Global Election Review 2025: New Pressures and Practical Responses Shape a Fragile but Resilient Democratic Landscape
A comprehensive new international review of national elections held in 2025 has found that while disinformation, opaque campaign funding, and violence continued to pose serious challenges to electoral integrity, authorities and civil society groups developed innovative, practical responses to protect participation and public trust. Published by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) in collaboration with the Electoral Integrity Project, the Review of the 2025 Year of Elections: Inclusivity, Transparency and Trust draws on monitoring of national elections in 39 countries, complemented by 20 detailed case studies and further examples from around the world. The report’s overall conclusion is that there was “no noticeable shift in overall electoral integrity” in 2025, but that this global average conceals significant improvements and setbacks in individual countries. Campaigns remained the weakest stage of the electoral cycle, with media coverage and political financing singled out as persistent problem areas. Among the national elections monitored, disinformation or misinformation appeared in at least 62 percent of cases, administrative malfunctions in 49 percent, and election-related violence in 38 percent. The monitoring sample deliberately excluded countries classified as not free or scoring low on credible elections, meaning that the findings likely understate the severity of challenges in the least democratic environments.
The chapter on campaign finance paints a stark picture of how unequal resource distribution can disadvantage smaller parties, women, and independent candidates. Corporate donations, misuse of public resources, foreign interference, and poorly regulated online spending are all identified as factors that distort electoral competition and undermine the principle of equal opportunity. The study is unambiguous in its recommendation, stating that “strengthening political finance regulation is an essential democratic imperative.” Yet the report also highlights how civil society can step in where formal oversight is weak. In Bolivia, for example, party financial reports are not required to be public and auditing capacity is limited, so the Jubileo Foundation took on the role of monitoring traditional and social media. Its findings, according to the review, informed early warnings to electoral authorities about disinformation, incitement to violence, and negative campaigning. This example demonstrates that non-governmental actors can provide a crucial check on opaque financial influences, even in environments where state regulators lack the resources or legal powers to act effectively. The report argues that such independent monitoring should be supported and institutionalized rather than treated as a temporary fix.
The review also examines outright manipulation of electoral rules, voters, and ballots, cataloging abuses that range from vote buying to the exclusion of opposition candidates. In the Philippines, vote buying remained a serious concern, distorting the will of voters and undermining the credibility of results. In Tanzania, the report refers to the exclusion of opposition candidates and describes election-related violence that resulted in between roughly 500 and over 1,000 fatalities, depending on the estimates consulted. These cases illustrate the extremes of electoral malpractice that can occur when legal safeguards are weak or ignored. However, the report also offers a contrasting example of successful reform. Argentina replaced the traditional system of separate party ballots with a single ballot containing all options for its October legislative elections. This change was assessed positively for reducing the undue influence of party officials, who previously could control or manipulate the distribution of ballots. Counting also became faster, and there was no increase in invalid votes, suggesting that the reform improved both efficiency and transparency without unintended negative consequences. This case serves as a reminder that well-designed electoral reforms can yield tangible benefits for integrity, even in complex national contexts.
A separate chapter focuses on violence against women in elections, including physical attacks and abuse facilitated by technology. The study is clear that “responsibility cannot rest with those targeted,” and calls for a comprehensive response involving prevention, enforcement, and support, with active participation from political parties, public institutions, and civil society. Violence against women in politics remains a significant barrier to equal participation and democratic representation, and the report emphasizes that addressing it is not merely a matter of personal safety but a fundamental requirement for inclusive governance. In Chile, the electoral service brought together public institutions, digital platforms, media, and civil society to address disinformation, hate speech, and digital violence. According to the review, these efforts included monitoring tools and coordination with platforms, complemented by public education campaigns. However, the report cautions that such initiatives still need to be consolidated into lasting state policies rather than remaining one-off or project-based responses. Legal reform also expanded participation in 2025. Albania introduced overseas voting for its parliamentary election following a Constitutional Court ruling that the absence of such arrangements violated citizens’ constitutional rights. This marks a significant step for diaspora engagement and demonstrates how courts and electoral authorities can work together to close gaps in participation.
The report’s conclusions connect the themes of inclusion, transparency, and trust, arguing that electoral authorities need independence, reliable funding, trained personnel, and preparations for disruptions if they are to safeguard the democratic process. New technologies, the study says, require human oversight and data protection, while clear communication helps citizens understand procedures and assess competing claims. In an era of widespread misinformation, voter education is no longer a secondary concern but a core component of electoral integrity. The report also emphasizes that financial flows, foreign interference, and online manipulation cross borders, making national regulatory frameworks alone insufficient. It highlights the Stockholm Consensus, adopted by electoral management bodies from around the world, as a landmark example of growing international cooperation. The Consensus represents a collective commitment to maintaining election integrity in a context of technological change and globalized threats. The review argues that such international cooperation is essential because challenges such as social media disinformation campaigns, cross-border political financing, and coordinated digital attacks do not respect national boundaries. Only by sharing data, best practices, and early warning systems can electoral authorities and civil society effectively counter these threats.
Overall, the Review of the 2025 Year of Elections offers a nuanced picture of global electoral integrity: neither hopeless nor triumphant, but a field of ongoing struggle and incremental progress. While the persistence of disinformation, manipulation, and violence is deeply concerning, the report also documents a growing toolbox of practical responses, from civil society monitoring in Bolivia to ballot reform in Argentina, collaborative anti-disinformation efforts in Chile, and overseas voting arrangements in Albania. These examples show that determined actors can make a difference, even under challenging circumstances. Yet the report also warns that many of these efforts are fragile and in need of consolidation. Pilot projects must become permanent policies, voluntary codes must become enforceable regulations, and national initiatives must be linked to international cooperation. The themes of inclusivity, transparency, and trust are not abstract ideals but practical benchmarks for measuring progress. As the report makes clear, credible elections are not a given; they are the product of continuous work by electoral authorities, political parties, civil society, and citizens. The 2025 data provide a reminder that democratic resilience requires sustained engagement and vigilance, especially in an era of rapid technological change and growing political polarization.