NO ONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SURPRISED BY THE LATEST
QUESTIONABLE ELECTION
13-12-2005 14:40:00 | USA | Articles and Analyses
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
Armenia held a referendum on proposed constitutional
changes on November 27. Opposition leaders and foreign observers
questioned the election results and made allegations of serious
abuse and fraud. Regrettably, this is neither the first nor
probably the last questionable election in Armenia.
While it is true that the government is ultimately
responsible for all developments in the country, be they
positive or negative, one needs to cast a wider net of blame
beyond just the current authorities. Elections were tampered
with before the present regime came to power and they would
probably be tampered with long after this regime is gone. There
are no guarantees that, if and when the opposition comes to
power, the elections would be any more honest than they have
been up to now.
During the past few years, opposition leaders have held
countless demonstrations calling for the resignation of Pres.
Kocharian. Because of internal bickering, lack of a popular and
competent leadership, and undelivered promises on regime change,
the opposition leaders do not have much credibility with the
Armenian public. Even though the authorities themselves are not
very popular, Armenia's citizens do not see why they should
overthrow the existing leaders, only to replace them with even
more unpopular ones.
In this latest election, opposition leaders first called
for a "no" vote on the constitutional changes. When they
realized that they would not be able to win, they switched their
tactics and called for a boycott. Such a decision, however, did
not sit well with the European and American governments which
viewed the proposed changes as a marked improvement over the
existing constitution.
To make matters worse for themselves, the opposition
leaders withdraw their representatives from local election
commissions nationwide, thus making it easier to tamper with the
election results.
By boycotting the election, the opposition leaders thought
that they could prevent the participation of one-third of
registered voters, which is mandated by Armenian law to make the
outcome legal. The surprise was not that there was a 93% "yes"
vote on the referendum (it could have been even higher thanks to
the opposition's boycott), but that close to two thirds of the
registered voters went to the polls. Most observers felt that
this percentage was artificially inflated. It is simply not
credible that just about as many people turned out for this
referendum as for the previous hotly contested presidential
election. In addition, most observers reported that the polling
stations were far too deserted to account for such a high
turnout. There were strong suspicions of a considerable number
of ballot stuffing.
Given the boycott by the opposition, the authorities did
not really need to tamper with the election. They could have won
it fairly. Three factors contributed to this undesirable
outcome: 1) the old habit of tampering with all elections, even
when fake ballots were unnecessary for a successful outcome; 2)
the inclination of local government officials to help win the
election by all possible means in order to preserve their
current positions or to be rewarded with more lucrative jobs
after the election; and 3) given the mandatory one-third
threshold, local officials' intent to go overboard in order to
ensure that they do not fail again to garner the minimum number
of votes as they did in the referendum two years ago.
Most western countries that favored of the passage of the
referendum in the first place do not seem to be too upset with
the outcome of these elections. Instead, they have their eyes on
the upcoming parliamentary elections in 2007 and the
presidential election in 2008. They are busy making plans to
ensure that these next two crucial elections are properly held.
It appears that no amount of preparation would guarantee
honest elections in Armenia in the near future. The solution to
Armenia's electoral problems is not to be found in the elections
per se. No amount of transparent ballot boxes and international
observers could ensure proper elections in Armenia. All those
who truly care about Armenia's well-being, before worrying about
honest elections, must take all necessary steps to ensure that
after 70 years of communism, a sense of right and wrong is
instilled in Armenian society. Once the desire to abide by the
rule of law is internalized by the public at large, Armenia
would automatically have honest cops, judges, government
officials as well as honest elections.
Maybe then, Armenia's elections, which are less fraudulent
than those held in several other former Soviet Republics,
particularly Azerbaijan, would rise to the level of desirable
European standards.