Shams Network and Nazaha team for election monitoring held a News Conference together

Sat. 10:30 am, Aug. 1, 2009, Shams network which consists of 113 NGOs all over Iraq was established 2004. it monitored election processes in Iraq ( like latest elections: provincial elections) in Jan. 2009 via 10117 monitors. For what concerns Kurdistan region’s elections, the network observed the election process in its seven stages by 3000 monitors. Nazaha team for election monitoring, which an independent group of civil organizations in Iraq, it consists of 60 NGOs. Each organization, group and union member of the group monitored the last election process in Iraq and founded this group because of the need of this work. Nazaha team participated in Kurdistan region election by 3500 monitors. Nazaha and Shams hold a news conference together at Goran hall in Chwarchra Hotel.

In this news conference, Hogir Chato, general coordinator of Shams network, and Abdulla Khalid spokesman of Nazaha team for election monitoring addressed  to the journalists

In this announcement, both sides shed light on the most important positive and negative points of Kurdistan region elections and presented their notes about private voting, voter’s register, voting calendar, and many other sides.

This is the speech that they made:

The Joint announcement about Kurdistan Region Elections

Parliamentary and presidential elections of Kurdistan region was conducted July 25th 2009 so as to elect 111 parliament members and the president of the region in a legal way in which the voters vote freely and secretly to choose their candidate. For the sake of having a clean and transparent election there must be independent monitoring by civil organizations. For the sake of achieving such aims, both sides: 

Shams network for monitoring elections in Iraq: Shams network which consists of 113 NGOs all over Iraq was established 2004. It monitored election processes in Iraq ( like latest elections: provincial elections) in Jan. 2009 via 10117 monitors. For what concerns Kurdistan region elections, the network observed the election process in its seven stages by 3000 monitors.

Nazaha team for election monitoring in Iraq: it’s an independent group of civil organizations in Iraq consisting of 60 NGOs. Each organization, group and union member of the group monitored the last election process in Iraq and founded this group because of the need of this work. Nazaha team participated in Kurdistan region election by 3500 monitors.

By having two greatest independent election monitoring networks that could cover all the voting centers and 86% of the voting stations jointly. In the joint meetings of both sides before the day of private elections and general elections put plans to cooperate in covering region provinces and the provinces of Baghdad, Nineveh and Anbar in which elections would be conducted by the aid of foreign monitors from Arab World Election Monitors. This joint work was done on the base:

-One aim, which is having a clean election

-One work which is monitoring the elections

-One problem, each one working will be weak

Such cooperation was taken into consideration and both sides agreed on using different ways and methods for monitoring elections in Kurdistan region. After the process there will be a workshop by the leaders of both groups for evaluating the process depending on the international bases of a successful election.

Major bases of integrate election process which has been emphasized by Iraqi Constitution:

1-Election must be general: which means that every individual can take part in election legally and practically, this base can be notices in Kurdistan region elections and it was allocated legally, except in case for the voters who did not have their names in the voters’ register.

2-Election must be direct: means that the voter can freely elect the candidate he wants without having any constrains, this can also be notices in Kurdistan region elections, except in the case of illiterate voting, family voting, and special voting for prisoners that in some centers there violations.

3-Election must be confidential: means that the voter can vote in a secret way, this was notices in Kurdistan region elections and IHEC followed some procedures for keeping voter’s voting secret, except in some cases of group voting, having individuals inside the polling station who were not related to the staff, or putting the cabinets in a wrong way, or having conditioned voting, these are all against the regulations of IHEC. 

Beside these points, Shams and Nazaha for monitoring Kurdistan region elections found some problems that could affect the integrity of the process, such points must be seriously taken into consideration in future, because without solving such problems the election process will remain under suspicion and the election process and democracy will be questioned.

The points:

1-Special voting for policemen, security, hospitals and prisons, in both experiments of Iraqi and Kurdistan Region elections, IHEC with its procedures that apply them now can not control the process especially in voting more than one time. That is why we suggest for removing special voting; policemen and security men have to vote with the staff of the voting centers in the day of general election. Patients in hospitals and prisoners have to vote through the mobile teams in the same day.

2-The cases of not having the voters’ names in the registers show that the procedures that IHEC follows are not good and depending on ration card is not scientific. That is why IHEC must do census for the population inside and outside Iraq and put other scientific bases for voters’ registers.

3-The voters do not know where to vote. Although this is the duty of IHEC and other sides related to the elections, but IHEC must take best procedures to give information to the voters and must think of finding better ways beside renewing time of voters’ registers, tele-center and propaganda, and to make a special card for each voter as soon as possible to contain all information about the voter which are necessary for renewing and in the days of voting.

4-Preventing organized counterfeiting, though IHEC follows some procedures for preventing organized counterfeiting especially in what concerns the average of voters participating in the election and not to revote. One of the good steps was that each voter had his name only in one polling station, but  sometimes because of some reasons and over all being loyal to a political party will lead to organized counterfeiting, that is why  we suggest that voter’s registers to be distributed on all the representatives of political parties in the polling station so as to check the voter’s name more than one time. This will be a step forward for preventing organized counterfeiting and controlling the real participation average and guarantying not to vote more than one time, such ways are found in Lebanon.

5-Not applying the legal bases, systems and regulation of IHEC as they are. Monitors from both sides recorded many violations to the regulations of IHEC , some of the violations were not intentional and some others were intentional by IHEC employees and political parties for example in having election propaganda in an area of 100 m close to the polling stations, voting  of the illiterate and existence of informal persons inside the polling centers. IHEC must face such violations in a stronger way by imposing more clear and transparent punishments, for example, if an employee of IHEC is punished, the punishment must be announced clearly in order others not to repeat the violation.

6-Limiting the works of an active monitor, for the sake of having  a more integrate and clean election, IHEC must remove the limitations of the rights of the monitors and give all information to the monitoring networks, especially the regulations and the procedures except the systems that they are published in the website of IHEC. The way of treatment inside the voting centers must be changed and monitors must be given more rights and this can be done through changing System No. 5 concerning the importance of the reports as appeals and complaints to the process.

7-The problem of monopolizing information, there are much information that remain secret, IHEC must treat these information more transparently, especially the information related to appeals and election results. IHEC must, at least, give all the information of voting stations to the political parties and monitors so as to build measurements on it not building assumptions.

8-Weakness of training, some of our monitors’ notes were about that a number of IHEC employees, political parties, voting agencies, and even foreign and local monitors need quantitative and qualitative training concerning knowing the regulations and procedures of IHEC. IHEC must depend on private sector to solve this problem and Iraqi universities can be suitable institutions to hold this duty. 

9-Unorganized appointment and not abiding by timetable of election, according to the international bases the voter must know in advance for a long time about the election process and he must have enough information and know the timetable. IHEC must  put an end to changing date and extending it, not to make the voter get use to extensions and deadlines. That is why it is necessary to treat time and timetable in a sacred way.

10-Interfering in the work of IHEC and making pressure, IHEC is the only party responsible for arranging and managing election process, previously there are some examples showing interference in the works of IHEC especially by government and imposing some demands that some of them are against the regulations and procedures of IHEC. We notice this case and we know it is a difficult task, but for keeping the independence of IHEC, it must get rid of political influence and carry out all regulations and procedures and not to do any political compliment.

Certainly, we highly appreciate the role of IHEC in managing the process, we consider ourselves as close partners to it. We appreciate the coordination of IHEC, we think that what has been done is great besides having some notes in a state which is new to democracy and the age of elections is less than 25 years.