Introduction
Present in Haiti since August 2010, the OAS-CARICOM
Joint Election Observation Mission was able to
monitor the administrative, technical and logistical
preparations for both the postponed legislative
elections and the presidential elections. In view of
the fact that the legislative elections should have
been held on 28 February 2010, but were postponed
following the devastating earthquake of 12 January,
the JEOM was not present for the political dimension
of the legislative elections, the registration of
political parties and the submission and validation
of candidates. The Mission however notes that an
important facet of this phase which would have an
impact on the political dimension of the remainder
of the electoral process was the non-validation of a
number of political parties.
In the course of its monitoring activities, the
JEOM made a number of observations, comments and
recommendations to the Provisional Electoral Council
as well as the political parties, which it believed
could have been of assistance in bringing about free
and fair elections.
The Last Preparatory and Election Campaign
Phases
Despite the doubts cast by some commentators on
the electoral register and the manner on which it
was prepared, the JEOM is of the view that its
preparation was in keeping with the respective legal
responsibilities of the ONI and CEP. The late
submission of the last batch of names by the ONI was
unhelpful, but was no doubt due to the late surge of
persons wishing to register in September, a mere two
weeks before the transmission of the ONI data base
to the CEP.
The very late launching of the "Where to Vote"
campaign and the saturation of the call centres put
in place by the CEP and, later, the Private Sector
Forum, did not fully offset the negative
repercussions of the delayed campaign. This would
have a grave effect on the ability of voters to find
their polling stations on Election Day and create an
atmosphere of intense frustration and tension. The
Mission believes that at the same time citizens have
the responsibility to make an effort in advance of
Election Day to identify their Polling Stations.
Despite the swift rise in election-related acts
of violence and civil unrest in the last days of the
campaign as pre-Election Day tensions rose and
several earlier scuffles and grave incidents, the
election campaign was to quite an extent well
conducted and to the credit of the political parties
and the citizenry. The public rallies, candidate
posters, radio and television debates, the efforts
of the media to inform the public on the candidates
and their programmes, as well as the polling, helped
to instill some excitement in the campaign despite
the dampening impact of the ravages of the cholera
epidemic.
The JEOM noted and commented publicly on the
enormous disparity in resources enjoyed by the
ruling party and its competitors. It also noted that
a number of presidential candidates appeared to have
stopped campaigning with one conceding publicly that
he had withdrawn.
The last days of the election campaign were
accompanied by rumours as well as allegations by
leading presidential candidates of preparations for
massive fraud. Senior officials of the CEP appeared
to be swept up in this toxic atmosphere and
unhelpfully added their voices to these
unsubstantiated claims.
Election Day Safeguards
Drawing the lessons from previous election
experiences, including the partial legislative
elections of 2009, a number of safeguards were built
into the voting and vote count procedures:
- photographs accompanied the names of the
voters on the polling station registers.
However, the identity card numbers were left off
in order to prevent the known practice of poll
workers signing for absent voters and stuffing
ballots;
- the ballots and proces-verbaux contained
security features to deter counterfeiting;
- the tally sheet procedures also included
deterrent elements to prevent the changing of
the results;
- the provision of tamper-proof transparent
envelopes for the tally sheets and other
sensitive voting material.
Election Day
Election Day was marred by a number of
irregularities:
- late opening of Polling Stations
- inability of many voters to find the
correct Voting Centre and/or Polling Station;
- inability of voters to find their names on
the electoral registers posted up outside the
Polling Stations;
- saturation of the call centres overwhelmed
by callers seeking where to vote;
- instances of incorrect application of
voting procedures ( the signing of the ballots
by BV Presidents before the arrival of the
voter);
- instances of voter manipulation - repeat
voting of some voters facilitated by complicit
poll workers and unidentified party agents;
- the lack of control of already limited
voting space by the poll workers , as well as
the indiscipline of many mandataires, led to
clogged polling stations where control of the
process became tenuous and facilitated
misconduct.
The observation reports transmitted by the JEOM
observer teams indicate that the voting process
unfolded far more smoothly in most of the provinces
than in Port-of-Prince, though the above
irregularities were also observed.
There were also deliberate acts of violence and
intimidation to derail the electoral process both in
Port-au-Prince and the provinces.
More subversive of the process was the toxic
atmosphere created by the allegations of "massive
fraud". The JEOM observed instances where even
before the voting started, any inconvenience or
small problem led to the immediate cry of fraud.
Such conduct continued during the day.
The presence of 66 parties meant that there would
be a large number of party agents ("mandataires")
deployed. Foreseeing the problems that this would
cause, the CEP had indicated that no more than five
party agents would be allowed into the Polling
Station at any one time. Rotation of party agents
would therefore be necessary. However, all would be
permitted to monitor the vote count. The JEOM
observed the problems that this arrangement caused
with many party agents claiming that their party
agents were being denied entry. The JEOM teams
followed up in several parts of the country the
complaints made to it by party representatives on
this problem and found that in general the
complaints were not founded. This became another
reason to cry fraud.
The electoral process continued until the very
end in all the Departments despite the destruction
of Polling Stations in a number of locations,
discontinued polling in some polling stations
because of rising but localized insecurity, and
limited incidents of serious violence. According to
information provided by MINUSTAH, the total number
of Polling Stations destroyed did not exceed 4% in
the entire country.
Recommendations to the CEP
Immediately struck by the deficit of credibility
of the CEP and the lack of confidence it enjoyed on
the part of the political parties, a perception
which was repeatedly reinforced by both the
political parties in their declarations and the
media in their reporting, the JEOM suggested the
following which it transmitted to the CEP as well as
to the wider public through its press reports and
releases:
- the CEP needed to be more open and
communicative vis-à-vis the political parties and
the wider public on its decisions and proposals in
order to achieve greater transparency. To its
credit, the CEP did take several steps in this
direction. It held three meetings with the political
parties, thereby providing a space for frank
dialogue with the political parties and civil
society, an essential ingredient in any electoral
process. It also made its judicial services
available to the non-validated presidential
candidates. Despite the increase in suspicion
towards the CEP following the controversial decision
it took on the discharge for presidential candidates
early in the presidential elections process, the CEP
was successful in restoring some of its lost
credibility. However, these gains were dissipated in
the last two weeks of the pre-election period by the
controversies and disruption that surrounded the
recruitment of the electoral supervisors, and the
knock-on effect on the designation of the poll
workers, the persons designated by the political
parties;
- the CEP should be more communicative.
Regrettably, its communication strategy never fully
lived up to expectations and was further weakened by
the late launching of its most important
public-related initiatives such as the voter
sensitization, the public information and the "Where
to Vote" campaigns. The latter would have a critical
negative impact on the ability of voters to find
their polling stations on Election Day;
- the importance of the training of supervisors
and poll workers. Aware of the weaknesses that
marred the handling of the tally-sheets and the
packaging of the sensitive voter material, the JEOM
underlined the critical importance of these aspects
of the training. Regrettably, the effectiveness of
the training was marred by the disruption and
protests caused by the controversies referred to
above. This no doubt played a role in the weaknesses
observed in their work on Election Day.
The mission believes that these recommendations
remain valid.
Recommendations to the Political Parties
- the importance of the training of the party
agents so they would become the effective
protectors of the interests of the parties;
- the importance of their vigilance, combined
with that of national and international
observers, in preventing fraud on Election Day;
- the importance of insisting on the
integrity and neutrality of the persons they
would designate as mandataires and poll workers.
The actions of a small number of these poll
workers on Election Day were contrary to this
recommendation.
Conclusions
The JEOM has considered whether the
irregularities it observed were of the magnitude and
consistency that would invalidate the legitimacy of
the process. Based on its observations in the eleven
electoral departments, the Joint Mission does not
believe that these irregularities, serious as they
were, necessarily invalidated the process.
Despite the disruptions of the polling and vote
count process in several locations and the
withdrawal decision made by twelve presidential
candidates, the legislative and presidential
elections continued until the end of the voting and
vote count.
The decision of the twelve presidential
candidates to call for the cancellation of the
elections a few hours after the start of the process
was precipitate and regrettable. Moreover, these
candidates should have been minded of Article 226 of
the Electoral Law which establishes that "the
interruption of the vote for whatever the cause and
wherever cannot be considered a reason to cancel the
elections".
These candidates could also have had recourse to
the legal remedies available to them by the
Electoral Law. Their allegations of "massive fraud"
would have been ascertained by the vote count as
well as by their substantiation of their claims. The
Mission requests that the parties make available
this evidence to the CEP within the legally
stipulated claims process which is established to
ensure the transparency and fairness of the process.
Article 178 of the Electoral Law gives a candidate
or his or her representative the authority, within
72 hours of the posting of the results, to challenge
the election of another candidate if the vote count
or the tally sheet were improperly carried out and
contrary to the law; and if electoral fraud had
taken place.
The Mission will continue to observe the
electoral process starting with the operations of
the Tabulation Centre today.
In concluding, the JEOM reiterates its call to
all the political actors for peace and calm in the
coming days and calls on them to display leadership
by ensuring that their supporters do the same.
For more information, please visit the OAS
Website at www.oas.org
<http://www.oas.org/en/default.asp> .