07.11.2007 Russia, Moscow. Konstantin Kosachev, Head of Russia's delegation to the PACE, doesn't doubt the democratic way of changing the President of Russia. Nor does he understand why the Council of Europe censures the elections in Russia.
Photo: Dmitry Dukhanin
| Other Photos |
 |
|
 |
PACE Launching Anti-presidential Campaign
// The Council of Europe thrashed out the elections in Russia and Armenia
Yesterday the PACE (Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe) spring session opened in Strasbourg. First the delegates discussed the recent Russian presidential election, unanimously acknowledging it unfair and unjust, and even tried to find measures to be taken against Russia. Nonetheless one shouldn’t rule out the possibility of taking measures against Armenia before it comes to Russia: Yesterday the presidential election in that country caused a big scandal in the PACE.
An Unjust Russia
The morning session of the PACE began with discussing observers’ reports on the elections which were carried out in Europe within three previous months. These include the presidential election in Russia, Armenia, Serbia and Montenegro, as well as the parliamentary elections in Monaco. At that, only the Russian and Armenian electoral campaigns touched off quite a reaction with the delegates.
The PACE was the only European organization to send its observers to the Russian election of March 2. Andreas Gross, head of the mission, declared during his yesterday’s speech at the Assembly that the Russian election had been neither free nor fair.
“Election can be neither free nor fair when people have no opportunity to choose. This was the case in Russia: none of the candidates, except for Dmitry Medvedev, had a chance to win. For the election to have seemed a bit more free, the obvious favourite should have taken part in the pre-election debates. He might have shown at least some respect towards the challengers and voters, displaying that all candidates had equal rights,” Mr Gross assumed.
He recollected that fall 2007 about 70% of Russians declared ready to cast their ballots for the candidate President Putin would anoint, and the same 70% said they didn’t trust the voting process at all.
The report prepared by the PACE contains some suggestions which the Russian government should follow to improve its election legislation. First, the delegates suggest that all candidates for President be obliged to participate in debates. Second, the European parliamentarians consider the necessity for a candidate to collect 2,000,000 signatures to receive nomination too strict, depriving the opposition leaders of the right to get nominated. Finally, the PACE members resent that candidates don’t have the same share of access to the digital mass media. They insist that an independent public channel be set up in Russia. By the way, the last condition is one of the key PACE demands: until it’s met, the Assembly won’t give up monitoring Russian elections.
Konstantin Kosachev, Head of Russia’s delegation, decided to retort to the author of the report. He stressed that in Russia, as well as in Armenia, Serbia and Montenegro, the Head of State was changed as a result of democratic elections, whereas in Monaco, Great Britain and Sweden the title was inherited.
But after it Russian lawmaker Ivan Melnikov of the Communist Party took the floor and praised Andreas Gross for his “unbiased and detailed report.” He spoke in support of all the PACE requirements on altering the election laws, adding that not only should all candidates be obliged to participate in debates, but TV channels must also broadcast debates when it best suites the audience, not at 7 a.m. or 11 p.m.
Germany’s Holger Haibach stated that “Russia’s election, however smoothly it went, was a mere formality, it didn’t correspond to the spirit of democracy – this is the way it should be treated.” In his view, the PACE must not only establish the fact, but also take certain measures. Referring to the fact that Russia, among other things, broke its promise to ratify Protocols 6 and 14 to the European Convention on Human Rights, Mr Haibach declared that the PACE was to answer the question, whether Russia was moving in the right direction. In his opinion, “one can give only a negative answer to this question,” so Europe must consider “what to do with the huge country that is unwilling or unable to address its current problems.” Kommersant wrote yesterday that some of the PACE delegates have already proposed to deprive Russia of the right to vote unless it ratified Protocols 6 and 14. Apparently, this was the measure Mr Haibach implied.
PACE vs. ODIHR
Discussing the recent elections in the European states, the PACE delegates mentioned another organization dealing with human rights issues – the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). This body, evoking Moscow’s irritation, was unexpectedly subjected to severe criticism. Britain’s conservative, David Wilshire, was the one to begin with criticizing the ODIHR. He said that during the latest presidential election in Montenegro he was surprised to find out that the ODIHR observers had prepared their report on monitoring the election in advance and wouldn’t meet the demands of their PACE counterparts as drafting a joint report. Consequently, Mr Wilshire required that the Assembly consider whether to cooperate with the ODIHR in the future.
Konstantin Kosachev took up the issue he could use for his benefit. He also set himself to unmasking the red tape of that organization, retorting at the same time to the accusations of those delegates who blamed Russia for not allowing the ODIHR observers to come to the presidential election. According to Mr Kosachev, that organization has no written criteria stipulating which elections to monitor. “The bureaucratic structure determines where a stronger mission should be sent, and where – a weaker one. The OSCE ODIHR usually sends about 18 observers to a country. We invited 70 representatives of that organization, but were told that their number was too small,” said the exasperated Mr Kosachev.
Russia can’t accuse the PACE of that kind of policy since this organization has a definite rule: observers are sent to those countries which are monitored, that’s why the PACE observes the elections in Russia, not those in France and Germany.
In the end, the delegates agreed that the framework of the further cooperation with the ODIHR should be thought over.
Row over Armenia
The biggest yesterday’s scandal concerned discussing the situation in Armenia. During the morning session, Britain’s John Prescott, ex-Deputy Prime Minister in Tony Blair’s government, delivered his report on the recent presidential election in Armenia, which was even less critical than that on Russia’s election. Mr Prescott stated that it complied with the standards of the Council of Europe. The lack of criticism about Armenia though roused the indignation of several delegates.
Hungary’s Zsolt Németh reminded that the Armenian election resulted in civil unrest, with 9 people killed. “The Council of Europe legitimizes the anti-democratic policy of the Armenian government! If we are unable to influence or change anything, let’s give up the practice of sending observers there! We need a thorough evaluation of the monitor missions,” claimed the excited Mr Németh.
Sweden’s Marietta Purbe-Lundin, member of the PACE mission to Armenia, described emotionally that in her presence vote fraud took place. “Hundreds of ballots for Levon Ter-Petrosyan were rendered to be for Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan. The members of the electoral commission were aware of what they were doing and that I saw it, but they were far from embarrassed. There were Mr Sargsyan’s observers at the polling station, who so much threatened everyone there – my interpreter begged me not to make any remarks to them. I was so frustrated that couldn’t get a wink of sleep that night,” the parliamentarian complained.
Azerbaijan’s Samad Seidov was even more critical of Armenia, “Mr Prescott says that the Armenian election complies with the standards of the Council of Europe. What does he mean? Have murders become the standards of the Council of Europe? Here 9 people killed were mentioned, but no one recollected those died in jail, or thousands of political prisoners, including the members of the Armenian Parliament. Why is the world so closely watching the situation in Tibet, paying no attention to the arbitrariness in Armenia?”
Nevertheless, John Prescott and several other observers stated that the critics of Armenia’s election were too emotional and biased, whereas there were no shocking facts of electoral fraud registered.
All in all, the dispute is sure to continue. It was decided in the morning that ad hoc debates on Armenia be held Thursday, which means that the majority of the delegates rather disagree with the positive conclusions of Mr Prescott. More to the point, Russia’s representatives told Kommersant that the question of overhauling and confirming the credentials of the Armenian delegation might be raised during one of the forthcoming PACE sessions.
Mikhail Zygar
All the Article in Russian as of Apr. 15, 2008
|
|
|
