AFGHANISTAN: INTERNATIONALS CLAIM VICTORY WHILE AFGHANS CRY FRAUD

CIVIL SOCIETY
Aunohita Mojumdar 8/24/09



Diplomats have rushed to declare Afghanistan’s August 20 presidential and provincial council elections a success, while downplaying credible reports of disenfranchisement and widespread electoral irregularities. The apparent reluctance to acknowledge circumstantial evidence of substantial vote-rigging could have damaging, even irreparable consequences for Afghanistan’s democratization process, some experts contend.

In Kabul and donor capitals, the emphasis has been on celebrating the fact that elections were held at all, rather than on the likelihood that the voices of a considerable number of Afghans will not be heard. Both Afghans and internationals heaved a sigh of relief when polling day passed with a much lower-than-expected level of violence.

Noting the extremist challenge, US President Barack Obama characterized the elections as an important step forward. The European Union Observer Mission (EUOM) and the observer missions of the US-based National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI) also termed the elections successful, adding that the voting offered evidence of Kabul’s commitment to democratization. Meanwhile, in his congratulatory remarks, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon referred to the "extremely challenging environment."

In their assessments, international observers appeared to focus mainly on the Taliban’s attempt to disrupt the polls. They paid far less attention to other electoral problems, including alleged irregularities carried out by government functionaries.

The Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan, an Afghan body, documented a widespread "lack of impartiality of election staff at the local level." It also recorded numerous cases of proxy voting and some voters’ use of multiple cards. It reported underage voting, and said it was difficult to judge the credibility of the elections at this stage.

Independent reports from around the country echoed the foundation’s findings. In her blog post on the elections, former EU diplomat and analyst with the Afghan Analysts Network, Martine Van Bijlert, wrote: "consistent and credible reports from the south and the southeast have been coming in for days now: massive and blatant ballot stuffing; the removal or invalidation of votes for rival candidates; complete overhaul of ballot boxes; intimidation of witnesses and IEC [Independent Election Commission] staff; systematic removal of the publicly displayed tally sheets."

Given the preoccupation with the insurgent threat, there has not been much attention paid to the possibility that low voter turnout provided more space for electoral manipulation. There are signs that suggest a large number of people have been deprived of their constitutional right to cast a ballot.

Addressing the issue of disenfranchisement during a news conference on August 22, the head of the NDI delegation, Kenneth Wollach, stated "disenfranchisement here takes on a different meaning" since it is "not the work of partisan actors, but the result of those trying to disrupt the elections. You cannot blame the IEC for it."

Regardless of who was responsible, Van Bijlert told EurasiaNet, voters were still deprived of their rights: "If there was a flood in the country and half the country couldn’t vote, that’s nobody’s fault but that doesn’t mean that the voters weren’t disenfranchised. That doesn’t mean that it was fine."

The European Union Mission, which termed the holding of elections as a "victory for the Afghan people" said the IEC "generally functioned efficiently" and that "the process seems at this stage to have been largely positive." Currently, the EU seems reluctant to address questions of fraud, saying it is too early in the process for any definitive assessment, and that only Afghans themselves could make the judgment.

By remaining tight-lipped, the EU mission threatens to undermine its credibility, some human rights advocates say. "An assessment this positive will be hard to [believe] for millions of Afghans in insecure parts of the country," said Rachel Reid, the Afghanistan researcher for Human Rights Watch.

The initial findings of the observer missions lauded the polling process and its fairness. Many local experts, however, say that irregularities appear to have been most prevalent in the insecure southern provinces, where most observer missions were unable to deploy. Some observers who did make it to southern areas remained confined to secured military compounds for the better part of election day.

While acknowledging that insecurity hampered their movements, the missions have been reticent in providing details of their election-day activities. Their conclusions, based solely on observations from the more secure areas where polling was less tainted, therefore may well provide only a partial, if not distorted, perception of the proceedings.

While the lack of official statistics from the IEC is certainly a constraint for diplomatic missions and international observers, even the right questions are not being asked at this stage, experts say.

Of half a dozen observer groups and a plethora of diplomatic representatives, only Democracy International (DI), pointed out the problems related to the IEC’s decision to withhold the vote count until five days after Election Day, terming it "unfortunate." DI has noted that releasing the partial results would be a way to enhance confidence in the process by increasing transparency.

Concerned analysts say that downplaying irregularities could have practical consequences for the democratization process. "Most observers are treating the election as if it is over, but I think the real contest is just beginning. The main question is how much blatant breaking of the law will be accepted for the sake of [what seems to bring] short-term stability," Van Bijlert said, adding, "Much of the fraud has been widespread, blatant and linked to government or electoral officials. If that is left unchallenged and unacknowledged, the message to the population is clear: this is how it is going to be."

Echoing these sentiments, Reid said, any attempt "to deny the full extent of the flaws in this election would only serve to further disenfranchise the Afghan electorate."