See related documentsElection observation report
| Doc. 12432
| 11 November 2010
Observation of the general elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina
(3 October 2010)
Bureau of the Assembly
Rapporteur : Mr Tiny KOX,
Netherlands, UEL
1. Introduction
1. Following an invitation on 12 May 2010 from the Central
Electoral Commission (CEC) of Bosnia and Herzegovina, at its meeting
on 25 May 2010 the Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly decided
to form an ad hoc committee of 30 members to observe the general
elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina on 3 October 2010, and to organise
a pre-electoral visit by five members – one from each political
group, who were also members of the ad hoc committee. This visit
took place on 13 and 14 September 2010. Mr Tiny Kox was appointed
Chair and Rapporteur of the ad hoc committee.
2. On 4 October 2004, the Parliamentary Assembly and the European
Commission for Democracy through Law (“Venice Commission”) signed
a co-operation agreement. Article 15 of the agreement states that
"when the Bureau of the Assembly decides to observe an election
in a country in which electoral legislation has previously been
examined by the Venice Commission, one of the rapporteurs of the
Venice Commission on this issue may be invited to join the Assembly’s
election observation mission as legal adviser". The Bureau of the
Assembly thus invited an expert from the Venice Commission to join
the ad hoc committee as legal adviser.
3. On the advice of the Assembly's political groups, the ad hoc
committee had the following membership:
- Tiny KOX, Head of the delegation (Netherlands, UEL)
- Group of the European People's Party (EPP/CD):
- Renato FARINA, Italy
- Jean-Charles GARDETTO, Monaco
- Françoise HOSTALIER, France
- Anna LILLIEHÖÖK, Sweden
- Miroslawa NYKIEL, Poland
- Kent OLSSON, Sweden
- Janusz RACHOŃ, Poland
- Socialist Group (SOC):
- Mirjana
FERIĆ-VAC, Croatia
- Angelika GRAF, Germany
- Sinikka HURSKAINEN, Finland
- Igor IVANOVSKI, “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”
- Reijo KALLIO, Finland
- Geert LAMBERT, Belgium
- Pietro MARCENARO, Italy
- Gisela WURM, Austria
- Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE):
- Nursuna MEMECAN, Turkey
- Jørgen POULSEN, Denmark
- Andrea RIGONI, Italy
- European Democratic Group (EDG):
- Yüksel ÖZDEN, Turkey
- Karin S. WOLDSETH, Norway
- Group of the Unified European Left (UEL):
- Secretariat:
- Vladimir
Dronov, Head of the Secretariat, Interparliamentary Co-operation
and Election Observation Unit
- Chemavon Chahbazian, Deputy Head of the Secretariat, Interparliamentary
Co-operation and Election Observation Unit
- Franck Daeschler, Principal Administrative Assistant
- Danièle Gastl, Assistant
- Serguei Kouznetsov, Elections and Referendums Division,
Venice Commission
4. The ad hoc committee formed part of the international
election observation mission, which also included election observers
from the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE, the NATO Parliamentary
Assembly and the election observation mission of the OSCE Office
for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR).
5. The ad hoc committee met in Sarajevo from 1 to 4 October 2010.
It met representatives of the main political parties standing for
election, the Chairperson of the Central Electoral Commission, the
Council of Europe Secretary General's special representative in
Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Head of the OSCE mission, the Head of
the OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission and his team and representatives
of civil society and the media. The programme of the ad hoc committee’s
meetings is reproduced in Appendix 1.
6. On election day, the ad hoc committee divided into 11 teams
to observe the elections in Sarajevo, Banja Luka, Pale, Srebrenica,
Brčko and their surrounding areas.
7. The international election observation mission concluded that
the general elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina on 3 October 2010
"represented further progress and, except for legal restrictions
of voting rights, were conducted generally in line with OSCE and
Council of Europe commitments". However, Mr Tiny Kox added that
"the elections were once again conducted with ethnicity and residence-based
limitations to active and passive suffrage rights imposed by the
Dayton Accords. As such, the extant legal framework continues to violate
Protocol No. 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights". The
joint international election observation mission press release published
after the elections is reproduced in Appendix 2.
8. The ad hoc committee wishes to thank the Secretary General's
special representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the staff of
the Council of Europe office for their co-operation with and logistical
support to the ad hoc committee and its pre-electoral visit. It
also wishes to thank the OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission
in Sarajevo for its efficient co-operation.
2. Political and legal context
9. The voting arrangements for the general elections
in Bosnia and Herzegovina on 3 October 2010 remained complex. Voters
had to elect the Presidency of the state and the members of the
House of Representatives. In addition, voters in the Republika Srpska
elected the President of the Republika Srpska and the members of
the National Assembly of Republika Srpska. Voters in the Federation
of Bosnia and Herzegovina elected members of the House of Representatives
of the Federation. There were also cantonal elections in the Federation
of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but these were only observed by the ad
hoc committee in so far as they had an effect on the state and entity
elections.
10. General elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina are governed by
the Constitution and the 2001 electoral legislation. The latter
has been amended on a number of occasions: in 2002, 2004, 2005 and
2006. Many of these amendments were designed to improve technical
aspects of the law. For example, the 2006 amendment, the most recent,
introduced a passive system of registering electors and abolished
the complaints and electoral appeals board.
11. The Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, appended to the
1995 General Peace Agreement – the Dayton Agreement – imposes restrictions
on eligibility based on ethnicity. Only citizens who identify themselves as
Bosniac, Serb or Croat can stand for the tripartite state presidency.
Within the entities only Serbs can stand for the presidency of the
Republika Srpska, which prevents anyone belonging to the so-called
"other" category from standing. Moreover, Republika Srpska voters
can only vote for Serb candidates and those of the Federation of
Bosnia and Herzegovina for Bosniac or Croat presidential candidates.
12. In its Resolution 1701 (2010), the Assembly expressed serious
concern about the constitutional reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina
in the context of the 3 October general elections, stating that
"it takes note of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
in the case of Sejdić and Finci v. Bosnia
and Herzegovina, in which the Court ruled that the applicants’
continued ineligibility to stand for election to the House of Peoples and
to the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, on the grounds that
they do not identify themselves with one of the three ‘constituent
peoples’, constitutes a violation of Article 14, taken in conjunction
with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1, as well as Article 1 of Protocol
No. 12 to the Convention. To comply with the decision of the Court,
the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina must implement a constitutional
reform. If this reform is not implemented in the coming months,
it will be impossible to hold the parliamentary elections of October
2010 on the basis of new rules, as it will not be possible to change
the electoral legislation in time. Thus, there is a serious risk
that, following the parliamentary elections of October 2010, the
country’s institutions will once again be formed in violation of
the Convention."
13. With the exception of the aforementioned constitutional restrictions,
the electoral legislation, as amended in March 2006, is an appropriate
basis for democratic elections. The Venice Commission's most recent
opinion on the electoral law was adopted in June 2008.
14. The members of the ad hoc committee met leaders and representatives
of the main political parties taking part in the elections: the
Alliance of Independent Social Democrats (SNSD), the Party of Democratic Progress
(PDP), the Serbian Democratic Party (SDS), the Party of Democratic
Action (SDA), the Party for Bosnia and Herzegovina (SBH), the Party
for a Better Future of Bosnia and Herzegovina (SBBBiH), the Croatian
Democratic Union of BiH (HDZ-BH) and the Croatian Democratic Union
(HDZ-1990).
15. The ad hoc committee noted that all the political parties
voiced support for the abolition of discriminatory provisions preventing
"other" candidates from standing for election. Nevertheless, despite
the commitment to implementing the judgment of the European Court
of Human Rights in the case of Sejdić
and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina of 22 December 2009,
major differences clearly remain on how to settle the problem. Certain political
parties advocate a simple change to the Constitution to permit the
implementation of the Court's judgment, whereas others call for
a radical reform of the Constitution. In several Assembly resolutions proposals
on how to possibly improve the rules have been made, but until now
they have not been implemented.
3. Electoral administration
16. The general elections of 3 October 2010 were the
second to be entirely administered by the authorities of Bosnia
and Herzegovina with no involvement of the international community.
17. The elections were managed by a three-tier arrangement made
up of a Central Electoral Commission, 142 municipal electoral commissions
and 5 276 polling station commissions.
18. The Central Electoral Commission comprises seven members appointed
by the parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Two members each represent
the Bosniac, Croat and Serb communities while the so-called "other"
category is represented by one member. The chair of the CEC is elected
from the members by rotation every 21 months. The municipal electoral
commissions contain three to seven members depending on the number
of voters in the municipality. The members are appointed by the
relevant municipal council/assembly, subject to CEC approval.
19. All the parties and independent candidates are entitled to
nominate members of the polling station commissions. They are appointed
by their local municipal electoral commission based on a system
for drawing lots organised by the CEC.
20. The ad hoc committee noted the professional and transparent
way in which the CEC conducted its business. Irrespective of political
stance, the representatives and leaders of the political parties
expressed confidence in the CEC. The CEC co-operated effectively
with the Council of Europe, particularly with the implementation
of the action plan for pre-electoral assistance, which started in
February 2010. The ad hoc committee encouraged the CEC to continue
and develop its co-operation with the Council of Europe.
4. Registration of candidates and electors
21. The deadline for registering candidates was 21 May
2010, which was respected by the CEC. Candidates were registered
in a transparent and inclusive manner, apart from the above-mentioned
constitutional restrictions on the right to eligibility based on
ethnic origin. In all, 32 political parties, ten coalitions and
seven independent candidates were registered, which was representative
of all the political tendencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina and provided
voters with an extensive choice on election day.
22. In all, 8 242 candidates were included on 562 separate lists
standing for the general elections, including 4 259 Bosniacs, 1
926 Serbs, 1 713 Croats and 299 “others”. Forty-four candidates
did not declare their national identity. Some 63% of candidates
were men and 39% women. According to CEC statistics, 324 candidates
were not registered for various reasons (mostly because of incomplete
registration forms), but none of the rejected candidates complained
to the CEC.
23. For the general elections on 3 October 2010, a total of 3 126 599
electors were registered on the electoral lists. One of the main
results of the amendments made to the Electoral Law in March 2006
was to replace the active system of elector registration by a passive
one. The central electoral register, which is used for drawing up
lists of electors, is based on the registry office list; this is
known as the “Citizen Identification Protection System”. All citizens
over the age of 18 are required by law to register on this system
and are therefore automatically included on the list of electors.
24. The central electoral register was closed on 19 August 2010.
For the first time, 1 065 electors were registered in embassies
and consular services abroad in order to vote in the elections.
Moreover, 36 649 voters were registered for televoting by mail,
which was subject to having completed the requisite form by 19 July 2010.
In connection with voting by mail, the CEC identified a number of
irregularities, including hundreds of envelopes containing ballot
papers which arrived at the CEC from the same addresses abroad.
Following investigations, the CEC decided to exclude these ballot
papers from the counting process.
25. As in previous elections, displaced persons were able to vote
either in their current municipality of residence or in their pre-1991
constituencies. Of the 113 642 displaced persons in the country,
22 473 opted for voting in their pre-1991 constituencies.
5. Pre-electoral period and the media
26. The election campaign began on 3 September 2010.
The climate surrounding the election campaign was peaceful. The
ad hoc committee noted the positive point that during the election
campaign the political parties did not campaign against each other
on the basis of ethnic belonging as had often been the case in the past.
Nevertheless, the election campaign took place in a context of ethnic
division and constitutional reform. With very few exceptions, the
parties fought for votes mainly within their own ethnic communities.
Opinion poll results showed widespread public dissatisfaction with
the fact that politicians had been breaking their electoral promises
for years and with the continuing gulf between the promises and
what the elected authorities actually did.
27. All the party representatives stressed the need to reform
the State Constitution and implement the judgment of the European
Court of Human Rights of 22 December 2009 in the case of Sejdić and Finci, in order to bring
the Constitution into line with the European Convention on Human
Rights. Despite these reassuring declarations, the deadlock on this
matter persists. In this context, the ad hoc committee asked the
national politicians to endeavour, after the elections, to resolve
this problem as a matter of the utmost urgency.
28. The ad hoc committee noted that, according to many civil society
operators and media representatives, ineffective action against
corruption and organised crime, the problems of economic development
and unemployment were the main subjects of concern to the citizens
of Bosnia and Herzegovina, regardless of ethnic background. The
ad hoc committee therefore voiced its surprise that these problems
had been hardly mentioned during the election campaign.
29. Another subject of major concern was the funding of the election
campaign, which comes from the state budget. The political parties
standing for election are required to submit statements of their
campaign expenditure within a month of the elections. According
to CEC representatives, in the event of non-compliance with the
rules on funding, the party in question must pay a fine of up to
KM 5 000 (approximately €2 500). This amount seems insignificant
compared with the actual expenditure of the main political parties.
The ad hoc committee was concerned to note that the rules on the
funding of the election campaign were very unclear, which hardly
boosts public trust in the democratic electoral process.
30. During the election campaign, many people, including members
of the CEC, mentioned the danger of possible irregularities on election
day, especially during the vote counting after the polling stations
closed, because of the complexity of the electoral system. In Banja
Luka, for instance, the members of the Parliamentary Assembly pre-electoral
mission were informed by members of the Democratic Progress Party (PDP)
that during the local elections in 2008, 12% of all ballot papers
in some polling stations were declared invalid, the overwhelming
majority of them having been for the PDP, which is an opposition
party. This is why a number of people interviewed by the pre-election
mission had asked if they could send more teams to the places where
this type of irregularity had been noted.
31. The ad hoc committee noted that in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
the network of local non-party NGOs involved in observing the elections
was much less developed than in other countries in the region, even
though the country’s electoral legislation authorises NGO observation
activity. The presence of local non-party observers would build
up mutual trust among the political forces, distrust still being
a major problem in the country’s political life. Such a presence
would also reinforce citizens’ confidence in the democratic electoral process.
As part of its electoral assistance programmes, including with the
CEC, the need for which is acknowledged by the Bosnia and Herzegovina
authorities, the Council of Europe has launched action to develop
a network of such NGOs. The ad hoc committee considers that this
type of electoral assistance programme should be further developed,
without waiting for the next election.
32. In connection with media coverage of the election campaign,
Bosnia and Herzegovina has a broad, pluralist range of media, which
meant that the electors had the requisite information to make an
enlightened choice on election day. The legal provisions on airtime
for all candidates were broadly respected. On the whole, the national
public broadcasters covered the election campaign in a nuanced,
impartial manner. As expected, broadcasters operating in the different
entities covered the campaign from an ethnic angle, as did the private broadcasters.
33. Bosnia and Herzegovina has some 200 broadcasters and 100 press
organs. A large number of broadcasters put out special daily “election
updates”. According to the media monitoring report by ODIHR/OSCE,
the news programmes in the Republika Srspka were more in favour
of the representatives of the authorities, whereas the Federation
of Bosnia and Herzegovina television channel, FTV, was rather critical
of the authorities, backing the opposition. The public channel BHT1
provided neutral coverage of the authorities’ activities.
34. The ad hoc committee stressed the importance of equitable
access by all political parties, including small ones, to the electronic
media. There is considerable room for improvement in the public
service, particularly in the areas of news programmes and campaign
reporting.
6. Election day
35. The members of the ad hoc committee stressed that
voting and vote counting in all the polling stations visited on
election day proceeded in a calm, well-organised manner. The ad
hoc committee took particular note of the good general atmosphere
in the polling stations and the easy relations among members of
the electoral commissions working there.
36. The members of the ad hoc committee made the following critical
observations: long queues were sometimes observed in the polling
stations, caused by the large number and complexity of the ballot
papers which each voter had to slip into the ballot boxes; the number
of ballot boxes varied from one polling station to another, ranging
from one to three; some polling stations were too small; virtually
all the polling stations were inaccessible to persons with reduced
mobility; there were cases of non-compliance with voting procedure,
for example voters’ identity cards were not inspected by the polling
station official when presenting the ballot papers; there were isolated
cases of family voting in rural areas, albeit more in order to assist
than direct the voting; there was one case of an electoral commission
failing to co-operate with the observer team in a polling station
near Sarajevo airport.
37. One of the ad hoc committee teams observing the election in
the Republika Srpska was present when Mr Dodik, the current Prime
Minister of the Republika Srpska, voted in his home town of Laktasi.
Mr Dodik voted in public, without entering the polling booth, which
is a breach of voting secrecy and may also be considered as propaganda,
since his public voting was broadcast by the television channels
on election day. However, the ODIHR/OSCE informed members of the
ad hoc committee of a case where a political party leader tried
to vote but the polling station officials refused to hand over the
ballot papers to him because he had forgotten his identity card.
He was forced to return to the station later with his card.
38. The members of the ad hoc committee noted that the vote-counting
procedures were not properly respected in a number of polling stations.
Once again, this situation is apparently due not to any malicious intent
but rather to the complexity of the voting system, the unwieldy
and complicated vote-counting procedures, the fact that votes in
four different elections had to be counted, the fatigue experienced
by polling station officials and, in some cases, the fact that members
of the electoral commission were poorly trained.
39. According to the preliminary results of the general elections
of 3 October 2010, the turnout was 56.28%, which is an increase
of some 3% over 2006. The deadline for publishing the official results
is 2 November 2010.
40. According to the preliminary results issued by the CEC, Mr
Izetbegović, the candidate of the Bosniac SDA party, Mr Komšić,
the Croat candidate of the SDP party, and Mr Radmanović, the Serbian
candidate of the SNSD party, were elected to the Presidency of the
state. The SNSD candidate, Mr Dodik, was elected President of the
Republika Srpska, and his party won the majority of seats in the
Republika Srpska Parliament. On 20 October, the CEC declared the
results of the political parties in terms of the number of seats
won in the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina:
- Alliance of Independent Social
Democrats (SNSD) – 8
- Social Democratic Party of Bosnia and Herzegovina (SDP)
– 8
- Party for Democratic Action (SDA) – 7
- Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) – 4
- Party for a Better Future of Bosnia and Herzegovina (SBBiH)
– 4
- Croatian Democratic Union of Bosnia and Herzegovina (HDZ
BiH) – 3
- Croatian Democratic Union 1990 (HDZ 1990) – 2
- Party for Bosnia and Herzegovina (SBiH) – 2
41. On 11 October, the CEC declared that the official records
of the results in 697 polling stations had aroused suspicion, and
decided to recount the ballot papers from 11 polling stations in
the following municipalities: Banja Luka, Zvornik, Visegrad, Teslić,
Teochak, Gorni Vakuf and Travnik.
7. Conclusions and recommendations
42. The ad hoc committee concluded that the elections
were once again conducted with ethnicity and residence-based limitations
to active and passive suffrage rights imposed by the Dayton Accords.
As such, the extant legal framework continues to violate Article
14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and also of Article
3 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 12.
43. The ad hoc committee notes with great concern that, unlike
the previous elections, the general elections on 3 October took
place in a context where the Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities
had failed to enforce the judgment of the European Court of Human
Rights of 22 December 2009 in the case of Sejdić
and Finci, despite the fact that the Parliamentary Assembly,
in its Resolution 1725 (2010), had urged the country’s authorities
to comply with the Court judgment by amending the electoral legislation
in order to prevent the risk of once again setting up national institutions
under conditions incompatible with the European Convention on Human
Rights.
44. The ad hoc committee considers that the Parliamentary Assembly
should not allow the next general elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina
to take place under conditions incompatible with the European Convention
on Human Rights. With regard to Assembly Resolution 1725 (2010),
the ad hoc committee notes that the breakdown of the process of
preparing amendments to the Constitution required by the Sejdić and Finci judgment and the
holding of the general elections on 3 October 2010 in accordance
with rules incompatible with this judgment violate the commitments
entered into by Bosnia and Herzegovina on its accession to the Council
of Europe. This is an unacceptable situation. Consequently, the
ad hoc committee invites the authorities and the newly elected parliament
to launch “a serious institutionalised process for the preparation of
a comprehensive package of constitutional amendments, in accordance
with the country’s post-accession commitments, while making full
use of the expertise and recommendations of the European Commission
for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission)”, as recommended in
Assembly Resolution 1725 (2010).
45. That said, the general elections held in Bosnia and Herzegovina
on 3 October 2010 did constitute some degree of progress. The climate
of the election campaign was peaceful and the polling and vote counting
on election day took place in a calm, organised manner.
46. Regardless of their ethnic origin, many of the people the
ad hoc committee spoke to expressed concern about the unclear rules
on election campaign funding, the ineffective action against corruption
and organised crime and the problems with economic development and
unemployment, which are the primary concerns of the Bosnia and Herzegovina
population. The ad hoc committee invites the Assembly’s Monitoring
Committee and other relevant bodies of the Council of Europe to
reinforce their co-operation with Bosnia and Herzegovina on these
issues.
47. The Central Electoral Commission has the trust of the representatives
and leaders of the political parties regardless of political position
and ethnic background. The ad hoc commission would like to stress
the CEC’s professionalism and transparent operations, as well as
the motivation, devotion and hard work of the 43 000 or so officials
in the polling stations on election day, on duty for almost 24 hours.
The ad hoc committee would encourage the CEC to continue and step
up its co-operation with the Council of Europe.
48. On election day the members of the ad hoc committee noted
the absence of local non-party observers from the polling stations
visited. In Bosnia and Herzegovina in general the network of local
non-party NGOs involved in observing the elections is much less
developed than in other countries in the region, even though the
country’s electoral legislation authorises NGO observation activity.
49. The ad hoc committee considers that the presence of local
non-party observers would boost public confidence in the democratic
electoral process, as suspicion in this sphere is still a major
problem in the country’s political life. As part of its electoral
assistance programmes, including with the CEC, the Council of Europe
has launched action to develop the network of NGOs. This type of
medium- and long-term electoral assistance programme should be further
developed, without waiting for the next election.
50. The ad hoc committee invites the CEC to analyse the technical
vote-counting procedures, in close co-operation with the Venice
Commission, with a view to preparing recommendations to improve
the overly complicated procedures and speed up the procedure for
vote counting and publication of preliminary election results.
Appendix 1 – Programme
(open)
Friday, 1 October 2010
08.30-09.30 Ad hoc committee meeting:
- Opening of the meeting and information on the pre-electoral
mission by Mr T. Kox, Head of the Delegation
- Briefing by the other members of the pre-electoral mission
- Political situation and background, Mrs C. Ravaud, Special
Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe
in Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Recent developments in the field of election legislation,
Mr S. Kouznetsov, Secretariat of the Venice Commission
- Practical and logistical arrangements, Secretariat
Joint Parliamentary Briefing
09.30-10.00 Opening by the Heads of Parliamentary Delegations:
- Mr R. Batelli, Special Co-ordinator
and Head of the short-term OSCE observer mission
- Mr T. Kox, Head of the delegation of the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe
- Mr W. Sidorowicz, Head of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly
delegation
10.00-10.30 Round table:
- Ambassador
G.D. Robbins, Head of the OSCE Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Mrs C. Ravaud, Special Representative of the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe in Bosnia and Herzegovina
10.30-11.45 Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation
Mission:
- Welcoming address
by Ambassador D. Everts, Head of the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation
Mission
- Political background and election campaign
- Media monitoring
- Legal framework
- Election administration
- Election day procedures
- Observation forms
- Questions and answers
11.45-13.05 Meetings with political parties:
11.45-12.05: Party for Democratic Action (SDA)
12.05-12.25: Party for Bosnia and Herzegovina (SBiH)
12.25-12.45: Alliance of Independent Social Democrats (SNSD)
12.45-13.05: Social Democratic Party of Bosnia and Herzegovina
(SDP)
13.05-14.20 Lunch break
14.20-15.40 Meetings with political parties:
14.20-14.40: Croatian Democratic Union of BiH (HDZ BiH);
14.40-15.00: Serbian Democratic Party (SDS)
15.00-15.20: Croatian Democratic Union 1990 (HDZ-1990)
15.20-15.40: Party for a Better Future of Bosnia and Herzegovina
(SBB)
15.40-16.00 Coffee break
16.00-16.45 Meeting with representatives of the Central Election
Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina:
- Ms I. Hadziabdic, CEC chairperson
16.45-17.15 Panel with representatives of NGOs:
- Transparency International
- NGO Women to Women, Ms M. Zvizdovic, President
- Open Society Fund, Mr H. Batinic, Programme Director,
Roma, Civil Society
17.15-18.00 Panel with representatives of the media:
- Press Council, Ms L. Zurovac,
Executive Director
- “Avaz” Newspaper, Mr S. Numanovic, Editor-in-Chief
- Radio and Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr D.
Simic, Editor-in-Chief of news programmes
- TV Pink BiH, Mr S. Musaefendic, Editor of Informative
Program
Saturday, 2 October 2010
09.15-10.00 Area-specific briefing by long-term observer teams
based in Sarajevo
10.00 Meeting with interpreters and drivers
12.00 Deployment
Sunday, 3 October 2010
Observation of opening, voting and vote count
Monday, 3 October 2010
08.00 Debriefing of the ad hoc committee
13.00 Press conference
Appendix 2 – Press release
(open)
Elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina generally
in line with international standards, but key aspects need action
Strasbourg, 04.10.2010 – Yesterday’s general elections in
Bosnia and Herzegovina represented further progress and, except
for legal restrictions of voting rights, were conducted generally
in line with OSCE and Council of Europe commitments, international
observers concluded in a preliminary statement issued today. They
stressed that certain key areas require action.
“We have seen yet another demonstration that the electoral
process in Bosnia and Herzegovina has stabilized, which is a further
promising step towards full integration into the European structures.
I congratulate the people of the country and also the election administration
for the conduct of these elections. I hope we will soon see the
new parliament address the remaining issues,” said Special Co-ordinator
Roberto Battelli who leads the short-term OSCE observer mission
and heads the OSCE PA delegation.
“Our delegation is impressed with the peaceful and relaxed
atmosphere surrounding these elections, and it pays tribute to the
thousands of electoral administrators whose professionalism and
commitment made the voting process a success. However, the elections
were once again conducted with ethnicity and residence-based limitations
to active and passive suffrage rights imposed by the Dayton Accords.
As such, the extant legal framework continues to violate Protocol
No. 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights,” said Tiny Kox
(Netherlands, UEL), Head of the delegation of the Council of Europe
Parliamentary Assembly (PACE).
“These elections consolidated the progress achieved by Bosnia
and Herzegovina since 2006. We were impressed with the overwhelmingly
orderly process conducted in polling stations across the country
on election day. Shortcomings remain, particularly with regard to
procedural problems. Still, the people of this country won these
elections. They have demonstrated their strong commitment to democracy,”
said Wladyslaw Sidorowicz, Head of the delegation of the NATO Parliamentary
Assembly.
“Given the complexity of the electoral system, election officials
have done a commendable job in organising the process in a professional
and efficient manner. Removing existing limitations to voting rights
would not only bring the legal framework fully in line with international
standards, but also make the process more manageable for election
officials and more understandable to voters,” said Daan Everts,
Head of the election observation mission of the OSCE Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR).
Voters could choose from a broad range of candidates representing
a wide political spectrum at state and entity level.
Election day was orderly and calm. Voting was assessed positively,
but observers noted instances of family voting in one out of four
polling stations visited. The counting process was assessed less
positively, with numerous procedural irregularities observed. The
unusually high percentage of invalid ballots is a matter of concern.
The election commissions at the central and municipal level
enjoyed general confidence among electoral stakeholders. The appointment
process of polling station committees, however, was tainted by the
practice of contestants nominating committee members affiliated
with another party or candidate, or contestants trading seats.
The election campaign was generally calm, although occasionally
marked by nationalist rhetoric and inflammatory statements. The
variety of views presented in the media provided voters with the
opportunity to make informed choices, although populist rhetoric
often detracted from issues of substance. While contestants addressed
economic, social and European integration topics, constitutional
issues and underlying ethnic divisions remained omnipresent.