Hailed initially as ‘more successful’ and ‘less
violent’, the October 25 elections were no less controversial than the August,
9th legislative elections as the disparity between national and
international observers’ reports demonstrates.
Following the CEP’s announcement of preliminary results on November 6, many took to the streets in Port-au-Prince in outrage and
disbelief. Haitian civil society
organizations have been quick to identify the many failings of the electoral
process such as ballot stuffing. JILAP, the Episcopal Commission
for Justice and Peace, also provided a negative assessment of the day.
In
contrast, the response from the international community has been less
condemnatory and more reserved with few, if any, definite pronouncements on the
Sunday elections. The emphasis is on ‘wait and see’ attitude, easily
discernible in preliminary post-election reports. They over-emphasize the level
of progress since August elections and refuse to draw clear conclusions even
from their own observations of the many irregularities observed on October, 25.
OAS’s
preliminary observations, released a day after the
elections, note a higher level of attendance and recognize Haitian authorities’
efforts to increase security on the day.
At the same time, OAS notes that many voting stations were overcrowded
and that ‘the measures taken to guarantee the secrecy of the vote were not
always sufficient.’
The EU’s
preliminary report, issued on October 27, also
recognizes the ‘relative calm’ and drop in violent incidents during the elections day in
comparison to August 9th. The more detailed report notes some
administrative improvements on the part of the CEP deploring, at the same time,
the lack of legal punishment for those behind violence during the August vote.
The report acknowledges the use of decharge
as a targeted political tool,
partiality of media during the lead-up campaign and, most importantly, points
out the lack of unanimity in the process of counting the votes. The Mission
also remarks that the attendance remained very low and that female representation in the elections does not meet
the constitutional requirements.
The list
of general observations made by CARICOM on the same day
opens with a more definite evaluation: ‘Too many anomalies pertaining to voting
norms exist.’ The document goes on to list these irregularities such as varying
methodologies in the poll practices and inadequate physical space in the
polling station. Towards the end, the report reveals that ‘the methodology of
processing the Tally Sheets (not the content of the Tally Sheets) was shared
with political parties and other important stakeholders’, undermining the
transparency of the whole electoral process.
The UN
and the Core Group praise the Haitian voters for
‘demonstrating their willingness to exercise their constitutional right to
vote’ and ‘their desire for stability and democracy.’ Yet even among these
words of general praise, the statement recognizes the irregularities and
violent disruptions on the day, urging ‘the national authorities to investigate
these incidents without delay and in an impartial manner.’
As these
preliminary reports reveal, the international community is hesitant to provide
a definite stance on October, 25th elections. Most underline the
sense of advancement and progress since legislative elections earlier this
year. Yet by making such easy comparisons between the legislative and the
presidential elections, the international community validates the August
elections as an uncontroversial point of departure and a fair measure of Haiti’s
democracy. Finally, taken together, these reports revel that each step of the
electoral process (i.e. campaigning, opening of the voting centers, voting and
the vote count) was marred by serious irregularities which effectively
undermine the elections as a whole—a conclusion these reports are afraid to
draw.
No comments:
Post a Comment