See related documentsElection observation report
| Doc. 14897
| 23 May 2019
Observation of the presidential election in North Macedonia (21 April and 5 May 2019)
1. Introduction
1. At its meeting on 21 January
2019, the Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly decided, subject
to receiving an invitation, to observe the presidential election
in North Macedonia and to this end set up an ad hoc committee comprising
12 members and the co-rapporteurs on the Monitoring Committee’s
post-monitoring dialogue. On 25 January 2019, the Bureau approved
the membership of the ad hoc committee and appointed Ms Marie-Christine
Dalloz as its chair. The list of members is set out in Appendix
1.
2. In accordance with the co-operation agreement signed between
the Parliamentary Assembly and the European Commission for Democracy
through Law (Venice Commission) on 4 October 2004, representatives of
the Venice Commission were invited to join the ad hoc committee
as legal advisors.
3. For the observation of the presidential election, the ad hoc
committee formed part of an International Election Observation Mission
(IEOM), which also included delegations from the Parliamentary Assembly
of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
and the election observation mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR).
4. The ad hoc committee went to Skopje from 19 to 22 April 2019
to observe the first round of the presidential election on 21 April
2019. The programme of meetings during this visit is set out in
Appendix 2. On polling day, the committee split into six teams to
observe the election in Skopje and the surrounding area and in various
regions around the country.
5. The ad hoc committee concluded that the election of 21 April
was well organised and voters who participated in the election were
able to make their choice freely. The Assembly delegation regretted
that the turnout was low for a presidential election. Mature functioning
of the political system and a reform of electoral law would re-engage
citizens and ensure their active participation in the election of
their Head of State. The Parliamentary Assembly and the Venice Commission
are ready to assist the authorities of North Macedonia in implementing
the necessary reforms in the country. The IEOM press release on
the first round can be found in Appendix 3.
6. The ad hoc committee would like to thank the OSCE/ODIHR election
observation mission and the Council of Europe Office in Skopje for
their co-operation and support.
2. Political context and legal framework
7. The Parliamentary Assembly
has observed all the elections in the Republic of North Macedonia
since 1994. The last presidential election was held in April 2014.
The Assembly delegation came to the following conclusion: “In general,
the election day was conducted efficiently and, in principle, in
accordance with the national legislation. However, in one municipality
observed, the voting process was problematic, and a greater number
of irregularities were witnessed (in particular organised voting).
Other procedural irregularities were observed, particularly during
the opening of the polling stations and during the counting, but
they were rather of a technical nature and with no discernible influence
on the results.”
8. In the first round of the presidential election in 2014, none
of the candidates received the required majority of the total number
of votes cast to be elected. The incumbent president Gjorge Ivanov
received 51% of the votes cast, Stevo Pendarovski 37.51%, Iljaz
Halimi 4.49% and Zoran Popovski 3.61%. The turnout was 48%. Voter
participation remained low in the ethnic Albanian areas. The candidates
in the second round were therefore Gjorge Ivanov and Stevo Pendarovski.
Gjorge Ivanov was elected with 55.28% of the votes cast. The turnout
for the second round of the presidential election was 54.38%.
9. On 30 September 2018, a consultative referendum was held following
the Final Agreement signed by Greece and “the former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia” on 17 June 2018, known as the Prespa Agreement. The
question on the referendum ballot paper was “Are you in favour of
European Union and NATO membership by accepting the agreement between
the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Greece?”. The Parliamentary
Assembly delegation for the observation of the consultative referendum
pointed out that the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice on
Referendums recommends that questions in referendums should not
be misleading and should not suggest an answer and that “there must
be an intrinsic connection between the various parts of each question
put to the vote, in order to guarantee the free suffrage of the
voter, who must not be called to accept or refuse as a whole provisions
without an intrinsic link”. Two weeks later, the Greek Parliament
ratified the agreement by 153 votes to 146, thus approving the name
“Republic of North Macedonia” despite the objection of a large part
of the population.
10. In February 2019, the member countries of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organisation (NATO) signed an agreement with North Macedonia,
laying the ground for the country’s accession to the military alliance
as its 30th member. The accession protocol must now be ratified
by each NATO member State.
11. On 8 February 2019, the Speaker of the National Assembly officially
called the presidential election. On the same day the State Electoral
Commission (SEC) published the election timetable, setting out in
order all the statutory deadlines for the presidential election
and the early municipal elections in Ohrid, Novo Selo and Debar.
12. Given that the parliament’s decision to call the presidential
election predates the full ratification of the Prespa Agreement,
the vote relates to the election of the “President of the Republic
of Macedonia”, not the “President of North Macedonia”.
13. The delegation of the Assembly points out that North Macedonia
has signed and ratified the European Convention on Human Rights
(ETS No. 5, “the Convention”) and its Additional Protocol (ETS No.
9), which enshrine several principles that are essential for effective
and real democracy, including the right to free elections (Article
3 of the Additional Protocol), freedom of expression, freedom of
assembly and association, and the prohibition of discrimination
(Articles 10, 11 and 14 of the Convention).
14. The main texts governing the presidential election are the
1991 Constitution (as amended in 2011) and the Electoral Code of
2006 (as revised in January 2019).
15. North Macedonia has a parliamentary regime with a President
of the Republic who is elected for a five-year term by universal
suffrage in a secret two-round majority vote.
To
be elected in the first round, a candidate must receive the votes
of more than 50% of the registered voters. In the second round,
the candidate receiving the most votes is elected provided that
turnout is over 40%. If it is not, the entire election process must
be repeated. In this event, a new presidential election is held
in six months and the Speaker of the Parliament acts as president
until the election of the new president. There is a risk that the
minimum turnout requirement of 40% in the second round of the presidential
election could trigger a succession of election cycles.
16. All candidates must have Macedonian nationality, be at least
40 years of age on the day of the vote and have resided permanently
in the country for at least ten years in the preceding fifteen.
Under the nomination procedure, candidates must present the signatures
of 10 000 voters or 30 members of parliament.
17. The Assembly delegation was informed that most of the previous
recommendations of the ODIHR and the Venice Commission had not yet
been incorporated into electoral law, including those relating to
campaign funding, the misuse of State funds, and appeals. Most of
the people the observers talked to, including the SEC, stressed
the need for a comprehensive reform of electoral legislation.
18. In 2004 the European Court of Human Rights examined the case
of
Boškoski v. “the former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia”,
concerning
the applicant’s bid to stand as an independent candidate in the presidential
elections of 2004. The SEC had rejected his application on the ground
that he did not meet the constitutional requirement whereby candidates
had to have resided continuously in the country for at least ten of
the fifteen years preceding the date of the election.
19. The applicant had challenged the rejection of his candidature
before the Supreme Court, arguing that Article 132 of the Constitution
had been incorrectly and restrictively applied in the calculation
of his length of residence in “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.
The Supreme Court had dismissed the claim, finding that the SEC
had correctly assessed the overall length of domestic residence.
The Constitutional Court had likewise rejected the applicant’s petition
on the ground that the right to stand for elections was not among the
individual rights which could be challenged before that court.
20. Ultimately, the applicant brought his case before the European
Court of Human Rights, which decided that the application was inadmissible
under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1. The application of this provision,
which guaranteed the “choice of the legislature”, to presidential
elections was not excluded as such. However, in “the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia” the office of President of the Republic did
not have the authority to initiate or adopt legislation, nor did
it have any power of censure over the main institutions responsible
for passing legislation. As the President merely enjoyed limited
discretion to provisionally suspend the promulgation of statutes,
such an office could not be construed as the “legislature” within
the meaning of this provision: incompatible ratione
materiae.
3. Electoral
administration, electoral lists and the registration of candidates
21. The presidential election of
2019 was organised by a three-tier administration, comprising the
State Electoral Commission (SEC), 80 municipal electoral commissions
(MECs) and the Electoral Commission of the City of Skopje, together
with 3 396 electoral boards (at polling stations).
For voting abroad, 32 polling
stations were set up in diplomatic or consular missions in 24 foreign
countries. In 2019, the parliament decided to retain the seven members
of the State Electoral Commission who had managed the referendum
of September 2018. A measure restricting their term of office to
two years was introduced, however.
22. Civil society experts had been called in prior to this to
depoliticise the electoral administration process. This experiment
had not been particularly successful however,
so parliament had decided
to resort to the previous arrangement of seven members appointed
by the political parties. The provisional SEC set up following the
revision of the Electoral Code in July 2018 became a permanent body
in January 2019, for a term of office limited to two years.
23. According to the people that the IEOM spoke to, the confidence
of some stakeholders in the SEC was undermined by the perceived
inaction of the electoral administration authorities in response
to the alleged violations in the consultative referendum of 30 September
2018.
24. MECs are made up of five members (and their substitutes) who
are chosen from among public officials by drawing lots. They supervise
the administration of elections in each municipality, appoint and
train members of the electoral boards and manage other technical
aspects.
25. The 3 396 electoral boards are responsible for organising
the ballot and the vote count in the polling stations. They are
made up of three members and three substitutes drawn by lots from
among public officials and two temporary members appointed by the
two main political parties.
26. The electoral lists comprise all citizens aged 18 or over
on polling day, who reside permanently in North Macedonia and have
not been stripped of their legal capacity by a binding court decision.
Voters must also possess a valid identity card or biometric passport.
According to the electoral administration bodies, 53 972 voters
checked their details at polling stations, including the voters
who came to sign the candidate nomination lists. The electoral authorities
provided copies of the electoral lists to five parliamentary parties
after the registers had been checked. The final register comprised
1 808 131 voters for this presidential election.
27. Many of the people the IEOM spoke to noted improvements in
the electoral lists. However, according to some of the people the
Assembly delegation spoke to, although the population census is
not directly linked to the voter registration process, the fact
that the last census dates back to 2002 did not inspire confidence
among those concerned as to the accuracy of the electoral lists.
28. All citizens living or working temporarily abroad and possessing
a home registered in North Macedonia and a biometric passport are
also registered on the electoral lists and vote in the diplomatic
or consular missions in their host country.
29. Persons living in North Macedonia are automatically registered
on the electoral lists whereas those voting abroad must register
themselves.
30. In its final report, the OSCE/ODIHR observation mission on
the 2018 referendum stated as follows: “Despite long-standing issues
related to the processing and accuracy of voter registration data,
the integrity of the voter list was not cited as a major concern
of ODIHR ROM interlocutors.” The mission recommended that “the establishment
of a permanent national address register should be prioritised,
with the harmonisation of residency data clearly defined”. The establishment
of such a register was included in the land registry office’s strategic
plan for 2017 to 2019.
31. For the presidential election of 21 April 2019, of the nine
initial candidates, only three gathered the 10 000 signatures needed
to be registered by the SEC: Gordana Siljanovska-Davkova, who was
endorsed by the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation–Democratic
Party of Macedonian National Unity (VMRO–DPMNE), collected 15 926
signatures; Stevo Pendarovski, of the Social Democratic Union of
Macedonia (SDSM), collected 31 729 signatures; and Blerim Reka,
of the Alliance of Albanians/Besa, collected 11 128 signatures.
4. Election
campaign, campaign funding and media environment
32. The election campaign began
20 days before polling day and ended 24 hours before. The three candidates
were validated by the SEC on 21 March.
33. It is legally prohibited, subject to a heavy fine, to engage
in campaigning before the start of the official campaign. However,
the Chair of the SEC announced that until the official campaign
launch on 1 April, all activities by candidates would be regarded
as party meetings, not as illegal campaign activities.
34. Ms Gordana Siljanovska-Davkova is a former member of the Venice
Commission and the first woman to stand for the presidential election
in North Macedonia. She presented herself as a “non-partisan” candidate, both
running a party campaign and representing civil society. Ms Siljanovska
shares the negative stance of the VMRO–DPMNE with regard to the
agreement with Greece, as a result of which the country was renamed
North Macedonia and Greece lifted its long-standing veto on the
country’s accession to NATO and the European Union.
35. Mr Stevo Pendarovski was nominated to stand for the presidency
by the SDSM party. He was a candidate in the 2014 presidential election,
in which he lost to the outgoing president, Gjorge Ivanov. Stevo Pendarovski
was also supported by Albanian partner parties, the Democratic Union
for Integration (DUI), and 29 smaller parties. He also has the advantage
of being considered a non-partisan candidate.
36. Professor Blerim Reka was nominated to stand for the presidency
by the Alliance of Albanians/Besa. Mr Reka announced his intention
to stand after the Albanian party in government, the DUI, agreed
to support a joint candidate with the SDSM. According to Mr Reka,
if only Macedonian candidates stood and there was no Albanian candidate,
North Macedonia’s multi-ethnic society would end up resembling a
mono-ethnic State in which Albanians could only vote in elections,
not stand in them. His message contrasted with the non-ethnic line
of the main government parties, the social democrats and the DUI.
No Albanian candidate has ever succeeded in reaching the second
round of the elections, but Albanian votes are often crucial at
that stage.
37. The new State Commission for the Prevention of Corruption
(SCPC) began work in February 2019 after the adoption of a new law
on preventing corruption and conflicts of interest. It is tasked
with supervising the legality of campaign funding and receiving
complaints of infringements of the separation between the State
and the political parties, misuse of State resources, vote-buying
and pressure on voters.
38. On 4 March 2019, the SEC, the State Audit Office and the SCPC
signed a memorandum on the exchange of information on irregularities
reported in financial reports and subsequent measures to be taken
for the period preceding the election. The SCPC deals with all complaints
concerning the role of State officials and the use of public resources
during the election campaign. Complaints relating to alleged violations
of the rules on campaign funding are a matter for the State Audit
Office.
39. The rules on election campaign funding are set out in the
Electoral Code, the Law on the funding of political parties and
the Law on preventing corruption and conflicts of interest. Candidates
for the presidential election do not receive public funds directly
but their political advertising expenses are reimbursed out of the State
budget.
40. Candidates are required to register a unique tax number and
open a separate bank account, through which all financial transactions
linked to the campaign must be made. Donations are limited to €3 000
for individuals and €30 000 for legal entities (including contributions
in kind).
There
are no specific regulations on the participation of third parties
in the campaign and it is not compulsory to declare the expenses
of any political parties which endorse candidates proposed by groups
of voters.
41. According to information from the ODIHR election observation
mission, the three candidates are reliant on party political infrastructure
and their logistical support. Campaign spending is subject to an
upper limit of MKD 110 per registered voter, or about MKD 198 million
(€3.2 million).
42. Presidential candidates must submit to the SEC, the State
Audit Office and the SCPC two interim reports and a final report
on their income and their spending. These institutions are required
by law to publish each candidate’s interim report on campaign funding,
though not to examine them. The final reports must be submitted
in the four months following the election and checked by the State
Audit Office.
43. The Assembly delegation was told that the SCPC’s resources
are limited and a number of procedures required by law had not yet
been put in place, particularly access to the databases of public
institutions, enabling information to be exchanged rapidly. The
SCPC’s limited means and imperfections in the regulations affected
the transparency of election campaign funding and the effectiveness
of the controls on the spending of presidential candidates.
44. Freedom of the press is guaranteed by the Constitution, the
Electoral Code and the Law on Audio and Audiovisual Media Services.
Television is the public’s main source of information. In a media
landscape that is highly divided along political and ethnic lines,
over 130 radio and television channels share a relatively small market.
45. Audiovisual media outlets must ensure that they provide balanced
information on all subjects relating to the elections in accordance
with the principle of the equality of all presidential candidates.
Furthermore, paid political advertising must be clearly indicated
and clearly separated from other media content. Amendments to the
Electoral Code in 2019 clarified the role of the Agency for Audio
and Audiovisual Media Services and the arrangements for its work
with the SEC, which is now authorised to reimburse expenses incurred
by broadcasters when broadcasting paid political advertising.
46. The Agency for Audio and Audiovisual Media Services is required
to supervise the programming and treatment of election issues by
audiovisual media outlets from the day on which the election is
announced to the end of polling day.
47. Since 2018, electronic media outlets (internet portals) which
broadcast paid political advertising for candidates for an election
must register with the SEC to be able to be reimbursed. The SEC
reimburses expenses on presentation of an invoice and after communication
of a report to the Agency for Audio and Audiovisual Media Services.
48. ODIHR’s EOM media monitoring found that the public broadcaster
provided impartial coverage and, overall, the media presented diverse
information on the candidates and the political parties supporting
them through various programmes and five televised debates involving
all the candidates, enabling voters to make an informed choice.
Most of the channels surveyed covered the three candidates comparably,
providing largely neutral information. Furthermore, all of the public
MRT channels dedicated a significant portion of political coverage
to government activities (21%-37%), including both positive and
negative reporting.
5. Polling
day, first round
49. On polling day, the ad hoc
committee split into six teams to observe the election in Skopje
and the surrounding area and in various regions around the country.
The ad hoc committee members noted that the vote was well organised,
voters were able to make their choice freely, without restriction,
and fundamental rights and freedom of expression were respected.
The staff at the polling stations observed by the delegation co-operated
fully with the observers. It was noted that most polling stations
were not equipped for voting by persons with reduced mobility.
50. According to the preliminary official results announced by
the SEC, the three presidential candidates received the following
numbers of votes: Mr Stevo Pendarovski – 323 714 (42.84%); Ms Gordana
Siljanovska-Davkova – 319 811 (42.24%); and Mr Blerim Reka – 79 921
(10.58%). Turnout was 41.79% and 4.34% of the ballot papers were
invalid. The two best placed candidates, Mr Stevo Pendarovski and
Ms Gordana Siljanovska-Davkova, qualified for the second round of
the presidential election, which was held on 5 May 2019.
6. Voting
day, second round
51. The ad hoc committee returned
to Skopje from 4 to 6 May 2019 to observe the second round of the presidential
election on 5 May. Stevo Pendarovski of the Social Democratic Union
of Macedonia (SDSM) was standing against Gordana Siljanovska-Davkova,
supported by the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation–Democratic
Party of Macedonian National Unity (VMRO-DPMNE).
52. On 4 May 2019, in Skopje, the ad hoc committee met Ms Siljanovska-Davkova
and Mr Damjan Manchevski, representative of Mr Pendarovski, the
head of the OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission and his staff,
and the Chair of the SEC. The ad hoc committee formed part of the
International Election Observation Mission (IEOM), which also included
a delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE and the
election observation mission of the OSCE/ODIHR.
53. In the period between the two rounds, both candidates appealed
to ethnic-Albanian voters, whose turnout had been particularly low
in the first round. No Albanian candidate has ever succeeded in
reaching the second round of the elections, but Albanian votes have
often been crucial in the second round. The 2019 presidential election
was no exception to this rule. In addition, the campaign environment
among ethnic-Albanians was affected by legal moves to remove the
head of the Islamic Religious Community, which were criticised by
prominent ethnic-Albanian figures. The Assembly’s delegation recalled
Article 19 of the Constitution of the country concerning the principle
of separation of powers between State and religion: “The Macedonian
Orthodox Church, as well as the Islamic Religious Community in Macedonia,
the Catholic Church, the Evangelical Methodist Church, the Jewish
Community and other Religious communities and groups are separate
from the State and equal before the Law.”
54. Election day was calm and well organised, the overall assessment
of voting was positive. In a limited number of cases, the ODIHR
observers noted indications of vote-buying. On 5 May, the Head of
the Assembly delegation observed the counting in the polling station
No. 2438/1 in the Albanian-speaking locality of Glumovo where out
of 272 voters Mr Pendarovski received 264 votes, Ms Siljanovska-Davkova
received one vote and seven ballots were invalid. In general, the
analysis of voting statistics in different communities shows that
there is a dividing line between Macedonian and Albanian voters.
For example, in six municipalities, the candidate supported by the
SDSM/DUI coalition, Mr Pendarovski, obtained a score above 90%.
There are many polling stations in those six municipalities where
the candidate supported by the VMRO–DPME, Ms Siljanovska-Davkova,
did not receive any votes. For example, this was the case in 25
of the 36 polling stations in the municipality of Lipkovo.
55. On 6 May 2019, the SEC announced the results of the second
round of the presidential election: Mr Pendarovski obtained 436 212
votes (51.66%); Ms Siljanovska-Davkova – 377 713 votes (44.73%).
The turnout was 46.70%, the percentage of invalid ballots was 3.60%.
Mr Pendarovski was elected President of the Republic of North Macedonia.
7. Conclusions
and recommendations
56. Following the first round of
the presidential election, the Assembly delegation concluded that
the election day was calm, well organised and the voters who participated
in the election were able to make their choices freely. The delegation
regretted that the turnout for a presidential election was low.
A mature functioning of the political system and a reform of the
electoral law would allow citizens to support and actively participate
in the election of their head of State.
57. Following the second round of the presidential election, the
Parliamentary Assembly delegation concluded that “[t]he voting for
the second round of the presidential election was well organised
and voters, as in the first round, were able to make their choice
freely. But an election is not limited to voting day. The PACE delegation
considers that some recurrent problems in the electoral process
remain unaddressed, in particular the need to reform the electoral
code and, in general, the political system, to re-engage citizens
and to ensure their active participation, regardless of ethnic origin.
In addition, it is crucial to strengthen the transparency and the
control of election campaign funding. The issue of EU and NATO membership
should not be allowed to obscure some recurrent problems in the
electoral process” (the IEOM press release of the second round can be
found in Appendix 4).
58. The election campaign was conducted in a calm atmosphere,
in which all candidates were able to campaign without obstacles
and fundamental freedoms were respected. The Assembly delegation
noted with satisfaction that, unlike previous elections, during
which recurrent problems were noted, in particular concerning the
abuse of administrative resources, this time public employees tried
to maintain a clear distinction between their official and political
activities, and to avoid using State resources in the campaign.
59. According to the IEOM's conclusions, “[t]he legal framework
was generally conducive to the holding of democratic elections.
However, some provisions of the Electoral Code did not reflect the
specific requirements of the context of the presidential election.
Regulatory gaps have created confusion among stakeholders. In the absence
of explicit campaign rules for presidential candidates, elements
of the campaign were conducted on the basis of cross-party agreements
that did not provide equal opportunities for all candidates. Many
previous recommendations of the Venice Commission and ODIHR concerning
the legal framework have still not been implemented, including those
relating to election financing and election complaints and appeals”.
60. The Assembly delegation recalls that since the 2016 Joint
opinion, two electoral processes and a national referendum have
taken place and the Electoral Code has been amended four times.
As previously recommended by the Venice Commission and ODIHR, “[t]he
Code would benefit from a complete review in order to harmonise
it internally and with other relevant laws”. Key previous recommendations
aimed at improving electoral litigation, voter registration, representation
of the diaspora, campaign financing and the political campaign,
as well as at addressing the use of participation thresholds for
both referendum and presidential elections, could be addressed in
the next electoral reform.
61. Regarding the financing of the electoral campaign, it was
financed by donations from individuals and legal entities and some
candidates received financial support from political parties. The
State Audit Office is the main supervisory body, but its control
was limited to the verification of information submitted by candidates for
election and it did not have the capacity to verify whether this
information was accurate or complete. The SCPC was competent for
all complaints concerning the role of public employees and the use
of State resources during the election campaign. The Assembly delegation
noted that the resources of the State Audit Office and the SCPC
were limited and that a number of procedures required by law had
not yet been put in place, in particular access to the databases
of State institutions for the rapid exchange of information. The
limited resources, as well as the imperfections of the regulations,
reduced the transparency of the financing of the election campaign
and the effectiveness of control over the expenses of the presidential
candidates.
62. Regarding media coverage of the election campaign, according
to the ODIHR EOM Media Monitoring Report, the public broadcaster
provided impartial coverage and, overall, the media presented a
variety of information about presidential candidates and the political
parties that supported them, allowing voters to make an informed
choice. Most of the channels monitored covered the three candidates
in a comparable way, with the majority of information being neutral.
63. In general, the election administration performed its key
functions, operated impartially and enjoyed the confidence of most
stakeholders. On voting day, the functioning of the polling stations
was well organised. The transparency and efficiency of the SEC was
sometimes hampered by technical malfunctions in its information and
communication systems. According to some IEOM interlocutors, the
confidence of some stakeholders in the SEC was undermined by the
perceived inaction of the election administration with regard to
the alleged violations during the consultative referendum of 30
September 2018.
64. The Assembly delegation considers that the Assembly should
continue its close co-operation with the authorities of the Republic
of Northern Macedonia, through its post-monitoring dialogue procedure,
as well as with the Venice Commission, in order to resolve the problems
identified during the 2019 presidential election and to improve
the legal framework and electoral practices.
Appendix 1 – Composition
of the ad hoc committee
(open)
Based on the proposals by the political groups
of the Assembly:
Chairperson: Ms Marie-Christine
DALLOZ, France (EPP/CD)
Group of the European
People’s Party (EPP/CD)
- Mr David BAKRADZE, Georgia
- Ms Marie-Christine DALLOZ, France
- Mr Joseph O’REILLY, Ireland
Socialists, Democrats
and Greens Group (SOC)
- Ms Petra BAYR, Austria
- Mr Miroslav NENUTIL, Czech Republic
- Mr Predrag SEKULIC, Montenegro
Alliance of Liberals
and Democrats for Europe (ALDE)
- Mr Raphaël COMTE, Switzerland
- Ms Zdeňka HAMOUSOVÁ, Czech Republic
Venice Commission
- Ms Florence GANOUX,
expert, France
Secretariat
- Mr Chemavon CHAHBAZIAN,
Head of the Election Observation and Interparliamentary Co-operation Division
- Ms Danièle GASTL, Assistant
- Mr Gaël MARTIN-MICALLEF, Legal Adviser, Venice Commission
Appendix 2 – Programme
of the meetings of the ad hoc committee (19-20 April 2019)
(open)
Friday
19 April 2019
11:30-12.30 Meeting of the PACE ad hoc committee:
- Opening by Ms Marie-Christine
Dalloz, Head of Delegation
- Briefing on election legislation by Ms Florence Ganoux,
Expert, Venice Commission
- Practical and logistical arrangements, Secretariat
Parliamentary joint
briefings
14:00-14:20 Welcome by the Heads of delegations:
- Ms Sereine Mauborgne, OSCE Special
Co-ordinator
- Mr Reinbold Lopatka, Head of the delegation of the OSCE
Parliamentary Assembly
- Ms Marie-Christine Dalloz, Head of the PACE delegation
14:20-14:35 Welcome by the Speaker of the Parliament, Mr Talat
Xhaferi
14:35-15:00 Meeting with representatives of the international
community:
- Ambassador Clemens
Koja, Head of the OSCE mission in the Republic of North Macedonia
- Mr Samuel Žbogar, Head of the Delegation of the European
Union in the Republic of North Macedonia
15:00-17:00 Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation
Mission – Part I
- Introduction
– Ms Corien Jonker, Head of Mission
- Political Overview and the Campaign – Mr Peter Palmer,
Political Analyst
- Legal Framework, Campaign Finance, Complaints and Appeals
– Ms Kseniya Dashutina, Legal Analyst
- Election Administration, Voter and Candidate Registration
– Ms Marcela Mašková, Election Analyst
- Media Environment – Mr Ivan Godársky, Media Analyst
- Security Overview – Mr Valeriu Mija, Security Expert
17:15-18:45 Campaign and policy analysis panel:
- Mr Dejan Georgievski, Director,
Media Development Center
- Ms Migena Gorenca, Editor-in-Chief, MRT 2
- Mr Branko Geroski, Editor-in-Chief, Slobodan Pechat
- Mr Nino Sotirovski, Project Manager, Association for Democratic
Initiatives
Saturday 20 April
2019
09:30-11:00 Election administration panel:
- Mr Oliver Derkoski, Chairperson,
State Election Commission
- Mr Vladimir Georgiev, State Advisor, State Commission
for Prevention of Corruption
- Mr Darko Aleksov, Executive Director, NGO Most
- Mr Vildan Drpljanin, Project Co-ordinator and Legal Advisor,
Helsinki Committee for Human Rights
- Mr Dragan Sekulovski, Executive Director, Association
of Journalists
11:00-11:30 Mr Blerim Reka, candidate
11:45-12:15 Mr Goran Momirovski, Campaign Manager of presidential
candidate Ms Gordana Siljanovska Davkova
12:15-12:45 Mr Damjan Manchevski, Vice President of SDSM,
representative of presidential candidate Mr Stevo Pendarovski
12:45-13:35 Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation
Mission – Part II
- Election
Day Procedures – Ms Marcela Mašková, Election Analyst
- Statistics and Observation Forms – Mr Max Bader and Mr
Robert Bystrický, Statistics Analysts
13:35-14:00 Area specific briefing by ODIHR Long-Term Observers
for teams deployed in Skopje
14:00 Meetings with drivers/interpreters
Sunday 21 April 2019
Election day: observation of the opening, voting, closing
and tabulation
Monday 22 April 2019
08:30-09:30 PACE delegation meeting (debriefing)
15:00 Joint press conference
Appendix 3 – Press release
of the International Election Observation Mission (IEOM) (1st round)
(open)
North Macedonia’s
presidential election well run but legal framework still needs improvement, international
observers say
Strasbourg, 22.04.2019 – Sunday’s presidential election in
North Macedonia was well run and fundamental freedoms of assembly
and expression were respected, and election day was peaceful, orderly
and transparent. However, wide-reaching electoral reform is still
very much needed, international observers concluded in a preliminary
statement released today.
“This peaceful, generally well-run election demonstrated that
the political will can be found to hold democratic elections,” said
Sereine Mauborgne, Special Co-ordinator and leader of the short-term
OSCE observer mission. “This constructive approach must be maintained
through the second round and beyond. I sincerely hope that following
these elections real effort will be made to enact a coherent electoral
law and finally address the long existing challenges.”
Some 1.8 million voters were eligible to cast their ballot
in 3 396 polling stations across the country. However, the automatic
exclusion of voters based on expired identification documents created
an unreasonable barrier that affected some 11 000 citizens. While
improvements in the accuracy of the voter register were noted, discrepancies
between State databases and diverse data formats need to be addressed.
“Yesterday’s election was well organised and voters who participated
in the election were able to make their choice freely,” said Marie-Christine
Dalloz, head of the delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of
the Council of Europe (PACE). “The delegation regrets that the turnout
was low for a presidential election. A mature functioning of the
political system and a reform of the electoral law would re-engage
citizens and ensure their active participation in the election of
their head of State. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe and the Venice Commission are ready to assist the authorities
of North Macedonia in implementing the reforms.”
The campaign took place in a calm and peaceful environment,
in which all participants were able to campaign without hindrance
and fundamental freedoms were respected. State officials worked
to maintain a clear distinction between their official and political
activities, and to avoid using State resources in the campaign.
“We were pleased to see a campaign that addressed substantive
concerns, with candidates engaging in debate on their visions for
the future of North Macedonia,” said Reinhold Lopatka, head of the
OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA) Delegation. “All three candidates
clearly advocated for further European integration; whatever future
the people here may choose, democratic elections will be crucial.
The clear efforts made by State officials to avoid mixing political
and official activities are an important development, helping to level
the playing field for candidates.”
The election administration carried out its work impartially
and enjoyed the confidence of the majority of stakeholders. However,
the transparency and efficiency of the State Election Commission
was hindered by technical malfunctions of its information and communication
systems, raising doubts over IT security.
ODIHR’s media monitoring found that the public broadcaster
provided impartial coverage and the media overall presented diverse
information on the candidates and the political parties supporting
them, enabling voters to make an informed choice. Both public and
other media broadcasters covered the campaign and were mostly neutral
in their reporting, while online and print media sometimes lacked
balance in their coverage.
Concerns continue over the legal framework. While the law
does allow for democratic elections, the electoral code is not tailored
to the requirements of a presidential contest. The absence of explicit
campaign rules for candidates resulted in parts of the campaign
being carried out on the basis of cross-party agreements that did not
provide equal opportunities to all candidates.
“The election was smoothly run and shows just how much can
be achieved when there is genuine political will,” said Corien Jonker,
Head of the election observation mission from the OSCE Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). “I hope that both
the national authorities and political parties will continue to
work in this spirit. The electoral reforms ODIHR has previously
recommended need to be completed, with a focus on the transparency
and accountability of campaign finance.”
It was the lack of uniform reporting of candidate expenditure,
regulation of third-party campaigning, and reporting by political
parties supporting candidates that reduced both the transparency
of campaign finance and the effectiveness of oversight.
The international election observation mission comprises some
240 observers from 38 countries, including 189 long- and short-term
observers deployed by ODIHR, 40 parliamentarians and staff from
the OSCE PA, and 12 from PACE.
Appendix 4 – Press release
of the International Election Observation Mission (IEOM) (2nd round)
(open)
Second round of North
Macedonia’s presidential election calm and well run but legal gaps
remain unaddressed, international observers say
Skopje, 06.05.2019 – The second round of North Macedonia’s
presidential election was calm and well run. However, shortfalls
in the legal framework continued to be a concern, international
observers concluded in a preliminary statement published today.
The observation mission is a joint undertaking of the OSCE
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), the
OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA), and the Parliamentary Assembly
of the Council of Europe (PACE).
“This election cycle has now been brought to a successful
conclusion, with voters freely able to choose between distinct choices,”
said Sereine Mauborgne, Special Co-ordinator and leader of the OSCE
short-term observer mission. “Yesterday’s increased voter turnout
shows determination by the population to unite and address the challenges
facing this country. It is now up to the political leadership to
hear this message and undertake real reform that will replace the
legal patchwork requiring constant political agreements with a coherent
and sustainable electoral law.”
Some 1.8 million voters were eligible to cast their ballot
in 3,396 polling stations across the country. The election authorities
carried out preparations for the second round professionally and
impartially, and generally enjoyed public confidence. However, the
fact that citizens whose identification documents had expired were excluded
from voting needs to be addressed. In addition, while the turnout
requirement of 40% was met on this occasion, it does create the
potential for repeat elections, a concern that ODIHR has previously
voiced.
The campaign took place in a calm environment. All participants
were able to campaign without hindrance and fundamental freedoms
were respected. State officials appeared to continue differentiating
clearly between their official and political activities. Further,
both candidates reached out to different ethnic communities.
“The voting for the second round of the presidential election
was well organised and voters, as in the first round, were able
to make their choice freely. But an election is not limited to voting
day. The PACE delegation considers that some recurrent problems
in the electoral process remain unaddressed, in particular the need
to reform the electoral code and, in general, the political system,
to re-engage citizens and to ensure their active participation,
regardless of ethnic origin. In addition, it is crucial to strengthen
the transparency and the control of election campaign funding. The
issue of EU and NATO membership should not be allowed to obscure recurrent
problems in the electoral process,” said Marie-Christine Dalloz,
Head of the PACE delegation. “The Parliamentary Assembly and the
Venice Commission are ready to assist the authorities of North Macedonia
in implementing the necessary reforms.”
As in the first round of the election, however, the international
observers expressed serious concerns over the legal framework. While
the law does allow for democratic elections, the regulatory gaps
already evident on issues such as campaigning, media advertising,
campaign finance and voter registration remain unaddressed. This
further highlights the importance of legislative reform, which was
already emphasised in the preliminary conclusions following the first round.
“Election day was well prepared, and passed calmly and peacefully,”
said Corien Jonker of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions
and Human Rights (ODIHR). “But democracy is not just about election
day. Political will is needed to ensure that genuinely inclusive
legal reforms are followed by a consistent implementation that builds
and keeps citizens’ trust.”
The international election observation mission for the second
round comprises some 170 observers from 32 countries, including
156 long- and short-term observers deployed by ODIHR, 11 parliamentarians
and staff from the OSCE PA, and 5 from PACE.
