-We are deeply impressed with the standard of Norwegian elections, said the 28 election observers from Central Asia and Caucasus at a press conference at the Norwegian Human Rights House yesterday. -The voting took place in a calm and orderly manner, demonstrating that all actors wanted the procedure to be carried out the best way possible. We have seen no attemps of abusing the system. (14-SEP-05)

tigranOleBenny.jpgOn Monday, the day of the parliamentary elections in Norway, the professional election observers – brought in from Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kirgyzstan, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Georgia and Armenia – visited approximately 100 voting stations in seven different municipalities, including both urban, suburban and rural, and both high-, medium and low in population. An Burmese intern with the Norwegian Burma committee also took part.

-Notwithstanding minor shortcomings, you are doing very well
-To many of us, this is the first time we see how truly democratic elections work. We have noticed that Norwegians have a deep faith in their own system, which is well working, and with most methods thoroughly tested and familiar to the voters. However, we have also noticed that there are differing practices regarding the sealing of the ballot boxes, the identification of voters, and the possibility of voting if, for whatever reason, one?s name cannot be found in the registry. There were also instances of voters entering the voting cabinets together, and the design of the voting tickets themselves left something to be desired, causing confusion on how to fold them so as to make the whole procedure entirely confidential. The information to the voters could also have been better.

-System open to abuse
The Uzbeki election expert Tigran Karapetyan, speaking on behalf of the 28 observers, addressed that shortcomings in the Norwegian election legislation seem more often than not to be made up for partly through good traditions, practices and procedures, partly through the remarkably high degree of trust and faith in the system. Karapetyan also remarked that the legislation does not include anything on election observation and that there is a total lack of regulations of the campaign. While this is arguably very positive and a hallmark of a democracy that truly works, one can also imagine various kinds of power abuse on the part of the larger parties, at the expense of the less resourceful smaller ones. Finally, Karapetyan addressed the potential problems of transparency in the Norwegian election system; that while the election administration is quite transparent in practice, measures to secure this are not clearly outlined in the election law and thus open to abuse.

Strong seminar on the observers? own experiences with democracy
The press conference at the Norwegian Human Rights House during which these findings were presented was followed by a seminar entitled ?Democratic Revolution in Central Asia and Caucasus,? once again co-hosted by the Norwegian Helsinki Committee and Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt / Norwegian Institute for International Affairs. All four speakers were recruited among the election observers. Ana Dolidze, leader of the Georgian Young Lawyers? Association spoke on ?Georgia one and a half years after the revolution – problems and prospects,? Edil Baisalov, President of the Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society, Kirgyzstan, spoke on ?A new democratic Kirgyzstan? – The synergy between political fractions and popular mobilisation during and after the Tulip revolution,? Eldar Zeynalov, leader of Human Rights Centre in Azerbaijan, spoke on ?New disappointments? Key players and likely scenarios in the November 2005 Parliamentarian elections in Azerbaijan,? and Yevgeny Zhovtis, leader of Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights, spoke on ?Democratic prospects? – Sources of popularity and reasons for discontent with the Nazarbaev leadership in light of Kazakhstan?s December 2005 Presidential elections?.