PACE monitoring mission evaluation non-biased? Opinion
Evaluation of parliamentary election in Russia presented by leaders of PACE monitoring mission is politically biased, OSCE mission representative, member of Council of the Republican Party of Armenia Armen Ashotyan said in an interview to REGNUM. Mr. Ashotyan said he would prefer if election in Russia was evaluated as an independent act, outside the context of the controversy between Russia and the Council of Europe and OSCE, the deputy observed. He added that the controversy prevented the European officials to issue a more objective judgment.
“Despite the judgment disseminated by the PACE monitoring mission office, the parliamentary election in Russia, to my mind, was held in accordance with the Russian legislation, the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and international recommendations. Although the secretariat’s evaluation was not accepted unanimously and some allegations caused argument and dissent not only on my behalf, but also among parliamentarians from Greece, Finland, and Italy, our opinions was not taken into account,” accounts Armen Ashotyan. He says that monitoring at the polling stations did not reveal serious violations of the electoral process.
“Some statements of the evaluation are surprising: the short-term monitoring PACE mission could not allow such a deep analysis,” the Armenian deputy argues. Mr. Ashotyan also regrets that observations and suggestions of some deputies were not taken into account by the PACE mission leaders, and that the statement issued by the mission leadership did not reflect all opinions of the mission members.
On Dec 3, OSCE and PACE observers at the vote to the State Duma of the 5th convocation announced their assessment of the election process. PACE chairman Göran Lennmarker declared that the vote could not meet common European electoral criteria, hence the OSCE observation mission could not call it fair. PACE observation mission head Luc Van den Brande uttered that the election to the State Duma of the 5th convocation did not meet criteria “adopted in European democratic community.”
OSCE and CoE, as well as parliamentary assemblies of the organizations, perform monitoring of elections in the post-Soviet countries from the moment of these countries’ joining the Council of Europe. They have issued roughly positive evaluations of elections in Ukraine in 2006 and 2007, pointing mostly to the fact that the elections had been held largely in accord with the OSCE and CE requirements, as well as with Ukraine’s obligations with these organizations. The bureaucracies also generally did not mind too much parliamentary vote in Armenia in 2007.
Quite contrary was the mood of the European machines in 2003. OSCE and CE severely criticized parliamentary election in Armenia that year. The same year’s election in Georgia was appraised with even harsher rhetoric.
PACE representatives claimed that they were shocked by the amount of violations. Head of the PACE delegation lamented that the people of Georgia deserved a much better election, and the OSCE echoed the thesis. Straight after the accusations Mikhail Saakashvili led the people to the assault of the parliament.
The European observers also frowned over parliamentary election in Azerbaijan in 2005 where, they claimed, international norms were grossly violated. Among violations listed by OSCE were: restrictions of the freedom of meetings, confusions in voters’ registration, and breaches in votes’ count. Failing to meet international requirements was also announced parliamentary vote in Kazakhstan in 2007.
23:07 12/03/2007
COMMENT ON THIS NEWS ! (please, do not use "http://")
