ELECTIONS ACTIVITIES • The level of public confidence in the election administration and the conduct of elections; Observation missions are the most visible part of ODIHR’s election mandate. The findings and recommendations in election observation reports provide a valuable resource for ODIHR’s other programmes, as well as for the activities of other OSCE institutions and field operations. In 2014, ODIHR’s activities in the field of elections continued to focus on the following areas: • The nature of the media environment; • Election observation; • Follow-up to observation missions and their recommendations; • Development of election observation methodology; • Assistance to reform of electoral legislation; • Training of observers; and • Support for OSCE Partners for Co-operation. Election Observation ODIHR assesses electoral processes throughout the OSCE region for their compliance with OSCE commitments, international obligations and other standards for democratic elections. To date, ODIHR has deployed election-related activities in nearly all OSCE participating States. In line with the Office’s well-established election observation methodology, an election observation process begins with the deployment of a needs assessment mission (NAM). A NAM, typically deployed several months before an election, assesses the pre-election environment and the preparations for the elections. Based on this assessment, the NAM recommends whether to deploy an ODIHR activity for the elections, and if so, what type of activity best meets the identified needs. In 2014, ODIHR conducted 11 NAMs. When recommending a possible election-related activity, a NAM considers a number of issues: • Whether the legal framework for elections is in line with OSCE commitments; • Respect for fundamental rights and freedoms; • Existing checks and balances; • The state of preparedness of the election administration; 14 ODIHR Annual Report 2014 • The complaints and appeals system; • The level of civil society involvement; and • The implementation of prior ODIHR recommendations. In 2014, ODIHR deployed election-related missions for 12 elections in ten participating States and one partner for co-operation (Afghanistan, from extra-budgetary funding). As with all ODIHR missions, these were guided by two principal objectives: first, to assess whether the elections met OSCE commitments, international obligations and other standards for democratic elections, and were conducted in accordance with national legislation; and second, to offer concrete and concise recommendations to support participating States in improving their electoral processes. The purpose of election observation, therefore, is not to commend or criticize those countries in which ODIHR deploys observation missions. Instead, the Office offers constructive feedback and provides concrete recommendations to remedy identified shortcomings. Over the course of 2014, ODIHR published some 50 election-related reports, including NAM and interim reports, statements of preliminary findings and conclusions, and final reports, with the objective of fulfilling its mandate in a transparent and accountable manner. Five of the 12 election missions deployed were full-scale election observation missions (EOMs), including long- and short-term observers, which are seconded by individual participating States, as well as core teams of experts recruited directly by ODIHR. Limited election observation missions (LEOMs), which include a core team of experts and long-term observers but no short-term observers, as they do not conduct comprehensive and systematic observation of election day, were deployed for elections in five participating States. As per ODIHR’s methodology, LEOMs are deployed to participating States where long-term observers are deemed necessary to ensure comprehensive regional coverage, but election-day issues are expected to be unproblematic or where fundamental shortcomings are so significant as to render election day observation inconsequential.