IDEE's observers about presidential elections in Azerbaijan

VOTUM SEPARATUM - DISSENTING OPINION

Of the Institute for Democracy in Eastern Europe (IDEE'S)
observers mission from the OSCE/ODHIR Preliminary Report
about the Presidential Elections of October 15, 2003
in the Republic of Azerbaijan

The Institute for Democracy in Eastern Europe (IDEE) was asked by the United States Government to organize an observers' mission for the October 15th presidential elections in Azerbaijan. The mission, put "under the umbrella" of the OSCE/ODHIR, was composed of 188 observers from Austria, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia-Montenegro and Kosovo, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United States.

These observers accounted for about one third of the total of the OSCE/ODHIR mission and among them were elected representatives of all levels, including the parliament; journalists; NGO activists, and among them election observation specialists. On October 15-16 these observers had an opportunity to follow the electoral process in all 124 constituencies in the Republic of Azerbaijan and in close to 1000 precincts.

After familiarizing themselves with the OSCE/ODHIR preliminary report of October 16, 2003, all 188 observers from the Institute for Democracy in Eastern Europe (IDEE) are declaring a votum separatum, a dissenting opinion. The IDEE observers are appealing to the United States Government which made this mission possible; to the European Commission and European Parliament, to governments, and to the media, and to the OSCE itself to hear their testimonies and examine their documentation which were not included in the OSCE/ODHIR preliminary report.

We also call on the international community and the governments of democratic states to undertake strong and immediate measures to stop the political repressions in Azerbaijan, which started even before the electoral process was over.

The observers from Central Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union, from countries which recently won democracy or are struggling toward it are concerned that if the word "elections" is to retain its original meaning, the events of October 15th in Azerbaijan, have to be described by a different term.

Bellow is the summary of the IDEE's mission conclusions.

1. The voters lists did not reflect the reality. Many citizens, present in Azerbaijan on the election day were not on the lists, while many others, living abroad, or sometimes deceased long ago - were on the lists. Crowds of voters, not inscribed on the lists, surrounded the courts since early morning, attempting to restore their voters rights, but only very few succeeded. Many other voters, who did not find their names on the voters lists, did not even went to courts and returned home without being able to fulfill their constitutional right to participate in the elections.

2. Circumstance in polling stations generally prevented the free expression of the will of the citizens. Police officers were closer than the required distance, and sometimes they were even inside the polling stations; inside were also people not having the right to be present there. In many polling stations there was continuous video recording of the voters by people who did not have required accreditations. Local observers often were not able to perform their duties since they were not allowed to see the voting itself, and especially were often prevented from seeing the counting of the ballots; IDEE observers recorded instances of physical violence against the local observers and the members of the electoral commissions with consultative voting rights (most of the time independents or opposition representatives), and throwing them out of the polling stations.

There were also instances when the officially accredited interpreters accompanying international observers were threatened and intimidated. There were also attempts to threaten or bribe the voters, members of the commission, representatives of the candidates, or observers. Most of the reports about the violations made by the observers were ignored by the police as well as by ConEC officials.

3. The election process was marked by planned and goal oriented falsifications. Opening of the polling stations and preparation for voting, as well as closing of polling stations and preparation for counting of votes were systematically accompanied by violations of the procedural laws. There were instances when all the documents related to the election in the polling station were carried out from the room or the building for a long time. Also there are documented facts of voters coming to the polling station with ballots already placed in stamped envelopes with cut-off upper left hand corner and the first candidate for president on the list marked off. Empty stamped ballots with cut off corner were also circulated outside of polling station. In some occasions there was more than one voter in a cabin, more than one ballot issued to one person, ballots issued to people not having the required documents, creating illegal "additional voters lists". In some polling stations seals from voting boxes were damaged or often outright taken off.

4. The actions of the ConEcs were characterized by a number of direct violations of the election code of Republic of Azerbaijan. The results of the election in the polling station were not openly declared or read to all; there was no voting in ConEcs confirming or rejecting the submitted protocols from polling station; the protocols from the polling stations were most of the times submitted to the ConEcs either as "drafts", or filled in in pencil, not pen, or even simply blank - no filled in at all but with the signatures of the members of the commission. The protocols submitted by the polling stations were corrected in the ConEc and some times the protocols from the polling stations were fully completed in the ConEC. Often, the protocols from the polling stations were brought into the ConEcs by people who did not have such right or the protocols were brought without ballots themselves. Very rarely were the protocols - results of the voting in the precincts and constituencies - displayed on time. In many cases the international observers were refused copies of the voting protocols in the precincts and in the ConEcs. The local observers and the representatives of the presidential candidates were refused the protocols as a rule.

International observers only rarely could go inside the room, where the information about the results of the election in the PEC was inserted into the computers and transferred to CEC. All the local observers were deprived of such an opportunity.

***

These and other violations confirmed by IDEE's observers in all 124 constituencies brought the observers to the following conclusions regarding the presidential elections in Azerbaijan on October 15, 2003:

1. The elections were not free, since the freedom of expression of the will of citizens of Azerbaijan was restricted;
2. The elections were not equal since a part of Azerbaijani citizens were deprived of their right to vote;
3. The elections were not just which was proven by observed facts of manipulations and straightforward falsifications;
4. The elections were not transparent, since the legal right to observe the process of voting, of counting and tabulating of votes was violated in most of the observed instances.

The elections - as such - were conducted with major violations of the laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan, without mentioning gross violations of international standards.

In this situation, since none of the criteria applied to the evaluation of an electoral process were met, the observers of IDEE's mission concluded that the presidential elections of October 15, 2003 in the Republic of Azerbaijan cannot be qualified as what in the practice of civilized nations is called "elections".

Baku, October 18, 2003

For more information contact:
irena@idee.org
in Azerbaijan, tel: 994-50-631-1826