On December 12, 1999, municipal elections were held for the first time in Azerbaijan. The elections were held on the eve of Azerbaijan’s membership to the European Council in the new century. Free and fair municipal elections in Azerbaijan are a condition of membership in the council.
The Azerbaijani officials stated that some problems could be expected to occur in these elections, as they are being held for the first time. But problems which occurred as the result of intentional manipulation were not connected with a lack of experience as stated by government officials.
The fabrication of results during parliamentary and presidential
elections held in Azerbaijan since 1995, during recent municipal elections
as well as the illegal activity of the Central Electoral Commission (CEC)
and its local bodies have galvanized the mistrust of the population and
electorate. As a result, voter turnout for the municipal elections was
approximately 15 percent. However, as usual, the CEC announced a higher
voter turnout, 52 percent. In order for the elections to be valid in Azerbaijan,
a voter turnout of 25 percent is required.
The CEC’s voter turnout figure is obviously in error based on the
following facts:
1. As a result of measures taken by representatives and observers
of the democratic parties, government tampering was prevented and the level
of voter turnout in these elections was established at 8-15 percent. Only
in 8 polling stations in the Sabael district of Baku was voter turnout
on a level of 10-18 percent. In district 17, where Mr. Heidar Aliev actively
campaigned, voter turnout was 18 percent. This showed that Mr. Aliev’s
state television supported campaign was unsuccessful.
2. The initial opinion of international observers, provided by the
Institute for Democracy in Eastern Europe (IDEE), confirms the low level
of voter participation. For example, a journalist from the Czech Republic,
Ms. Petruska Shustrova, observed the entire election process at polling
station number 47 in the Nizami district of Baku. Voter turnout in this
district was 8 percent. Official figures in neighboring districts show
voter turnout levels of 40, 45 and 50 percent.
These as well as other facts confirm that the municipal elections should not have been validated in Azerbaijan. These elections should not have been validated for the following additional reasons:
1. Poorly constructed electoral laws, i.e. what is not in the law
is legal;
2. The CEC and its bodies organize and conduct elections as well
as count the votes, despite having no formal status;
3. Obstacles encountered by selected nominees during the registration
process. For example, 4 thousand nominees of the 8 thousand from the main
opposition parties represented in these elections, the popular Front and
Musavat, were not registered;
4. Most of the observers representing democratic parties and independent
organizations were not allowed to participate in the electoral process;
5. Illegal interference by the police and representatives of governing
bodies in the election process as well as other processes.
While the participation of democratic parties in the municipal elections allowed the government to claim that the elections were free and fair, the Popular Front and Musavat have stated that these elections were not free and fair.
Finally, there is a famous saying in the West: "Every election is
a step forward!" It is difficult not to agree with this opinion, but elections
in Azerbaijan are conducted according to the famous words of Joseph Stalin:
"It is not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes."
"MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS HELD TO BE ANTI-DEMOCRATIC"
Yesterday, the international observers (supported by the Institute for Democracy in Eastern Europe - IDEE) who monitored the municipal elections, Petrushka Shustrova, a Czech journalist, Ivlian Haindrava and Fridon Salviladze from Georgia, held a press conference on the initial results of the elections.
The observers, who monitored the election process in the Nerimanov,
Nizami, and Nesimi election districts of Baku, noted the lack of experience
among the population in municipal elections. In their opinion, the elections
in all districts they monitored were held in an undemocratic manner. The
observers also stated that they witnessed a single voter casting 13 ballots
in one of the electoral districts and that the level of voter turnout was
below the required quorum.