Two days ago the Atlanta-based Carter Center gave the official announcement that it will be sending an electoral observation mission to Libya, a welcome move for those interested in the integrity and transparency of voting processes. But the Centre's own press release was the first to be open about the relatively narrow scope of their contribution, stating that the mission will be "mission will be limited in nature and will not offer a comprehensive assessment of the electoral process." However, the results of their assessment will be shared with Libya's election authority and will also be publicly available. In addition to staff at a Carter Center office set up in Tripoli in June, observers include persons from Canada, Cyprus, Sudan, Yemen, Egypt, Iraq, Germany and the United States. The official reason given for the restricted movement and location of observation teams was security concerns in many areas of the country.

It should go without saying that the dissolution of Egypt's parliament is an affront to democracy that should not be accepted or tolerated. It should also be uncontroversial that the activists’ efforts to wrest power from the regime, which in large part remains intact despite Mubarak's ouster, are admirable and should be replicated elsewhere where appropriate. Large parts of the commentary in Western discussions find these assertions to be mostly benign truism, yet do not apply the same standards to similar efforts at disobedience in their own backyard, nor to attitudes toward and perceptions of their governments and actions meant to challenge them.

Libya's first elections since the fall of Muammar Gaddafi have been delayed for three more weeks, with elections officials emphasizing that the delay will occur only for logistical and technical reasons. Electoral commission president Nuri al-Abbar has also been cited as saying that the delay is also meant to give additional time for voter registration and appeals by candidates deemed ineligible to run.

As one would expect, the bulk of media coverage of the Egyptian election focused on the leading contenders who will face off later this month. As in French and certain other presidential elections, the model used here necessitates run-off contests when no single candidate gains an outright majority of votes cast. While twenty-three candidates registered, only thirteen were ultimately deemed eligible by the Supreme Presidential Electoral Commission. Among the higher profile candidates barred from contesting the election were longtime intelligence director and Mubarak's immediate successor, Omar Suleiman; former deputy chair and original candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood Khairat El-Shater; Hazem Salah Abu Ismail, the popular Salafi Islamist who faced earlier eligibility challenges over his mother's citizenship; and Ayman Nour, the centrist liberal who placed a far distant second against Mubarak in 2005, albeit in a poll widely viewed as corrupt. Suleiman and El-Shater each launched appeals over their denial of eligibility but both were rejected.

Egypt’s current presidential elections are the first since the fall of Hosni Mubarak and the first in recent memory where the result is not expected to be a foregone conclusion. In the dearth of coverage, the representation of the Muslim Brotherhood and other elements of political Islam has often lacked nuance and accuracy - and it has also often taken the view that the official entry of Islam into the electoral landscape has to be a net negative for achieving a more democratic or secular society.

Algeria's parliamentary elections this past week produced a surprising result under conditions of lackluster turnout and mixed views on integrity. Opposition forces were all but astonished to learn that the long-ruling Front for National Liberation (FLN) party and its junior party have actually strengthed their majority in the legislature. Their perception of a far lower level of support for the FLN has become part of wider suspicion of significant fraud. Importantly, there was some variation in the response by different international monitors and figures, while another feature of Algeria's legislature also made the low turnout unusual: Algeria's lawmakers come from over twenty different and consistently competitive political parties. While no second party or coalition has been able to unseat the FLN since the introduction of multiparty politics in 1989, voters have at least able to count on some representation by opposition members.

Reformists in Iran have been crippled by the severe vetting process of the parliamentary election. Nearly three years after the June 2009 vote denounced by the Green Movement, former opponents Mousavi and Kerroubi remain under house arrest with only occasional contact from their wives and daughters, and the movement itself has been harshly limited from its former days of openness and energy. The results have meant that the February election was essentially a contest between rival conservative factions supporting President Ahmedinejad and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. With only 65 seats at play, selected due to insufficient turnout in the earlier vote, numerical changes in the 290-seat Majilis were not large but are expected to strongly influence selection of the parliamentary speaker, while a higher turnout will provide fodder for vindication of the political status quo. The final results spell out how easy it will be for pro-Khameni forces to stifle and perhaps eliminate current and future challenges by the presidency.

The 2002 presidential election in Mali had significant procedural irregularities, a large series of private invalidations by the Constitutional Court, and an unfortunately low voter turnout that left much to be desired. During the campaign both President Amadou Toumani Toure and main rival Soumalia Cisse traded accusations of officially sanctioned and systemic fraud, with Toure's camp claiming that corrupt mayors throughout the country distributed fake IDs to people who agreed to vote against him. Staff from Cisse's campaign said that his opponent organized false witnesses to cast proxy votes for people who didn't exist or didn't authorize their representation.