|
Last Updated: Dec 29, 2011 - 2:18:31 AM |
OAS-CARICOM Joint Electoral Observation Mission on the Presidential and Legislative Elections of 28 November 2010
By OAS/CARICOM
Nov 29, 2010 - 8:36:00 PM
|
Email this article
Printer friendly page
|
 Introduction
Present
in Haiti since August 2010, the OAS-CARICOM Joint Election Observation
Mission was able to monitor the administrative, technical and logistical
preparations for both the postponed legislative elections and the
presidential elections. In view of the fact that the legislative
elections should have been held on 28 February 2010, but were postponed
following the devastating earthquake of 12 January, the JEOM was not
present for the political dimension of the legislative elections, the
registration of political parties and the submission and validation of
candidates. The Mission however notes that an important facet of this
phase which would have an impact on the political dimension of the
remainder of the electoral process was the non-validation of a number of
political parties.
In the course of its monitoring activities,
the JEOM made a number of observations, comments and recommendations to
the Provisional Electoral Council as well as the political parties,
which it believed could have been of assistance in bringing about free
and fair elections.
The Last Preparatory and Election Campaign Phases
Despite
the doubts cast by some commentators on the electoral register and the
manner on which it was prepared, the JEOM is of the view that its
preparation was in keeping with the respective legal responsibilities of
the ONI and CEP. The late submission of the last batch of names by the
ONI was unhelpful, but was no doubt due to the late surge of persons
wishing to register in September, a mere two weeks before the
transmission of the ONI data base to the CEP.
The very late
launching of the “Where to Vote” campaign and the saturation of the call
centres put in place by the CEP and, later, the Private Sector Forum,
did not fully offset the negative repercussions of the delayed campaign.
This would have a grave effect on the ability of voters to find their
polling stations on Election Day and create an atmosphere of intense
frustration and tension. The Mission believes that at the same time
citizens have the responsibility to make an effort in advance of
Election Day to identify their Polling Stations.
Despite the
swift rise in election-related acts of violence and civil unrest in the
last days of the campaign as pre-Election Day tensions rose and several
earlier scuffles and grave incidents, the election campaign was to quite
an extent well conducted and to the credit of the political parties and
the citizenry. The public rallies, candidate posters, radio and
television debates, the efforts of the media to inform the public on the
candidates and their programmes, as well as the polling, helped to
instill some excitement in the campaign despite the dampening impact of
the ravages of the cholera epidemic.
The JEOM noted and commented
publicly on the enormous disparity in resources enjoyed by the ruling
party and its competitors. It also noted that a number of presidential
candidates appeared to have stopped campaigning with one conceding
publicly that he had withdrawn.
The last days of the election
campaign were accompanied by rumours as well as allegations by leading
presidential candidates of preparations for massive fraud. Senior
officials of the CEP appeared to be swept up in this toxic atmosphere
and unhelpfully added their voices to these unsubstantiated claims.
Election Day Safeguards
Drawing
the lessons from previous election experiences, including the partial
legislative elections of 2009, a number of safeguards were built into
the voting and vote count procedures:
- photographs accompanied
the names of the voters on the polling station registers. However, the
identity card numbers were left off in order to prevent the known
practice of poll workers signing for absent voters and stuffing ballots;
- the ballots and proces-verbaux contained security features to deter counterfeiting;
- the tally sheet procedures also included deterrent elements to prevent the changing of the results;
- the provision of tamper-proof transparent envelopes for the tally sheets and other sensitive voting material.
Election Day
Election Day was marred by a number of irregularities:
- late opening of Polling Stations
- inability of many voters to find the correct Voting Centre and/or Polling Station;
- inability of voters to find their names on the electoral registers posted up outside the Polling Stations;
- saturation of the call centres overwhelmed by callers seeking where to vote;
-
instances of incorrect application of voting procedures ( the signing
of the ballots by BV Presidents before the arrival of the voter);
-
instances of voter manipulation – repeat voting of some voters
facilitated by complicit poll workers and unidentified party agents;
-
the lack of control of already limited voting space by the poll workers
, as well as the indiscipline of many mandataires, led to clogged
polling stations where control of the process became tenuous and
facilitated misconduct.
The observation reports transmitted by
the JEOM observer teams indicate that the voting process unfolded far
more smoothly in most of the provinces than in Port-of-Prince, though
the above irregularities were also observed.
There were also
deliberate acts of violence and intimidation to derail the electoral
process both in Port-au-Prince and the provinces.
More subversive
of the process was the toxic atmosphere created by the allegations of
“massive fraud”. The JEOM observed instances where even before the
voting started, any inconvenience or small problem led to the immediate
cry of fraud. Such conduct continued during the day.
The presence
of 66 parties meant that there would be a large number of party agents
(“mandataires”) deployed. Foreseeing the problems that this would cause,
the CEP had indicated that no more than five party agents would be
allowed into the Polling Station at any one time. Rotation of party
agents would therefore be necessary. However, all would be permitted to
monitor the vote count. The JEOM observed the problems that this
arrangement caused with many party agents claiming that their party
agents were being denied entry. The JEOM teams followed up in several
parts of the country the complaints made to it by party representatives
on this problem and found that in general the complaints were not
founded. This became another reason to cry fraud.
The electoral
process continued until the very end in all the Departments despite the
destruction of Polling Stations in a number of locations, discontinued
polling in some polling stations because of rising but localized
insecurity, and limited incidents of serious violence. According to
information provided by MINUSTAH, the total number of Polling Stations
destroyed did not exceed 4% in the entire country.
Recommendations to the CEP
Immediately
struck by the deficit of credibility of the CEP and the lack of
confidence it enjoyed on the part of the political parties, a perception
which was repeatedly reinforced by both the political parties in their
declarations and the media in their reporting, the JEOM suggested the
following which it transmitted to the CEP as well as to the wider public
through its press reports and releases:
- the CEP needed to be
more open and communicative vis-à-vis the political parties and the
wider public on its decisions and proposals in order to achieve greater
transparency. To its credit, the CEP did take several steps in this
direction. It held three meetings with the political parties, thereby
providing a space for frank dialogue with the political parties and
civil society, an essential ingredient in any electoral process. It also
made its judicial services available to the non-validated presidential
candidates. Despite the increase in suspicion towards the CEP following
the controversial decision it took on the discharge for presidential
candidates early in the presidential elections process, the CEP was
successful in restoring some of its lost credibility. However, these
gains were dissipated in the last two weeks of the pre-election period
by the controversies and disruption that surrounded the recruitment of
the electoral supervisors, and the knock-on effect on the designation of
the poll workers, the persons designated by the political parties;
-
the CEP should be more communicative. Regrettably, its communication
strategy never fully lived up to expectations and was further weakened
by the late launching of its most important public-related initiatives
such as the voter sensitization, the public information and the “Where
to Vote” campaigns. The latter would have a critical negative impact on
the ability of voters to find their polling stations on Election Day;
-
the importance of the training of supervisors and poll workers. Aware
of the weaknesses that marred the handling of the tally-sheets and the
packaging of the sensitive voter material, the JEOM underlined the
critical importance of these aspects of the training. Regrettably, the
effectiveness of the training was marred by the disruption and protests
caused by the controversies referred to above. This no doubt played a
role in the weaknesses observed in their work on Election Day.
The mission believes that these recommendations remain valid.
Recommendations to the Political Parties
-
the importance of the training of the party agents so they would become
the effective protectors of the interests of the parties;
- the
importance of their vigilance, combined with that of national and
international observers, in preventing fraud on Election Day;
-
the importance of insisting on the integrity and neutrality of the
persons they would designate as mandataires and poll workers. The
actions of a small number of these poll workers on Election Day were
contrary to this recommendation.
Conclusions
The
JEOM has considered whether the irregularities it observed were of the
magnitude and consistency that would invalidate the legitimacy of the
process. Based on its observations in the eleven electoral departments,
the Joint Mission does not believe that these irregularities, serious as
they were, necessarily invalidated the process.
Despite the
disruptions of the polling and vote count process in several locations
and the withdrawal decision made by twelve presidential candidates, the
legislative and presidential elections continued until the end of the
voting and vote count.
The decision of the twelve presidential
candidates to call for the cancellation of the elections a few hours
after the start of the process was precipitate and regrettable.
Moreover, these candidates should have been minded of Article 226 of the
Electoral Law which establishes that “the interruption of the vote for
whatever the cause and wherever cannot be considered a reason to cancel
the elections”.
These candidates could also have had recourse to
the legal remedies available to them by the Electoral Law. Their
allegations of “massive fraud” would have been ascertained by the vote
count as well as by their substantiation of their claims. The Mission
requests that the parties make available this evidence to the CEP within
the legally stipulated claims process which is established to ensure
the transparency and fairness of the process. Article 178 of the
Electoral Law gives a candidate or his or her representative the
authority, within 72 hours of the posting of the results, to challenge
the election of another candidate if the vote count or the tally sheet
were improperly carried out and contrary to the law; and if electoral
fraud had taken place.
The Mission will continue to observe the electoral process starting with the operations of the Tabulation Centre today.
In
concluding, the JEOM reiterates its call to all the political actors
for peace and calm in the coming days and calls on them to display
leadership by ensuring that their supporters do the same.
For more information, please visit the OAS Website at www.oas.org.
© Copyright 2010 by thebahamasweekly.com
Top of Page
|
