measures to prevent fraud. In states with declining levels of democracy, these principles are sometimes invoked in favour of changes that damage the integrity of elections (for example by imposing unduly onerous voter registration processes).

The government has announced some significant changes to be brought forward in an Elections Bill, not least the expansion of the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds, and stronger enforcement powers for the Electoral Commission. But there remain various ways in which both the rules surrounding elections in the UK, and the mechanisms for upholding and enforcing those rules, could be strengthened. Some of these deserve attention during passage of the upcoming bill – including restoring independence to the Electoral Commission, and more rigorous regulation of political finance. Rationalisation of the legal framework is increasingly urgent, but would require a separate ‘consolidation’ bill; while better administrative resourcing could be provided without legislation.

Any work to improve the UK’s electoral processes should also be considered in the context of the broader need to foster and maintain a healthy democratic culture.

This briefing is part of a series designed to inform policy-makers and the public about key constitutional issues and democratic debates. It is an output from the Constitution Unit’s Constitutional Principles and the Health of Democracy project. Every briefing is available to read on our website, in both webpage and PDF format.

The Constitution Unit is holding a free, online event on 24 October at 1pm asking whether the government’s electoral reform plans go far enough, featuring Cat Smith MP, Rose Whiffen, Tom Hawthorn and Professor David Howarth. Sign up to attend on the Unit’s website.

About the authors

Alan Renwick is Professor of Democratic Politics at UCL and Deputy Director of the Constitution Unit.

Lisa James is a Senior Research Fellow at the Constitution Unit.

Image attribution: ‘Polling Station‘ by Rain Rabbit (CC BY-NC 2.0).