INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS CITE MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS IN ARMENIAN ELECTIONS
Armenian Weekly
May 10, 2012
YEREVAN (A.W.)-Beginning on March 22, the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the OSCE Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR), the OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly (OSCE PA), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council
of Europe (PACE), and the European Parliament (EP) began a joint
election-monitoring mission that lasted until the elections on May 6.
Men in front of a campaign poster in Yerevan (Photo by Aaron Spagnolo,
The Armenian Weekly) In their 13-page preliminary conclusions, made
public on May 7, they started by characterizing the May 6 Parliamentary
elections in Armenia as “a competitive, vibrant, and largely peaceful
campaign.” However, in much of the rest of the report, they discussed
shortcomings and violations: “An unequal playing field due to
violations of campaign provisions and cases of pressure on voters,
as well as deficiencies in the complaints and appeals process were
cause for concern,” they stated. Below is a summary of their findings.
Prior to election day, the elections were carried out in an “overall
professional and transparent manner.” Although “generally calm and
peaceful,” however, election day was “marked by organizational
problems and undue interference in the process, mostly by party
representatives.”
Although voter lists were available for inspection before the
elections, their accuracy was “negatively affected by insufficient
regulation of data exchange between various institutions.”
The country’s Electoral Code, as it related to campaign rules, was
sometimes violated, mostly by local authorities and some parties,
noted the report. “This included teachers being involved in campaign
events during school hours, gifts to people and communities from
organizations connected to political parties during the campaign
period, and the posting of campaign materials in schools and municipal
buildings. These observed cases contributed to an unequal playing
field for electoral contestants and, together with cases of pressure
on voters, are in contravention of Paragraph 7.7 of the OSCE 1990
Copenhagen Document. This underscores the need for fair and proper
implementation of the new Electoral Code by all stakeholders.”
The OSCE also voiced its concern over the lack of confidence in the
“integrity” of the electoral process by political parties and the
public.
As to the Electoral Code, the report noted it “unduly limits the right
to file complaints.” It also did not allow plaintiffs to appeal to
a higher court.
Although the new Electoral Code, adopted in May 2011, provides an
overall “sound framework” to conduct fair elections, “Its fair and
proper implementation by all stakeholders is as important as the
law itself.” The report also noted that the law had “a number of
substantive shortcomings.”
Election administration, voter, and candidate registration
Regarding voter lists, the OSCE found that the exchange of information
between government institutions was “insufficiently regulated.” For
instance, because the Civil Status Registry did not provide “timely
and sufficient data” on deceased persons on the voter registry,
the deceased individuals were removed from the list “on the basis of
written statements of relatives and/or neighbors.”
Similarly, on the issue of voters registered at empty buildings,
“OSCE/ODIHR LTOs verified six cases of demolished buildings or
of buildings damaged during the 1988 earthquake where voters are
still registered.” The buildings were in Gyumri and constituency 6
in Yerevan.
Voters had a “wide” choice, as the eight political parties and the
one bloc had a total of 1,016 candidates running in the proportional
part of the elections. Twelve candidates subsequently withdrew. In
the majoritarian constituencies, 155 candidates registered. Two
candidates were rejected, and 18 withdrew. One self-nominated candidate
in constituency 12 was beaten on April 6. He withdrew his candidacy
soon after. The matter is under investigation.
Campaign environment, and finance
The report noted the campaign was “marked by allegations of
deficiencies in the voter lists, vote buying, issuance of passports
to facilitate election fraud, and voter intimidation.”
It also noted that the police pressed no charges against potential
violators. “Many cases were closed,” it continued, “some after only
apparently cursory investigation.”
The OSCE also raised concern over instances of voters pressured to
attend Republican Party (RPA) rallies. In its footnote, the OSCE
listed some of these cases:
“For example, on 27 April, the RPA rally organizer in Gyumri (Shirak
province) checked attendance by asking all present Gazprom employees
to raise their hands. At the same event, the Director of the Gyumri
Department of Cultural Affairs pledged his staff’s support to the RPA
candidate. Several participants at that rally informed OSCE/ODIHR LTOs
[long-term observers] that they were Gazprom employees who had been
ordered to leave earlier from work and attend the rally. In Talin
(Aragatsotn province), LTOs noted staff from the local tax office
discussing the fact that they had been released early from work
to attend an RPA rally. In Armavir province, a number of residents
separately informed the LTOs that they had been threatened with job
loss by the authorities, the mayor, and the RPA if they attended a
Heritage rally scheduled for the same day. In Syunik province, the head
of a village made a list of RPA supporters and a ‘list of suspects,’
asking the local school director to verify them. The school director
confirmed this to LTO, and presented herself as an RPA supporter. The
head of Ageshat village (Armavir province) informed the LTOs that
he had urged campaigners of a self-nominated candidate to leave the
village and that he supports his brother who is running for the RPA.”
The authors of the report then stated that such cases raise questions
over how free voters actually were to “discuss and learn about all
contestants’ views and cast their vote free of retribution.”
The report also noted how administrative resources were misused,
especially in cases of campaigning in schools, and even universities.
“OSCE/ODIHR LTOs observed numerous cases where the RPA actively
involved teachers and pupils in campaign events, including during
school hours.” Sometimes school administrators asked parents to
attend RPA events. Party posters and banners were also seen on school
grounds. In its footnotes, the report noted, “Cases of teachers and
students being released from school to attend RPA rallies or being
asked to attend rallies after school hours were observed by OSCE/ODIHR
LTOs in Charensavan, Ejmiatsin, Hrazdan, Nor Hacin, Vardenis, Vanadzor,
and Yerevan.”
The RPA wasn’t the only political party cited for breaking the
Electoral Code. Multigroup, a company owned by Prosperous Armenia
leader Gagik Tsarukyan, apparently distributed around 500 tractors
during the campaign period.
On election day
“While opening procedures were assessed positively in almost all
polling stations observed, voting was assessed negatively in 10
percent, which is considerable,” read the report. Eight percent of
the observed polling stations had campaign materials outside, which
violates electoral laws.
Observers also noted that 15 percent of polling stations were
negatively affected by “lack of organization or disputes between PEC
[Precinct Election Commission] members and party/candidate proxies
or observers.” Sixteen percent of polling stations were overcrowded,
and 15 percent had “tension or unrest.” Almost all polling stations
had proxies, and 87 percent had observers.
“Unauthorized people, mostly proxies, interfered in or directed the
work of 12 percent of the PECs observed. International observers
reported cases of people attempting to influence voters on who to
vote for (4 percent of polling stations observed), as well as cases
of intimidation of voters (2 percent). On election day, allegations
of vote buying were reported to the police and several criminal cases
were initiated,” read the report.
In addition, observers noted some serious violations, “including
group voting (12 percent of polling stations observed), proxy voting
(4 percent), multiple voting (2 percent), and series of seemingly
identical signatures on voter lists (2 percent). In 7 percent of
polling stations observed, ballot boxes were not properly sealed at the
time of observation. The secrecy of the vote was not always ensured,
as not all voters marked their ballots in secret (12 percent) or put
them in envelopes before leaving the voting booth (13 percent).
International observers noted several instances where videotaping by
proxies or media representatives violated the secrecy of the vote.”
In nearly one fifth of observed polling stations, the vote counting
process was “assessed negatively.” Some PECs failed to begin counting
the votes immediately after voting was closed, while others did not
take the required steps before beginning the count, such as counting
the number of voter signatures on the voter lists. Furthermore,
according to the report, “A few PECs performed the count in a
non-transparent manner. Unauthorized people participated in one in
four counts observed. International observers reported isolated cases
of serious violations, such as falsification of results or protocols
(four cases) or indications that ballot box stuffing had occurred
earlier (five cases). Figures on the results protocols frequently did
not reconcile, one in three PECs observed had problems completing the
protocols, and one in four PECs did not post copies of the protocols
for public scrutiny.”
Regarding the tabulation process, it was “assessed positively” in 33
out of 41 Territorial Election Commissions (TECs). The process was
transparent in most TECs, but overcrowding made them inadequate to
process the PEC protocols. “International observers reported that many
PEC results protocols were not fully completed and that frequently
arithmetical errors had to be corrected by the TECs (in accordance
with the law). A few cases of problems with the data processing of
results were reported.”
The OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission started its work in Armenia
on March 22, with 17 experts in Yerevan, and 24 long-term observers
deployed throughout the country. On May 6, 349 short-term observers
visited 1,000 polling stations out of a total of 1,982. The observers
came from 42 countries. They included 60 observers from OSCE PA,
25 from PACE, and 10 from EP.
To read the full report, click here.
http://www.osce.org/odihr/90332