Observation de l’élection présidentielle en République du Kirghizstan (30 octobre 2011)
Election observation report
| Doc. 12797
| 24 November 2011
1 Introduction
1. Following an invitation of 28 July 2011 from the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic, at its meeting
on 3 October 2011, the Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly decided
to set up an ad hoc committee of 5 members to observe the presidential
election in the Kyrgyz Republic on 30 October 2011, the first election to
be observed in the Kyrgyz Republic by the Parliamentary Assembly.
Ms Nursuna Memecan was appointed Chairperson and rapporteur of the
ad hoc committee.
2. In early October 2011, the Kyrgyz Republic expressed its intention
to submit an application to obtain the status of partner for democracy
with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in order
to co-operate more actively and receive advice in the building of
a parliamentary system of governance.
3. On 4 October 2004, the Parliamentary Assembly and the European
Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) signed
a co-operation agreement. Article 15 of the agreement states that
“when the Bureau of the Assembly decides to observe an election
in a country in which electoral legislation has previously been
examined by the Venice Commission, one of the rapporteurs of the
Venice Commission on this issue may be invited to join the Assembly’s
election observation mission as legal adviser”. The Bureau of the
Assembly thus invited a member of the Venice Commission to join
the ad hoc committee as legal adviser.
4. On the proposal of the Assembly's political groups, the ad
hoc committee was composed as follows:
- Nursuna MEMECAN, Head of the delegation, Turkey, Alliance
of Liberals and Democrats for Europe
- Nikolaos DENDIAS, Greece, Group of the European People's
Party
- Lord Donald ANDERSON, United Kingdom, Socialist Group
- Zmago JELINČIČ PLEMENITI, Slovenia, European Democrat
Group
- Andrej HUNKO, Germany, Group of the Unified European Left
Venice Commission
- Aivars ENDZINS, member of the
Venice Commission
Secretariat
of the Parliamentary Assembly
- Ivi-Triin ODRATS
- Elodie FISCHER
5. The ad hoc committee formed part of the international election
observation mission, which also included election observers from
the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE, the European Parliament
and the election observation mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR).
6. The ad hoc committee met in Bishkek from 28 to 31 October
2011. In the context of the joint briefing programme, it met representatives
of the main candidates standing for election, the Central Electoral Commission,
the Head of the OSCE mission, the Head of the OSCE/ODIHR election
observation mission and her team, representatives of civil society,
international organisations and the media. It also held bilateral meetings
with the incumbent President, the Speaker of the Parliament, human
rights defenders and the Mission of the Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights in Osh. The programme of the
ad hoc committee’s meetings is reproduced in Appendix 1.
7. On election day, the ad hoc committee was divided into four
teams deployed in Bishkek and the surrounding Chui region (three
teams), Osh and Uzgen (one team).
8. The international election observation mission concluded that
the presidential election in the Kyrgyz Republic was conducted in
a peaceful manner, but shortcomings underscored that the integrity
of the electoral process should be improved to consolidate democratic
practice in line with international commitments. The joint international
election observation mission press release published after the election
is reproduced in Appendix 2.
9. The ad hoc committee wishes to thank the OSCE/ODIHR election
observation mission in Bishkek for its co-operation.
2 Political and legal
context
10. The early presidential election held in the Kyrgyz
Republic on 30 October 2011 was the first one since the ousting
of former President Bakiyev in April 2010, when a provisional government
led by the parliamentary leader of the Social Democratic Party Roza
Otunbayeva took power. A new constitution enhancing the role of the
parliament was drafted and the provisional government called a referendum
on the draft constitution on 27 June 2010. The new constitution,
which limits the powers of the president and boosts those of parliament
and the prime minister, was largely supported.
11. President Roza Otunbayeva was not a candidate for these elections
and remains in office until the end of 2011. This presidential election
was a key election for stability in the Kyrgyz Republic, where ethnic
tensions escalated after April 2010. The major outbreak of violence
between ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbeks began on 10 June 2010 in Osh, the
second largest city in the country and home to a substantial Uzbek
minority, and reached Jalal-Abad on 13 June. This resulted in mass
killings, looting, arson and a massive displacement of civilians. Tensions
between the ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbek communities have remained significant
in Osh and Jalal-Abad throughout 2011. They have been exacerbated
by the nationalistic rhetoric of politicians and local media. Other major
human rights concerns to date have been allegations of ill treatment
and torture in detention, the lack of due process and arbitrary
detentions.
12. Parliamentary elections were organised on 10 October 2010
without any major disturbances. Three political parties in Kyrgyzstan
agreed to form a governing coalition. The Respublika party joined
the Social Democratic Party and the Ata-Jurt Party. The head of
the Ata-Jurt party, Akhmatbek Keldibekov, was chosen as Speaker
of the Parliament. Almazbek Atambaev, Chairperson of the Social
Democratic Party, became Prime Minister.
13. Under the new Constitution adopted in 2010, the Kyrgyz President
is elected for six years and is not allowed to run for another term.
The President’s role is to provide a balance in the creation of
new legislation, appoint certain members of government (Minister
of the Interior, Head of the National Security Council), declare
war and act as Commander-in-Chief and represent the country internationally.
14. The presidential election of 30 October 2011 took place under
a new legal framework completed as late as four months ahead of
the election. This framework included the 2010 Constitution, the
newly adopted Constitutional Law on Presidential and Parliamentary
Elections and the Law on Election Commissions to Conduct Elections
and Referenda, Central Election Commission instructions and decisions
and related legislation governing the activities of media, non-governmental
organisations and political parties.
15. In March 2011, the authorities of the Kyrgyz Republic requested
the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR to provide an opinion on
the draft Law on Presidential and Parliamentary Elections, the draft
Law on Elections to Local Government and the draft Law on Election
Commissions. In their opinion, the Venice Commission and OSCE/ODIHR
expressed a number of concerns, including significant limitations
to certain civil and political rights, short application deadlines
of the new rules, and the uncompleted process of nomination of judges
of the new Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court, which prohibited
citizens from challenging the constitutionality of key provisions
and which was seen in general as a potential source for undermining
confidence in the fairness of the electoral process.
3 Electoral administration
16. On 30 June 2011, the Parliament of the Kyrgyz Republic
scheduled the presidential election for 30 October 2011. As the
new legislation on elections was adopted only in June 2011, this
created conditions for the electoral administration, candidates
and voters in general not to be fully aware of the rules applicable
to this election.
17. The 2011 presidential election was administered by a three-level
election administration system, as provided for by the law on election
commissions: the Central Election Commission (CEC), 58 Territorial Election
Commissions (TECs) and 2 318 Precinct Election Commissions (PECs).
According to the law, TECs and PECs are formed for two years, and
composed half by representatives of political parties and half by representatives
elected by local keneshes.
The ethnic composition of the TECs corresponds to the ethnic composition
of the total population. In some areas with a large Uzbek population,
members of the Uzbek minority appeared to be under-represented.
18. The CEC is elected by the parliament for five years and has
12 members. The parliamentary majority, the parliamentary opposition
and the president each nominate four members. Four members are women. There
is only one CEC member from a national minority (Kazakh).
19. According to the law, the CEC sessions are to be open to the
media, candidate representatives and observers, and decisions are
to be made public through the media and the CEC website. However,
some international observers indicated that the CEC applied a practice
whereby, in addition to short public sessions at which decisions
were taken without discussion, the CEC held closed meetings without
the presence of candidate representatives, observers or journalists.
In addition, the CEC did not allow the observation of the printing
of the ballot papers and did not disclose ballot security measures.
According to the OSCE/ODIHR, the work of the Central Election Commission
(CEC) lacked transparency.
20. The CEC accredited 792 international observers and 3 000 domestic
observers were deployed by local organisations. International observers
were only accredited 30 days before the election day, which restricted the
period of observation.
4 Registration of candidates
and electors
21. The deadline for registering candidates was 27 September
2011. Eligible candidates for the presidential election had to be
no younger than 35 and no older than 70, demonstrate their knowledge
of the Kyrgyz language (language test) and reside in the country
for no less than 15 years. Candidates had to register with the CEC
in order to be listed on the ballot papers. A nominee had to collect
at least 30 000 signatures of eligible voters to register as a presidential
candidate and pay an election deposit of 100 000 soms (€1565).
22. A total of 23 candidates qualified to run the elections (83
were initially declared to run), of whom 10 were nominated by political
parties and 13 were self-nominated. By the 27 October registration
deadline, seven candidates withdrew, thus leaving 16 candidates
in the running. This short registration deadline, which ran up to
three days prior to the election day, led to the additional burden
of each PEC having to manually cross out the names of the withdrawn
candidates on each printed ballot paper. None of the candidates
were female or representatives of a national minority.
23. The CEC was responsible for managing voter lists, according
to a new unified system of voter registration. A total of 3 034 046
voters were registered in the country, of which 38 056 registered
to vote abroad. Out-of-country voting took place in 29 polling stations
in 23 countries.
24. The new system introduced two fundamental changes to voter
registration procedures. First, the new electoral law established
the concept of an “electoral address” that would allow voters to
vote at their actual place of residence, regardless of their permanent
registration. Secondly, the possibility to be added to the voter lists
on election day was abolished; voters had to verify at least 10
days prior to election day that they were on the voter list. The
latter could be done in PECs as well as through the CEC website.
25. The International Election Observation Mission (IEOM) noted
that, whereas the decision to create a unified voter registration
system under the auspices of the CEC was a considerable improvement,
the overall quality and accuracy of voter lists remained a significant
concern throughout the electoral procedure. On the one hand, the
CEC was limited in its ability to cross-check data and remedy errors
(a merged database had to be abandoned because of irreconcilable
duplications), and, on the other, the inconsistent voter registration procedures
led to the exclusion of a considerable number of voters. Mobile
door-to-door verification was used but the efficiency varied from
district to district because of an inconsistent understanding of
mobile verification procedures.
5 Pre-electoral period: campaign
environment, media situation and participation of national minorities
26. Due to the large number of candidates and in the
absence of a clear front-runner, it was expected that the campaign
period would be highly competitive and possibly result in a second
round. The campaign remained however low-key, driven by personality
rather than issues, and was conducted in a relatively calm atmosphere,
despite underlying tensions – notably in the South of the country.
Only six candidates had high visibility in printed campaign materials.
27. According to the OSCE/ODIHR long-term observation, all presidential
candidates were able to campaign freely and without impediment.
Freedom of assembly and speech were respected throughout the country during
the campaign. Ten of the 16 presidential candidates signed a Code
of Honour for parties, candidates and supporters.
28. Members of the ad hoc committee were informed of allegations
of misuse of institutional authority and administrative resources.
Cases were reported in Bishkek of university students and staff
being pressured to submit applications to vote by their “electoral
address”, and, in a few of these cases, they were reportedly directed
to vote for one particular candidate. However, this remained unverifiable.
29. Freedom of expression has been viewed as one of the most significant
achievements after the events of April 2010, which has resulted
in the establishment of a public broadcaster and decriminalisation
of libel.
Note Some concern still remains regarding self-censorship
and level of professionalism of journalists.
30. All in all, the OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission, monitoring
media, assessed positively the wide range of information available
to voters, with minor downsides such as lack of independent editorial
coverage, broadcast media refraining from covering the campaign
outside the official campaign spots or lack of analysis in the broadcast
media, which was mainly attached to the cautious interpretation
of unclear legal provisions. Public and state-funded media generally
adhered to their obligation to provide free media space for registered candidates,
of various format. Political debates enabled candidates to convey
their views and platforms. Print media offered readers a wide range
of information; however, many outlets were reported to have displayed
an unbalanced portrayal of the contestants.
31. The ad hoc committee noted that certain local cable operators
restricted access to some international news channels. This was
prompted by the interpretation of Article 22 of the electoral law
that prohibits campaigning via foreign media, but was arbitrarily
applied to BBC, CNN and Euronews which were taken off the air whereas
the Russian first channel was aired with a delay and other Russian
channels, such as RTR, RTR24 or TV Center, and Deutsche Welle continued
to be aired live. The ad hoc committee wishes to underline that
such restrictions have no legitimate basis and are not in line with
OSCE commitments or Council of Europe principles.
32. In the aftermath of the ethnic tensions of 2010, the OSCE/ODIHR
long-term observers noted the absence of inter-ethnic relations
among predominant issues of the election campaign, even if some
candidates called for the nation’s unity without specifically addressing
matters pertaining to integration or participation of national minorities.
They attached this to the lack of adequate integration policies
and slow progress in the security situation in areas populated by
national minorities, which, in turn, had created a general sense
of apprehension and isolation among these communities.
6 Election Day
33. On election day, voting in the majority of the country’s
27 000 polling stations was reported to have taken place in a calm
and well-organised atmosphere, an opinion shared by the four teams
observing on behalf of the Assembly. The relatively high voter turnout
(61.28%) indicates that this election was perceived as being relevant
for the country’s future.
34. Although frequent references had been made during the pre-electoral
period to the use of administrative resources, members of the ad
hoc committee did not perceive or hear any allegation of intimidation
or forced participation in the voting process. Nevertheless, the
IEOM reported the presence of unauthorised people in 26% of the
PECs visited, although in 93% of cases they did not interfere with
the work of the commissions.
35. The ad hoc committee welcomed the large number of domestic
political party and NGO observers who were present in the vast majority
of the polling stations observed. It also commends the active participation
of women in the electoral process – as members of the PECs, observers
and voters. For example, 56% of the Chairs of the PECs observed
by the IEOM observers were women. The ad hoc committee encourages
the further engagement of women in the democratic process through
seeking a higher level representation.
36. The ad hoc committee nevertheless observed a number of irregularities
in implementing electoral procedures, which cast doubt on the election
living up to international democratic standards. The teams observing
in Bishkek and its surroundings encountered difficulties with the
already mentioned accuracy of voter lists, which prevented many
citizens from carrying out their electoral duty, and the absence
of systematic application of the inking procedure. The number of
voters per PEC sometimes amounted to 3 000 persons, which led to
overcrowding in these stations at peak hours. The team observing
in Osh and Uzgen noted numerous cases of family voting, problems
with inking and certain culturally sensitive forms of intimidation
of ethnic minority voters, for instance, by playing loud Kyrgyz
music in predominantly Uzbek neighbourhood PECs.
37. The IEOM observers remarked the poor quality of voter lists
across the entire country. Voters who had checked themselves on
voter lists, had previously been on or applied for inclusion were
not found on election day. In at least a few regions, PECs allowed
voters to vote even though they were not on the voter lists. This was
done contrary to the election law and CEC instructions, yet reportedly
with TEC approval. In some cases, the TEC reportedly issued an instruction
stating that voters should be allowed to vote in cases where they
were included in previous versions of lists used during the initial
display period.
38. The members of the ad hoc committee assessed positively the
transparency and efficiency of the vote count in the PECs observed;
however, they were informed that this was not the case everywhere
in the country and that the situation deteriorated during tabulation
in a number of TECs, where the access of international observers
was restricted and procedures with protocols were not respected.
39. As a result of this election, Mr Atambayev obtained 63.24%
of the votes, leaving other contestants far behind (Mr Madumarov
– United Kyrgyzstan – 14.72%; Mr Tashiev – Ata Jurt – 14.32%; Mr
Asanbekov – 0.9%, etc.).
7 Conclusions and recommendations
40. The presidential election in the Kyrgyz Republic
held on 30 October 2011 constituted an important step in the completion
of the transitional period after the 2010 events. The citizens of
the Kyrgyz Republic had the opportunity to choose from among a plurality
of candidates and make informed choices as a result of free broadcast
and print media. The outcome reflects the overall will of the electorate
and the aspiration of the population towards enhanced stability
and consolidation of the democratisation process in the country.
41. The ad hoc committee welcomes the political will of the Kyrgyz
authorities to organise democratic elections. It welcomes the overall
professionalism and dedication of electoral administrators but calls
on the authorities to urgently address the shortcomings mentioned
in this report, in particular as regards bringing election legislation
into line with international standards and improving voters’ registration
and the accuracy of voter lists.
42. The ad hoc committee urges the Kyrgyz authorities to commit
themselves to further reform and building up a truly pluralist democratic
society along the ground lines of the 2010 constitutional reform,
respect for human rights and the rule of law, and the establishment
of functioning democratic institutions. Following this presidential
election, all political actors should do their utmost to consolidate
the achievements so far attained and make the protection of human
rights, the fight against corruption, the implementation of the
rule of law and reconciliation between communities their top priorities.
43. The ad hoc committee invites the Assembly and other relevant
bodies of the Council of Europe to reinforce their co-operation
with the Kyrgyz Republic, within the context of the partnership
for democracy programme as well as in legal co-operation. The Council
of Europe should provide its expertise in the functioning of parliamentary
democracy, the promotion and protection of human rights, the protection
of the rights of national minorities and the standards set forward
in the international legally binding instruments of the Council
of Europe. On the other hand, the Organisation should remain vigilant
as regards the implementation of the progressive laws adopted in
2010 and 2011 and further steps taken in reforming the judiciary
and the police as well as in curbing corruption.
Appendix 1 – Programme
Friday, 28 October
2011
|
10:00 -10-45
|
Ad hoc Committee meeting
Recent
developments in the field of election legislation, Mr Endzins, Member
of the Venice Commission
Practical and logistical
arrangements, Secretariat
|
|
11:00 – 12:00
|
Meeting with Ms Roza
Otunbayeva, President of the Kyrgyz Republic*
|
|
12:00 – 12:15
|
Opening by the Heads
of Parliamentary Delegations
- Ms
Walburga Habsburg Douglas, Head of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly
Delegation and Special Co-ordinator to lead the short-term OSCE
observer mission
- Ms Inese Vaidere, Head of the European Parliament delegation
- Ms Nursuna Memecan, Head of the delegation of the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe
|
|
12:15 – 12:35
|
Political Context
- Ambassador Andrew Tesoriere,
Head of the OSCE Centre in Bishkek
- Ambassador Chantal Hebberecht, Head
of the Delegation of the European Union to the Kyrgyz Republic
|
|
12:35 – 14:00
|
Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR
Election Observation Mission
Introduction
- Ms Corien Jonker, Head of the
OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission
Political
overview, campaign activities and media landscape
- Mr Jarek Domanski, Political
Analyst
- Mr Ivan Godarsky, Media Analyst
- Elections framework, polling procedures and observation
forms
- Ms Meaghan Fitzgerald, Legal Analyst
- Ms Simeon Apostolov, Election Analyst and Mr Steven Martin,
Election Analyst
- Mr Oskar Lehner, Deputy Head of the OSCE/ODIHR Election
Observation Mission and Mr Anders Eriksson, Statistics Expert
Security
- Mr Robin Seaword, Security Expert
Questions
and answers
|
|
14:00 – 14:45
|
Meetings with NGOs
- Ms Ainura Usupbekova, Executive
Director, “Taza Shailoo”
- Mr Abdy Kerim Ashyrov, “Citizens against Corruption” Human
Rights Center
- Ms Dinara Oshurahunova, “Coalition for Democracy and Civil
Society”
|
|
14:45 – 15:30
|
Panel discussion with
media representatives
- Mr Sultan Jamagulov, Director, Radio Azattyk
- Mr Meerim Oroobekova, Head of Secretariat, National Television
and Radio Broadcasting Corporation
- Mr Alexander Tuzov, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Vecherniy
Bishkek
- Mr Vitalij Shestakov, Lawyer, Channel 5
|
|
16:00 – 18:30
|
Meeting with human rights
defenders*
- Ms
Aziza Abdirasulova, NGO Kylym Shamy
- Mr Dmitry Kabak, Open position public fund
- Mr Nurbek Toktokunov, Lawyer and Director of the NGO “Precedent”
- Meeting with Ms Chiara Pallanch, Human rights officer,
Mission of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
in Osh
|
|
19:00
|
Reception organised by
the Turkish Embassy, in presence of ambassadors of all Council of
Europe member states represented in Bishkek and of the Ambassador
of the European Union*
|
Saturday, 29 October
2011
|
10:00 – 11:00
|
Electoral Administration
- Ms Gulnar Djurabaeva, Deputy
Head of the Central Election Commission
- Mr Nurmamat Ashimov, member of the Central Election Commission
- Mr Kanatbek Abdukadyrov, member of the Central Election
Commission
|
|
11:00 – 13:00
|
Meetings with Presidential
Candidates (or proxies)
- Mr Farid Niyazov, representative of Mr Almazbek Atambaev,
candidate
- Mr Kubatbek Baibolov, candidate
- Mr Bekibaj Mamytov, representative of Mr Adakhan Madumarov,
candidate
- Mr Omurbek Suvanaliev, candidate
- Mr Samat Borubaev, representative of Mr Kamchybek Tashiev,
candidate
|
|
13:00 – 13:45
|
Area specific briefing
with long term observers
Meeting and briefing with
interpreters and drivers
|
|
15:00 – 16:00
|
Meeting with Mr Keldibekov,
Speaker of the Supreme Council*
|
| |
Deployment
|
|
16:00 – 17:30
|
Meeting of Heads of Missions
(1+1) in the OSCE/ODIHR office
|
* bilateral meetings organised by the Secretariat of the ad
hoc committee
Sunday, 30 October
2011
|
All day
|
Observation of opening,
voting and vote count
|
|
17:00 – 18:30
|
Debriefing meeting of
Heads of Missions (1+1) in the OSCE/ODIHR office
|
|
22:00 – 23:00
|
Debriefing meeting of
the ad hoc committee
|
Monday, 31 October
2011
|
08:00 – 08:45
|
Joint debriefing for
Delegations
|
|
09:00 – 12:00
|
Meeting of Heads of Missions
(1+1) in the OSCE/ODIHR office
|
|
14:00 – 15:00
|
Press conference
|
|
15:00 – 17:00
|
Parliamentary Round Table
“The election through the eyes of observers” organised by the Kyrgyz delegation
to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly
|
Appendix 2 – Kyrgyzstan’s presidential
election was peaceful, but shortcomings underscore need to improve
integrity of process
PACE, OSCE PA, EP and OSCE
ODIHR today made the following joint statement:
Strasbourg, 31.10.2011 – The presidential election in Kyrgyzstan
was conducted in a peaceful manner, but shortcomings underscored
that the integrity of the electoral process should be improved to
consolidate democratic practice in line with international commitments,
international observers concluded in a statement issued today.
The observers noted that candidate registration was inclusive,
giving voters a wide choice, and the campaign was open and respected
fundamental freedoms. This was overshadowed by significant irregularities
on election day, especially during the counting and tabulation of
votes. Measures should be taken to improve voter lists, to amend
electoral legislation and strengthen the polling process.
“Despite flaws with the voters lists and tabulation processes,
we are cautiously optimistic about the future of democracy in Kyrgyzstan.
Significant work is still needed at all levels for this country
to live up to its commitments to hold democratic elections,” said
Walburga Habsburg Douglas, the Special Co-ordinator to lead the
short-term OSCE observer mission and Head of the OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly delegation.
“We believe that this election is crucial for the future of
the country and its further co-operation with the European Union.
Overall, our delegation positively assessed the voting procedures
on election day but we would like to underline the necessity to
improve the voter registration system to further increase public confidence
in the electoral system,” said Inese Vaidere, the Head of the European
Parliament delegation.
“It was important that the people of the Kyrgyz Republic had
the opportunity to express their choice in a peaceful and orderly
manner. I hope this election will be a step towards breaking the
vicious cycle of corruption, lack of implementation of the rule
of law and ethnic tensions. We call on all political actors to continue
doing their utmost for the stability of the country by protecting
the human rights of all its citizens and respecting democratic standards,”
said Nursuna Memecan (Turkey, ALDE), the Head of the Council of
Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly delegation.
“The election made clear that serious action is needed to
ensure the integrity of voting, counting and tabulation. This is
crucial for consolidating democratic practice. Full transparency
of the Central Election Commission’s work would significantly improve
confidence in elections,” said Corien Jonker, Head of the Election
Observation Mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions
and Human Rights (ODIHR).
Election day proceeded in a calm atmosphere without violence
and observers overall assessed the voting positively. A considerable
number of voters were not on the voter lists and a number of cases
of ballot box stuffing, multiple and family voting, vote buying,
and bussing of voters were noted. The situation deteriorated during
counting and tabulation, with a significant number of polling stations
assessed negatively. In a number of cases, protocols were altered
or completed by higher-level commissions. Many observers were restricted from
following the counts and tabulations.
Campaign advertisements provided voters a wide range of information,
but most broadcast media refrained from independent editorial campaign
coverage, limiting voters’ ability to make an informed choice.
The Central Election Commission’s work was adequate but lacked
transparency as it held closed-door sessions, at times restricted
information, refused to disclose ballot security measures and forbade
the observation of ballot printing on security grounds.
The lack of adequate integration policies and slow progress
in improving the security situation in national minority areas created
a general sense of apprehension and isolation among these communities
and limited their involvement in the campaign.
