Thursday, February 11 2016 03:46

 The report of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) on the Constitutional referendum in Armenia demonstrates that international structures do not trust the Armenian authorities, Head of the Heritage Faction Zaruhi Postanjyan said at a press conference in Yerevan on Feb 10.     

"It demonstrates that European structures are trying to cooperate with the Armenian side, however, they do not trust the authorities," she said. Postanjyan noted that Heritage is going to take no part in the process of elaboration of the new Electoral Code. "We have submitted our proposals. If the authorities intend to conduct real reforms, they can take them into account," the MP said.         

To note, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) says in its final report on the Constitutional referendum in Armenia: "The conduct of the referendum reflected the absence of meaningful actions over the previous three years to address prior OSCE/ODIHR recommendations to improve confidence and public trust in the electoral process, including by improving accuracy of voter lists, preventing misuse of public resources in campaigns, and strengthening safeguards against voting day irregularities as well as the effectiveness of complaint mechanisms and accountability for electoral offences". The experts point out that despite efforts to work in a transparent and professional manner, the referendum administration suffered from lack of trust among stakeholders and the widespread perception that lower-level commissions were incapable of performing their duties in an impartial manner. At the same time the experts note that Armenia has a passive voter registration system based on the state population register maintained by the police. The final voter lists contained 2,566,998 eligible voters. The police made efforts to improve trust in the voter register but various stakeholders reported unresolved longstanding problems with accuracy of the voter lists, including an unduly high number of registrations at some addresses and deceased people on the voter lists. "Particular concerns over potential for manipulation were raised by the fact that the voter lists include the names of many people living abroad who would only be eligible to vote if physically present in the country", the experts note in the report. They also say that basic freedoms of association, expression, assembly, and movement were largely respected during the campaign period, however, the campaign was highly polarized and focused on a few aspects of the proposed new constitutional framework". 
According to the report, following the recent lifting of legal restrictions on campaigning by public officials, state officials led the "Yes" campaign and the authorities mobilized extensive public resources to campaign in favour of constitutional amendments. The media environment is perceived to be politicized. A large number of media outlets operate in a limited advertisement market and television remains the main source of information. The safety and security of the work of journalists remains of serious concern.  Campaign regulations for the media are defined by the Referendum Law and the Electoral Code, but lack clarity. Almost all parliamentary factions took advantage of the opportunity to receive free airtime.  Paid advertising airtime was available only for parliamentary factions and was mainly purchased for the "Yes" campaign. The experts also mention that the legal framework for electoral complaints and appeals is sufficiently detailed and the system is characterized by formalized procedures. However, the Constitution grants the right to appeal referenda results only to the president and at least one-fifth of the members of parliament. This restricted legal standing to bring appeals raises questions about de facto availability of a judicial remedy for referendum stakeholders.  Credibility of dispute resolution was undermined by the lack of trust and confidence in the referendum administration and courts. At polling stations where the OSCE/ODIHR RET observed the counting procedure, serious problems included interference and intimidation by proxies of supporters of the "Yes" campaign leading to alteration of the actual vote results.  Citizen observers, opposition groups, and media reported allegations of widespread irregularities, interference and intimidation in the voting and counting process throughout the country.  The authorities pledged that all allegations were being investigated by the CEC and law enforcement bodies while denying that irregularities were systematic and suggesting that leading civil society groups were biased because they were known to oppose the referendum. The CEC rejected a detailed complaint by one opposition party seeking invalidation of the results on the basis that legal and procedural violations were systematic and widespread. A subsequent request for the Constitutional Court to declare the referendum invalid on the same grounds was not supported by the required one fifth of the members of parliament. 

To recall, according to the Central Electoral Commission, the turnout made up 50.74% of the 2 mln 566 thsd 998 voters. "63.37% voted for the constitutional amendments and 32.36% said 'no' to the new Constitution. The number of invalid ballots was 53,435. The number of stamped ballots at the district electoral commissions was 1 mln 337 thsd 670," the CEC says.  The opposition considers the referendum results to be rigged.