CAMBODIA

HAS THE DUTY TO IMPLEMENT

A PERFECT DEMOCRACY

THAT REMAINS A GOAL IN A HUGE

MAJORITY OF COUNTRIES

The BBC’s Jill McGivering, visiting Cambodia for the first time in her life, said on Sunday 27 July : “The political climate has improved but it is still far from being perfect”. In which country has this journalist found a perfect electoral climate?

Not doubt that countries that enjoyed the support of the West present a quite different performance : in Singapore where the level of intimidation is so high that it is impossible to express an effective political opposition; or in Thailand where vote buying is now like an institution; or in the Philippines where the killing of political activists is like a tradition during electoral campaign.

In Washington DC, US Senator from Kansas Sam Brownback, another hawk from the Republican pro war, pro “regime change” and conservative wing, made the following statement :

"In the lead-up to the elections, human rights organizations, international observers and the media reported widespread, politically-motivated violence against political parties in Cambodia, including several dozen murders. The absence of the rule of law is underscored by the unwillingness of Cambodian authorities to credibly investigate and prosecute those implicated in the pre-election violence.  As a result, the possibility for a free and fair election has significantly diminished under the weight of this environment of intimidation and violence.”

No doubt that for such “pro democracy” activist, the model for free and fair election is coming from Florida.

Does such evaluation mean that the 2,441,578 citizens who voted for the CPP are stupid or manipulated or slaves? Does it mean that the will expressed by 47.31% of the voters must now be ignored while no other party reaches 25 % ?

In February and March 2003, The Asia Foundation, an American NGO that nobody will charge for sympathy with the CPP, commissioned a survey consisting of a random, representative sample of 1,008 in-person interviews with Cambodian citizen over 18 conducted in 24 of the country’s 25 provinces. The survey was conducted by Charney Research (New York) and the Center for Advanced Studies (Phnom Penh) with technical assistance from AC Nielsen Indonesia (Jakarta).The weighted sample drawn for the survey mirrored the adult population of Cambodia as a whole when compared to the results of the national census (45% male; 55% female; 18% urban; 81% rural; 50% 18/35 years old and 50% older than 35).

Evaluating the election results, one should keep in mind the key findings of this survey :

- 81 % think that things in Cambodia are going in the right direction

- 81% do not feel obligated to vote for a party that gives them money or gifts

- 79% feel free to express their political opinion in the area where they live

- 78% feel free to vote for another party if they are unhappy with the government

- 76% are satisfied with the performance of the national government;

- 67 % agree that if a person sees or hears about election problems, that person should report this problem

- 66% are satisfied with the performance of the National Assembly representatives;

- 41% feel their own personal economic situation has improved compared to two years ago.

Source : “Democracy in Cambodia – 2003 A survey of the Cambodian Electorate”, 16 May 2003, The Asia Foundation.

A more sophisticated and fair analysis about the election in Cambodia than the one from the BBC or Republican Senator Brownback came from Marwaan Macan-Markar from Inter Press Service whose article was published on August 1 by The Manila Times (The Philippines):

“DESPITE being one of Southeast Asia’s poorest countries, Cambodia succeeded this week in pulling off a general election that can easily shame most of its regional neighbors, where democracy is either absent or skin deep.

“The poll was conducted in a peaceful manner. It was obvious that the CPP tried hard to make sure the election was transparent,” says Sunai Phasuk, an analyst with the Asian Network for Free Elections (Anfrel), a regional polls monitor.

The credibility of the poll, however, suffered in its lead-up due to reports of vote-buying and other economic carrots dangled by the political parties to sway the public into their fold. Threats were also used in some quarters to intimidate voters, stated the New York-based rights lobby Human Rights Watch (HRW) in a briefing paper released before Sunday’s election.

Local officials affiliated with the CPP were “threatening opposition party supporters with violence, expulsion from their villages and denial of access to community resources,” the HRW study revealed. “Threats ranged from being rejected for village rice distribution to having land confiscated for voting for the opposition.”

However, in truth, the three major parties were linked to vote-buying schemes, Anfrel’s Sunai told IPS. “Some used methods such as election lotteries, where voters were promised a reward if the party that had distributed these special lottery tickets won.”

This mixed picture of Cambodia’s journey toward political normalcy brings it closer to the countries in Southeast Asia that have placed faith in democracy, such as Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand.

Many nations elsewhere in the region, by contrast, are either no respecters of such a political culture–such as Burma, Vietnam and Laos–or have it in form but not in reality–such as Malaysia and Singapore. In all of them, the space of a political opposition ranges from narrow to nonexistent.

“Cambodia’s political achievement on Sunday is important for this region,” Tian Chua, vice president of Malaysia’s Justice Party, told IPS. “Countries belonging to the Asean [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] should follow the lead of this emerging democracy.” Chua, who was released last month after a two-year prison sentence for his political activities, belongs to an opposition party founded by the wife of Malaysia’s former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim. Anwar himself is in prison on charges of corruption and sodomy, which he and his political allies say was a case of political victimization.

The political opposition in Singapore has found even smaller space for it, and critics have blasted the government for using lawsuits–and the threat of financial ruin–to get at its political opponents.

Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, for instance, has shown his disdain for democracy by trying to silence his critics at home and Indonesia President Megawati Sukarnoputri’s policies toward the separatist struggle in the province of Aceh has been criticized by human rights groups.

The Philippines’ democratic record has been solid since a 1986 popular uprising. But President Gloria Arroyo has had to battle questions of legitimacy since she was not elected to office, but assumed her post after her predecessor was forced to step down over corruption charges in 2001.

(Inter Press Service - extracts)

HOW TO EVALUATE FAIRLY THE ELECTORAL PROCESS ?

Basically, a democratic election is a free choice between independent candidates and parties able to inform the voters about their choice. How to evaluate whether these requirements are met? I don’t think that it is fair to base such evaluation on a perfect model that remains a goal in a huge majority of countries in the world and, in particular, in South-East Asia. No need to adopt this kind of partisan hypocrisy (most of the time proposed by people whose concern is not a “perfect” democracy but the victory of their local friends as the International Republican Institute –IRI - or the Transnational Radical Party demonstrated clearly – on IRI, see our paper dated 14 July 2003). There are simple practices that create ground for a democratic ballot. Let’s verify how they were implemented using mostly the material coming from the 30,691 national and international election observers.

a) Freedom to create political parties

This freedom must be guaranteed by a law that prevents any discrimination. This requirement is met in Cambodia without the slightest exception. In 2003, 23 parties were registered for the poll.

b) Freedom of expression and campaigning for political parties and candidates

There is no doubt that political parties have been free to campaign :

- “ANFREL welcomes that the election campaign has been conducted in a safer and more free environment with few serious security incidents compared with the past elections. ANFREL also noticed several more positive signs in the conduct of the election, such as more awareness of clearer interpretation of the election law and the code of conduct, and more willingness to implement them strictly on the side of both political parties, election commissions at all levels and government officials.” (Asian Network for Free Elections)

- “Freer and more open” than last election (Cambodia-Canada Legislative Support Project)

- “The electoral process was taking place in a satisfactory manner” (New Zealand observation mission)

- “A steady improvement on all fronts, more marked in the process than in the climate” (Australian Embassy and four visiting parliamentarians)

- “Elections are getting progressively better each time. The 2002 commune election was better-run than the 1998 one. These have been the best elections yet” (Singapore’s Ambassador)

- “Six years ago the supporters of these parties were killing each other, now they're able to sit down and respect each other's opinions” (National Democratic Institute – USA)

- “By and large, things went smoothly. The overall conduct of the elections was marked by less violence and more access to the media than in previous times, but there were some election irregularities reported and we would expect those to be looked into and followed up by the National Election Commission." (US State Department)

- “The campaign was dynamic and meetings generally took place in a peaceful environment. Compared with previous election, the opposition parties conducted a more vigorous campaign and put up a considerably higher number of banners and signs. In even the smallest villages, each of the three main parties had at least one office and these were often side by side with their opponents.” (European Union Election Observation Mission)

Access of political parties to the media was dramatically improved :

- “Access to media for all parties has improved since 1998. While major television and public radio stations are government-owned, the junior coalition partner and largest opposition party have their own media outlets and are doing an effective job of reaching voters.” (International Volunteer Observers (IVO) team from The Fund for Reconciliation and Development)

- “This election has been much more balanced, because of the surprising openness of the media," (Chea Vannath, president of the Cambodian Centre for Social Development).

- “Access of all political parties to the media was significantly improved in this election compared with the previous ones. The National Election Committee deserves credit for creating the conditions necessary for a relatively more balanced coverage of all the political parties. The regulations governing equal access and the “equity” programmes on radio and television were respected and provided a reasonable amount of coverage to all political parties.” (European Union Election Observation Mission)

c) Freedom for citizens to express their opinion, their sympathy and their support for the political party of their choice and to question and challenge candidates

- “carnival atmosphere” among those voting ; “impressed by the general openness with which the people discussed voting” (Australian Embassy)

- “There was little evidence of fear in the carnival atmosphere which prevailed on the final day of official campaigning on Friday as thousands of supporters of the three main parties paraded their flags and banners through Phnom Penh's streets” (Reuters)

According to one of the most anti-CPP sources of information in Phnom Penh, during the whole electoral campaign, the SRP and the FUNCINPEC organized freely dozens of rallies and meetings gathering thousands of sympathizers or supporters who felt free to express their support to non-CPP political parties even in the countryside, even in remote areas (source : The Cambodia Daily from Friday June 27 until Saturday July 26).

Hundreds if not thousands of people attended political debates organized by national and international NGOs. Every fair observer has in mind the first debate organized by the National Democratic Institute (USA) in Kompong Cham where around 2,500 people witnessed the debate (later broadcast on TV and radio like 19 other debates) between representatives of the three main parties. This first debate was one of the most significant events in this electoral campaign (The Cambodia Daily, 30 June, p.13).

d) The right to every citizen to vote

This right which is set up in the Constitution is implemented through the registration process according to the electoral law. The registration is based on criteria for citizenship.

This year, the average turnout has been less than in previous national elections (from 89.56% in 1993, to 93.74% in 1998 and 81,38 % in 2003). But this is the first time that the registration process implies only new voters and those who moved to another location.. In the past, all those who wanted to vote went for registration the year of the poll.

This time, 76% of the number of voters estimated for 2003 were already registered for the 2002 Commune elections. Among these people there were voters who did no want, this year, to express their support to one party. It is typical in most of the democratic countries.

This novelty in the registration system seems to have created confusion. People failed to verify whether they were registered at the right polling station, in particular those who, according to the law, have been registered in 1998 or 2002 where they have their professional activity and not where they live. Another confusion was observed resulting from a lack of clear identification of the voter, many people sharing quite identical names. In a number of cases, people have voted in good faith in the wrong polling station where a voter bearing the same name was registered. As a result, when the other person came to vote, it was discovered that someone else had already voted under that name. The problem of homonym is not unique to Cambodia.

No doubt that there is a need to improve the registration system which has to be more sophisticated preventing confusion about voters sharing the same name or voters registered in one place and moving to another without informing the election administration.

e) A transparent and neutral administration of the process

- “NEC [is] doing a better, more professional job – and the improvement goes all down the line. Commune officials generally knew what to do” (International Volunteer Observers (IVO) team from The Fund for Reconciliation and Development)

- “The National Election Committee performed its duties in a professional and transparent manner. The recent changes to its structure and composition have increased its operational capacity and have allowed the NEC to work more efficiently than in previous elections. The NEC consulted with political parties, NGOs, media and others on a range of issues. In similar fashion, PECs and CECs held weekly meetings with political parties to inform them about the election process and discuss their concerns. Such meetings served to promote dialogue and to increase the stakeholders’ trust in the process” (European Union Election Observation Mission)

f) Sufficient information by the voters about the procedures

- “Voters’ knowledge of the election process and their political awareness have generally increased, notably among women” (Asian Network for Free Elections)

- “EU observers reported that voting was generally well organized and that voters and election officials had a clear understanding of the process. They rated the overall voting process as satisfactory or good in 96.8% of polling stations visited while it was poor or very bad in the others (less than 4%)” (European Union Election Observation Mission)

One additional major improvement over the 1998 and 2002 election is the very low percentage of invalid ballots: preliminary figures suggest that less than 2% of ballots were deemed invalid for various reasons. This figure was above 3% in the 2002 Commune election. This is the proof that voters are better informed on how to mark their ballot validly.

g) Secrecy of the vote

- “The International Volunteer Observers found that the elections were carried out in an open and inclusive manner, with painstaking attention to detail to ensure the secrecy of ballots.” (International Volunteer Observers (IVO) team from The Fund for Reconciliation and Development).

- “The secrecy of the vote was insured in some 94% of polling stations visited.” (European Union Election Observation Mission).

h) Transparency of the counting process

- “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. IVO noted also with approval that a large percentage of polling officials were women.” (International Volunteer Observers (IVO) team from The Fund for Reconciliation and Development)

- “On 28 July, the EU Election Observation Mission observers followed the ballot verification and count in counting centres in all 24 constituencies. The process was assessed as good or satisfactory in 98% of counting centres visited and as poor in the rest. Party agents and national observers were present in all counting centres visited. Procedures were generally adhered to during the verification and the count, but as on Election Day, observers noted that the complex procedures and the paperwork required proved to be over-demanding and resulted in a slower counting process.” (European Union Election Observation Mission).

* * *

Each of these 8 basic requirements was largely met during the 2003 electoral process. It is honestly possible to claim that an overwhelming majority of the voters, duly informed, expressed freely their opinion that was correctly reflected in the counting of the votes. And I do share the evaluation made by Mr. Glyn Ford, Member of the European Parliament, Member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament and Member of the Federation of Democratic Leaders of the Asia-Pacific who said : the 2003 election was “the freest and the most democratic election ever organized in Cambodia” during the 50 years of her independence.

Are all those reports and evaluation expressed by free, competent and honest people showing the electoral process described above by the BBC and Senator Brownback? Does the reader see a country plunged in “widespread violence, intimidation and fear” as expressed by pro “regime change” foreign journalists and politicians?

THE COMPLAINTS

The SRP summarized the main criticisms expressed by political parties and several media. The National Election Committee published a clarification.

1. Village chiefs and commune heads, using fear or bribe, had collected voting cards – the cards were never returned and these voters had no choice, they did not even go to the polling stations. One to two days before the elections several dozen voting cards were found on a rubbish dump, obviously having been just thrown away.

NEC clarification : A voter card was not the only document to be able to vote on 27 July, 2003. Registered voters could also produce a number of other documents, as follow: National I.D. Card, Written Statement of Identify, Cambodian passport, Family Book with photo of the voter, Family Certificate with photo of the voter, Monk I.D. card, I.D. card of civil servant, police or military. This information was widespread around the country through posters and radio announcements, among others. Also, the Cambodian NGOs involved in voter education regularly stressed this information. However, the NEC received information according to which a small number of old voting cards (approximately thirty) from the 1993 and 1998 election have been confiscated. The NEC has ordered an investigation on that issue, and will inform on its findings.

2. In other instances the voters with all their ID cards and voters cards in order found that their names had just simply been crossed out: they were told that they had ``already voted `` and had no choice but to go home without voting. It must also be noted here that 63% of the adult population in Cambodia are illiterate which means that thousands of people cannot read a voters list and were not able to find their names. We have serious reports stating that the election officers in no way helped voters when trying to vote, on the contrary they just sent them back to the lists posted outside the polling station, thus causing total utter confusion, and in the end, people became discouraged and went home without voting. Election officers are under the obligation to help the voters, and not hinder the process. Another cause for concern is the very bad communication by the NEC to inform the population that the basis for the voting lists was the commune council election in February 2002, and those who had not voted then had to register by February 2003. Many voters turned up with only their 1998 voter’s card which was not accepted and had to go home without voting.

NEC clarification : It seems that, despite a huge campaign organized by the NEC through electronic media, a number of NGOs and political parties, and that the list was made public and available to all political parties at an early stage, still some voters neglected to register and/or check to make sure that his/her name was effectively on the list in the right polling station.

3. Receiving special treatment, CPP supporters were given a slip of paper by their village chief containing the voter’s name and registration number, and were able to go through the process smoothly, with no hassle.

NEC clarification : It is not an illegal activity for parties to help voters find their names on the voters lists.

4. Organized chaos was put into full force when many voters turned up only to find that their polling station had been moved to another location. Not able to find the right polling station, they were discouraged and went home.

NEC clarification : Because of the floods in the previous week, the NEC was obliged to move only 6 polling stations (out of 12,826) to safer locations. The NEC did so in consultation with political parties’ representatives. A document was signed by parties, expressing their agreement.

5. The rules and regulations of the NEC state that the tally sheet, Form 1105, must be given to political party agents immediately after the counting process is finished. This was not put into practice in numerous provinces and polling stations, where the tally sheets, at best, were only given very late on election night, some are even still being withheld up to today. It is too late now to do anything about it – there is a serious possibility that the ballots could have been manipulated during this time with the corresponding tally sheets given late containing figures which have also been manipulated.

NEC clarification : At the end of the counting process, many party representatives immediately left the counting station with their own results without waiting to get the official tally form (form 1105). The election results in each counting centre were also posted publicly for everyone to see. The NEC has reports that some Counting Centres worked late to provide this tally forms to those who had left the centre prematurely and came back later. It is unfortunate that the NEC gets blamed for the poor training of party representatives who didn’t know that they had to wait for the official tally form before rushing out with their own results.

6. Foreign journalists, SRP and FUNCINPEC blamed the NEC for a slow release of the preliminary results opening the door to speculations.

NEC clarification : The process of disseminating the preliminary results was not slow; in fact it has never been so fast. The NEC is proud to have been able to communicate preliminary results in only a few days, compared to previous elections.

7. Another cause for the drop in voter turnout was the scare tactics associated with fear of bomb blasts and civil war. In Phnom Penh, the turnout in the afternoon of Election Day dropped significantly after a bomb blast. Before and during the elections, there were rumors spread that if the opposition parties won, there would be civil war and serious unrest and fighting.

NEC clarification : The NEC believes that the unfortunate grenades discovered in Phnom Penh was a minor incident and didn’t bring any fear among the population. It is not unusual that the turnout was less in the afternoon as the vast majority of voters have already cast their ballot when the information was published. All our information corroborates to maintain that a festive atmosphere prevailed among the population during polling day.

THE POST ELECTION POLITICAL CRISIS

It is too soon for a credible analysis of results that are not officially claimed yet. But three facts are observable :

a) the confirmation of the popularity of the CPP who reaches its best result since 1993

b) the tremendous defeat of the royalist FUNCINPEC loosing 752,587 voters since 1993

c) a defeat that made possible the significant progress of the Sam Rainsy Party that competed for the first time in 1998 and now represents a little bit more than one fourth of the voters and becomes the second party.

From a democratic point of view, it is quite surprising to observe the huge gap between the high sense of democracy expressed by the Cambodian citizens and the very strange one showed by segments of the political elite. After a poll, a true democratic leader of a political party in government resigns when he is facing a big defeat. That’s what Jospin of France did last year and the president of the Israeli Labour Party this year. In Cambodia, the looser pretends to chose the future prime minister !

From a legal point of view, when one has a proportional representation system which quite mechanically leads to a coalition government, the task of the existing government during the transition period is to remain in office and to implement its primary duty : to insure the continuity of the State. In Cambodia, this duty seems not to be the concern of ministers from the losing partner of the coalition.

From a political point of view, in a typical democracy, after the trends showed by the preliminary results, the normal rule is to start the negotiation first of all on the governmental program between the political parties that enjoyed an increased support of the voters. In Cambodia, one starts by ignoring the will of the voters and by targeting individuals to be excluded.

Once again, the Cambodian people deserves better than such political games. It deserves a higher sense of responsibility and accountability from its leaders.

Dr. Raoul Marc JENNAR

Political analyst

4 August 2003

"Raoul Marc Jennar" <jennarraoulmarc@hotmail.com>