Tweet
WHY WERE THE ASSESSMENTS GIVEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS MAINLY POLITICAL? READ COUNT:
February 20 2013
The assessments of the presidential election in Armenia given by the
international monitoring organizations were often contradicting. The
OSCE/ODIHR assessed the election: "We think that this election was
a step backward in terms of competition." The ICES's assessment
was milder. And how do the representatives of the local monitoring
missions assess the work and position of their foreign colleagues?
www.aravot.am talked with Armenian monitoring organizations'
representatives about this. Artak Kirakosyan, the head of the Civil
Society Institute, said about this: "Their reports comprise two parts.
In one part, they assert what they have seen. In that part, they
mainly mention problems, about which the local observers have also
talked. The second one is about political conclusions, where a problem
arises every time whether they do it as politicians or as a monitoring
mission. The biggest problem that arose this time was that analysts
have the right to talk about whether the election was competitive or
not, whereas an international observer has no right to say something
like that. International observers draw political conclusions, which
are based on their perceptions and interests and not merely carry
out a monitoring mission. A step backward doesn't work anymore; they
didn't say that during the parliamentary election either. There are
political issues related, say, to the integration of the Republic of
Armenia in the European Union. The OSCE is a political organization,
the Council of Europe too, and political organizations give political
descriptions. The same thing applies to the American conclusion. The
Russians also have political interests. They cannot say that the
elections in the Republic of Armenia were conducted badly, since they
say that they were conducted well in Uzbekistan, so that they are not
blamed afterwards. Therefore, we should assess the legitimacy." Anahit
Gevorgyan, the head of the Martuni Women's Community Council NGO,
in her turn, said in this regard: "I don't blame the observers. When
they enter a polling place, they really see that everything is perfect.
Outwardly it is normal, no crowds within 50 meters; it is placid
inside. How could they know that all members of that commission are
uniform people, which is the reason why no one makes a fuss there? It
is a calm election; what should they record? They would enter at the
time, and a poll-watcher would fight; who would fight now, so that
they could see? If political parties don't join the game; what this
election was for? An observer is not politically active. We cannot
find a neutral man to fight. Besides, everyone knows everyone; last
time our observers were more secure, we would tell them to go and tell
the poll-watchers of the Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP), and they would
fight. Yes, I agree that the election was not competitive. While Raffi
Hovhannisyan rarely had poll-watchers in a district, Serzh Sargsyan had
poll-watchers four times registered in each place." Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/02/20/152395/
© 1998 - 2013 Aravot - News from Armenia
From: A. Papazian
February 20 2013
The assessments of the presidential election in Armenia given by the
international monitoring organizations were often contradicting. The
OSCE/ODIHR assessed the election: "We think that this election was
a step backward in terms of competition." The ICES's assessment
was milder. And how do the representatives of the local monitoring
missions assess the work and position of their foreign colleagues?
www.aravot.am talked with Armenian monitoring organizations'
representatives about this. Artak Kirakosyan, the head of the Civil
Society Institute, said about this: "Their reports comprise two parts.
In one part, they assert what they have seen. In that part, they
mainly mention problems, about which the local observers have also
talked. The second one is about political conclusions, where a problem
arises every time whether they do it as politicians or as a monitoring
mission. The biggest problem that arose this time was that analysts
have the right to talk about whether the election was competitive or
not, whereas an international observer has no right to say something
like that. International observers draw political conclusions, which
are based on their perceptions and interests and not merely carry
out a monitoring mission. A step backward doesn't work anymore; they
didn't say that during the parliamentary election either. There are
political issues related, say, to the integration of the Republic of
Armenia in the European Union. The OSCE is a political organization,
the Council of Europe too, and political organizations give political
descriptions. The same thing applies to the American conclusion. The
Russians also have political interests. They cannot say that the
elections in the Republic of Armenia were conducted badly, since they
say that they were conducted well in Uzbekistan, so that they are not
blamed afterwards. Therefore, we should assess the legitimacy." Anahit
Gevorgyan, the head of the Martuni Women's Community Council NGO,
in her turn, said in this regard: "I don't blame the observers. When
they enter a polling place, they really see that everything is perfect.
Outwardly it is normal, no crowds within 50 meters; it is placid
inside. How could they know that all members of that commission are
uniform people, which is the reason why no one makes a fuss there? It
is a calm election; what should they record? They would enter at the
time, and a poll-watcher would fight; who would fight now, so that
they could see? If political parties don't join the game; what this
election was for? An observer is not politically active. We cannot
find a neutral man to fight. Besides, everyone knows everyone; last
time our observers were more secure, we would tell them to go and tell
the poll-watchers of the Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP), and they would
fight. Yes, I agree that the election was not competitive. While Raffi
Hovhannisyan rarely had poll-watchers in a district, Serzh Sargsyan had
poll-watchers four times registered in each place." Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/02/20/152395/
© 1998 - 2013 Aravot - News from Armenia
From: A. Papazian