Human rights activists: “Amendments to Electoral Code are prepared behind closed doors”
- 30.11.2009, 16:31
Belarusian human rights activists say the main problems of the electoral legislation haven’t been solved, making it impossible to talk about holding free elections in the country.
On November 30, the “house of representatives” adopted in the second reading the draft law on amendments to certain laws of the Republic of Belarus on holding elections and referendums and on annulment of the Law on the Central Commission of the republic on Belarus on Elections and National Referendums.
Belarusian human rights activists say not much is known about the planned changes in the Electoral Code, as the draft law itself was considered behind closed doors, but the changes that already known do not arouse much optimism.
“These amendments were worked out behind closed doors, the public and all subjects interested – NGOs and opposition political parties –had no access to this process. The only thing we knew is that the Belarusian authorities had consultations with OSCE/ODIHR over that matter. I make these conclusions based on statements of officials. As far as we know, the talks were held this spring, after that nothing has been discussed with Europe. So, we do not know what has been worked out and who made proposals. The democratic community didn’t saw the draft law offered to the house of representatives,” lawyer of Viasna human rights center Valyantsin Stefanovich told in an interview to charter97.org.
The human rights activist analyzed each amendment to the Electoral Code:
“I can judge these amendments basing on the words by head of the Central Election Commission Yarmoshyna and Lukashenka. I know that it was proposed to amend the article regarding funds of candidates and allow them to use the money from budget and from own sources. Firstly, the volume of resources is limited. Secondly, who it will work, if anonymous sponsorship is forbidden in our country, and foreign aid is banned as well. Are there any people who won’t scare to render financial aid to opposition candidates, won’t scare sanctions of regulatory agencies? This amendment will legalize the administrative resources, pro-governmental candidates will be financed in an open way.
Then, meeting with the electorate won’t be controlled by the law on mass street events. But this practice was in force until recently. The Electoral Code says meetings with the electorate are allowed in any comfortable form. But the CEC said such meetings must be held in accordance with the Law on Mass Events. We said in response that the CEC had no right to give such a wide interpretation of the Electoral Code. These amendments offer nothing new – it is just returning to the previous position.
Besides, it had been planned that in the end of each day of early voting lists of those who has voted would be posted. But it is not clear how it would influence the early voting itself, which arouses much criticism. We have always stated that early voting should be refused outright, as it is held under duress, the number of persons who take part in early voting is huge, and rigging election results takes place.
It has been also planned that the commission would issue observers a copy with the results of the vote signed by members of commission and a seal. Very often it happens so that members of the commission make many mistakes: sometimes they have extra voting ballots, sometimes they do not enough ballots. There would be control to some extend, but o the other hand, if forming of the commission would be held according to the previous method, to check the figures in the copy given by the commission would be impossible, if observers are to be kept away from the vote count.
And the most important change is that when forming election commissions, one third should make representatives of public associations and political parties. It is the most interesting fact. It is hard to say how it would work, considering a great number of pro-regime public associations, that are always included to commissions, as the practice shows.
The most distressing situation concerns observers. The latest statement by Yarmoshyna is that everything remains without changes. Everybody knows how it happened before: the commission defines where an observer should sit. In practice an observer is placed far, he cannot see anything, and all attempts to come closer to the table finish in his expulsion from the polling station. It neutralizes all the changes. If the process would be non-transparent for observers, what kind of elections are we discussing?
So there are no causes for optimism, as the main problems are not solved, and they are: the early vote problem, vote count problem, observers’ rights. I fear that we won’t see anything revolutionary,” Valyantsin Stefanovich said.