"Seriously undermines the credibility of this kind of company." Pavel Sapelka spoke about international elections* monitoring
Recently, it finally became known that Belarus will not invite OSCE observers to the parliamentary elections*. This election campaign will be the third without observers from the OSCE-ODIHR structures and the Parliamentary Assembly. The international observers will include the CSTO mission and representatives of the CIS countries. Pavel Sapelka, an expert of the Human Rights Defenders for Free Elections campaign, comments on the situation with international elections* monitoring in Belarus.
On the International Day of Solidarity with Belarus on November 16, the United Kingdom and other OSCE member states (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland, and Canada) issued a statement by the OSCE Permanent Council on the human rights situation in Belarus, calling for the immediate release of all political prisoners. The statement gave an unambiguous definitive assessment of the social and political situation in Belarus after the 2020 presidential elections and recommended holding free and fair elections "without interference, intimidation and fear of persecution, in full compliance with international standards." Further, the essential characteristics of free elections were mentioned: respect for freedom of expression and association, including independent media and political parties, the opportunity to run for office without fear of arrest or reprisals, and the invitation of international observers.
10 days later, the chairman of the Central Election Commission (CEC), Ihar Karpenka, spoke about this statement and made it clear that the OSCE's definitive position was unacceptable to the Belarusian regime and was regarded as interference in the internal affairs of Belarus. At the same time, he announced the plans:
"We plan to invite representatives of the central election commissions of the CIS countries, as well as colleagues from the Association of World Election Bodies, whose headquarters are located in the Republic of Korea. The Association unites about 111 countries. Congresses of this organization are held annually, and we actively participate there."
In early December, it became known that the CEC of Belarus had sent invitations to colleagues in the CIS countries to participate in monitoring the single voting day. On December 20, information appeared about the planned participation of members of the Advisory Council of Heads of Electoral Bodies of the CIS member states in monitoring the elections of deputies to the House of Representatives of the National Assembly of the Republic of Belarus. The members of the Advisory Council are representatives of the CEC of the Republic of Armenia, the CEC of the Republic of Belarus, the Central Commission for Elections and Referendums of the Kyrgyz Republic, the CEC of the Russian Federation, the Central Commission for Elections and Referendums of the Republic of Tajikistan, the CEC of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
On January 8, it became clear that the current election campaign would be the third held without observers from the OSCE-ODIHR structures and the Parliamentary Assembly. Pavel Sapelka, an expert at the Human Rights Defenders for Free Elections campaign, expected this situation:
"The authorities, in anticipation of a predictably negative assessment from democratic subjects, both of the electoral events themselves with their unresolved shortcomings, and the context of suppressed expression of will in a purged political sector, preferred to leave the opportunity to be present at another farce mostly for time-tested partners with no less traditions of falsifying elections. The regime clearly has no problems with representatives of the Association of World Election Bodies: this organization essentially holds five-day study visits by small groups of observers and does not publish in-depth professional monitoring reports, limiting itself to a technical description of the rules enshrined in the law of the visited state. The absence of an element of long-term surveillance seriously undermines the credibility of this kind of company and the plausibility of the overall conclusions."