The ambiguity surrounding the outcome of Afghanistan’s August 20 presidential poll once again highlights the major impediments to a robust and transparent Afghan electoral framework.

More than two weeks after Afghanistan’s August 20 presidential and provincial council elections the results remain unclear. At this stage, with the results of more than 75 percent of polling stations reported, the incumbent, President Hamid Karzai, is well ahead of his competitors but still short of the 50 percent mark required to avoid a second round runoff. The preliminary results are mired in controversy fueled by broad allegations of fraud by both local power brokers and the international media.

The ambiguity in the results stems from more than allegations of fraud, however. While the Independent Election Commission (IEC) has reported the results from more than 75 percent of polling stations, the actual percentage of votes this represents is clouded by the imperfections of the Afghan electoral framework. The IEC has provided polling station level results by which district-level analysis can be conducted.  Without a reliable voter list, however, it is impossible to calculate the actual percentage of voters who have cast their ballots. The actual number of polling stations open on Election Day is also an ambiguous figure, as the IEC has reported different provincial totals over the course of the tallying process. These complications, compounded with the lack of accurate census data, makes predicting the outcome with any level of confidence impossible.

It is to the credit of the IEC that it has provided rolling results of the presidential poll on its website and have gone so far as to provide polling station-level data (albeit not in a format easily processed for data analysis). The IEC has not provided similar data for the number of invalid and invalidated votes per polling station, however. This data would provide analysts the means by which to examine correlations between polling stations that reported an average number of voters significantly higher than the provincial or district average and stations where the percentage of invalid or invalidated votes falls outside a reasonable deviation from the district average.

Many analysts have argued that the absence of an accurate voter list and the imperfections in the voter registration process contributed to creating an environment conducive to fraud. Just as the final election results have yet to be announced, however, most allegations of fraud have yet to be corroborated. The international media have reported testimony from tribal elders claiming they were forced to cast ballots for one candidate or another, allegations that have been refuted by the accused. The Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) is reviewing more than 600 Category A complaints, which could affect the final vote tally, but to this point has avoided making public statements regarding specific cases or the broader legitimacy of the process.

It is unclear what effect the ECC’s investigative procedures will have on the final outcome. What is clear is that in order for final results to be certified, the ECC must complete its adjudication process. The protracted period of vote tabulation not only calls into question the strength of the Afghan electoral framework but also highlights the need for more sophisticated international observation of future Afghan elections. With more than 75 percent of polling station-level results reported, and the outcome still unclear, never has the need for independent vote count verification, such as a parallel vote tabulation, been more apparent.