The way electoral complaints are handled or mishandled is an integral part of the election process that international observers are supposed to monitor. There was only one international observer left today in Cambodia. He was from the European Union Election Observation Mission.
Today was the final day of the complaint resolution process following Voting Day of July 27. None of the opposition's numerous complaints has been properly dealt with. Over the last four weeks following Voting Day, both the National Election Committee (NEC) and the Constitutional Council (CC) have dismissed all the opposition's requests for re-vote or vote recount in spite of irrefutable evidence of massive fraud. http://tinyurl.com/4eegak
This failure in the election complaint resolution process says a lot about the whole election process…
The following is an excerpt from letters that the Sam Rainsy Party and the Human Rights Party have just written to signatories of the 1991 Paris Peace Agreements on Cambodia.
The letter to France's President of the Republic is in French http://tinyurl.com/56b3xl
The letter to Indonesia's President of the Republic is in English http://tinyurl.com/6ka6x4
France and Indonesia were co-chairs of the Paris International Conference on Cambodia which led to the signing of the Paris Peace Agreements on October 23, 1991.
"An acceptable resolution of a number of our electoral complaints should be through the holding of a re-vote or, at least, a vote recount in a limited number of constituencies (provinces or municipalities) where the opposition has come very close to winning one additional parliamentary seat according to figures provided by the NEC. However, the NEC, which is both judge and judged, has rejected practically all our complaints. Even the most important ones were only "examined" behind closed doors and very quickly dismissed as "groundless". As of today, the NEC has not allowed a single vote recount, let alone a re-vote, even when first reports of ballot counting from a given polling station conflict with each other and some of these reports seem to have been doctored. When the opposition submits a complaint with some evidence raising some doubt, why doesn't the NEC accept to jointly with the plaintiffs recount the ballots from any given ballot box from any given polling station so as to dissipate any doubt? Are they afraid that a vote recount even for a single ballot box from a single polling station – there are 15, 254 polling stations nationwide – could reveal anomalies/irregularities that are indicative of broader fraud commune-wide, province-wide and nationwide? The Constitutional Council, which is another CPP-controlled institution acting as a kind of Supreme Court, has so far upheld all the NEC's decisions to dismiss the opposition's complaints and requests. There is apparently no other reasons for the two institutions for not allowing any vote recount than the fear to see the CPP's "landslide victory" evaporate following proper verifications."
SAM RAINSY PARTY
5 comments:
Khmerization;
Just a personal thought on SR's letter to the president of Indonesia [need time to read all].
President of Indonesia has had his hands tied behind his back by 2 things: 1] Signatory of Paris Peace Accord as vice-chair, 2] Charter of ASEAN on non-interference on internal affairs of members' state. Therefore, if he did he will be damned or if he didn't he will be damned.
2 instances that my thought reflect badly on SR. 1] the use of National Assembly letter head, which is really odd if a party is to contest the result of the election - kinda of abuse of his power as parlimentarian and co-signed by the person is yet swearing in as MP but acknowledged that he will be the MP elect following the election. 2] word MP elect following the july 27, 08 election - is said that both SR and Kem recognized the result.
This is purely my personal thought
the letter to the co-chair of paris peace accords or to the 19 signatories of that peace accords will not produce anything. most countries who signed that peace accords are having problems of their own and indonesia is one country that is facing problems.
on the issue of son chhay using the parliamentary letterhead, i believe he has the right to do so because while the new parliament has not been sworn in, the old parliament still has its mandate and therefore son chhay is still a member of parliament- the old parliament. but if the co-signatory is a newly-elected member of parliament it is very odd indeed, because he is not a member of parliament yet because he has not been sworn in. also he didn't recognise the election results therefore it is odd. but for son chhay alone, he is within his power to use parliamentary letterhead as he is still a member of the old parliament because the new one has not been sworn in yet, so the old one is still in force.
Khmerization;
I am referring to letter by Mr. Sam Rainsy to Indonesia president, letter head of the national assembly was used and duly signed by Mr. Sam Rainsy and Mr. Kem with wording "MP elect following 27th July 2008".
personally i think that sam rainsy has the right to use the parliamentary letterhead because he is both a member of the old and new parliament. for kem sokha it might not be appropriate if he alone uses the parliamentary letterhead. but since he is a co-signatory of the letter and only signed with "mp elect" it might be ok because whether he recognises election or not he is an "mp elect", like any other cpp mp elect, but again it seem odd.
Khmerization;
Sam Rainsy and his is well known to leaders around the world. For him to use the letter head of NA is ok because NA's members and immunity from previous mendate is not resolved until new one searing in, however in this instant, if he is to protest the result and is to have a co-signature by newly elect member is yet to swearing and is protesting the result, in my opnion, they shall have use their political party letter head instead to avoid any confusion by other which seen as inappropriate.
Post a Comment