28 March 2024, Thursday, 11:57
Support
the website
Sim Sim,
Charter 97!
Categories

Five Key Preliminary Conclusions Of International Observers On ‘Elections’ In Belarus

Five Key Preliminary Conclusions Of International Observers On ‘Elections’ In Belarus

What did the observers pay attention to?

After the “elections” on November 18, international observers of the OSCE ODIHR, OSCE PA, PACE, made preliminary conclusions on the parliamentary “elections” in Belarus during a press-conference. What are these conclusions? The “Viasna” HRC writes about this.

1) Do not meet democratic standards

Thus, observers from the OSCE / ODIHR, the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe said that despite the calm atmosphere of the “elections”, they do not meet important standards for democratic elections.

International observers noted a general disrespect for fundamental freedoms of assembly, association, and expression. The legal framework within which the voting took place provided insufficient guarantees for the conduct of elections in accordance with international standards.

“These elections have demonstrated an overall lack of respect for democratic commitments,” said Margareta Cederfelt, Special Coordinator and leader of the OSCE short-term observer mission. “In a country in which the power and independence of parliament is limited and fundamental freedoms are restricted for both voters and candidates, parliamentary elections are in danger of becoming a formality.”

2) Non-transparent electoral process

According to the CEC, about 6.8 million voters were registered to vote, but voter lists are not publicly available, which leads to a complete lack of transparency.

Head of the PACE delegation Lord Blencathra noted that Belarus does not have a central voter register. In the context of transparency, he also drew attention to ballot boxes:

“At the vast majority of polling stations, there were non-transparent ballot boxes, like the election process itself.”

In addition, he noted the inadequate quality of the seal on the ballot boxes, which could be easily opened.

The results related to the non-transparency of “elections” reported by international observers were influenced by the restriction of observer access to some key elements of the electoral process (for example, counting and checking votes), which contradicts the OSCE commitments and international standards.

3) Non-competent “elections”

Despite the fact that a large number of candidates took part in the “elections”, the excessively restrictive registration process complicated the participation of the opposition. According to the international observers, a limited number of campaigning events were conducted under oppressed conditions, which generally did not provide a full and competitive political struggle. Margareta Cederfelt, special coordinator and leader of the OSCE short-term observer group, noted that “a competitive environment for the elections was not created in Belarus.”

Ditmir Bushati, head of the OSCE PA delegation, added that the results of the non-competitive “elections” were made on the basis of opposition protests and the absence of opposition representatives in the election commissions at all levels. “This undermines trust to these elections,” the international observers noted.

International observers generally noted an unbalanced composition of election commissions.

Human rights activists once again came to the conclusion that the parliamentary “elections” were held with gross violations of the Belarusian law and the international standards.

4) Lack of media pluralism

As noted at the press-conference, a significant number of state-subsidized media outlets limits the space for independent media, reducing overall media pluralism. Few media outlets cover political issues, leaving voters uninformed about candidates and the campaign. Despite constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression and a prohibition of censorship, defamation remains criminalized and has been used to intimidate journalists.

“The high proportion of state-affiliated media outlets, as well as the pressure on independent media, bloggers and other independent commentators, have a chilling effect on freedom of expression,” said Corien Jonker, Head of ODIHR’s election observation mission. “It is hardly surprising that many independent journalists feel they have to practise self-censorship in order to avoid potential retribution.”

5) Previous recommendations of international observers have been ignored

At the press-conference, it was emphasized that international observers were very disappointed that Belarus ignored their recommendations given after the parliamentary “elections” in 2016. “Thus, depriving their citizens, voters, and candidates of the possibility of full participation in the democratic process,” - emphasized the head of the PACE delegation, Lord Blencathra.

In general, the legislative framework does not contain sufficient guarantees for the conduct of elections in accordance with OSCE commitments and other international standards and agreements, which necessitates a large-scale and comprehensive reform. Limited efforts to revise election laws after previous “elections” have not been realized. A number of key recommendations of the ODIHR and the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe remained unfulfilled, including those regarding the unbalanced composition of election commissions, restrictions fn the rights of voters and candidates, insufficient protective mechanisms for voting and vote counting, and restrictions on the rights of observers.

The full text of the preliminary findings of the mission of international observers can be found HERE. A full report on the findings and conclusions of the international mission to monitor the parliamentary “elections” in Belarus will be presented in January 2020.

Write your comment

Follow Charter97.org social media accounts