Legal Expert Says Ballot Frauds Might Lead to Mass Protests

Q&A with Davit Usupashvili

Representatives of the civil society are alarmed with the irregularities of the pre-election process in Georgia, including the mass inaccuracies of the voter lists. Davit Usupashvili is a senior legal and policy adviser of IRIS Georgia to implement the USAID Rule of Law program. He was among those three candidates for the Central Election Commission Chairmanship post, proposed by the OSCE for approval to President Shevardnadze. He expresses concern over the use of state resources by the authorities and facts of intimidation of voters.

Q: Which are the main problems that might hinder the democratic elections?

A: As of my opinion the main problem is that the governmental structures and officials are directly involved as a party and they use their administrative and state resources in favor of a particular political force. This is not a new trend. The previous elections were characterized with the same problems as well. But this time such processes became too apparent.

There is a pressure on employees of the governmental structures to support the presidential-backed election bloc [For New Georgia]. The same is happening in the law enforcement structures, but openly. Deputy Interior Minister has stated at a staff meeting recently that it is the police’s duty to support the government. Everybody knows that the state resources are used especially in the provinces to ensure votes for the government. Therefore, on November 2 the voters might not witness the violations, such as false ballots in the boxes, but they might be targets of the pressure.

The opposition is confronting authorities’ these measures with countermeasures, which, quite often are also far from the Constitution’s framework. Among them are the sources of financing. Large part of the opposition does not show openly and clearly these sources. Since they do not have the administrative means, they face confrontation rather frequently, hence the tensions increase further.

I do not think that active voters, which support one or another party, would simply sigh and return to the homes, once they do not find their names on the lists on the elections day. I think these errors in the lists might increase tensions even further.

The voter lists added fuel to these tensions. Recent debates between the opposition and the government were topped with the issues of the CEC and election administration composition, disregarding another also very important issue – the voter lists.

Q: Do you think that the authorities would follow the Azerbaijani government’s model of maintaining order after the elections? What would be the impact of the recent events in Baku on Georgia and should we expect the same scenario here on November 2?

A: It is expectable if a part of the society would believe that their favorite party was unjustly discriminated, while the others won. The events in Azerbaijan became possible because of mass ballot fraud.

There are 5 or 6 parties that have well-justified claims to clear the 7% barrier. In case of fair elections the recent opinion polls are quite enough to draw the general picture. If the governmental forces take the first place, overcoming other parties with significant number of votes, there naturally will be doubts over the fair elections. A voter might not see where exactly the fraud took place, but he or she and the whole part of the society would still protest. Many of them might commence illegal actions as well.

There are [parties] which have full grounds to be confident about support of at least 10% of the voters. They would surely protest in case of the defeat.

We should not expect any outbreaks of confrontation if only one party fails. For instance, if four out of five parties achieve success and these four would recognize the elections, then this last party would find it hard expressing its protest.

Q: What is the prime reason of the inaccuracies in the voter lists? The Central Election Commission admits that thousands of eligible voters are not included on lists.

A: Everybody found out that the lists were inaccurate only two weeks before the elections, so the Central Election Commission has to make the lists over again.

I think we are witnessing at least a criminal neglect, which is punishable under the law, since we might be dealing with case when a state official or a person with the equivalent position showed neglect and thus inflicted damage to the society or a person.

However I would not rule out that this quite might be the case of sabotage as well. Inaccuracies in the lists, which obstruct normal functioning of the election administrations and might even jeopardize the elections, definitely needs to be investigated. Some people say that we should wait and at first improve the lists and only then find the person accountable for inaccuracies in the lists. However, I personally believe that these two things should be done at the same time. In other words, we should work on adjustments and others, namely the General Prosecutor’s Office, which is not involved in the adjustment process, should investigate who is responsible for this. This is very urgent and necessary thing to do.

I also would not rule out that both the opposition and the government intended to create a pre-condition for post-election protests. The opposition claims that the government made these errors in the lists with purpose to fraud the elections and if a certain major party would feel discriminated after November 2, it could motivate its protests with these lists.

Q: How possible it is to correct the lists in the remaining time before the elections?

A: The deadline for correcting the lists expires on October 26, but there would be another way: individual appeals to the court. However, this is a very complicated process. Correcting errors of such scale is almost impossible through the court. I am looking forward seeing results of the joint work of the Interior Ministry and the CEC. I do not fully believe that the process will be finished by the deadline.

Q: How real it would be to improve this problem with the recent initiative of the opposition parties, which suggested that a voter, who would not find his or her name in the lists, should fill in a special form and submit to the parties’ election headquarters.

A: If this will be done under a joint plan, then this could help indeed. But I have an impression that such activities lack coordination, hence separate activity of the parties could produce too different data, complicating the situation even further. I do not say that such activities of the parties are bad, but chaos and uncoordinated efforts would be most damaging in this case.

Q: Despite all the above, which positive trends do you see on the eve of the elections?

A: Finally a clear political spectrum is emerging in Georgia with strong supporters and basis. There are 6 political groups. Among them are the United National Movement, the New Rights, the Burjanadze-Democrats and the Labor Party. Although many things will still change, this is an example of a positive tendency.

Another positive trend is growth of importance of a single voter; hence politicians pay more attention to the public’s attitude. The government suffers most from this. During the previous elections only the opposition parties really talked about errors of the government, while now almost every citizen is closely watching what the government is doing.

This means that whoever comes to the power, they will fear the society. This is very good, but still we need caution here too. One small mistake might render activity of the public worthless. If the people would see now that nothing is going to change after the elections, it will loose the faith completely.