DRAFT ONLY:  NOT FOR CIRCULATION

 

Fund for Reconciliation and Development

355 West 39th Street (ground floor), New York, NY 10018

(212) 760-9903    fax (212) 760-9906   director@ffrd.org   www.ffrd.org

 

 

International Volunteer Observers

Final Field Report (#5)Field Report #65                                                                                           July 31August 2, 2003

 

 

Cambodia Elections: A Preliminary Assessment Final Report

 

Final figures will not be available for several days, but it is provisionally estimated that the Cambodian People’s Party has won some 73 731 National Assembly seats (out of 123) in the July 27 elections.  The royalist Front Uni pour un Cambodge Indépendant, Neutre, Paisible et Coopératif (FUNCINPEC) is likely to receive 26 and the opposition Sam Rainsy Party are likely to receive 26 and 24 seats respectivelyeach24, a spectacular advance for the SRP (up 9911) and a continuation of FUNCINPEC’s ignominious slide (down 17) since 1998.  Cambodia has a proportional representation system, in which seats are determined by the percentage of votes parties receive in each province.  The National Assembly elections are therefore not a national election per se, but a set of simultaneous elections in each of the provinces and the special areas of Phnom Penh, Kep, Pailin and Sihanoukville.

 

The International Volunteer Observers (IVO), deployed by the Fund for Reconciliation and Development  (FRD) in 12 provinces -- (including Phnom Penh --) for the National Assembly Elections and the counting process that followed, concluded that the elections were conducted in a highly satisfactory waymanner.  This is reflected in the IVO Statement, issued as a Press Release on July 29[1].  We are encouraged especially by a comment by the spokesperson of the European Union mission who said that these were “the most democratic elections in [Cambodia’s] history”. 

 

The Setting:

 

Cambodia, by general consensus, is not yet a fully functioning democracy.  National and local elections, however well-run, are not the determining factor in defining a democratic society under the rule of law.  The purpose of sending national and international observers to oversee elections in a developing pluralist society is mainly to establish whether the election process, including the campaign, the conduct of the polling process and a tally of votes won by each party, has been impartial and transparent. 

 

This does not imply that international observers should ignore the political environment in which the elections took place.  There is no doubt that instances of vote buying and intimidation preceded the July 27 elections, starting weeks or months before the campaign.  The local election monitoring NGO coalition COMFREL has credibly reported some 31 deaths, probably politically motivated, in the eight months before the elections, but it was pointed out that 11 of the alleged victims were members of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party, and that 9 others were from its coalition partner FUNCINPEC. 

 

Voting “incentives”, moreover, were a common device used by all three major parties.  In rural areas, where the power and influence of local authorities such as village chiefs and commune officials are acknowledged, it is quite likely that people were more inclined to support the CPP.  For 25 years, especially in remote regions, the distinction between government and party has been blurred.  As development expands beyond the urban areas and main highways, it is to be expected that the situation will change, especially now that there is a more pluralistic system in place for local elections. 

 

The campaign of 2003, which ran for one month from late June, was evidently more issue-oriented than any in recent history.  While the personalities of the main political leaders were still a major factor, all made clear undertakings with regard to economic development, corruption and, in the case of the oppositionFUNCINPEC and the Sam Rainsy Party, immigration , -- the latter being a code word for “illegal” Vietnamese migrants, a popular theme given the decade-long occupation of Cambodia by its neighbour in the 1980s. 

 

 

Observing the Elections

 

The head of the International Volunteer Observers (IVO), former Canadian Ambassador Gordon Longmuir, arrived in countryon July 11, followed by FRDthe Deputy Director of FRD, Susan Hammond.  Together they had meetings with a wide variety of personalities, including the Chairman of the National Election Committee, Prime Minister Samdech Hun Sen, senior party officials of all three major parties, the Canadian and United States Ambassadors, other senior diplomats and foreign experts and heads of key NGOs, both national and international, involved in the election process.  The mood was generally optimistic, with only some local NGOs, SRP and  and FUNCINPEC officials predicting serious problems associated with apprehended allegations ofapprehended violence and intimidation.  Human rRights organizations were concerned that there would be attempts by local authorities to manipulate voters, especially in rural areas.  A request to meet the king was politely declined on the grounds that he could not meet all the international observer groups.  Similar requests to meet Prince Ranariddh and opposition leader Sam Rainsy received no response in spite of several follow-ups; we have sent them our findings. 

 

Unlike the situation in 1998, there was little evidence of intervention by military or even police authorities, who kept a low profile throughout the campaign and the weekend of the elections themselves.  A major concern had been that the ruling CPP would dominate the media, especially radio and TV, which are the major sources of news for illiterate rural peopleCambodians.  Doubtless, the government continued to control coverage not directly related to the elections.  The NEC, however, with assistance from the UN, orchestrated a series of 15-minute news broadcasts each day of with equal time for the major parties.  TVK, the state TV network, broadcast debates and other events that equitably laid out the party platforms -- with the approval of the Prime Minister.  This was a major improvement on 1998, although paid political announcements were not permitted by any private network, clearly under pressure from the government.  Progress in this area will be slow, but TVK has indicated that it may continue to cover more open political debate even after the elections.  The Voice of American (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA ) reportedly carried more balanced news of all party campaigns than in 1998.

 

In During the two or three days immediately precedingweek before voting day, the 34 additional IVO members arrived; all but a half dozen had previous experience in Cambodia; some had observed the elections of 1998.  After an in-house orientation and a training session generously provided by tThe Asia Foundation, the observers were deployed to eleven provinces and the capital area:  two in Phnom Penh, four in Battambang, four in Kampot, four in Kandal, two in Kratie, four in Kampong Cham, four in Prey Veng, two in Preah Vihear, two in Kampong Chhang, two in Kampong Speu, two in Siem Reap, and four in Takeo.[2]  Armed with Polling Station Observation Forms, Vote-count Reports and other guidance manuals provided by the Asia Foundation, all observers had a consistent set of questions to address concerning the conduct of the elections.  These forms are available on line at www.CambodiaVote.info or, in Khmer, at www.BohChnout.info .  Observers were provided also with background material including a fact sheet from Tthe Asia Foundation, a political-economic assessment, maps, and, most important, contact information for the Long- Term Advisers Observers -- LTOs (two or three in each province, assigned funded either by tThe US-funded Asia Foundation or by the European Union) in their provinces..  These LTOs were most helpful in arranging local accommodation, transportation and interpreters in rural areas.

 

The findings of the Observers are briefly described in the Statement of July 29.  The observers were enthusiastic about their experience.  Their original documents will be kept at FRD headquarters in New York and are available on request to the National Election Committee and Cambodian political parties, provided individual observers have no objection to their release.  It should be emphasized that these are not official documents and have no legal status in the Kingdom of Cambodia -- they reflect the personal views of the independent observers.

 

A Ggenerally feeling was that theThe administration of most polling and counting stations wereas feltgenerally considered to be meticulous, sometimes to a fault, and some wondered if the system could not be streamlined to make it faster.  Others thought that the very deliberateness of the process gave voters more confidence in its honesty.  It was agreed that we should congratulate the authorities in including such a large number of women in the electoral process.

 

Most observers viewed the electioncommented that their experience was positive, although some irregularities were observed, most of them minor.  Among the most frequent comments was that the village chief or commune officials were present in the vicinity of the station, which may have been intimidating.  There also seemed to be an unusually high number of persons who were not on the voters’ list.  In some areas, uniformed officers came to vote; this was noted but not contested by party agents.  There were instances of handicapped persons not being able to enter polling stations.  Several observers noted that the ballots, printed for the first time in Cambodia, stuck together where the NEC serial number had been embossed, thus causing the ballots to rip.  Crowd control was poor in some areas.  At a number of locations, there were party signs (of all parties) within 200m of the polling stations.  And a few persons did complain of incidents of intimidation prior to July 27.  One “death threat” was heard (“if you come back, we will shoot you”) this to an observer’s driver/interpreter, but it evidently was not election-related.

 

The most problematical issue involved the cConfusion around the registration process, and this may partially explain why there was a lower voter turnout was lower this year than in 2003 1998 (although it is dangerous disingenuous to make too much of the fact that “only” 83 per cent voted -- this was still a high turnout by world standards).  Persons who swear they registered correctly and had proper ID were not on the list.  This Their omission did not necessarily correlate with their political allianceaffiliation, so we can perhaps conclude that it may be a structural issue, but one that must be addressed before the next elections, probably for the Senate in 2005. 

 

The most serious irregularity noted by a number of observers, including from the International Republican Institute (IRI) and some from the US Embassy, had to do with the status of Cambodian citizens of Vietnamese origin.  While none of our observers was involved in this issue, it is important to take note of it in this report.  An incident occurred in Kandal on July 27 wherein roughly 100 ethnic Vietnamese, whose names were on the voter list, were prevented from voting by a group of young activists.  Riot police were reportedly called out and they were subsequently allowed to vote.  When news of this kind circulates, it is likely that many ethnic Vietnamese would simply stay home on election day. 

 

In fairness, we observed stations in northern Phnom Penh where there is a significant Vietnamese community and saw no problems.  Moreover, some of our observers in border areas of Prey Veng province saw no evidence of Vietnamese crossing into Cambodia to vote, as FUNCINPEC and SRP politicians had alleged.  Inflammatory racist rhetoric specifically aimed at the Vietnamese is a problem that will have to be examined in the period between elections.  It will be recalled that a number of ethnic Vietnamese were beaten to death during the demonstrations that took place following the 1998 elections. 

 

 

 

On their return to Phnom Penh, most of the IVOs attended a debriefing presided over by Gordon Longmuir, where the text of the Press Release of July 29 was discussed, some amendments suggested, and approved for publication.  That was an excellent opportunity for observers to explain or augment the comments in their individual observation forms. A general feeling was that the administration of most polling and counting stations were meticulous, sometimes to a fault, and some wondered if the system could not be streamlined to make it faster.  Others thought that the very deliberateness of the process gave voters more confidence in its honesty.  It was agreed that we should congratulate the authorities in including such a large number of women in the electoral process.

 

The observers were enthusiastic about their experience.  Their original documents will be kept at FRD headquarters in New York and are available on request to the National Election Committee and Cambodian political parties, provided individual observers have no objection to their release.  It should be emphasized that these are not official documents and have no legal status in the Kingdom of Cambodia -- they reflect the personal views of the independent observers.

 

The personal commentaries of the observers were invaluable in the preparation of our public statement and in handling subsequent interviews.  Gordon Longmuir spoke on the record to VOA (Gary Thomas), the Economist (Tom Fawthrop), Radio Free Asia (Sam Borin) and the Cambodia Daily (Michelle Vachon).  He also met Seth Mydans of the New York Times, who had unfortunately already filed his story.  Mydans left early to cover the mutiny in Manila and told us later that the Philippines at that moment made Cambodia look like a developed democracy.

 

 

During the period since the election, there have been a number of press conferences and information sessions; we attended two “seminars” hosted by the Canadian Ambassador, the first to compare preliminary conclusions the day following the vote count, the second, on July 31 to look at the longer period surrounding the elections and to “lessons learned” for next time.  The larger oObserver teams, i.e., COMFREL, ANFREL, the EU, la Francophonie and the International Republican Institute (IRI) held press briefings.  Their documents have been widely circulated.  Most took a positive view of the elections., and  

 

Ooral debriefings from the Australian, New Zealand, Canadian, US, Swedish and Japanese Embassies and the National Democratic Institute indicated a uniform opinion that the 2003 election process was greatly improved over 1998.  Other groups observing the elections were from the French Embassy, NICFEC (a Cambodian NGO consortium including some foreign observers), and Human Rights Watch.  The Japanese Ambassador held a post-election reception for selected observer missions, and the mood, even among critical Cambodian NGOs, was upbeat.

 

IRIs preliminary report, while critical, was somewhat more balanced than in 1998, but still proceeded from a preconceived premise that the elections had failed to meet international standards.   Christie Todd Whitman, who led the observer mission, was cautious in drawing overly broad conclusions, and a detailed evaluation will be published only in September.  When one reporter raised the issue of IRIs clearly perceived failure of impartiality in favoring and financing the SRP, IRI President George Folson responded that the organization had, in fact, trained all political parties in Cambodia over a ten year period -- which was factual but glossed over the fact that IRI had done no training for CPP or FUNCINPEC since the 1997 factional fighting.   The Asia Foundation confirmed in post-election observer meetings that IRI did offer its polling manual to all party agents.

IRI’s report, while critical, was more balanced than in 1998, but proceeded from the accepted premise that the elections had “failed to meet international standards.”.  Governor Christine Todd Whitman, who led the observer mission, seemed cautious in drawing overly- broad conclusionssomewhat embarrassed by the whole thing.  When one reporter We presume the detailed report promised for September will signal a return to more muscular rhetoric.  In the question period, the Guardian correspondent raised the issue of IRI’s perceived lack of impartiality in favoring and financing (i.e., the perception among Cambodians that it favoured and financed the SRP, ) and was told that IRI President George Folsomn responded that the organization had, in fact, trained “all political parties” in Cambodia over a ten year period.  This is no doubt the case, but aside from its offerIt is a fact that IRI had offered training to train  to all party agents for this election, we understand that it has done no training for CPP or FUNCINPEC since 1997.  M -- many observers commented that some party agents carried notebooks with the large letters “IRI” on the covers.   However, theThe Asia Foundation notedconfirmed in post -election observer meetings that IRI gave out these notebooksdid give them to all party agents. In his interview with VOA immediately following the IRI briefing, Gordon Longmuir commented that he thought the elections “exceeded” international standards in many ways; that was echoed in a later statement from the mission of la Francophonie. 

 

The EU Observation Mission, by far the largest and best endowed, with some 20 LTOs in the country from June 11 to mid-August, came to the most positive conclusion, i.e., that the elections were “well conducted”, although Cambodia still had “some way to go to full democracy..  Glyn Ford, MEP, said that he could not disagree with the preliminary election results announced by the NEC.  Asked by a rather belligerent European correspondent if the election was not a “charade” to please the international community,; he Glyn Ford, MEP, suggested the gentleman “tell that to the 6 million people who came out to vote, especially the two million who voted for parties [other than the CPP]”.  Another spokesperson referred to the elections as “the freest and most democratic in [Cambodia’s] history”, a judgment that, while positive, will not please King Sihanouk, who truly believes he presided over several such elections..

 

The most serious irregularity noted by a number of observers, including some from the US Embassy, had to do with the status of Cambodian citizens of Vietnamese origin.  While none of our observers was involved in this issue, it is important to take note of it in this report.  An incident occurred in Kandal on July 27 wherein roughly 100 ethnic Vietnamese, whose names were on the voter list, were prevented from voting by a group of young activists.  Riot police were reportedly called out and they were subsequently allowed to vote.  When news of this kind circulates, it is likely that many ethnic Vietnamese simply stay home on election day. 

 

In fairness, we observed stations in northern Phnom Penh where there is a significant Vietnamese community and saw no problems.  Moreover, some of our observers in border areas of Prey Veng province were told that Vietnamese citizens would cross over to vote CPP, but saw evidence of no such activity. Inflammatory racist rhetoric specifically aimed at the Vietnamese is a problem that will have to be examined in the period between elections.  It will be recalled that a number of ethnic Vietnamese were beaten to death during the demonstrations that took place following the 1998 elections. 

 

 

 

What Next?

 

The coming days and weeks will determine whether or not a new coalition government can be formed:  a two-thirds majority is required in the National Assembly, and no single party has achieved that number.  The SRP and FUNCINPEC have called for a change in leadership in the CPP, but that is highly unlikely, given that the CPP under Hun Sen has added as many as nine seats to its parliamentary representation.  There is no constitutional provision for a hung parliament, and the new National Assembly must be sworn in within 60 days.  One foresees a situation similar to that in 1998, but perhaps without the prolonged demonstrations and subsequent violence.  The king, although he is leaving the situation up to the parties for now, may well step in to mediate the problem after a much shorter delay than in 1998, when the new coalition was not agreed to until mid-November.  His Majesty is clearly disgusted with the inability of the party he founded to revive itself and play a constructive role. 

 

 

Conclusions:

 

The IVO presence was relatively low-keymodest, in that itin Cambodia was short in duration and the bulkall but six of the observers spent a very short time in Phnom Penh.  It did, we are told, attract the attention of Julio Jeldres, the king’s biographer and a supporter of FUNCINPEC, whose comments may appear in this weekend’s edition of the bi-weekly Phnom Penh Post.  IVO’s mandate was to try to be rigorously impartial -- a difficult task in Cambodia -- and its findings were very much in line with most other observer missions.  IVO’s statement of July 29 was, indeed, less fulsome in its praise than the preliminary report of EU’s preliminary report, but then the EU mission, which  was in country for a longer time and with much greater resources.  The conclusions in our Press Release are stillremain valid, and the advice that all parties accept the results and work together for the welfare of the Cambodian people are even more apt, given the developments of the last three days.  We have orally urged Im Sousdey, Chair of the National Election Committee, to consider all complaints and grievances and give them prompt and impartial attention.

 

This may be the last time significant numbers of foreign observers will be required to monitor a Cambodian election, although that is a judgment that should be suspended until we see how the run-up to the Senate elections of 2005 proceeds.  If FRD were to consider repeating the experience, we would suggest deploying a smaller number of people for a longer period -- i.e., 20 people for two or three weeks, rather than 36 people for four days.  This would involve more individual expense, of course, and that could be a limiting factor for FRD.  The voluntary nature of this group was unique:  IRI and EU observers in the provinces could not believe that the IVOs received neither a per diem nor travel expenses. 

 

In conclusion, we must thank Susan Hammond for her tireless support and attention to detail, stickhandling the travel and accommodation arrangements for 36 demanding people, deciding on their deployment and maintaining excellent communications, not only with New York, but with the media and local organizations.  Her good relations with The Asia Foundation and her obvious knowledge of and affection for Cambodia were valuable assets. 

 

The Members of the IVO teamobservers, who selflessly paid their own way for every aspect of this mission, clearly enjoyed the adventure, and made a valuable contribution to the comfort level of the Cambodian people in what was really only the second national election for most.  The insights and enthusiastic critiques of this diverse and talented team will be most valuable in making constructive recommendations to the NEC and the government for subsequent elections. 

 

 

Recommendations to the NEC:

 

The NEC will doubtless receive masses of advice from international organizations; we will keep our list brief:

 

1.      In the short run, ensure that the official vote count is an accurate reflection of that which was carried out in the presence of party agents and observers, and produce copies of all forms 1105 signed by the various party agents;  a credible certified count is essential;

 

2.      Assiduously follow up on all complaints and grievances brought before it by the parties or disinterested observers, investigate them carefully, reject only those that have no discernible merit, and mete out appropriate sanctions to alleged offenders where these are appropriate;

 

3.      Undertake an immediate review of the registration process, including a new procedure for the issuance of voting cards to all eligible Cambodian citizens;  consider a permanent voting list with updates, rather than a short, fixed period for registration;

 

4.      Consider a reform in the choice of election officials from the NEC down; officials should renounce any party membership, and an effort should be made to bring in persons who have not necessarily been members of the ruling party, even if their professional skills are not immediately of a high standard;

 

5.      Consider some streamlining measures that might make the election process and, especially, the counting process, more manageable, while not sacrificing the security of the ballot.

 

We repeat that a very professional and transparent process seems to have been carried out almost everywhere our observer group traveled during their mission to the 2003 elections -- those areas were chosen randomly, and included some very remote places.  Nonetheless, it is public perceptions that must be addressed, and members of all parties should be assured that there will be no discrimination as a result of party allegiance at any level.  That is a tall order in a country like Cambodia, but we are confident it can happen.

 

Each time Cambodia goes to the polls, the situation grows better -- this exercise was significantly better than in 1998, and still all parties cannot seem to accept their fate and get on with representing their people in such a way as to create a modern society.  His Majesty King Sihanouk has said on several occasions that there are no good losers in Cambodia (a phenomenaon not unique to Cambodia).  We truly hope that that will cease to be the case, and that a new and more forward looking coalition will emerge out of the new National Assembly.

 

 

 

 

 

D. Gordon Longmuir

Head, International Volunteer Observers

 

 

 

Election results are posted and analyzed at the NEC site prepared with the assistance of the government of Canada  http://www.cambodiaelection2003.com/ProvincialResults.htm?language=e


Annex A: 

Annex A:  Press Release issued July 29, 2003

 

Contact: John McAuliff

              1-212-760-9903

             Catharin Dalpino

              1-202-338-0241

355 West 39th Street

   ground floor

New York, NY 10018

director@ffrd.org

www.ffrd.org

Fund for Reconciliation and Development

Press Release

International Volunteer Observers Positive on Cambodian Election Process

 

Field Report Number 5                                                                                             July 29, 2003

 

On July 27 and 28, the Fund for Reconciliation and Development deployed 36 International Volunteer Observers (IVOs) to 12 provinces of the Kingdom of Cambodia, including Phnom Penh Municipality, to observe the conduct of the National Assembly Elections and the vote counts that followed.  Members of this voluntary team, led by Gordon Longmuir, former Ambassador of Canada to Cambodia, came from the United States, Australia, Switzerland and Indonesia.  They were dispersed widely and at random throughout the country, some in very remote areas.

 

On the basis of their observations of polling stations and communal counting centers, the IVOs found that the elections were carried out in an open and inclusive manner, with painstaking attention to detail to ensure the secrecy of ballots and an accurate vote count.  Election officials, both at polling stations and counting centers carried out their duties with evident impartiality, professionalism, zeal and good humor, for which they are to be commended.  IVO noted also with approval that a large percentage of polling officials were women.

 

Some IVOs reported isolated incidences of possible intimidation, irregularities or fraud, but none of these were likely to have affected the outcome of the elections.  It should be emphasized, however, that the majority of international observers, including the IVOs, were in Cambodia for only a matter of days before, during and after election day.  Although many had previous experience in Cambodia, their mandate did not extend to an analysis or conclusions related to allegations of pre-election intimidation and violence. 

 

It is clearly for the Cambodian people, not the international community, to judge these elections.  The IVOs wish to congratulate polling officials, party agents and observers who worked so diligently to ensure the transparency and integrity of the voting and counting process, and the voters who came out in large numbers to exercise their democratic rights.  All 22 parties that participated had agreed in advance to accept the ground rules laid down in the National Election Law and in the regulations of the National Election Commission. 

 

Final results of the elections are not yet available.  The IVOs’ experience, taken together with that reported by other national and international observer groups, leads us to conclude that the election process of July 27 and 28 was administered in a transparent and accurate way. We urge all parties to accept the final results when they have been certified and published, and to work together to create an effective and productive National Assembly and a government dedicated to the welfare of the Cambodian people.Fund for Reconciliation and Development

355 West 39th Street (ground floor), New York, NY 10018

(212) 760-9903    fax (212) 760-9906   director@ffrd.org   www.ffrd.org

International Volunteer Observers, Cambodia -- 2003

 

PRESS RELEASE

 

FRD Volunteers Positive on Cambodian Election Process

 

July 29, 2003

 

On July 27 and 28, the Fund for Reconciliation and Development deployed 36 International Volunteer Observers (IVOs) to 12 provinces of the Kingdom of Cambodia, including Phnom Penh Municipality, to observe the conduct of the National Assembly Elections and the vote counts that followed.  Members of this voluntary team, led by the former Ambassador of Canada to Cambodia, came from the United States, Australia, Switzerland and Indonesia.  They were dispersed widely and at random throughout the country, some in very remote areas.

 

On the basis of their observations of polling stations and communal counting centres, the IVOs found that the elections were carried out in an open and inclusive manner, with painstaking attention to detail to ensure the secrecy of ballots and an accurate vote count.  Election officials, both at polling stations and counting centres carried out their duties with evident impartiality, professionalism, zeal and good humour, for which they are to be commended.  They noted also with approval that a large percentage of polling officials were women.

 

Some IVOs reported isolated incidences of possible intimidation, irregularities or fraud, but none of these were likely to have affected the outcome of the elections.  It should be emphasized, however, that the majority of international observers, including the IVOs, were in Cambodia for only a matter of days before, during and after election day.  Although many had previous experience in Cambodia, their mandate did not extend to an analysis or conclusions related to allegations of pre-election intimidation and violence. 

 

It is clearly for the Cambodian people, not the international community, to judge these elections.  The IVOs wish to congratulate polling officials, party agents and observers who worked so diligently to ensure the transparency and integrity of the voting and counting process, and the voters who came out in large numbers to exercise their democratic rights.  All 22 parties that participated had agreed in advance to accept the ground rules laid down in the National Election Law and in the regulations of the National Election Commission. 

 

Final results of the elections are not yet available.  The IVOs’ experience, taken together with that reported by other national and international observer groups, leads us to conclude that the election process of July 27 and 28 was administered in a transparent and accurate way. We urge all parties to accept the final results when they have been certified and published, and to work together to create an effective and productive National Assembly and a government dedicated to the welfare of the Cambodian people.

 

Further info, call:  Susan Hammond, Deputy Director, FRD 012 804 475 or

                  Gordon Longmuir, Head, International Volunteer Observers  012 414 801

 

-30-


 

 

Annex B

 


Annex B

 

 International Volunteer

Observer Teams

 

Battambang

 

Theodore Ross            

Valerie Mamara

Daniel Guttentag

 

Wendy McAvoy

Daniel Guttentag

Wendy McAvoy

Valerie Mamara

 

Kampot

 

Duane Sacket

William Wilson

 

Jane Martin

Truleen Delgado

 

Kandal

 

Benny Widyono

Fransesca Widyono

 

Peter S. Pen

Bill Rose

 

Kratie

 

Joel Montague

Joy Chia

 

Kampong Cham

 

Samrach Sok

Phuntsok Jansar

 

Sally Benson

Theodore M. Lieverman

 

Kampong Chhnang

 

Tom Grunfeld

Helmut Reuschle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kampong Speu

 

Sothida Tan

Richard Walden

 

Preah Vihear

 

Thomas Sean Butler

William Collins

 

Prey Veng

 

Clint Blandford

Molly Daggett

 

Russell Proctor

Andrew Wells-Dang

 

Siem Reap

 

Jill Ireland

Robert Schweiger

 

Takeo

 

Joan Kraynavski

Sharmali Fowler

 

Lance Rasbridge

Caroline Wischmann

 

Phnom Penh

 

Susan Hammond

D. Gordon Longmuir



[1] Press Release of July 29 is attached as Annex A.

[2] The names of Observers and their provincial deployments are attached as Annex B.