IWPR Home institute for war & peace reporting
   
 Advanced Search
building peace and democracy through free and fair media

Home
Programmes
Afghanistan
Afghan Recovery Report
Africa
Zimbabwe Crisis Reports
Caucasus
Caucasus Reporting Service
Cross Caucasus Network
Central Asia
Reporting Central Asia
News Briefing Central Asia
Human Rights Reporting
Central Asia Radio
International Justice
ICC - Africa Update
ICTY - Tribunal Update
Face à la Justice - RD Congo
Facing Justice - Uganda
On the Scale - Darfur
Iran
Mianeh Reports
Iraq
Iraqi Crisis Report
Pakistan
Open Minds
Philippines
Human Rights Reporting
Syria
Syria News Briefing
Multimedia
Resources
Books
Training
IWPR Comment
Kurt Schork Awards
Photo Galleries
Sahar Fund
Past Programmes
Past Publications
CIJ Trial Reports Archive
Links
RSS Feeds
Other IWPR sites
Academy
Mianeh
Open Minds Pakistan
Regional Media Network
Rights Reporting
IWPR on acebook
witter
 



Reporting Central Asia
Central Asia home
Uzbek Presidential Election

Uzbeks Invite Friendly Monitors to Bless Polls

Russian

While the OSCE cites grave democratic shortcomings, there will be no shortage of praise from the election observers sent by former Soviet states.

By Inga Sikorskaya in Bishkek (RCA No. 522, 19-Dec-07)

A polling station in Bukhara.
Uzbekistan is putting on a show of democratic legitimacy for the December 23 presidential election, dispatching thousands of observers to polling stations throughout the country.

In a recent speech marking Constitution Day, President Islam Karimov said 23,300 observers would monitor the vote, drawn from local state organisations, the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, OSCE, and Muslim countries.

But while some of these observers will visit polling stations, monitor the sealing of ballot boxes and attend the count, few analysts expect their presence to make much of a difference.

Significantly, the OSCE is not mounting the comprehensive monitoring exercise that is normal in other member states. Earlier this month, it announced that its Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, ODIHR, was sending only a limited contingent of about 20 observers, because it did not see any real competition taking place among the four candidates.

“Due to the apparent limited nature of the electoral competition, it is not considered necessary to deploy short-term observers and the OSCE/ODIHR will not conduct any systematic and comprehensive observation of election-day proceedings, but observers will nonetheless visit a number of polling stations on election day,” said a statement from the organisation.

A political analyst who declined to be named commented, “The fact that the OSCE is sending only a limited mission and is not going to [fully] monitor the vote suggests its assessment of the presidential elections will be negative.”

Farhad Tolipov, a political analyst based in Tashkent, said the government was not worried by this implied slur on the election process, even though it was fully aware of the views of international organisations like the OSCE.

“Both sides are perfectly aware of the situation, which is why the authorities have taken no steps to win over the OSCE,” he said.

The OSCE and the Tashkent regime have clashed before over the government’s conduct of elections.

During the last presidential election, held in 2000, the OSCE similarly declined to conduct comprehensive monitoring, saying the vote was “not democratic, non-transparent and did not provide equal rights to all participants”.

The OSCE also condemned the 2004 parliamentary election, saying that it was far from democratic and that the election process needed “radical changes”.

Uzbekistan’s hard-line president appears indifferent to the OSCE’s concerns.

“The OSCE results are not very important for us,” he said in 2004. “It is not the only organisation for us, because the OSCE represents Europe and we are in Central Asia.”

At the same time, Karimov insisted that as a member state, Uzbekistan remained committed to the grouping’s principles.

Beside the token OSCE mission, other foreign observers will represent the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the Eurasian Economic Community of former Soviet states, and most numerous of all, the Commonwealth of Independent States, CIS, whose members are sending more than 80 monitors.

CIS observers have opened regional headquarters in Samarkand, Bukhara and Fergana.

They are seen as a “friendly” mission by Tashkent, and on past performance they will not make any critical remarks however the poll is conducted.

As one political expert put it, CIS observer teams are “always loyal in assessing Central Asian elections”.

He added, “It was the same during the [August] parliamentary election in Kazakhstan, and in presidential elections in other Central Asian countries.”

A similar scenario was played out in Tajikistan in November 2006 after the incumbent president, Imomali Rahmon, was elected for a third time. Although the opposition did not take part in that election, the CIS mission blandly endorsed the vote as transparent, free and democratic.

Uzbek human rights activists argue that the authorities want large-scale but toothless election monitoring in hope of pasting over the cracks in the electoral process.

“The announcement that large numbers of observers – about 23,500 of them, most of whom are controlled by the authorities – shows the government intends to cover up the illegitimacy of the current election,” said Surat Ikramov, the Tashkent-based leader of the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Activists of Uzbekistan.

Originally Soviet Uzbekistan’s Communist boss, President Karimov has held a tight grip on power throughout the 16 years of independence. He has been elected head of state twice and managed to prolong existing terms in office on two occasions.

There are no legally-operating opposition parties.

According to an anonymous source in the Liberal Democratic Party, which nominated Karimov as its candidate, the majority of local election observers are drawn from the ranks of this and other parties that are equally subservient to the regime.

Apart from Karimov, three other individuals are standing - Asliddin Rustamov, nominated by the People’s Democratic Party, Diloram Tashmuhammedova of the Adolat party, and Akmal Saidov, director of the National Centre for Human Rights.

Human rights activists and observers say none of them constitutes any kind of threat to Karimov, and that genuine opposition candidates were not allowed to stand.

Inga Sikorskaya is an IWPR editor in Bishkek.




Subscribe
Past Reports
MonthIssue No.
Feb602-602
Jan600-601
MonthIssue No.
Dec597-599
Nov594-596
Oct590-593
Sep588-589
Aug586-587
Jul582-585
Jun579-581
May576-578
Apr573-575
Archive 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 00
Highlights
Facing Justice - UgandaFacing Justice - Uganda
Vacancies Available
On the Scale - DarfurOn the Scale - Darfur
Project Review Oct/Nov 2009
Kurt Schork Awards Videos
Kurt Schork Award Winners
Reporter Shortlisted for Regional Prize
In the News
Winnipeg Free Press"Now [the Taleban] appear to be able to launch their attacks even in the most heavily protected sections of [Kabul], "said IWPR Afghan project editor/trainer Jean MacKenzie.
McClatchy"The simple fact is that the condition of the economy has never played a major role in the minds of Iranian leaders or in Iran's national security equation," said IWPR contributor Omid Memarian on the prospect of tougher western sanctions.
BBC“I would like to imagine that at least a few senior politicians woke up this week to seriously wonder what kind of monsters they and their system have created over the years," said IWPR's Head of Asia Alan Davis, referring to Maguindanao massacre.
The New York TimesRecent double bombing in Baghdad has cast doubt on the government's ability to guarantee security and prompted fears such violence may affect voter turnout in anticipated January elections, writes iWPR reporter Ali Karim.
Support
To support IWPR's work in Central Asia, contact Ria Burghardt, or make an ONLINE DONATION >>
IWPR thanks the following for their generous support:
UK Foreign & Commonwealth OfficeUK Foreign and Commonwealth Office
US Department of StateUS Department of State
Open Society InstituteOpen Society Institute (OSI)



© Institute for War & Peace Reporting
48 Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X 8LT, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 7831 1030    Fax: +44 (0)20 7831 1050

The opinions expressed in IWPR Online are those of the authors and do not
necessarily represent those of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting.

Registered as a charity in the United Kingdom (charity reg. no: 1027201, company reg. no: 2744185)