Leaving aside certain excesses, the elections in Georgia were "a step towards achieving the standards set out by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe." At least this was the verdict of international OSCE observers. I, too, had the opportunity to observe the elections, but I completely disagree with the view of this respected institution.
In the company of Polish journalist Marek Pedziwol, I observed the elections in Batumi, the capital of the autonomous Adzhar republic located on the Black Sea coast. Aslan Abashidze, chairman of the Adzhar parliament and head of the All-Georgian Union of Revival Block, was the expected winner. His block included parties with contrasting programs, united only by their thirst for power. Abashidze's position in the Adzhar republic was suggestively indicated by the fact that in Batumi there were billboards depicting him alone: not a single iota, no number of the party, nothing but the head of a man to whom the citizens of Batumi refer merely as of "Aslan" (in the same way as in Cuba Fidel is described without his surname).
Representatives of the opposition told us about the course of the election campaign - for example, that in shop windows there were only posters of parties which had been brought by representatives of the Town Hall. When someone from the opposition wanted to place a leaflet in a shop window, he was told by those in the store that they were afraid of problems with the Town Hall. Even the fact that people from the Town Hall went from household to household before the elections, asking the people whom they would vote for and where they were working, demonstrates that Abashidze left nothing to chance.
Local observers argue that the time given by television to pre-election spots of the block was far longer than the time allocated by law (this also applies to the election campaign of the Georgian Union of Citizens under Eduard Shevardnadze, which came in first in the elections with almost 42 percent). We spent election day in the premises of 45th ward in Batumi. It was a strenuous day that began at 6 a.m. before the chairman of the election commission had sealed the ballot boxes, and ended long after 2 a.m., after all the votes had been counted. We read in the papers that roughly 200 OSCE observers had visited some 800 election wards. It would hardly have been possible for them to spend the whole day in one place - and I find it difficult to imagine how they could have discovered possible election gerrymandering. In the 45th ward the voting took place most of the day in a regular manner, we could easily have spent several hours there and notice no irregularities. But since we were there the whole day without a break, we saw people arriving and depositing bundles of ballot papers in the boxes, possibly twenty and more. We drew the attention of members of the election commission to this but they had no intention of taking the offender to task.
We carefully counted all the voters who placed their ballots into
the box. The day was long, we could have made a mistake, but one local
observer checked us and counted the voters on his own. Our results differed
by twenty votes. According to our count, some 1,600 persons had come to
vote at the polling station, and even if we add the bundles of ballot papers,
only 100 to 150 additional ballots could have been deposited in the ballot
box. But once the votes had been counted it was found that almost 2,400
votes had been cast; and had a mere 14 votes been added, the participation
in the election in that ward would have been 100%. This means that in 45th
ward, 800 votes were added, making almost one-third invalid under the rules.
An "excess"? Could things have been different in other wards? If we take
into consideration that according to official figures, 98 to 100 percent
of the electorate went to the polls in the Adzhar republic, it is easy
to arrive at the conclusion that the results, according to which the All-Georgian
Union of Revival obtained more than 25%, were rigged (observers in Tbilisi
told us there were irregularities there as well, just as elsewhere, but
they were more "civilized" and not on such a wide-scale).
Why all this cheating when Shevardnadze and Abashidze won convincingly
even without it? The reason was to make sure that the make sure that falsified
participation in the elections would change the number of votes and, consequently,
the power ratio, so that smaller parties did not get into Parliament. One
of these, the Industry Block to Save Georgia, reached the seven percent
election threshold, but it is being said in this block that the threshold
was created on instructions from Shevardnadze as his satellite ally in
Parliament.
So, why do OSCE observers claim that the elections in Georgia were a step forward? Agency reports encourage the belief that the fundamental battle took place between two major rivals - the smaller parties appeared to be irrelevant. Something is explained also by Mr. Michael Ochs, who had monitored many elections as an observer for the OSCE. He told us even before the event that there would be cheating in the elections, but that in Georgia the situation was better than, for example, in Kazakhstan. He is surely right, but I believe that the honesty and regularity of the Georgian elections can be judged solely by Georgian laws.
The United States welcomed Shevardnadze's victory. This is understandable - his drive towards Europe is definitely closer to that of the developed world than Aslan Abashidze's orientation towards Russia, which could bring even further problems to a region already full of turbulence.
But what about the citizens of Georgia? What about the voters who
saw the rigging of the elections with their own eyes, and are now told
that the world regards this as "occasional excesses?” After all, democracy
in the country is created neither by Shevardnadze nor by some other prominent
politician, but through the participation of people in public events, and
many Georgian citizens feel deceived and sold out to "higher political
interests." Not even a post-Soviet republic will get very far without civil
commitment. By all international standards, there is far-reaching corruption
in Georgia, and it is generally known that unless there is a change of
elites, the rule of the law is unlikely to make any progress.